Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

EXPERIMENT 3
Impact Test

1.0 OBJECTIVE
1.1 To apply the Charphy method in measuring impact strength of polymer materials.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The stresses that are applied by subjecting the test sample to a sudden blow are the basic
characteristics of an impact test. Impact is something that can happen in service and the test
methods that have been developed seek to stimulate this and to provide a relatively simple means
of achieving high strain rates. Impact strength can be defined as energy required to break the
samples per original cross sectional area, since impact load had been applied to the samples.
There are two main forms of impact test, the Izod and the Charpy test, both involve striking a
standard specimen with a controlled weight pendulum travelling at a set speed. The amount of
energy absorbed in fracturing the test piece is measured. For this experiment, we using the
Charphy test for measuring impact strength of each polymer samples prepared.
Charpy impact test is practical for the assessment of brittle fracture of metals and is also used
as an indicator to determine suitable service temperatures. The Charpy test sample has
10 x 10 x 55 mm3

in dimensions and a 45 V notch. To perform the test, the pendulum set at a

certain height is released and impact the specimen at the opposite end of the notch to produce a
fractured sample. By calculating the energy lost in propagating a crack through the specimen, we
can learn about the toughness of a specimen, as well as its tensile strength. Additionally, by
inspecting the breakage plane of the specimen, we can also gain some insight into the ductility of
the material.

1 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

Figure 1: Charphy Impact Testing Machine

Figure 2: Working principle of pendulum impact test machine

2 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

3.0 COMPONENTS AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 Pendulum Impact Tester

Figure 3: Pendulum Impact Tester Machine

3.2 Vernier caliper

Figure 4: Vernier caliper

3.3 Samples
3 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

3.3.1

Exp. 3: Impact Test

Polystyrene (PS)

Figure 5: PP (black)

3.3.2

Polypropylene (PP)

Figure 6: PP (yellowish)

4 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

3.3.3

Exp. 3: Impact Test

Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE)

Figure 7: LDPE (opaque)

3.3.4

Polycarbonate (PC)

Figure 8: PC (white)

5 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

4.0 PROCEDURES
4.1 The sample sheets were prepared into bars at dimension 55mm x 10mm x 10mm.
4.2 Using vernier caliper, the width, length and thickness of every sample were measured.
4.3 The Pendulum Impact Tester had to make sure in good conditioned, clean and safe to
use.
4.4 The sample was clamper into the pendulum impact test fixture.
4.5 The pendulum was released and was allowed to strike through the sample.
4.6 The pendulum was stopped and the impact reading was written.
4.7 Steps 4.4-4.6 for another samples.
4.8 D 6110 (Charphy) was referred for more details.

6 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To calculate the impact strength of the sample, we used this formula:
impact energy (J /m)
Impact strength (J /m2)= cross section area(m)
The cross sectional area of each sample is 55mm X 10mm = 550 mm2 or 0.00055m2
Table 1: Table of data of impact energy of every un-notched sample.

Type of samples

Reading 1 (J)

Reading 2 (J)

Average reading (J)

PS

0.2

1.0

0.60

PP

2.9

3.0

2.95

LDPE

0.6

0.5

0.55

PC

4.0

4.00

(unnotched)

Table 2: Table of data of impact strength of every un-notched sample.

Impact strength
Type of samples
(unnotched)

Average reading (J)

(J /m2)=

impact energy( J )
cross section area(m 2)

PS

0.6

0.6
=1090.90
0.00055

PP

2.95

2.95
=5363.64
0.00055

LDPE

0.55

0.55
=100.00
0.00055

4.0

4.0
=7272.73
0.00055

PC

7 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

5.1 Discuss on ductile and brittle failure of the sample used.

The Graph of Average Impact Energy vs. Samples

4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
Average impact energy (J/m)

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
PS

PP

LDPE

PC

Type of samples

Figure 9: The graph of average impact energy vs. type of samples.

Based on Figure 9, it shows the graph of average impact energy gained from
pendulum impact tester vs. type of samples. The graph shows zig-zagged pattern as the
average of impact energy of samples up and down. The highest value of average impact
energy is 4.0 J/m which is belongs to polycarbonate (PC). As the highest energy
absorbed, it make the sample in conformity with a ductile fracture. Both LDPE and PS
mostly have same value which it have 0.5 j/m in difference. But the lowest energy
absorbed is 0.55 J/m which is belong to LDPE thus make it brittle fracture. The ductile
material will give higher impact reading test thus the energy value will indicate bigger
than the brittle material.

