College Of Engineering and Technology

CETG 211
Experiment Lab Report 1

TENSILE TEST

NAME: KEBALEBILE OTENG TELEKELO

ID NUMBER: 14000921
PROGRAMME: BEng INDUSTRIAL & MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING
DATE OF EXPERIMENT: 25/01/2016
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 08/02/2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................1
Objective..................................................................................................................................................2
Apparatus................................................................................................................................................2
Procedure.................................................................................................................................................3
CALCULATIONS AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS................................................................................................3
Calculations.................................................................................................................................................6
DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................................................7
Possible errors.........................................................................................................................................7
Improvements..........................................................................................................................................7
CONCLUSION...............................................................................................................................................8
REFERENCE..................................................................................................................................................8
APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................................8
INTRODUCTION

Tensile testing is one of the most fundamental tests for engineering, and provides
valuable information about a material and its associated properties. These properties can
be used for design and analysis of engineering structures, and for developing new
materials that better suit a specified use.

The tensile testing laboratory was conducted using an Instron load frame and the Blue Hill
data acquisition software. Two different materials were tested, including flat Aluminum and Mild steel
rod.
The samples had a reduced gage section. The reduced gage section ensured that the highest stresses
occurred within the gage, and not near the grips of the Instron load frame, preventing strain and fracture
of the specimen near or in the grips. (1)

Measurements of the test were taken as force against elongated or change in length. If the applied force is
shared equally across the entire cross section of the specimen the stress (σ) on the object is calculated as

Appiled force F
σ= =¿ (stress)
Area of the cross section Ao

∆L
ϵ= (Strain)
L

σ
E= (modulus of elasticity)
ϵ

Where;

F= Load (N)

Ao= Cross- sectional area

∆ L = Change in length

L= Original length

Yield strength and tensile strength can be obtained from the strength-displacement curve produced from
each experiment;

 Yield Strength (N), σy

 Tensile Strength (N), σt
 Modulus of Elasticity (N), E
 Modulus of Resilience(N), ER

1
Objective
To investigate the behavior of two material specimens under a Tensile Test. The materials to be
investigated are aluminum and mild steel. From performing the Tensile Test the following properties will
be determined; modulus of elasticity, yield stress, ultimate tensile stress ,percentage elongation at
fracture, percentage reduction in cross-sectional area at fracture and fracture stress. This experiment is
used to determine a material’s properties, and is used in a wide range of industries. One example of this
could be to determine the Ultimate. (2)

Apparatus
Tenius Olsen Tensile Tester H5OKT
Flat Aluminum specimen
Mild steel specimen
Steel rule
Vernier Caliper

2
Procedure
The length and width/diameter of specimen was measured and recorded on the data sheet. The specimen
was placed and tightened onto the jaws of the machine. The horizon software was opened on the
computer and clicked new test. The geometry of the specimen was entered as required and clicked the
start button. Both the upper and bottom grips started moving in opposite directions according to the
specified pulling rate. The experiment was observed at a safe distance of about 1.5 meters away at an
angle and took note of the failure mode when the specimen failed. The mode of force and extension was
noted at regular intervals until the specimen fractured. A plot of tensile stress (MPa) vs tensile strain
(mm/mm) was generated in real time during the experiment.

End of test: The machine stopped automatically when the sample was broken. The “return’ button was
pressed on the digital controller. Both the upper and lower grips automatically returned to their original
positions. The two handles in the open directions were turned to remove the sample. The previous steps
were repeated for additional tests. Any broken fragments from the specimen were cleaned. The machine
was turned off and exited the program when finished.

CALCULATIONS AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

SPECIMEN: Mild steel

Diameter: 8.2 mm Gauge length: 14.4 mm Diameter after fracture: 3.97 mm
Original length: 205 mm Length after fracture: 235 mm

Extension (mm) Load, F(N) Stress, (N.mm-2) Strain (mm.mm-1)

F ∆L
σ= ε=
Ao L
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.33 36620.73 693.35 0.01
3.02 132552.72 2509.66 0.01
5.00 164239.02 3109.59 0.02
6.05 167280.12 3167.16 0.03
8.02 174990.78 3313.15 0.04
9.02 182063.79 3057.07 0.04
10.10 186507.72 3009.20 0.05
11.90 193776.93 3668.83 0.06
14.00 200025.90 3787.15 0.07
16.00 204342.30 3868.87 0.08
18.00 207314.73 3925.15 0.09
20.00 209394.45 3964.53 0.10
30.10 211238.73 3999.44 0.15
32.40 209904.57 3974.18 0.16
33.50 203979.33 3862.00 0.16
33.70 186703.92 3534.92 0.16
35.10 175922.73 3330.80 0.17

3
35.50 160717.23 3042.91 0.17
35.70 158647.32 3003.72 0.17
35.80 181808.73 3130.24 0.17
36.20 142666.83 28011.15 0.18
36.30 135505.53 2565.57 0.18

Stress vs Strain

4500

4000 Yield strength

3862
3500 3531.2
3130.24
Engineering stress (MN.m-2)

3000 Tensile strength

2500 Series 1
Fracture Series 2
2000 Series 3
∆σ/∆Ԑ =modulus
1500 of elasticity
1000

500

0 0
0 01 03 04 06 08 1 16 16 17 17 18
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
Engineering strain (mm.mm-1)

