Lab Report - Tensile Testing

MCET 211 Group 2 Tuesday 11 AM
Section: 01 Tensile Testing
MCET 211
Materials in Engineering Design Lap
Tensile Testing
By
Dustyn Crowley
Matt Eckert
Patricia Delph
For
Prof. Michael J. Parthum Jr.
Group 2
Date Performed: 2/13/17
Date Submitted: 2/21/17
Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Rochester Institute of Technology Page 1 of 19
Table of Contents
1.0 ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………... 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 3
2.1 Background………………………………………………………………………... 3
2.1.1 Test………………………………………………………………………..... 3
2.1.2 Materials……………………………………………………………………. 3
2.1.3 Structure - Property Relationship (theory)........................................... 4
2.2 Goals and Objectives………………………………………………………..….... 4
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF TEST…………………………………………………………… 5
3.1 Procedure………………………………………………………………………….. 5
3.2 Apparatus………………………………………………………………………...... 5
4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS………………………………………………………….6
4.3 Data Products……………………………………………………………………....8
5.0 DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………….13
6.0 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………….. 15
7.0 APPENDIX……………………………………………………………………………. 16
Raw Data…...…………..…………………………………………………………….... 16
Reference…….………..……………………...……………………………………….. 19
Group Activity Report….…………………………………………………………….... 19

1.0 ABSTRACT
Abstract
In this experiment, three materials (HDPE, LDPE, and HIPS) were tested to determine
their tensile properties using an Instron Materials Testing Machine per ASTM D 638. The
materials were also tested at two different strain rates (2 in/min and 20 in/min) to evaluate the
difference, if any, strain rate makes.
The material with the highest ultimate tensile strength, yield strength, and elastic
modulus was the Hyrene (HIPS). All comparisons between the materials were done at the 2
in/min strain rate since that is the standard. One of the reasons HIPS had the best mechanical
properties of the three materials is because it also has the greatest density. The more dense the
material, the greater the mechanical properties will be due to how tightly the polymers are able
to pack.
Comparing strain rates, all three materials generally showed an increase in yield
strength and ultimate tensile strength. This follows published data that states that at higher
strain rates materials will exhibit higher strength properties9.
2.0 INTRODUCTION:
2.1 Background
2.1.1 Test
Polymers will have different strength properties depending upon chain length, density,
bonds, and many other factors. To test for the difference in these properties, samples are
placed into a Materials Testing Machine. This machine pulls the sample apart at a given rate
and calculates the yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, % elongation, and % reduction in
area. For this experiment, three different materials (HDPE, LDPE, and HIPS) were tested and
compared.
Another test that was run in this experiment was different strain rates on each of the
materials. Samples were first pulled at a rate of 2 in/min according to ASTM D 638. After pulling
at the standard rate, samples were then pulled at 20 in/min. The goal of this test was to
determine the strain rate effect. When samples are pulled at a low strain rate, the standard in
this case, the toughness of the material is more apparent. When the strain rate increases, the
material's strength and stiffness become more apparent9.
2.1.2 Materials
The materials used for Tensile Testing were HDPE (High-density polyethylene), LDPE
(Low-density polyethylene) and HIPS (High impact polystyrene). The HDPE plastic is a
polyethylene thermoplastic that is made of petroleum. It has high density, high strength, high
impact resistance, lightweight, can last for a long time, and resists the weather as well. It is
widely used for bottles and containers for foods, drinks, personal care products such as
shampoo, and household products. The LDPE plastic is a thermoplastic that is made of
monomer ethylene. It is low density, high impact resistance, high moisture resistance, high
chemical resistance, lightweight, and strong. It is widely used for shopping bags, toys, germ-free
packages, insulations of cables and wires, and plastic film.

