Usyd

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 5/21/2018 Usyd

    1/4

    MECH3362 3 Point bending Flynn Gould

    Materials 2 bending lab report 311225977

    Page 1of 4

    Aim:

    To determine the flexural strength and modulus of the glass slide using a three point bending test.

    Results

    1) Both sides of the glass sanded with coarse sand paper.2)

    3)

    4) Fracture load P = 22.79N

    Geometry of Specimen:

    L 50 mm

    t 25.513 Mm

    c 0.513 Mm

    I 2.29627E-12 m^4

    Flexural Strength

    P 22.79 N

    M 0.284875 Nm

    fb63.64 MPa

    Flexural Modulus

    K = P/v 57900 N/m

    E 65.66 GPa

    y = 0.0559x

    -0.005

    0

    0.005

    0.01

    0.015

    0.02

    0.025

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

    Load

    (kN)

    Deflection (mm)

    Load vs deflection diagram

    Series1

    Linear (Series1)

  • 5/21/2018 Usyd

    2/4

    MECH3362 3 Point bending Flynn Gould

    Materials 2 bending lab report 311225977

    Page 2of 4

    Using the data from the tables in section 2 and the formulas above the flexural strength was

    calculated to be

    Flexural Strength(fb)= 63.64 MPa

    5) Load deflection diagram along the linear portion from 0.1mm to 0.2mm

    Therefore: dp/dv = 0.056 kN/mm = 56000 N/m

    Using the slope taken from the diagram, the geometry of the specimen and the formulas

    above the flexural modulus was calculated to be

    Flexural Modulus (E)= 63.51 GPa

    y = 0.056x - 0.0017

    R = 0.9997

    0

    0.002

    0.004

    0.006

    0.008

    0.01

    0.012

    0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

    Load

    (kN)

    Deflection (mm)

    Load vs Deflection diagram

    Series1

    Linear (Series1)

  • 5/21/2018 Usyd

    3/4

    MECH3362 3 Point bending Flynn Gould

    Materials 2 bending lab report 311225977

    Page 3of 4

    6)

    Discussion

    Discussion:

    1) By observing the force vs displacement curve, it can be seen that it is not completelylinear. Which would suggest that the components within the crosshead which have some

    backlash or is picking up interference as the specimen begins to crack.

    The specimen suffered from brittle fracture suddenly with a loud crack. The displacement

    was only 0.4mm.

    After calculating the slope of the graph several times the most linear section was selected

    as seen by the R^2 values of the trend line.

    Name (MPa) E (GPa) Treatment

    Robert 83.50 71.12 None

    andi 60.69 67.79 None

    cat 65.43 67.08 Top Side, Compression

    Miao 59.78 67.34 Bottom Side, Tension

    Junting 71.22 72.53 Both Side

    HongJian 57.37 61.59 Top Side, Compression

    Joey 44.57 56.40 Bottom Side, Tension

    Kevin 105.48 84.92 Both Siderunming 62.66 66.61 Both Side

    dixon 74.58 62.81 Top Side, Compression

    flynn 63.64 63.51 Both Side

    Average Stress (MPa) 68.08

    Average E (GPa) 67.42706174

    Standard Deviation () 15.92391202Standard Deviation (E) 7.342137271

  • 5/21/2018 Usyd

    4/4

    MECH3362 3 Point bending Flynn Gould

    Materials 2 bending lab report 311225977

    Page 4of 4

    2) The calculated values of both the flexural strength and modulus were lower than theaverage. This is most likely due to the range of different treatments that were

    applied to the glass slides as well as pre-existing defects. If all the slide has no

    treatment or a controlled method of applying one type of treatment the averagewould be closer together.

    Both values, however, fall roughly within the range as specified by a material science

    website. For example, the expected value for the flexural modulus of glass is between

    5090GPa; my value was 63.51Gpa.

    Conclusion: Two key properties of the glass material were determined which would have otherwise

    been difficult using a regular stress-strain test. These properties were the flexural modulus and

    strength, which were 63.51GPa and 63.64MPa respectively.