Experimental analysis of mechanical properties in metals and polymers
By:Jad El Ghaziri
Username:JFeg21
Words: 1493
Abstract
This report aims to find the mechanical properties of different materials, through tensile
testing using an Instron machine. The results show differences in stiffness, strength, and
ductility allowing for informed decisions to be made in regards to engineering.
Introduction
Understanding the mechanical properties of a material is essential in engineering to ensure
that the material is able to withstand the stresses and strains it is put under. The mechanical
properties of material can be found through experimentation. This experiment considers two
types of materials, metals and polymers; and aims to find the Elastic Modulus i.e Young’s
Modulus E (GPa) and It’s uncertainty, Yield Stress σy (MPa), Tensile Stress σTS (MPa), and
Elongation εf (% at failure). A linear relationship between Force applied (F) and resulting
extension (∆L) was first proposed by Robert Hook. This idea was built on by Thomas Young
who theorised that the constant of proportionality between elastic stress and elastic strain,
now commonly known as Young’s Modulus, is the modulus of stiffness of a material. The
equations are as follows:
Stress (σ) = 𝐹/𝐴 (1)
Strain (ε) = Δ𝐿/𝐿 (2)
Modulus (E) = σ/ε (3) [1,2]
Method
Our experiment involved the mechanical testing of four different materials, normalised steel
(0.1% Carbon 220M07) and aluminium alloy 2011-T3, for the metals and nylon 6
(NH(CH2)6CO) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) (CH2C(CH3)COOCH3), for the
polymers. A standardised dumbbell shaped specimen (figure 1) of length 25 mm and
diameter 5 mm was used for the test. A Vernier Caliper can be used to ensure the length
and diameter of the specimen.
Figure 1: Metals Specimen
Metals:
For the metals test the sample was placed into a 30 KN Instron testing machine (figure 2). A
button end grip was used to fasten the specimen in the machine (figure 3). Before any force
is applied the debris shield was closed ensuring that no flying fragments escape when the
fracture occurs. The Instron machine then began applying a force on the specimen;
measuring the extension, force applied, and time passed using built in sensors. A second set
of tests were taken for the metals using an extensometer (figure 4). When using the
extensometer the test is stopped past the limit of proportionality in other words the test only
considers the elastic region, disregarding the plastic deformation. This allows for a more
accurate calculation for Young’s Modulus.
Figure 2: Instron Testing Machine
Figure 3: Specimen Fastened with Button Grip
Figure 4: Specimen with Extensometer Attached
Polymers:
The polymers tests followed the same basic principle as the metals tests. The samples are
loaded into a 5 KN Instron testing machine. These samples are flat instead of round so a
wedge grip is used instead (figure 4). Once again the debris shield was closed before any
force was applied. As the force is applied measurements can be taken the same way as for
the metals test, by using the built in sensors, and stored in an excel file.
Figure 4: Wedge grip
The excel files can then be imported into Matlab allowing stress (σ) and strain (ε) to be
calculated and graphed. The graphs can be plotted using the plot function on Matlab (figure
5). Then using the polyfit function and using a specific linear limit (different for each material)
the elastic modulus and standard error can be calculated (Table 1). For the metals a linear
graph for the extensometer is used instead to find elastic modulus for a more accurate result
(figure 6).The ultimate stress can be calculated by finding the maximum stress on the graph,
while the yield stress can be calculated using the 0.2% proof stress. The % elongation at
failure is calculated by dividing the extension at failure and the original length and multiplying
by one hundred (Table 2). Finally an additional five data sets for each material are used to
find the weighted average of the elastic modulus and the standard error.
Results
Figure 5: Stress and Strain Graphs
Figure 6: Extensometer Graphs
Table 1: Elastic Modulus and Standard Error
Material Elastic Modulus (GPa) Standard Error (GPa)
PMMA 2.14 0.0044
Nylon 6 0.76 0.0115
Aluminium alloy 78.7 0.044
Steal (normalized) 210 0.054
Table 2: Yield Stress, Ultimate Stress, and %Elongation at failure
Material Yield Stress Ultimate Stress Elongation
(MPa) (MPA) (%)
PMMA 63 63 4.8
Nylon 6 53 97 633
Steel (normalized) 405 478 41.4
Aluminum Alloy 340 428 22.6
Table 3: PMMA Elastic Modulus
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Average
Elastic 2.14 1.97 1.95 1.87 2.08 1.94 1.94
Modulus
(GPa)
Standard 0.0044 0.0017 0.0013 0.0011 0.0018 0.0017 0.00064
Error
(Ga)
E = 1.94 ± 0.0064 GPa
Table 4: Nylon 6 Elastic Modulus
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Average
Elastic 0.76 0.78 0.70 0.73 0.87 0.78 0.76
Modulus
(GPa)
Standard 0.0115 0.0044 0.0038 0.0039 0.0052 0.0042 0.0019
Error
(MPa)
E = 0.76 ± 0.0019 GPa
Table 5: Steel Elastic Modulus
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Average
Elastic 210 221 207 202 234 213 211
Modulus
(GPa)
Standard 0.054 0.11 0.1 0.12 0.24 0.15 0.039
Error
(GPa)
E = 211 ± 0.039 GPa
Table 6: Aluminum Alloy
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Average
Elastic 78.7 69.7 69.4 68.5 70.5 73.9 69.8
Modulus
(GPa)
Standard 0.044 0.014 0.0067 0.01 0.025 0.016 0.0048
Error
(GPa)
E = 69.8 ± 0.0048 GPa
Discussion:
The strain-stress curves for all the materials demonstrates a linear region at relatively low
stresses. For metals the linear region where elastic deformation is observed seems to be at
stress less than 400 MPa, whereas polymers appear to undergo elastic deformation at
stresses less than 100 MPa. These findings are consistent with Hooke's Law as stress is
directly proportional to strain. The Instron machine is made out of materials with similar
physical properties as the metal specimen, This means that when high forces are applied the
grips along with other parts of the Instron machine can be deformed, causing inaccuracies in
the measurement of extension. Using an extensometer rectifies this; therefore the data from
the extensometer tests are used to calculate the elastic modulus.