Figure 1: The Structure of Polyethylene (used in both HDPE and LDPE). 1

The HIPS plastic is a polystyrene thermoplastic that is made of rubber and general
purpose polystyrene (GPPS). It has high impact resistance, and low strength. It is widely used
for television, appliance parts, bicycle trailer, hot and cold drink cups, instruments panels and
gasoline tanks.
Figure 2: The Structure of Polystyrene (HIPS).4
2.1.3 Structure –Property relationship (theory)

Tensile strength of a polymer varies with density. The more dense a polymer, the higher
the tensile strength will be. If a polymer is branched, then the density will decrease since
branching doesn’t allow for tight packing or folding. Linear polymers are much denser since
there is nothing in the way of them getting close to each other. The only exception to this is
cross-linking. Though the density of the material may be lower, the cross-linked covalent bonds
provide the polymers with strength when under load.
2.2 Goals and Objectives:

The goal of this experiment was to compare tensile properties of three different materials
(HDPE, LDPE, HIPS) and at two different loading rates (2 in/min and 20 in/min). The properties
were also compared to published data, only for the 2 in/min per ASTM D 638. Another goal was
to determine what relationship existed between the materials and their differing tensile
properties.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF TEST

3.1 Procedure
The two samples of each HDPE, LDPE, and HIPS was picked to be tested in this
experiment and used the system of ASTM D 638. One sample of each materials were tested
at the loading rate of 2 in/min and the other samples were tested at the loading rate of 20
in/min.
An Instron Material Testing Machine was used for this experiment. The samples were
loaded into the machine, the load rate was set and the test was run. The machine collected
all of the data for later analysis while the samples were pulled by the load. A sample of
HDPE was tested first with the loading rate of 2 in/min, then the data was saved into the
flash-drive. A sample of LDPE was tested second with the loading rate of 2 in/min and the
data was saved. A sample of HIPS was tested third with the loading rate of 2 in/min and the
data was saved. The second samples of each material was repeated but with the loading
rate of 20 in/min and the data was saved each time into the flash-drive.
3.2 Apparatus
Figure 3: Tensile Machine: Instron

The tensile machine, Instron, is used to determine the Ultimate Tensile Strength,
Modulus of Elasticity, Yield Offset, Elongation, and the breaking point. This specific machine
is used for plastics and non-metallic polymers.

4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Table 1: Summary Table for important data collected by the tensile tester

Table 2: Differences between experimental and published data for Yield Strength and %
Elongation at break

4.3 Data Products
Graph 1: Stress-Strain diagram for the six plastic samples.
Per the data supplied by the tensile testing device, the ultimate tensile strength for
HDPE at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 21.84 MPa. The ultimate tensile strength
of LDPE at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 14.97 MPa. The ultimate tensile
strength of HIPS at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 28.68 MPa.
For an extension rate of 20 inches per minute, the ultimate tensile strength for HDPE is
42.79 MPa. At an extension rate of 20 inches per minute, the ultimate tensile strength for LDPE
was 15.76 MPa. At an extension rate of 20 inches per minute, the ultimate tensile strength for
HIPS was 34.38 MPa.

Graph 2: HDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute
Per the data displayed in Graph 2, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen of
HDPE at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 21.84 MPa. The yield strength was
roughly 16 MPa, the modulus of elasticity as calculated using the linear elastic region was 9.3
MPa, and the % elongation of the part reached 1012% before the tensile tester ran out of travel.
Graph 3: LDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute
Per the data displayed in Graph 3, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen of
LDPE at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute is 14.97 MPa. The yield strength was roughly

7 MPa, the modulus of elasticity as calculated using the linear elastic region was 1.8 MPa, and
the % elongation of the part reached 240% before the specimen broke.
Graph 4: HIPS stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute
Per the data displayed in Graph 4, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen of HIPS
at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 28.68 MPa. The yield strength was roughly the
same, the modulus of elasticity as calculated using the linear elastic region was 21.26 MPa, and
the % elongation of the part reached 63.64% before the specimen broke.

