Objective:

To determine the Impact Strength of Steel

Theory/ Literature Review The purpose of this experiment is mainly to determine the impact properties of selected materials. In our experiment, we conduct a test by using four types of specimen which are Brass, Aluminium, Steel and Copper. The tensile test is performed at a low strain rate at which the specimen is very slowly elongated. When a material is subjected to a sudden and intense blow and the strain is extremely rapid, the material may behave in a much more brittle manner than is observed in a tensile test. An impact test is often used to evaluate the brittleness of a material under these conditions. The test is based on breaking a specimen by using Kinetic Energy of a heavy pendulum which starts at an elevation , swings through ).

its arc and finally strikes and breaks the specimen, and reached a lower final elevation (

By knowing the Initial and Final elevations of the pendulum, the difference in potential energy can be calculated and the impact energy absorbed by the specimen during the test. The ability of a material to withstand an impact blow is often referred to as the toughness of the material. The Izod value is the amount of energy absorbed by the specimen and the larger this value the tougher the material. The actual figure has little absolute significance as because the exact mechanics of the test are not understood and the Izod values can only be used as a guide to the relative resistance of similar materials under specific condition which approximate to those of the test. Impact tests are used to identify the ability to resist the rapid propagation of a crack conditions. It measures the energy necessary to fracture a standard notched bar by a compact load, which is indicates of the notch toughness of a material under shock loading. A pendulum is released from a known height, strikes and breaks the sample of materials as it continues its upward swing which in this experiment used for testing is Brass, Aluminium, Steel, and Copper. From the knowledge of the mass of the pendulum and the difference between the initial and final heights, the energy absorbed in fracture can be calculated. The impact test indicates the notch sensitivity of a material which resulting from the presence of internal stress such as grain boundary inclusions, internal cracks and secondary phases. It is also useful as a production tool in comparing manufacturing materials with others which have proved satisfactory in service. Impact test is often used to assess the temperature of the transition from the ductile to brittle state which occurs as the temperature is lowered. The

1|Page

transition temperature is also dependent on the shape of the notch in the specimen. For identical materials, the sharper the notch, the higher the apparent transition temperature. Highly brittle materials have low-impact strength and temperature also influences impact strength of the materials. The area under the stress strain curve In a static tensile test is measure of the energy absorbed per unit volume of the material, called the modules of toughness. This is also a measure of the impact strength of the material. The impact loads can be applied in many ways. Allowing a standard mass to fall on the specimen from progressively increasing heights until fracture occurs test's rails and framed structural members. For Laboratory, Charpy and Izod impact tests are used which both tests employ beam type of specimen. Charpy - test are the specimen is supported as a simply supported beam. Izod - test a cantilever type of beam support.

These notched specimens are fractured with a standard blow from a pendulum hammer and energy absorbed is measured. In addition to these beam type of specimen there are also Tension and shear or torsion specimen, which can be used with special type of testing machines. In any event, the distribution of stress throughout the impact test specimen is not known and the test results are, therefore, mainly comparative, even though they have some correlation with the fracture toughness. Charpy Impact test Tests for the impact toughness, such as the Charpy Impact test, were developed before fracture mechanics theory was available. The Charpy impact test continues to be used nowadays as an economical quality control method to assess the notch sensitivity and impact toughness of engineering materials. It is usually used to test the toughness of metals. Similar tests can be used for polymers, ceramics and composites.

The Charpy impact test can be also used to assess the relative toughness of different materials such as steel, brass, copper and aluminium, as a tool for materials selection in design. It may also be used for quality control, to ensure that the material being produced reaches a minimum specified toughness level.

2|Page

The Charpy V-notch impact test has limitations due to its blunt notch, small size, and total energy. However, this test is used widely because it is inexpensive and simple to operate. Historically, extensive correlation with service performance has indicated its usefulness. The Charpy V-notch test commonly is used as a screening test for evaluation notch toughness changes influenced by chemical composition (alloying and impurity elements, including gases) and physical and mechanical properties of materials. Typical physical properties of interest are microstructure and grain size, which are influenced by fabrication procedures. Mechanical properties generally considered are yield and flow properties and hardness.

