ENGI 5911: Chemistry and Physics of Materials II Dr.

Hsiao

III. RESULTS

A. Charpy Testing
Charpy Testing was performed on two 1018 carbon steel
specimens at different temperatures. The first specimen was
tensile tested at a room temperature of approximately 20C.
This was completed by the teaching assistants outside the
groups lab session. The second specimen, after being
immersed in liquid nitrogen (-190C), was Charpy tested at
approximately -20C by all the groups present in the same lab
slot. The Charpy Test results recorded for specimen 2 by
various groups:
P5Specimen 2 (-20C): 1.75 lb*ft
P2 Specimen 2 (-20C): 3 lb*ft
P3 Specimen 2 (-20C): 5 lb*ft
P4 Specimen 2 (-20C): 4 lb*ft
Although the impact for Specimen 1 was not measured it
can be assumed to have had a higher impact energy. As seen in
figure #, specimen 1 implies a more ductile fracture due to the
uneven fracture surface while specimen 2 shows a brittle
fracture indicated by the corresponding smooth surfaces at the
fracture. (Therefore a lower impact energy).

TABLE I
VALUES FOR YIELD STRESS, ULTIMATE TENSILE STRESS AND FRACTURE
STRESS

Yield Stress

142 MPa

Ultimate Tensile Stress

166 MPa

Stress at Fracture

111 MPa

Toughness

17.1 MPa

The toughness was calculated by integrating the stress-strain

curve.
From analyzing the raw data it was clear that after the
specimen was loaded into the grips of the test machine, the
machine was corrected for the zero error. This is made obvious
when analyzing the plotted data. The initial curve is flat and
fluctuates from stress values of 1.5 to 40 kPa. From this error,
an offset in the elongation and strain was present.
Rearranging the Hookes Law equation (#), you find that
the Modulus of Elasticity is determined from finding the slope
of the elastic region of the Stress vs Strain graph.

Specimen 1

Specimen 2

Fig. # Specimen 1 & 2 after Charpy Test

B. Tensile Testing
Through the collection of data from the load frame tensile
testing machine, it was possible to create a Stress vs Strain
graph for the specimen. This graph is shown in Fig. #. Table 1
identifies the values of the important points that are labelled
on the graph (y, u, f). Stress and strain were calculated
using equation # and equation #, respectively.

=Ft / A

(#)

= / L (#)

Fig. # Engineering Stress as a function of Strain

E=

Y
(#)

The elastic region of the Stress vs. Strain curve can be seen
in Fig. #. As mentioned above the data from the flat line has
been omitted from the curve to obtain the following graph.
The equation of the linear trendline, y = 2.45E + 06x 4.68E+04 and more specifically the 2.45E + 06 value gives the
slope of the line. The value of the slope (2.45 GPa) is the
Modulus of Elasticity.

ENGI 5911: Chemistry and Physics of Materials II Dr. Hsiao

Elastic Portion of Stress vs. Strain

100000
Stress

50000

f(x) = 2452826.08x - 46840.4

0
0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Strain

Fig. #. Elastic Portion of Stress vs. Strain Graph

The ductility of the specimen can be represented as a
function of elongation. The percent elongation (% EL) for the
specimen is calculated below.

%EL=

l f l O
100
lO

( )

mm58.08 mm
( 67.12 58.08
)100
mm

15.57
This 15.57 %EL refers to the degree of plastic tensile
deformation that the specimen underwent at fracture.
IV. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. Charpy Testing
The Charpy test demonstrated clearly that BCC materials
such as 1018 carbon steel become brittle at low temperatures.
It was also possible to prove that carbon steel also undergoes
an ductile to brittle transition. Tests at various temperatures
would show in a clearer fashion that this transition in ductility
and toughness occurs abruptly. There would also be a large
drop in the energy absorbed after a certain low temperature.
Nevertheless the values collected from other groups
conducting the experiment supported the argument that
material was in fact brittle. All the values were in the low
single digits and the differences in values could be attributed
to the staggered completion of the Charpy testing portion of
the lab by the groups. In other words since only one group
could complete the Charpy test at a time, specimens of
different groups would have been exposed to the liquid
nitrogen bath for different amounts of time. Hence, specimens
for different groups would in fact be at different temperatures,
potentially having an impact on the extent materials
brittleness and eventual energy absorbed values. Overall in
terms of qualitative analysis and visual inspection the 1018
steel sample showed the expected behavior. The impact energy
showed that as the material became brittle, no energy for
plastic deformation was required. Only a fraction of the