Graph 5: HDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute
Per the information displayed in Graph 5, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen
of HDPE at an extension rate of 20 inches per minute was 42.79 MPa. The yield strength as
calculated using the 0.2% offset line was roughly 41 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 19.08
MPa, and the % elongation was 35.12%.
Graph 6: LDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute
As displayed on Graph 6, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen of LDPE at an
extension rate of 20 inches per minute was 15.48 MPa. The yield strength as calculated using
the 0.2% offset line was roughly 9 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 2.68 MPa, and the %
elongation was 212.24%.
Graph 7: HIPS stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute
Per the data displayed in Graph 7, the ultimate tensile strength for the specimen of HIPS
at an extension rate of 2 inches per minute was 34.38 MPa. The yield strength was roughly the
same as the ultimate tensile strength, the modulus of elasticity as calculated using the linear
elastic region was 19.01 MPa, and the % elongation of the part reached 65.83%
5.0 DISCUSSION

Tensile testing was performed using three different plastics, each at two different
extension speeds. The first plastic was high density polyethylene DMDA 8904 NT7, the second
plastic tested was low density polyethylene NA960000, and the last was Entec Hyrene® PS-HI
8/2 High Impact Polystyrene. Each plastic type was run at two different tensile extension
speeds: 2 inches per minute, and 20 inches per minute. Tensile testing was performed per
ASTM D638 standards.
Of the three plastics tested, HIPS had the highest ultimate and yield tensile strength,
~28 MPa for both, at 2 in./min. At an extension rate of 20 in./min, HDPE had the highest
ultimate tensile strength, 42.79 MPa, while HIPS had the highest yield strength, 34.38 MPa. The
greatest elongation noted for any of the samples was 1012% for HDPE at 2 in./min, while the
greatest elongation at 20 in./min was significantly less at 212% for LDPE (see Table #1).
Of the three plastics tested, LDPE was the only plastic that displayed brittle material
characteristics, i.e. no peak at the ultimate tensile strength point followed by a drop. This held
true for LDPE at both 2 in./min and 20 in./min extension rates (see Graphs #3 & #6). LDPE acts
as a brittle material due to the structure of the polymer chains, which are branched. Polymers
with branched chains tend to stretch poorly, because the branches wrap around other chains,
stiffening and strengthening the polymer while also reducing its ability to stretch.
Both HDPE and HIPS at 2 in./min and 20 in./min displayed characteristics of ductile
materials. This means that their stress-strain graphs had an initial spike at ultimate tensile
strength, followed by a rapid drop in strength and they a gradual increase in strength until the
specimen broke. The only exception to this was HDPE, which did not break before the tensile
machine ran out of travel. These plastics act as ductile materials due to the polymer chain
structure type, which are linear. Linear polymers stretch well, due to a lack of branching or
crosslinking.
The three different plastics all displayed higher yield and ultimate tensile strength at the
higher extension rate, while HDPE and LDPE displayed greater % elongation at the lower
extension rate. HIPS responded very similarly in both cases. The reason why all the plastics
displayed a higher yield and ultimate tensile strength at the higher extension rate is due to the
inability of the polymers to stretch. Very little stretching occurred for in the polymer structures,
which caused the cross-sectional area to remain roughly the same, ultimately causing the yield
and tensile strength to go up. At a lower extension speed, however, the polymer chains were
able to stretch, reducing the cross-sectional area. Because of this, the % elongation for LDPE
and HDPE were greater at the lower speed, but their yield and tensile strengths were also less
than at the higher extension rate. Additionally, both HDPE and LDPE have significant
percentages of crystalline structures, 90% and 40% respectively, which will uncoil when placed
under stress, thereby increasing the % elongation of the specimens.
HIPS responded similarly to both extension rates because, unlike the other two plastics,
HIPS has a phenyl group within the monomer structure. This phenyl group impacts the material
properties in two different ways. Firstly, the phenyl groups cause increased polymer stiffness,
giving HIPS greater impact resistance and relatively high strengths at lower extension rates. On
the other hand, however, the phenyl groups do not allow the polymer chains to align themselves
in crystal structures. Therefore, due to the polymer being stiff and amorphous, it does not
stretch well. These results exactly match the behavior of HIPS as observed under tensile
loading conditions.
Marked differences were noted between experimental and published data. It is, however,
important to note that published data could not be found to compare to all the experimental
data, leaving potential errors unaccounted for in the experimental process. As such, the largest
difference noted was a 53.6% difference between the experimental % elongation of LDPE at 2
in./min, 239% elongation, and the published value of 515% elongation. The smallest difference
was a 9.6% difference between the experimental and published value for yield strength of HIPS.
This significant error in % elongation can be attributed to two potential sources: 1) an incorrect
value was used for published data, or 2) the tensile test specimen was of the wrong material.
Major sources of error in this lab originate from several areas. First, user knowledge of
the tensile testing machine, such as improper loading techniques. Next, with so many available
tensile testing methods, finding data created following ASTM standard D638 and the correct
extension rate posed several problems. As much data as possible was found from credible
sources, and the rest of the experimental data was left uncompared. A third a very slight source
of error may have been the dimensions entered for the tensile specimen, or the calibration of
the machine itself.
Picture 1: Samples of HDPE, LDPE and HIPS, in respective order from top to bottom, at a
loading rate of 2 in./min
Picture 2: Samples of HDPE, LDPE, and HIPS, in respective order from top to bottom, at a
loading rate of 20 in/min
6.0 CONCLUSION