In many structural applications, the Charpy V-notch test is used in procurement and quality assurance for assessing different heats of the same type of material. Also correlation with actual fracture toughness data is often devised for a class of materials so that fracture mechanics analyses can be applied directly. Heat-to-heat differences in Charpy properties can be quite large, and when conditions involving human safety are concerned, failure prevention is imperative. Two such examples are the nuclear pressure vessel and the structural steels. Izod Impact Test The Izod impact test was invented in the early 1900's by a metallurgist named Izod. These Izod test consists of a pendulum with a determined weight at the end of its arm swinging down and striking the specimen while it is held securely in a vertical position. The impact strength is determined by the loss of energy of the pendulum by precisely measuring the loss of height in the pendulum's swing. Some years later this test was modified by Georges Charpy to hold the specimen in a horizontal rather than a vertical position. This is the primary difference between the Izod and the Charpy test. The Izod test differs also in that, the notch is positioned facing the striker. The Specimen size and shape varies with the Izod test as according to what type of materials are being tested. Specimens of metals are usually square, and polymers are usually rectangular being struck perpendicular to the long axis of the rectangle. The Izod test, like the Charpy test, is also used to test materials at low temperature. This is to simulate the conditions that may occur in the actual use of the material. The Ductile to Brittle Transition Temperature may be obtained by testing a number of identical specimens at
3|Page

different temperatures, and then plotting the impact energy as a function of temperature. The ductile-brittle transition becomes apparent as the resulting curve shows a rapid decline in impact strength as the temperature increases. This is essential information to obtain when determining the minimum service temperature for a material. Hence, even though there are Izod test and Charpy Test for determining the Impact of a material, Charpys test is widely used in Europe compare to Izods which are widely used in America. To understand how the Charpy impact energy is affected by the properties of the material, we need to understand the different contributions which make up the measured energy. The impact energy measured by the Charpy test is the work done to fracture the specimen. On impact, the specimen deforms elastically until yielding takes place and a zone develops at the notch. As the test specimen continues to be deformed by the impact, the zone work hardens. This increases the stress and strain in the zone until the specimen fractures. The Charpy impact energy therefore includes three major parts: The elastic strain energy The plastic work done during yielding The work done to create the fracture surface (surface energy).

For a brittle material, the total fracture energy is dominated by the elastic energy and the surface energy. However, the elastic energy is usually not a significant fraction of the total energy for a ductile material. The total energy of impact fracture in an impact fracture toughness test for a ductile material is dominated by the plastic work. The total impact energy depends on the size of the test specimen, and on the depth and root curvature of the notch. Therefore, standard specimen size and notch geometry is used to allow comparison between different materials. The impact energy is affected by a number of factors, such as:

Yield Strength and Ductility. Notches (depth of notch and root curvature). Temperature and Strain Rate.

4|Page

Yield Strength and Ductility Increasing the yield strength of a metal by processes such as cold work, precipitation strengthening and substitution strengthening generally decreases the ductility. This is the total strain of the specimen to failure. Usually, percent elongation from a tensile test is used to assess the ductility of a material. Figure below shows the schematic stress-strain curves of two materials or the same materials, but with two different microstructure, such as grain size, phase size and distribution due to different heat-treatment history, different pre-deformation history and other variables. The two stress-strain curves have different yield strengths: the red curve has higher yield strength, but smaller elongation to failure than the blue curve. But if examine the areas covered by the two curves, it is apparent the one under the blue curve is much greater than that under the red curve. It implies that even though the material of red curve is stronger than that of the blue curve, it costs much more energy to break or fracture a mechanical testing specimen made from the blue curve material. We say that the material of the blue curve is a tougher material.

As we have referred in Materials Science and Engineering lectures by Mr. Gerald Victor and Foundation of Materials Science and Engineering text book, there are many way to increase the yield strength of a metal. Such strengthening mechanisms include grain size reduction, second phase strengthening, solid solution strengthening, and cold working. However, the majority of these methods will lead to significantly reduced ductility, and hence reduced fracture toughness. The only exception is probably grain size reduction. It has been found that metals with smaller grain size exhibit both increased yield strength and enhance fracture toughness. Increasing the yield strength by these mechanisms, except for grain size
5|Page

