CE 311 Lab Report 1 L Mauriot

docx

School

New Mexico State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

311

Subject

Civil Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BrigadierIce17816

CE 311 – CIVIL ENGINEERING MATERIALS LABORATORY Section Number: L-M01 Experiment Number: 1 Experiment: Stress-Strain Relationships from Tension Tests Submitted by: Louis Mauriot Submitted to: Soroush Mousavinezhad Date Experiment Performed: 08/28/23 Date Experiment Report Submitted: 09/07/23 Name of People Who Participated: Louis Mauriot Leah Clark Juan Limas Sonya Shanbhag

Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ 3 PROBLEM STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 3 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD ........................................................................................................................ 3 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Graph 1: 1045 Hot Rolled .................................................................................................................... 4 Graph 2: 1045 Hot Rolled Enhanced .................................................................................................... 4 Table 1: Reported Numerical Data for 1045 Hot Rolled ...................................................................... 4 Graph 3: 1045 Cold Rolled ................................................................................................................... 4 Graph 4: 1045 Cold Rolled Enhanced .................................................................................................. 4 Table 2: Reported Numerical Data for 1045 Cold Formed ................................................................... 4 Graph 5: Brass ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Graph 6: Brass Enhanced ..................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3: Reported Numerical Data for Brass ........................................................................................ 5 Graph 7: Copper .................................................................................................................................. 5 Graph 8: Copper Enhanced .................................................................................................................. 5 Table 4: Reported Numerical Data for Copper .................................................................................... 5 Graph 9: Aluminum ............................................................................................................................. 6 Graph 10: Aluminum Enhanced ........................................................................................................... 6 Table 5: Reported Numerical Data for Aluminum ................................................................................ 6 Graph 11: Cast Iron .............................................................................................................................. 6 Graph 12: Cast Iron Enhanced ............................................................................................................. 6 Table 6: Reported Numerical Data for Cast Iron .................................................................................. 6 Picture of Each Sample After Fracture ................................................................................................. 7 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 7 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Table: Specimen Dimensions ............................................................................................................... 8

ABSTRACT This initial laboratory experiment allowed us to study and obtain detailed information about the different stress strain relationships for steel and aluminum coupon samples. 6 specimens of steel and aluminum were subjected to a load and elongated until the fracture point was reached. Using the data obtained, stress strain graphs were plotted on Excel for each specimen and calculations were performed. Each specimen was compared and discussed. PROBLEM STATEMENT The determination of the stress-strain relationships while performing tension tests on coupon samples for steel and aluminum and studying the resulting data through calculations and graphical plotting were the objectives of this laboratory experiment. The resulting comparison between the different specimens, understanding the different stress strain relationships to be able to better categorize them for different uses in structural/construction purposes of civil engineering also was among the objectives of this experiment. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD A total of 6 specimens were subjected to a tension test (1045 Hot Rolled Steel, 1045 Cold Finish Steel, Copper, Brass and Cast Iron). Each specimen consequently experienced an elongation of the gage while a load was applied to each one until the complete fracture point. Using the elongation data recorded on the computer during the performing of each test, and the load data, we then calculated and plotted the strain vs strain corresponding graphs. Afterwards, we studied the graphs in detail by finding the corresponding proportional limit, the offset, ultimate stress and the strain at that corresponding point and the fracture stress and strain if specimen is fractured. Calculations were performed to obtain the ductility, the strain hardening ratio and the modulus of elasticity. Finally, the type of failure and yield behaviors, the effects of carbon content, and the shape of the stress strain curve compared with each specimen was discussed. RESULTS Initially, we have each stress strain graph for each specimen tested from 1045 Hot Rolled to Cast Iron presented with the enhanced graphical result focusing on the elastic part of the curve for each.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Graph 1: 1045 Hot Rolled Graph 2: 1045 Hot Rolled Enhanced Table 1: Reported Numerical Data for 1045 Hot Rolled E (psi) Ultimate Stress (psi) Fracture Stress (psi) Ductilit y (%) Ultimat e Strain (%) Fractur e Strain (%) Strain Hardening Ratio 0.2% Offse t Stress (psi) 0.2 % Offse t Strain (%) 2900000 0 113270.914 7 95597.086 7 29.546 13.776 29.546 0.0001927 2 7148 2 0.24 Graph 3: 1045 Cold Rolled Graph 4: 1045 Cold Rolled Enhanced Table 2: Reported Numerical Data for 1045 Cold Formed E (psi) Ultimate Stress Fracture Stress Ductilit y (%) Ultimat e Strain Fractur e Strain Strain Hardening 0.2% Offset 0.2% Offse