8 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

The Graph of Impact Strength vs. Samples

8000
7000
6000
5000
Impact Strength (J/m2)

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
PS

PP

LDPE

PC

Type of samples

Figure 10: The graph of impact strength vs. type of samples.

The graph of average impact strength calculated from gained impact energy using
respectively sample vs. type of samples is shown at Figure 10. This graph also shows up
and down value which we can say it as fluctuated. As the calculations had done, the
highest value of impact strength is 7272.73 J/m2 determined belongs to polycarbonate
(PC) as it has highest average impact energy. With value 1000 J/m2, the LDPE sample
has been determined as the sample that has lowest impact strength as its impact energy
also the lowest. LDPE sample has seen as brittle material as it needed the less energy to
break compared to PC which required more energy to make it break.

9 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

5.2 Discuss effect of notched on properties of impact crazing.

The Charpy specimen may be used with one of three different types of notch, a
'keyhole', a 'U' and a 'V'. The keyhole and U-notch are used for the testing of brittle
materials such as cast iron and for the testing of plastics. The V-notch specimen is the
specimen of choice for weld testing.

Figure 11: Standard Charpy-V notch specimen

The V-notch specimen acted as the point of stress concentration. As most

materials might go for the weakness point during impact crazing, it very sensitive on the
notch. A V-notch specimen is relatively weaker than the specimen un-notched. Thus, it is
very important for some materials as it will give more understanding for calculating the
factor of safety on their applications. The V-notch specimen tends to give accurate
fracture surface reading for determining their properties.
5.3 Discuss factors that can effect impact properties. What is the important of impact
properties in plastics material selection for certain application?

There are many factors that can effect impact properties. The first is yield strength
and ductility. For a given material the impact energy will be seen to decrease if the yield
strength is increased. For example, if the material undergoes some process that makes it
more brittle and less able to undergo plastic deformation. Such processes may include
cold working or precipitation hardening. The next factor is notches. The notch serves as a
stress concentration zone and some materials are more sensitive towards notches than
others. The notch depth and tip radius are therefore very important.
Temperature and strain rate also can be the factor that affects the result of the test.
Most of the impact energy is absorbed by means of plastic deformation during the
yielding of the specimen. Therefore, factors that affect the yield behavior and hence
ductility of the material such as temperature and strain rate will affect the impact energy.
10 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

This type of behavior is more prominent in materials with a body centered cubic
structure, where lowering the temperature reduces ductility more markedly than face
centred cubic materials.
Next, ductile to brittle transition . Some materials such as carbon steels undergo
what is known as a ductile to brittle transition. This behavior is obvious when impact
energy is plotted as a function of temperature. The resultant curve will show a rapid
dropping off of impact energy as the temperature decreases. If the impact energy drops
off very sharply, a transition temperature can be determined. This is often a good
indicator of the minimum recommended service temperature for a material.
The property of a material relating to work required to cause rupture is toughness,
which depends on the ductility and ultimate strength. It is known that a high-rate of
loading results in an increase in strength, but a reduction in ductility. When forces are
applied suddenly for very short time intervals, another effect of such forces is to produce
stress waves.
It is important of all impact properties in plastic material selection for certain
application because not all materials respond in the same way to variations in strain rate.
For instance, a slowly applied point load shatters the glass while a high-speed bullet
punctures a fairly clean hole. Similarly, sealing wax behaves in a ductile manner at low
strain rate, but snaps into two under a sharp blow.

11 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 3: Impact Test

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the experiment conducted, we can see from the Charphy test using the pendulum,
impact tester, polycarbonate (PC) undergoes ductile fracture while the LDPE undergoes brittle
fracture compared to other samples. PC absorbed more energy which will show that it is suitable
to use in electrical or electronic application. It also suitable to use in automotive application. It
because the amount of energy required to break a ductile material is greater than for brittle
material, so it will make the equipment not easy to broke.
7.0 REFERENCES
[1]

W. F. Smith, J. Hashemi Ph.D. Foundation of Materials Science and Engineering 5th

edition. (Page 283-288 and 513-514)

[2]

Journal of Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 89, 3115-3121 (2003). Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

2003
[3]

D. R. Askeland. The Science and Engineering of Materials 2nd SI edition. (Page 162-

173)
[4]

Material Science of Polymers for Engineers (3rd Edition) by Osswald, Tima; Menges,

Georg.

12 | P a g e