Name Lauren Wagner Section 09 Date 2 10 22 Instructor Lodhi E Mech 316 LAB 2 Tensile Behavior of a Ductile Metal To measure and determine the Tensile behavior of the ductile metal aluminum 6061 T6 through a dog bone specimen OBJECTIVE PROCEDURE First our group toke the measurement of the diameter of the specimen at the reduced section in the middle of the dog bone specimen We also toke an initial measurement of the gauge length of the sample Next the group toke the specimen and loaded it into the MTS Criterion testing machine so that of the gripping surface was in contact with the specimen Next the extensometer was attached and the zeroing pin was put into place on the sample Run the test according to the instructions provided making sure to remove the zeroing pin when prompted without disturbing the extensometer s position Once the sample has surpassed the proportional limit our group replaced the zeroing pin and removed the extensometer Lastly our group removed the fractured specimen from the machine measured the final diameter and then sketched the failed specimen DATA AND RESULTS Table 1 Dog bone dimensions 18 QUANTITY DIMENSION mm Initial diameter di 6 4 mm Sample Gauge length l0 77 15 mm Extensometer Gauge length le 25 4 mm Final diameter df 2 64 mm Table 2 Load Elongation Stress and Strain data Load Crosshead Elongation LCH Extensometer Elongation LEX Stress Crosshead Strain CH Extensometer Strain EX N mpa mm mm Total length 86 47mm Figure 1 Fracture surface ANALYSIS OF DATA Determination of specimen Area A pi 4 d 2 A pi 4 6 4 2 19 A 32 17 mm Sample calculation of Stress Strain Stress F A 37 30 32 15 1 16 mpa Crosshead strain F a 0 00404 32 15 0 00125 mm Extensometer strain extensometer Extensometer Gauge length 0 000373 25 4 1 46 10 5 mm Determination of Modulus of Elasticity E E stress strain 122 029 0 001989016 61014 MPa Determination of 0 2 Offset Yield Strength y y 0 002 1 159496 0 002 0 002 Determination of Ultimate Tensile Strength u Determination of Percent Elongation The highest max value 231 7034 MPa final gauge length initial gauge length initial gauge length 100 86 47 25 4 86 47 100 70 62 Determination of Modulus of Resilience Ur estimate P first Area under the graph 0 5 198 4 0 003 297600 Pa Determination of Modulus of Toughness UT Sigma yield sigma UTS 2 strain at fracture 231 003 205 3 2 0 1366706 29 814 MPa Determination of Toughness T 20 Area under the curve 297600 600000 897600 Pa Determination of Percent Reduction in Area 2 64 6 4 6 4 100 58 75 Figure 2 Full data plot Crosshead Figure 3 Yield strength plot Extensometer 21 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 1 Was the deformation of the specimen entirely uniform Explain The deformation of the specimen was uniform until it hit the UTS and started necking This caused the specimen to not be uniform 2 Was ratio of the gauge length to diameter ratio appropriate by ASTM standards at least 4 1 ratio The ratio was calculated to be 12 1 which is appropriate because it is greater than 4 1 3 Does Al 6061 T6 work harden If so to what degree Explain in detail All materials that undergoes plastic deformation undergoes work hardening This also shows that Al 6061 T6 can undergo work hardening This is computed by subtracting ultimate tensile strength by yield strength and then dividing the that by the yield strength 22 4 How did the Modulus of Toughness compare with the Toughness In what type of material is the Toughness exactly equal to the Modulus of Toughness The toughness is greater than the modulus of toughness for this material The brittle material will be exactly equal to the modulus of toughness This is because there is no plastic region 5 Describe the fracture surface of the specimen Is this expected Be sure to refer to Figure 1 The specimen had necking occur This is seen because there is a divot into the specimen showing that it was necking As well as the specimen s diameter was smaller after the necking than the original diameter before the load was applied CONCLUSIONS Al 6061 T6 when having a load applied will have necking occur before failing 23