reduction, therefore decreases the Charpy impact energy since less work can be done before the strain in the zone is sufficient to fracture the test specimen. An increase in yield strength can also affect the impact energy by causing a change in the fracture mechanism. Notches The notch in the test specimen has two effects. Both can decrease the impact energy. First, the notch acts as a stress concentrator in the specimen. It greatly amplifies the stress around the notch for a uniformly applied load. The stress concentration of the notch causes yielding or deformation to occur at the notch area. A hinge can develop at the notch, which reduces the total amount of deformation in the test specimen. This reduces the work done by deformation before fracture. Secondly, the constraint of deformation at the notch increases the tensile stress in the zone. The degree of constraint depends on the severity of the notch. The increased tensile stress encourages fracture and reduces the work done by deformation before fracture occurs. Some materials are more sensitive to notches than others and a standard notch tip radius and notch depth are therefore used to enable comparison between different materials. The Charpy impact test therefore indicates the notch sensitivity of a material. Temperature and Strain Rate Since the Charpy impact energy comprises mostly of the work of the yielding of the specimen, it is affected by factors which change the yield behaviour of the material, such as temperature and strain rate. It is through their effect that the motions of dislocations are influenced. Increasing the yield strength by lowering temperatures or raising the strain rates may impart effect on the ductility of the material, and therefore influences the Charpy impact energy. The yield strength of body centred cubic (BCC) metals is more sensitive to strain rate and temperature than that of face-centred cubic (FCC) metals. We use the term strain rate sensitivity to describe the dependence of a materials strength on the loading rate. BCC metals have a value of m usually 10 times higher that FCC metals. The Charpy impact energy of BCC metals such as ferritic carbon steel therefore has a stronger dependence on strain rate

6|Page

and temperature than that of FCC metals such as aluminum, copper and austenitic stainless steel. The Charpy impact test is used to determine the ductile to brittle transition behaviour of a metal. It's very important to realize that the ductile to brittle transition is defined in terms of the fracture energy. A brittle fracture is a low energy fracture and a ductile fracture is a high energy fracture.

#1 Pendulum movement diagram To be able to calculate the impact strength KCU, the pendulum potential energy when released, is first calculated. K = F* LR (1 + sin (a1 - 900)). The potential energy in the pendulum after is has broken the test piece is than calculated T=F* LR (1 cos a2) The energy consumed when breaking the test piece is than E=K T, neglecting friction and wind resistance losses. To calculate the impact strength KCU, the energy received is divided by the cross sectional area of the test piece.

7|Page

#2 The North American Standard for Izod Impact Testing

#3 Charpy Impact Test Using Pendulum

8|Page

Procedure 1) The test piece was placed on the supports so that the break indentation faces the direction of the pendulum swing and that the indent is exactly in the middle of the supports. 2) The pendulum was raised to the start point. 3) The pointer was set to 15 joules. 4) The pendulum was released by turning the black knob at the top right. The test pieces are checked for any broken or bent. 5) The pendulum was stopped by lifting the friction brake. The pendulum was at the standstill position before the test piece was removed. 6) The energy consumed when breaking the test piece can now be directly from the scale, was indicated by the pointer.

Equipment Descriptions

#4The test is completed using a drop hammer mounted as pendulum which breaks the test piece.

9|Page

Charpy impact test operates in a way with a big swinging hammer that come down and hits the sample at a high speed. The hammer goes through the sample which was kept in horizontal way.

#5 Charpy Impact test

Impact tester is intended for mounting on a bench, with fixing holes at the front and back of the baseplate. If the impact tester is mounted on a bench, the zero point must be set when installing.

The impact tester has maximum impact energy of 15 joule, each scale division being 0.1 joules. Test pieces suitable for the tester are 10 x 10 x 8 mm. The reduced length of the pendulum requires a test piece smaller than standard. The impact tester weights 30 kg and has dimensions of 195 x 315 x 590 mm.

10 | P a g e

Results, Data and Observations

Test Material Brass Aluminium Steel Copper Area : 10 X 10

Area ( 800 800 800 800

Area (

Impact Energy ( Joule) 1.7 2.6 3.1 2.6

Impact Strength ( Joule /

X8

= 800 =

Brass Impact Strength: Aluminium Impact Strength: Steel Impact Strength: Copper impact Strength:

= = = =

Observations

#6 Specimen Materials The name of the following specimen according from top to bottom: 1) 2) 3) 4) Brass Copper Steel Aluminium

11 | P a g e

Below are the images of the specimen after the impact test:

Specimen: Brass It breaks after the test.

Specimen: Copper It bends after the test.

Specimen: Steel It bends after the test.

Specimen: Aluminium It bends after the test.

