Leeds Beckett University

MSc Materials Technology

Metals Lab Report

Table of Contents
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 1

Apparatus ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Method ............................................................................................................................................. 2

Results .................................................................................................................................... 3

(1) Graphics about load P (kN), against extension, e (mm), for each of the
samples being measured by the Denison extension gauge. ......................................... 3
(2) Graphics Stress-Strain converted from the part (1). ............................................... 4
(3) Yield stress and 0.2% proof stress. ................................................................................ 6
(4) The elastic module using the initial linear-elastic part of the stress-strain
graph produced in (2) above and the Youngs modulus using the Extensometer
readings over the range 30kN to 83kN. ............................................................................... 7
(5) The maximum tensile strength. ...................................................................................... 9
(6) The stress at failure. ............................................................................................................ 9
(7) The percentage elongation at failure. .........................................................................10
(8) The true stress. ....................................................................................................................10
(9) Table of results. ...................................................................................................................10

Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 11
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 16
Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 17

Abstract
The aims of this Laboratory Report are to determine the characteristics (Yield
Stress, Modulus of Elasticity, Maximum Tensile Strength, the Stress at failure,
the percentage elongation at failure and the true stress) of two kind of steel
according to its carbon percentage. The results showed that how much
carbon percentage content more strength and less ductile the steel will get.
Some errors may be occurred because the Yield Strength had a considerable
increased comparing to normal values from relevant data. All the
characteristics were defined, the majority found by graphs.

Introduction
Due its characteristics steel started to be used 4000 years ago on the
beginning of the Iron Age. By the 17th century, irons property were well
understood but Europe needed a more versatile structural metal, by the 19th
century people was trying to find a manner to problems evolving irons
brittleness. In 1856 when Henry Bessemer discovered how to reduce the
carbon content in iron using oxygen, the modern steel industry was born.
Steels can be divided by its amount of carbon, low-carbon steels contain less
than 0.25 wt% carbon, they are applied in a variety of situations such as:
structural shapes (I-beam), pipelines, buildings, bridges, and cans. Medium
carbon-steels contain carbon concentration between 0.25 and 0.60 wt% and
are used to design that need more resistance than Low-carbon steel. This Lab
report is about the tensile test for both kind of steel cited before.
This study attempts to the steel properties and behavior in function of carbon
content to compare to relevant data and using the knowledge got from the
lectures presented about steel to explain this behavior.

Methodology
Apparatus
1. 500 kN Denison Testing Machine
2. Extensometer and Denison extension gauge (measures cross head
movement)

3. Grade 250 plain round mild steel bar, 20mm diameter.

Characteristic strength = 250 N/mm2
Length = 100mm
Conforms to BS 4449.
4. Grade 460 deformed high yield steel.
Reinforced bar, T16, 16mm diameter.
Characteristic strength = 460 N/mm2
Length = 80mm
Conforms to BS 4449.

Figure 1 The 1500 kN Denison Testing Machine, the extensometer and the specimen.

Method
Each of the bars in turn (first the Grade 250, second the Grade 460) is placed
in the jaws of the testing machine.
The 50mm extensometer is attached to the bar and zeroed by the Laboratory
Technician.
Each specimen is deformed up to fracture with a gradually increasing tensile
load that is applied uniaxially. According to the increment of the force applied,

3
extension readings from the extensometer and the Denison extension gauge
are noted.
At the yield point, the extensometer is removed to prevent damage to it and
readings continue on the Denison extension gauge.
The load at failure and the manner of failure are noted.

Results
All the graphics bellow were made using the software Excel 2011 by Microsoft
Corporation.

(1) Graphics about load P (kN), against extension, e (mm), for each
of the samples being measured by the Denison extension gauge.

Load P (kN) - Extension e (mm)

180
160
140

P (kN)

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

e (mm)
Figure 2 Graphic Load (P) x extension (e) to low carbon steel specimen.

30

35

Load P (kN) - Extension e (mm)

140
120

P (kN)

100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

e (mm)
Figure 3 Graphic Load (P) x extension (e) to medium carbon steel specimen.

(2) Graphics Stress-Strain converted from the part (1).

Stress - Strain
600

500

(N/mm)

400

300

200

100

0
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Figure 4 Graphic Stress x Strain to low carbon steel specimen.

0.30

0.35

Stress - Strain
700
600

(N/mm)

500
400
300
200
100
0
0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

Figure 5 Graphic Stress x Strain to medium carbon steel specimen.

Stress-Strain
700
600

Stress (N/mm2)

500
400
0.4wt% carbon

300

0.1wt% carbon
200
100
0
0

0.05

0.1

0.15
0.2
Strain

0.25

0.3

0.35

Figure 6 Graphic Stress x Strain to compare both specimens.

(3) Yield stress and 0.2% proof stress.

