FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

PDT 204
APPLIED STRENGTH OF MATERIAL LAB

LABORATORY REPORT 1
(TENSILE TEST)

SEMESTER 3 2020/2021
MATERIAL PROCESSING (RY – 58)

NAME: MUHAMMAD ALIFF HAIKAL BIN SHOLAHUDIN

MATRIC NO: 191352635

LECTURER NAME:

1. DR. ABDUL SYAFIQ BIN ABDULL SUKOR

2. PM. DR. MUHAMAD SAIFULDIN ABDUL MANAN

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 4TH DECEMBER 2020

PDT 204 – Applied Strength of Material Laboratory Module

Name: MUHAMMAD ALIFF HAIKAL BIN SHOLAHUDIN Date: 24/11/2020

Matrix No: 191352635

DATA & RESULT

TABLE 1
Material Name Plastic Mild steel
Original Diameter(mm) 11.7 12.6
Original Gage Length(mm) 100 100
Final Diameter(mm) 10.8 8.1
Final Gage Length(mm) 123.1 104.6

TABLE 2 (Mild Steel)

Load Force Elongation
No (kN) (mm)
1 0.198682 0

2 0.198682 4.17E-05

3 0.198682 0.000271

… … …

end -568.35 24.20369

TABLE 3 (Plastic)
Load Force Elongation
No (kN) (mm)
1 0.794729 0

2 0.874202 5.21E-05

3 0.874202 0.00049

… … …

end -10.2917 47.05174

1
PDT 204 – Applied Strength of Material Laboratory Module

Force Vs Elongation (Mild Steel)

12000

10000

8000
Force (N)

6000

4000

2000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-2000
Elongation (mm)

Fig. 1(a) Force vs. Elongation curve (Mild Steel)

Force Vs Elongation (Plastic)

1600

1400

1200

1000
Force (N)

800

600

400

200

0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50
-200
Elongation (mm)

Fig. 1(b) Force vs. Elongation curve (Plastic)

2
PDT 204 – Applied Strength of Material Laboratory Module

TABLE 4 (Mild Steel)

Load Elongation Stress Strain
No (kN) (mm) (MPa) (%)
1 0.198682 0
0.0046 0
2 0.198682 4.17E-05 0.0046 5.21E-05
3 0.198682 0.000271 0.0046 0.00049
… … … … …

end -568.35 24.20369 -13.1593 0.242037

TABLE 5 (Plastic)
Load Elongation Stress Strain
No (kN) (mm) (MPa) (%)
1 0.794729 0
0.017579 0
2 0.874202 5.21E-05 0.019336 5.21E-07
3 0.874202 0.00049 0.019336 4.9E-06
… … … … …

end -10.2917 47.05174 -0.22764 0.470517

3
PDT 204 – Applied Strength of Material Laboratory Module

Stress Vs Strain ( Mild Steel )

300

250

200
Stress (MPa)

150

100

50

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
-50
Strain (%)

Fig. 2(a) Stress vs. Strain (Mild Steel)

Stress Vs Strain (Plastic)

35

30

25

20
Stress (MPa)

15

10

0
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
-5
Strain (%)

Fig. 2(b) Stress vs. Strain (Plastic)

4
PDT 204 – Applied Strength of Material Laboratory Module

DISCUSSION / EVALUATION & QUESTION

- Briefly summarize the key results of experiment

During this tensile test, specimen A is mild steel and specimen B is plastic gives
two different mechanical properties. Mild steel possesses better stiffness and can
withstand more stress while being stretched or pulled. We can conclude that the mild
steel is more ductile than plastic based on the graph. The amount of force used to
break down the plastic is less than mild steel, which required more strength.

- Explain the significance of your findings

One of the objectives from this testing is to understand the concept of mechanical
properties of solid materials. This can be related from the outcome of the testing itself.
The findings of the test can be seen plainly, the elongation of the plastic is longer
compared to the elongation of the mild steel.
Next, to construct the stress-strain diagram based on Universal Testing Machine.
As data had been collected, graph of stress vs strain can be calculated and plotted
using Microsoft Excel. The graph itself is precise enough even though consists of
thousands of data.

- Explain any unusual difficulties or problems which may have led to poor results.

• The test frame itself will also deflect under load. Deflection may or may
not be linear, depending on the geometry of the load cell and the test frame.
• The extensometer can only measure a small amount of elongation which
normally only occurs within the linear region of a stress strain graph (The elastic
region).
• Since the specimen does not have a label to be seized by the system, the
method of positioning the specimen becomes unreliable.

- Offer suggestions for how the experimental procedure or design could be

improved.
Nonetheless, the recorded data may not be 100 percent accurate since we only
performed the test on for each specimen form. Error that may occur during this
experiment requires error of parallax during measurement readings. We are advised to
use vernier caliper to measure the parameters of the test specimen more than twice to
assess the reading. In addition, zero error may also occur due to lack of calibration of
the vernier caliper. We are advised to test the vernier caliper before calculation to avoid
this happening. In addition, it's also important to consider placing the test specimen on
the universal testing machine and the calibration of the machine itself.