In this lab, plastic tensile testing was performed to determine the material properties of
high density polyethylene (HDPE) DMDA 8904 NT7, low density polyethylene (LDPE)
NA960000, and Entec Hyrene® PS-HI 8/2 High Impact Polystyrene (HIPS). The material
properties measured and calculated for this lab were ultimate and yield tensile strength,
modulus of elasticity, and % elongation at break.
Based on the testing performed, the traits of each plastic type were determined. At an
extension speed of 2 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength of HDPE was 21.84 MPa, the yield
strength was 16 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 9.3 MPa, and the % elongation reached
1012% before the tensile tester ran out of travel. At 20 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength of
HDPE was 42.79 MPa, the yield tensile strength was 41 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was
19.08 MPa, and the % elongation was 35.12%.
For LDPE at an extension rate of 2 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength was 14.97 MPa,
the yield strength was 7 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 1.8 MPa, and the % elongation was
240%. At 20 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength was 15.79 MPa, the yield strength was 9 MPa,
the modulus of elasticity was 2.68 MPa, and the % elongation was 212%.
For HIPS at an extension rate of 2 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength was 28.68 MPa,
the yield strength was 28.5 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 21.26 MPa, and the %
elongation was 63.64%. At 20 in./min, the ultimate tensile strength was 34.38 MPa, the yield
strength was 34 MPa, the modulus of elasticity was 19.01 MPa, and the % elongation was
65.83%. See Table #1 for a summary of this data, as well as for HDPE and LDPE.
Comparing the test results to published data proved to be an obstacle. Finding published
data for exactly these plastics at exactly these feed rates using exactly the same ASTM test
standard proved to be difficult. What data that could be found was used, however, at which point
some considerable differences were noted between experimental and published data. The
largest difference seen in yield strength difference was 31.6% difference between the
experimental and published value for HDPE. For % elongation at break, the largest difference
between experimental and published data was 53.6% for LDPE.
From a structural standpoint, different traits in the plastics tested originate from
differences in the polymer chain structures. These qualities relate to the type of chain structure,
whether linear or branched, the level of crystallization within the polymer, and whether or not
phenyl groups are present within the monomer.
Error was an important factor in this lab report, concerning both the test data and the
differences between test data and published data. Errors in the test data may have occurred
due to lack of proper sample size and incorrect loading or operation of the tensile tester.
Concerning the published data, differences are significant enough to lead to one of two
conclusions. Either 1) the plastic samples tested were not made of the right material, or 2)
incorrect data was used for comparison.