Stress - Strain
400
350

(N/mm)

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0.000

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.002

0.003

0.003

0.004

0.004

0.005

Figure 7 Graphic Stress x Strain to low carbon steel specimen and straight line parallel to
the initial part of the stress-strain curve, from the value of 0.2% strain.

y = 370.78N/mm2

Considering the moment when the extensometer was removed that is the
Yield point, the Youngs modulus is:
y = 370.78 N/mm2

0.005

Stress - Strain
600
550
500
450
(N/mm)

400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0.000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

Figure 8 Graphic Stress x Strain to medium carbon steel specimen and straight line parallel
to the initial part of the stress-strain curve, from the value of 0.2% strain.

y = 549.40 N/mm2
Considering the moment when the extensometer was removed that is the
Yield point, the Youngs modulus is:
y = 545.78 N/mm2

(4) The elastic module using the initial linear-elastic part of the
stress-strain graph produced in (2) above and the Youngs
modulus using the Extensometer readings over the range 30kN to
83kN.
For the low carbon steel we have:

According to the extensometer over the range 30kN to 83kN:

0.008

Stress - Strain (extensometer readings)

400
350

(N/mm)

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0

0.0005

0.001

0.0015

0.002

0.0025

0.003

0.0035

0.004

Figure 9 Graphic Stress x Strain to low carbon steel specimen according to extensometer
readings.

For the medium carbon steel we have:

According to the extensometer over the range 30kN to 83kN:

Stress - Strain (extensometer readings)

600

(N/mm)

500
400
300
200
100
0
0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Figure 10 Graphic Stress x Strain to medium carbon steel specimen according to

extensometer readings.

(5) The maximum tensile strength.

For the low carbon steel:
Maximum tensile strength is 540.7384N/mm2 when the load is 169.9kN and
the deflection is 16.086mm.
For the medium carbon steel:
Maximum tensile strength is 638.6089N/mm2 when the load is 126.7kN and
the deflection is 11.89mm.

(6) The stress at failure.

For the low carbon steel:
The stress at failure is equal to 410.57N/mm2
For the medium carbon steel:
The stress at failure is equal to 519.15N/mm2

10

(7) The percentage elongation at failure.

For the low carbon steel:
The percentage elongation at failure is:

For the medium carbon steel:

The percentage elongation at failure is:

(8) The true stress.

For the low carbon steel:
The true stress is given bellow:
The initial area is 314.2mm2 for the specimen with 20mm diameter; this initial
area was reduced to 132.73mm2 because its diameter reduced to 13mm
during the test.
The load at failure is equal to 129kN; to find the true stress is necessary to
divide the load at failure by the final area.

For the medium carbon steel:

The true stress is given bellow:
The initial area is 198.4mm2 for the specimen with 16mm diameter; this initial
area was reduced to 132.73mm2 because its diameter reduced to 13mm
during the test.
The load at failure is equal to 103kN; to find the true stress is necessary to
divide the load at failure by the final area.

(9) Table of results.

Steel
0.1wt%
carbon
0.4wt%
carbon

y (N/mm2)
Extensometer

y (N/mm2)
0.2% proof

E (graphic)
(kN/mm2)

E (extensometer)
(kN/mm2)

370.78

370.78

185.90

214.55

545.36

549.40

140.01

217.09

Table 1 Table of results 1: Yield stress, E (graph) and E (extensometer reading).

11

Steel
0.1wt% carbon
0.4wt% carbon

Maximum
Tensile
Strength
(N/mm2)
540.74
638.61

Elongation %

Stress at
failure
(N/mm2)

True stress
(kN/mm2)

32.92
24.06

410.57
519.15

971.90
776.01

Table 2 Table of results 2: Maximum tensile strength, elongation, stress at failure and true
stress.

Discussion
Initially the definitions of: stress, strain and Youngs Modulus. Stress is the
force acting per unit area, Strain is defined as the change in dimension per
unit length, and the Youngs Modulus or Modulus of Elasticity is the slope of a
tensile stress-strain curve in the linear part (Askeland, Fulay and Wright,
2012).
The Modulus of Elasticity is an important characteristic because it expresses
how easy a material can be deformed elastically (Ahmed, 2014b).
The specimens tested are known as Ferrous Metals because its composition
(90% is iron and steel), specifically a plain carbon steel because it contents
iron and up to 1% carbon (Ahmed, 2014).
Callister states that low carbon steels normally have Yield Strength of 275
MPa, Tensile Strengths between 415 and 550 MPa, and Ductility of 25%EL
(Callister, 2007).
Using 0.4wt% carbon steel with AISI Number 1040 as example. The
properties for Tensile Strength, Yield Strength, and Ductility are given bellow
(Callister, 2007).
Tensile Strength (MPa): 605-780
Yeld Strength (MPa): 430-585
Ductility (EL%): 33-19
The Youngs modulus or Modulus of Elasticity for steel is 207 GPa or 207
kN/mm2 (Callister, 2007).
The figure bellow shows the properties according to the lecture 3, the
numbers are similar to the numbers above.

Figure 11 Properties of metals (Ahmed, 2014a).