2
energy was needed to merely to separate the atoms and
produce new fracture surfaces.
Such Charpy tests at low temperature can be useful when
deciding on material selection for applications in cold
temperatures, such as in structures like bridges. Such results
must be treated with caution due to the variability of actual
conditions that may be faced by a material in the field.
B. Tensile testing
The tensile testing confirmed from a qualitative perspective
what was expected of carbon steel at room temperature. With
increasing load necking began to form approximately at the
midpoint section of the sample, which was followed by
continued plastic deformation until the fracture. The cup cone
arrangement of the two remaining halves after fracture is
common feature of ductile fractures, where small cracks
forming around the necking area continue to expand as
increased stress was applied. Gradually the cracks enlarge and
combine and spread laterally to the edges. The rough and
irregular nature of the specimens fracture surfaces,
characteristic of ductile fracture, confirmed this process was
occurring as they are the remnants of the formation and
coalescence of numerous small cracks.
Such fracture
mechanics cannot be considered highly ductile since that
would result in necking to a single point that would then
fracture. The shape of the engineering stress-strain curve was
also very similar to what was expected, with an elastic region
culminating in a yield strength that then formed a cone shape,
the maximum point of which was the ultimate tensile strength.
Finally this sloped downward to the fracture stress point.
Experimental

Accepted

Yield Stress

142 Mpa

370 Mpa

Ultimate
Tensile Stress

166 Mpa

440 Mpa

Modulus of
Elasticity

2.5 Gpa

205 Gpa

%EL

Percent
Elongation

15.57%

15%

A comparison between experimental and accepted values

reveals considerable disparities. These could be explained by
calibration errors such as the zero error already mentioned in
the load frame tensile testing machine. Any such systematic
errors would affect the modulus of elasticity value more than it
would the yield or ultimate tensile stress. This due to the fact
that the systematic error introduced during the calculation of
stress and strain is compounded for the calculation of the

ENGI 5911: Chemistry and Physics of Materials II Dr. Hsiao

modulus of elasticity. Since the %EL was calculated by taking

measurements of the sample before and after by the group
themselves using a Vernier caliper, rather than through
computational errors, no computational errors were
introduced. Even though the Vernier caliper itself may have
had calibration errors and random errors could have been
committed due to the difficulty of measuring the dimensions
of the fractured sample, the experimental %EL value is very
close to the accepted literature value. The same errors
discussed previously for the modulus of elasticity would have
also impacted the calculation of the toughness. A lack of
literature values for 1018 steel carbon toughness meant that
was not able to be confirmed.
As a concluding note, further experiments in this area could
have been focused on how the carbon content of carbon steel
would have impacted its properties such as ductility and
strength. Low carbon steel is used in many applications such
as the material for gears, ratchets and any other parts that dont
require severe bending. Being able to match possible
applications for other carbon steel grades based on their
experimental ductility and strength data would be a interesting
continuation to the lab already completed.

The values derived from the tensile testing lab were

consistent with that of a material undergoing elastic and then
plastic deformation that eventually results in a fracture. All the
values derived from the computational data collected in the lab
had considerable degrees of error that could be explained by
calibration and zero errors. This could be seen by the
divergence of the experimental values from the literature
values. The percentage elongation that was calculated using
specimen dimensions measured directly by the group was
consistent with the literature value. The values are
summarized below:

V. CONCLUSION
The purpose of the lab was to demonstrate brittle and
ductile fracture at different temperatures hence showing the
transition BCC metals have from ductile to brittle when their
temperature is lowered. Engineering stress and strain along
with a visual demonstration of fracture mechanics were the
main concepts the tensile testing component of the lab. The
Charpy test showed the low amount of energy needed for
brittle fracture compared to that for ductile fracture and
allowed for a comparison between the smooth surfaces of a
brittle fracture and the rough surface of a ductile fracture.

Yield Stress

142 MPa

Ultimate Tensile Stress

166 MPa

Stress at Fracture

111 MPa

%EL

Percent Elongation

15.57%

Toughness

17.1 MPa

REFERENCES
[1] William D. Callister, Jr. David G. Rethwisch, Mechanical
Properties of Metals Materials Science and Engineering an
Introduction 8th edition, United States Of America.
[2] Hsiao, Amy, Fracture, Fatigue and Failure and
Mechanical Properties Chemistry and Physics of Material II
lecture notes.
[3] Azom, AISI 1018 Mild/Low Carbon Steel The A to Z of
Materials, 13th July 2013
http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6115
[3] Laboratory for Scientific Visual Analysis, Ductile
Fracture, 27th January 2015
http://www.sv.vt.edu/classes/MSE2094_NoteBook/97ClassPro
j/exper/bailey/www/bailey.html