12 | P a g e

According to our observation, steel was the one which is least bends. This is might be because of the pendulums weight. The pendulums weight wasnt enough to break through the steel specimen. But according to the research, steel can be break apart if it has been soaked in ice water. The temperature of the steel before the impact could be as low as -1C. This was estimated sea temperature from the pieces of the steel of Titanic after it hits the iceberg. Brass was broken into two parts after the impact test. This is showing that brass has the least toughness compared to any other specimens. Alloying works and also heat treatment need to be done so that the toughness of the material will be stronger. At the same time, this material can be used at the places where corrosion resistance is needed. Next specimen will be the copper. Copper do bends a bit when the pendulum hits. It was actually a heavy specimen after steel. The copper has a low strength and high ductility. Its strength can be increased by alloying it. The alloying varies according to the usage of the products. The last one will be the aluminium. Aluminium was a lightweight specimen if compare to the entire specimen that were used. It has proved that aluminium has the high strength. The stiffness of aluminium might be reduced by alloying.

13 | P a g e

Discussion of Findings and Applications Structural materials such as many metals and alloys are used to build load bearing structures. An engineer needs to know if the material will survive the conditions that the structure will experience in service. In most applications, catastrophic failure of the components of a structure should be avoided, because it is un-predictable and therefore very dangerous. To this end, we would like to choose a material that will not fracture in a catastrophic manner. Fracture of materials is a result of initiation and propagation of cracks. Catastrophic fracture is usually brittle, meaning that crack propagation experiences a small barrier, and therefore is fast. To quantify the materials resistance to catastrophic failure, we use a quantity called fracture toughness. This quantity reflects the amount of energy needed to sustain crack propagation. The higher the fracture toughness, the more the energy needed for a crack to grow. Important factors which affect the fracture toughness of a structural material include test temperatures, mode of mechanical loading and rate of mechanical loading or imposed strain rates, and stress concentrations such as notches and cracks. Such factors may arise due to wind or impacts and many others. These all tend to encourage fracture. To some extent, the complex interaction of these factors can be included in the design process by using fracture mechanics theory. In circumstances where safety is extremely critical, full scale engineering components may be tested in their worst possible service condition. For example, flasks for the transportation of nuclear fuel were tested in a full scale crash with a train to demonstrate that they retained their structural integrity, as an example a 140 ton locomotive and three 35 ton coaches at 100 mph crashed into a spent fuel flask laid across the track with its lid facing the train. The train was demolished but the flask remained sealed. The peak impact force of the test train was greater than that of an Inter-City Train. A theoretical fracture mechanics to evaluate the structural integrity of this situation would have been very difficult in reality. Such full scale tests are extremely expensive and are very rarely conducted. Fracture mechanics is also a fairly recent development in engineering design, and measurement of the fracture toughness parameters that are required to perform a structural integrity assessment during the design process (such as K1c) is quite time-consuming and expensive. Tests for the impact toughness, such as the Charpy Impact test, were developed before fracture mechanics theory was available. The impact test is a method for evaluating the
14 | P a g e

relative toughness of engineering materials. The Charpy impact test continues to be used nowadays as an economical quality control method to assess the notch sensitivity and impact toughness of engineering materials. It is usually used to test the toughness of metals. Similar tests can be used for polymers, ceramics and composites. Conclusion From this experiment, it is well observed that the amount of impact resistance by one particular material to over another is greatly difference as each particular type has its own structural integrity, brittle and ductile. Possible causes for the minor variations observed were the following factors which the results are varies from the theoretical value are ligament sizes were different, radii at bottom of notches were different, the broached notch had a slight flattening at its bottom, the notch had surface checks (tears) and a shallow amount of microstructural damage at the bottom of the notch.

15 | P a g e

References 1. William F. Smith, Javad Hashemi, Foundations of Materials Science and Engineering, 5th edition, Chapter 7, 283-291, 2011 2. Siewert, T.A., Manahan, M.P., McCowan, C.N., Holt, J.M., Marsh ,F.J., and Ruth, E.A. ,The History and Importance of Impact Testing, in Pendulum Impact Testing: A Century of Progress, STP1380, 116, ASTM,West Consohocken, PA (1999). 3. Norris, Jr., D.M., Computer Simulation of the CharpyV-notch Toughness Test, Eng, Frc, Mechanics, 11, 261-274 (1979). 4. Giovanola, J.H., Investigation and Application of the One-point Bend Impact Test, Fracture Mechanics: Seventeenth Volume, ASTM-STP 905, J.H. Underwood and R. Chaitetal., eds., 307-328 (1986) 5. Weisbrod, G. and Rittel, D., A Method for Dynamic Fracture Toughness Determination Using Short Beams, Int. J. Fract., 104 (1), 89103 (2000). 6. Rittel, D. and Maigre, H., An Investigation of Dynamic Crack Initiation in PMMA, Mechanics of Materials, 28, 229239 (1996).

16 | P a g e