The yield stress indicates the beginning of plastic deformation and the value varies for the
different materials. As observed on the graphs the metals had clear yield points while the
polymers had a more gradual transition from elastic to plastic deformation.
Additionally the yield point phenomenon is seen on the steel stress-strain graph as there is a
sharp drop in stress levels at the limit of elastic deformation, a plateau in stress levels can
then be observed. There appears to be a higher and lower yield point and this is caused by
imperfections in the crystal lattice that restrict the movement and dislocation of atoms.
Therefore a higher stress is needed to overcome these restrictions and this causes the
higher yield point. When these restrictions are overcome the stress needed to cause
deformation which results in the lower yield point [4]. The plateau in stress levels is caused
by Luder bands. These are bands which are sometimes visible which form at stress
concentrations in the specimen (typically at 45° to the force applied). Once the entire
specimen has deformed plastically, work hardening sets in, forcing a higher stress to be
needed in order for defamation to occur [5].
The metals and polymers exhibited significantly different physical properties. steel had the
highest elastic modulus meaning it was the stiffest while nylon was the least stiff. In general
the metals tended to be stiffer than the polymers. steel was also the strongest material as it
withstood the highest stress before fracture. PMMA was the weakest most likely due to its
brittle nature as it had no plastic deformation before fracture. On the other hand the most
ductile material appeared to be nylon as it deformed significantly before fracturing.
PMMA and nylon are both polymers however they behave very differently under stress. They
both consist of long carbon chains. nylon’s atoms are able to extend along the chain allowing
for elastic deformation as well as shift, in other words the atoms are rearranged, allowing for
plastic deformation. PMMA’s atoms are unable to ‘shift’ therefore plastic deformation is
impossible.
Comparing the calculated values to accepted textbook values, the calculated value of steel’s
yield stress and elastic modulus fits the (400-500 MPa) and (200 GPa) range. Additionally
aluminums values fit in with a yield stress range of (310-380 MPa) and an elastic modulus of
(70 GPa). On the other hand PMMA does not fit an elastic modulus of (3-4 GPa) but does fit
a yield stress of (50-70 MPa). Finally nylon fits a yield stress of (60-85 MPa) and an elastic
modulus of (2-4 GPa).
Errors in measurement are unavoidable in all experiments. These may include differences in
the physical properties of the materials, for example slight structural differences or
temperature differences. Moreover misalignments when using the machine itself cause
inaccuracies, for example the ‘slipping’ of the specimen at the start of the experiment due to
gaps between it and the fasteners. To mitigate these errors a weighted average technique is
used. This technique considers several data sets and considers their relative uncertainties to
mitigate the effect of outliers and random errors. This improves the reliability of the final
result.
The different physical properties of these materials make them useful for different aspects in
engineering. The steel being the strongest and stiffest is ideal for load bearing uses.
Aluminium is still relatively strong and stiff while being lightweight making it useful in
aerospace and automotive industries. Nylon being ductile makes it useful for applications
needing flexibility and durability such as for gears. Finally PMMA is brittle however it can still
be useful for components that need to be lightweight and don’t require much plasticity.
Conclusion
In conclusion this experiment found the mechanical properties of four different materials:
steel, aluminium, PMMA, and Nylon through tensile testing. Steel appeared to be the stiffest
as well as the toughest with the highest elastic modulus and tensile strength. Nylon was
proven to be the most ductile with PMMA being the most brittle, while aluminium showed
moderate properties. The yield phenomenon was observed in the steel specimen and the
polymers showed gradual yielding. A weighted average technique was used to reduce
uncertainties in measurements. These findings allow engineers to choose the correct
material in design which is essential for safety and innovation.
References
1. Callister, W.D., Materials science and engineering. 9th ed, ed. D.G. Rethwisch. 2015:
Wiley.
2. Ashby, M.F., Engineering materials 1 : an introduction to properties, applications and
design. 3rd ed, ed. D.R.H. Jones. 2005, Amsterdam, London: Elsevier
ButterworthHeinemann.
3. ResearchGate, n.d. Experimental setup: Schematic representation of INSTRON O
VHS 8800 setup. [image online] Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Experimental-setup-a-Schematic-representation-
of-INSTRON-O-VHS-8800-setup-and-b_fig2_270163132 [Accessed 5 January 2025].
4. Callister, W.D. and Rethwisch, D.G., 2015. Materials Science and Engineering: An
Introduction. 9th ed. Wiley.
5. ADMET, 2025. Lüders Bands Phenomenon in ASTM E8 Tensile Testing. [online]
Available at:
https://www.admet.com/blog/luders-bands-phenomenon-in-astm-e8-tensile-testing/
[Accessed 4 January 2025].