(psi) (psi) (%) (%) Ratio Stress t Strai n 3014333 3 130835.5 0 109866.5 6 7.95 2.13 7.95 1.19085829 6 109866.5 6 0.568 Graph 5: Brass Graph 6: Brass Enhanced Table 3: Reported Numerical Data for Brass E (psi) Ultimate Stress (psi) Fracture Stress (psi) Ductility (%) Ultimate Strain (%) Fracture Strain (%) Strain Hardening Ratio 0.2% Offset Stress 0.2% Offset Strain 15140080 76828.1 66393.5 23.5 17.7 23.5 1.4 54610.9 0.563 Graph 7: Copper Graph 8: Copper Enhanced Table 4: Reported Numerical Data for Copper E (psi) Ultimate Stress Fracture Stress Ductility (%) Ultimate Strain Fracture Strain Strain Hardening 0.2% Offset 0.2% Offset

(psi) (psi) (%) (%) Ratio Stress Strain 22635711 45045 16440 0.0318 0.301 3.18 1.0 45045. 0 0.301 Graph 9: Aluminum Graph 10: Aluminum Enhanced Table 5: Reported Numerical Data for Aluminum E (psi) Ultimate Stress (psi) Fracture Stress (psi) Ductility (%) Ultimate Strain (%) Fracture Strain (%) Strain Hardening Ratio 0.2% Offset Stress 0.2% Offset Strain 10699244 119294 98325 22.5 5.85 22.48 1.2 100000 1.2 Graph 11: Cast Iron Graph 12: Cast Iron Enhanced Table 6: Reported Numerical Data for Cast Iron E (psi) Ultimate Stress (psi) Fracture Stress (psi) Ductility (%) Ultimate Strain (%) Fracture Strain (%) Strain Hardening Ratio 0.2% Offset Stress 0.2 % Offset Strain 13489512 24224 24224 0.180 0.180 0.180 N/A N/A N/A

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Each curve has a very distinct shape to it. As we study each specimen and we get closer to cast iron, the shape of the curve seems to increase in strain and decrease in stress. Picture of Each Sample After Fracture The ductility in the farthest specimen is especially visually observable from that picture reinforcing the graphical representation of a higher ductility but lower strain. CONCLUSIONS Based on observations made during the experimental process and during calculations and plotting of graphs, each specimen studied has a distinct stress strain relationship. Whether it’s the type of failure for each material that is very distinct visually, or the type of yield behavior, or the resulting shape of the stress strain curve, each material specimen tested has very distinct properties. If compared all together, the stress strain curves, from steel all the way to cast iron tend to increase more in strain than in stress. The resulting curves decrease in stress but increase in strain. This also means that as the modulus of elasticity decreases, the amount of ductility increases between each specimen studied. This conclusion can also be argued by the visual aspect of each specimen after fracture. The finer and more cone shaped material entails a higher resulting ductility. This experiment is fundamentally important to be able to understand material behavior and stress strain properties as these are fundamental in the civil engineer industry. APPENDIX A Modulus of Elasticity Calculation Sample (cast iron sample): E = σ ϵ = 2 4224.1 psi 0.1795 × 100 = 13.5 × 10 6 p si

Strain Hardening Ratio Calculation Sample (brass sample): StrainHardening Ratio = UltimateStress 0.2% Offset Yield Stress = 76828.1 psi 54610.9 psi = 1.4 Table: Specimen Dimensions Column1 Specimen Dimensions (in) Gage Length 6 Shaft D 0.505 Shaft Area 0.200296167 SOURCES Department of Civil Engineering. (2023, Fall). CE 311 Laboratory 1. Las Cruces, New Mexico: New Mexico State University. Retrieved from laboratory instructions paper: CE_311_Laboratory_1_Stress-Strain Relationships from Tensions Tests

CE 311 Lab Report 1 L Mauriot

Related Documents