7.0 APPENDIX
Raw Data
See Attached Spreadsheet for Raw Data
Graph 8: HDPE with 2 in/min load rate
Graph 9: LDPE with 2 in/min load rate

Graph 10: HIPS with with 2 in/min load rate
Graph 11: HDPE with 20 in/min load rate

Graph 12: LDPE wiTh 20 in/min load rate
Graph 13: HIPS with 20 in/min load rate

References
1. Chemical Structure of Polyethylene from Google.
http://www.tudosobreplasticos.com/Imagens/estruturaPE.jpg, Accessed February 16,
2017
2. Information on HDPE and LDPE from Plastic Make it Possible.
https://www.plasticsmakeitpossible.com/ Accessed February 16, 2017
3. Information on HIPS from Polystyrene Package Council.
http://www.polystyrenepackaging.co.za/et6-high-impact-polystyrene.htm Accessed
February 16, 2017
4. How to Make Stress-Strain Graphs and Calculate Modulus and % Elongation
https://www.ipc.org/TM/2.4.18.3.pdf
5. Chemical Structure of Polystyrene from Google.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mahasin_Al-
Kadhemy/publication/256442141/figure/fig2/AS:297970374332438@1448053081922/Fi
g-2-Chemical-structure-of-PS-Mitchell-2004.png Accessed February 16, 2017
6. HDPE Material Properties.
http://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet.aspx?matguid=a1d6b5d64f8f4184b7708583b
1ed2980 Accessed February 19, 2017
7. LDPE Material Properties.
http://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet.aspx?matguid=d205f4bf11aa446ebf7da105e
5cd9259&ckck=1, https://www.plasticsintl.com/datasheets/LDPE.pdf Accessed February
19, 2017
8. HIPS Material Properties. Accessed February 19, 2017
http://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet.aspx?matguid=c49f4fb2a4c347aca55f94cdc1
26a545
9. The Strain Rate Effect, Accessed February 20, 2017
http://www.ptonline.com/columns/the-strain-rate-effect
Group Activity Report

Dustyn Crowley did Table of Contents, Abstract, Test, Structure, Goals and Objectives,
Discussion and Reference. Matt Eckert did Results and Analysis, Data Products, Discussion,
Conclusion, Raw Data, and References. Patricia Delph did the first page of lab report, Table of
Contents, Materials and Procedure, Apparatus, Discussion, References, and Group activities
Report.


Lab Report - Tensile Testing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lab Report - Tensile Testing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MCET 211 Group 2 Tuesday 11 AM

Section: 01 Tensile Testing

Materials in Engineering Design Lap

Prof. Michael J. Parthum Jr.

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Figure 1: The Structure of Polyethylene (used in both HDPE and LDPE). 1

Figure 2: The Structure of Polystyrene (HIPS).4

2.1.3 Structure –Property relationship (theory)

2.2 Goals and Objectives:

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF TEST

Figure 3: Tensile Machine: Instron

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

4.3 Data Products

Graph 1: Stress-Strain diagram for the six plastic samples.

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 2: HDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute

Graph 3: LDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 4: HIPS stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 2 inches per minute

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 5: HDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute

Graph 6: LDPE stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute

Graph 7: HIPS stress-strain graph at an extension speed of 20 inches per minute

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 8: HDPE with 2 in/min load rate

Graph 9: LDPE with 2 in/min load rate

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 10: HIPS with with 2 in/min load rate

Graph 11: HDPE with 20 in/min load rate

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Graph 12: LDPE wiTh 20 in/min load rate

Graph 13: HIPS with 20 in/min load rate

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

Group Activity Report

Dustyn Crowley, Matt Eckert, Patricia Delph 2/17/17

You might also like