SPECIMEN: Aluminum
Diameter: 1.92 mm Gauge length: 180 mm Diameter after fracture: 1.92 mm
Original length: 201 mm Length after fracture: 21.92 mm

Extension (mm) Load, F(N) Stress, (N.mm-2) Strain (mm.mm-1)

F ∆L
σ= ε=
Ao L
0.00 0.00 0 0.000
0.95 3825.90 83.19 0.005

4
1.99 6513.84 141.63 0.009
3.00 9456.84 205.62 0.015
4.40 11359.98 247.00 0.023
5.19 11615.04 252.55 0.026
6.07 11821.05 257.03 0.030
7.10 11987.82 260.65 0.035
8.04 12174.21 264.71 0.040
9.13 12321.36 267.91 0.045
10.10 12458.70 270.89 0.050
11.10 12576.42 273.45 0.055
12.10 12664.71 275.37 0.060
13.10 11772.00 265.96 0.065
14.00 12811.86 278.57 0.069
15.00 12860.91 279.64 0.075
16.00 12890.34 280.28 0.080
17.00 12890.34 280.28 0.085
18.00 12890.34 280.28 0.090
19.00 12831.48 279.00 0.095
20.00 12174.21 272.71 0.100
21.00 11791.62 260.39 0.104
21.20 11291.31 255.51 0.105

5
 Stress vs Strain
300
Yield Strength
267.91 265.96
260.65
250 Tensile strength
Fracture

200
Engineering Stress (MN.m-2)

150 Series 1
Series 2
∆σ/∆Ԑ= modulus of elasticity Series 3
100

50

0 0
0 05 09 15 23 26 03 35 04 45 05 55 06 65 69 75 08 85 09 95 .1 04 05
0 0 0 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 .1 .1
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0
Engineering strain (mm.mm-2)

Calculations

Mild steel rod sample

Modulus of elasticity

σ ( 2509.66−693.35 )
E= = =181631 N /mm ²
ϵ (0.02−0.01)

final length−gage length 235 mm−144 mm

Percentage elongation= == x 100% = 63.2%
gage length 144 mm

Original area−final area 52.81mm 2−12.38 mm 2

Percentage reduction in area = x 100% = = x
original area 52.81 mm2
100% = 76.58%

Aluminum sample
Modulus of elasticity

6
 σ ( 205.66−83.19 )
E= = =12243 N /mm ²
ϵ 0.015−0.005

final length−gage length 219 mm−188 mm

Percentage elongation= x 100% = = x 100% = 16.5%
gage length 188 mm

Original area−final area

Percentage reduction in area = x 100% ==
original area
45.9914 mm 2−14.6082 mm2
x 100% = 68.2%
45.9914 mm2

DISCUSSION
Possible errors
Data recording interval not constant

 It was not easy to keep constant interval when recording the readings of force (N) with
respect to extension (mm) and this could have dismally affected the results.

Temperature not constant and uncontrolled

 The temperature in the laboratory was not constant and it was affected by factors such as
the climatic conditions and also the crowding of people around the tensile machine
during the run of the experiment hence having an effect on the temperature of the
specimen thus affecting the test. (temperature can speed or lower the rate of the
experiment)

Parallax error

 Parallax error is very possible when taking readings with the steel rule and it can affect
the results.

Improvements
Repeat testing to get average
 Calculate the average value after performing two or more tests

Temperature control
 The experiment should be done at room temperature or any temperature that cannot alter
with the results. This can be done by controlling the temperature inside the laboratory and
also taking in consideration the temperature of the specimen as it also have a huge impact
on the test.

To avoid parallax error

7
  Digital measuring instruments could have been used instead of instruments like steel rule
since the readings are written in digit form thus avoiding parallax error.

CONCLUSION
The mechanical properties of a material are determined by testing a sample of material in a tensile
testing machine. The measured values would then help us firmly decide whether the material can
withstand a lot of stress or force applied on it. This is attained by looking at the stress and strain
curves of the tested samples which would give us the hardness, elasticity, deformation, yield point
and tensile strength of the material.

“A material that has a steeper slope on its stress-strain curve will be stiffer and will deform less under
load than a material with a less steep slope.” (3)

Comparing the two samples of this experiment one can easily observe that mild steel rod sample has a
steeper slope than the flat aluminum specimen, hence we can conclude that the mild steel specimen
has a higher strength than Aluminum. The modulus of elasticity of mild steel sample is 18 1631
N/mm2 as compared to that of Aluminum which is 12 243 N/mm2.

REFERENCE

1. google.scholar. [Online] https://stephanfavilla.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/tensile-testing-

laboratory.
2. Scribd. www.google.scholar.com. [Online] http://www.scribd.com/doc/22919957/Tensile-Test-Lab-
Report#scribd.
3. Mott, Robert L. Applied Strength of Materials. Applied Strength of Materials. New Jersey : Pearson
Education, 2008, pp. Pg. 20-26.

APPENDIX
Sample calculations

F 36620.73 N
σ= = = 693.35 N•mm-2
Ao (4.1∗4.1)π

∆ L 1.33
ϵ= = = 0.01
L 201

Ao=¿ (4.1)2x π = 52.81mm2

8
F= Load (N)

A0 = Cross- sectional area

∆ L = Change in length

L= Original length

σt= Tensile Strength (N)

E= Modulus of Elasticity (N)

ER= Modulus of Resilience (N)

σ= (Stress N•mm-2)

Є= Strain (no units since its change in length is over original length)