12

First, comparing the properties showed above for low carbon steels with the
0.1wt% specimen tested. The Yield Strength showed at Table 1 of 370.78
MPa is almost 35% higher than the value of 275 MPa, the maximum tensile
strength (540.74 MPa) is inside the limit between 415 and 550 MPa and the
ductility for the specimen is 32.92% whilst the normal ductility according to
Callister is 25%.
The results for the first specimen (0.1% carbon content) showed that the Yield
Stress is higher than normal and the ductility is also elevated, the possibility to
admit more carbon content on this specimen is ignored because its ductility is
higher than normal.
Analyzing the second specimen tested with the expected values, according to
figure 10, the ductility and the Yield Strength are elevated which represents
the same situation as first specimen.
The Modulus of Elasticity for both specimens showed almost the same value
according to extensometer reading as expected whereas using Gauge
readings the results were not reliable. The carbon content has no effect on the
stiffness of the steel as shown the figure bellow.

Figure 12 Graphs showing the effects of increasing carbon content (Ahmed, 2014a).

The figure above also demonstrates the effects according to the ductility and
the tensile strength, looking at figure 5 this effect showed above occurred in

13
the same way on test. The tensile strength was higher for the 0.4% carbon
content specimen whilst its ductility was decreased comparing to 0.1% carbon
content specimen.
The fracture behavior in metals occurs according the movement of atoms,
once the yield point is achieved the plastic deformation starts by dislocation
slip. There is a movement order of difficult to follow starting from the easiest
difficult until the more difficult to move, it explains the behavior of the stressstrain curve in the plastic part, it is a rising curve initially but decreasing
gradually until the fracture point. A characteristic of fracture is the appearance
of the neck due the deformations in the site of final fracture, the neck
appears due the coalesce of cracks. This ductile characteristic is important
because this behavior can gives warning that the material is going to failure,
otherwise brittle materials failure suddenly and cause accidents fast (Sturges,
n.d.a).
The pictures bellow show the neck during the test.

Figure 13 Neck during test.

14

Figure 14 0.1% carbon content specimen after failure.

The figure bellow show the 0.4% carbon content specimen after failure. The
ductile is considerate a moderately ductile fracture due the reduction in area,
the first specimen was 20mm diameter before failure and 13mm diameter
after failure, in other words, the area reduced 58%. For the second specimen
was 16mm diameter before failure and 13mm diameter after failure, the area
has reduced 34%. This shows the ductility in function of area, the results
showed the ductility in function of elongation. The fracture has cup and cone
appearance due the shear stress with an angle of 45 degrees between the
atoms in the end of fracture.

15

Figure 15 0.4% carbon content specimen after failure.

The figure above showed as expected less deformation, it is more difficult to

see the neck. It is due the higher percentage of carbon relation the other
specimen.
The two kind of bars tested are normally used for the reinforcement of
concrete specially to increase the tensile resistance of concrete and the
ductility. The bars are chose according to its Yield Strength to attend the
project, the Yield Strength is important because from this point the material
start to get plastic deformation, the 0.2% proof is used to determine the Yield
Strength. When it comes to steel in concrete is important to mention the
importance of ductility because concrete is a brittle material and brittle fracture
are general catastrophic.
It is important to cite the importance of the structure of irons atoms, the
transformation to increase steels resistance is possible due the characteristics
of the arrangement of atoms and its behavior when temperature changes,
changing the phase and returning to make possible the structure changes
from ferrite to austenite. As austenite will hold up to 1.7% carbon and our
steel is 0.8% carbon, to make it possible a lamellar structure called pearlite is
necessary to occur, heat energy can make the carbon excess diffuse through
pearlite regions until the carbon amount required (Sturges, n.d.b).
Some problems may be happened during of before the test because the Yield
Strength for both specimens showed different results from expected. Should
be analyzed the machine and specimens, the surface of the specimens or its
composition can be altered during the process of fabrication.
It is important to state the reliability of the extensometer comparing to the
Dennison Extension Gauge that gave different results to Youngs Modulus
than expected for both specimens.

16

Conclusion
The objectives of laboratory were achieved; all properties to be studied were
analyzed and compared with other data. The results showed that the unique
problem occurred with the Yield Strength. Moreover, more experiment with
each kind of steel should be made to analyze the problem and find a solution
to explain the reasons for the Yield Strength to be higher than normal.

17

Bibliography
[1] Ahmed, A. (2014a). Lecture 3 - Ferrous & Non-Ferrous Metals.
[2] Ahmed, A. (2014b). First lecture.
[3] Askeland, D., Fulay, P. and Wright, W. (2012). The Science and
Engineering of Materials. 6th ed. Stamford: Cengage Learning.
[4] Callister, W. (2007). Materials science and engineering. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
[5] Sturges, J. (n.d.a). Dislocations and Strengthening of Materials.
[6] Sturges, J. (n.d.b). Microstructure and Phase Transformations in Metal &
Alloys.