Jordan University of Science and Technology

Faculty of Engineering
[MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT]

[First Semester 2024/2025]

[Strength of Materials LAB|| ME 312]

Experiment ([2]): [Tensile test]

Student Name: ‫محمد عدنان رجا عدوان‬ ID: 152502

Instructor: [‫]محمد الداود‬

Section #: [2]

Date: [20/10/2024]
1. Objectives:
 To explore & observe the stress-strain behavior of some metals (Ductile & Brittle)
using static test (Low speed).
 To determine some mechanical properties of these metals, like:
1. Young’s modulus (E), Poisson’s ratio (ν), shear’s modulus (G), Bulk modulus (K).
2. Yield strength.
3. Modulus of Resilience.
4. The ultimate tensile strength, Toughness, % reduction in area, % change in
length (Over the gauge length).

3. Test Equipment:

Figure 1 20 KN WDW universal testing machine Figure 2 Cross head

(UTM)

Figure 3 Extensometer
Figure 4 : Load cell

Figure 5 upper grip and lower grip

 Figure 7 upper and lower load cell for 100KN UTM
Figure 6 100 KN Instron universal testing machine (UTM)

Figure 9 power supply

Figure 8 strain indicator and switch and balance unit

3.Test specimens

Figure 10 aluminum specimen Figure 11 cast iron specimen

Figure 13 strain gauge

Figure 12 steel specimen
4 . Procedure

The procedure has two parts:

1. Steps for part 1:

1. Record the initial diameter Do of the specimen, also record the gauge length Lo.
2. After starting the test. Load & deformation readings will be used to calculate the engineering
stress & engineering strain & to draw the stress-strain diagram.
3. The stress will be the engineering stress and the strain is the engineering strain.
4. The table 1, 2 & 3, will be filled with the right calculations from the stress-strain diagram.
5. The magnitude of the yield strength will be determined from the stress-strain diagram using
the offset method (proof strain = 0.2%).
6. Young’s modulus E will be calculated as the slope of the linear elastic part of the stress-strain
diagram.

2. Steps for part 2:

1. The original dimensions of the specimen will be measured.

2. The engineering stress will be calculated.
3. Drawing two curves, one for the engineering stress versus the axial strain (σ Vs ε) and another
for axial strain versus the lateral strain (ε axial Vs ε lateral).
4. E is the slope of the (σ Vs ε) curve, so it will be calculated.
5. Poisson’s ratio is the slope of the (σ Vs ε) curve, so it will be calculated.
6. The shear modulus (G) & the bulk modulus will be calculated using the following equations:

𝐸 𝐸
**𝐺 = **𝐾 =
2(1+) 3(𝟏+𝟐)

3.Data & Analysis

d0 = 4.9 mm A0 =18.8857𝑚𝑚2
Steel
df = 3.48 mm Af =9.511𝑚𝑚2
L0 = 25 mm Lf =31.03
Upper yield strength (Mpa) 293
Lower yield strength (Mpa) 293
Ultimate tensile strength (Mpa) 778
Engineering fracture strength (Mpa) 519.5
True fracture strength (Mpa) 1030
Modulus of Toughness (Joule/m3) 48.8
Percent change in length (Δ L %) 24.12%
Percent change in Area (Δ A %) -49.6%
Modulus of resilience (UR) 0.3155
Total strain 0.1212
d0 = 05.00 mm A0 =19.635𝑚𝑚2
Aluminum
df = 3.9 mm Af =11.9459𝑚𝑚2
L0 = 25.1mm Lf =30.795 mm
Proof strength (Mpa) 124.06
Ultimate tensile strength (Mpa) 477
Engineering fracture strength (Mpa) 445
True fracture strength (Mpa) 731
Percent change in length (Δ L %) 22.68%
Percent change in Area (Δ A %) 39.16%
Modulus of Toughness (Joule/m3) 50.122
Total strain 0.2269

d0 = 05.00 mm A0 =19.635𝑚𝑚2
Gray cast iron
df = 04.94 mm Af =19.1665𝑚𝑚2
L0 = 24.9 mm Lf =25.11 mm
Yield strength (Mpa) 243
Ultimate tensile strength (Mpa) 243
Engineering fracture strength (Mpa) 243
True fracture strength (Mpa) 249.39
Percent change in length (Δ L %) 0.8433%
Percent change in Area (Δ A %) -2.38%
Total strain 0.008635
Modulus of Toughness (Joule/m3) 0.37158

Load (kN) σ (Pa) εaxial (µmm) εlateral (µmm)

0 0 0 0
0.7 7000000 143 -47
1.4 14000000 249 -82
2.1 21000000 349 -115
2.7 27000000 433 -142
3.5 35000000 545 -179
4.2 42000000 644 -212
4. Sample of calculations:

Percent change in area of steel

𝑨𝒇 −𝑨𝒊 9.511−18.8574
∆𝑨% = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% = − 49.56%
𝑨𝒊 18.8574

Percent change in length of steel

𝑳𝒇 − 𝑳𝒊 31.03 − 25
∆𝑳% = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% = 24.12%
𝑳𝒊 25

5. Graphs

S-S STEEL DIAGRAM

900
800
700
600
Stress (Mpa)

500
400
300
200
100
0
-0.02 -100 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Strain

Aluminum Stress - Strain diagram

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
-100
 Cast iron Stress - Strain
diagram
300

250

200

150

100

50

0
-0.002 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01

Stress - Axial Strain diagram

45000000
40000000 y = 70169x - 3E+06
35000000
30000000
25000000
20000000
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

E=THE SLOPE =70169 (Pa)

Lateral Strain - Axial Strain diagram

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
-50

-100

-150

-200
y = -0.3288x - 0.0215

-250

𝛎=the slope =0.3288

𝑬 𝑬
**K = =68310.94 (Pa) **G= =102466.4 (Pa)
3(1 − 2ν) 2(1 − 2ν)
6.Discussion of Results
From experiment 1 we can see the results of steel table 1. First, after applying the load
we reached the yield strength, and the plastic deformation began because it is ductile
material. Unlike cast iron it has broken suddenly because it is brittle material. We can
see from table 1 that yield strength is higher than the yield strength of aluminum
(Table 2), so steel has more strength than aluminum.

From experiment 2 we can see that the axial strain is positive, and the lateral strain is
negative. Because the specimen was subjected to tensile force in the elastic range. So,
the material will be elongated so we get a positive axial strain, and the material will
get thinner in a very small value, so we got a negative lateral strain.

I can say that these results have a good reliability after comparing it with the normal
results I searched it on internet.

This experiment is crucial in our life. We get the mechanical properties that engineers
rely on these results to make an appropriate design that fits the requirements and the
most important doesn’t fail and cause damage.

This experiment gives me a good understanding of stress-strain diagram, because I

draw the diagram using excel from the (Load-Deformation) readings. Also, I saw the
necking phenomenon on ductile materials, and the sudden fracture on brittle materials
like cast iron.

7. Conclusions
During our materials testing, we noticed some fascinating differences between ductile
and brittle materials. The steel and aluminum specimens showed impressive strength
and took quite a while to finally break. Cast iron, being brittle, had a completely
different behavior. What caught my attention was how quietly the ductile materials
failed compared to the sharp, loud crack of the cast iron.

Something interesting came up with the steel's modulus of resilience in Table 1. At

first, I thought we might have made a calculation error since the value seemed off. But
after double-checking our math and comparing it with standard values, it turns out our
measurements were accurate. Pretty surprising, but that's what makes materials
testing so interesting - sometimes you get unexpected but valid results.