Young's Modulus / Steel / Abnormal values

Good morning,
Our laboratory makes tensile testing on steels. We often observe Young's Modulus (initial slope of the tensile curve) very different of the expected
value of 207 GPa (we observe 140 GPa to 230 GPa) on Carbon Steel materials in different metallurgical states (Q, QT, N, ...). This seems to occur since years (I have asked former workers), independently of tensile testing machines, operator, sample geometry. We have also asked INSTRON, the supplier of our testing machine, and they have no ideas.
To live with the problem, it was decided to make an hysteresis loop after 2% deformation and use that slope as Young's modulus. The value so obtained is only slightly less dispersed, but a recent experiment with multiple hysteresis loops (after 1% 2%, 3%, ...) shows that doing so, the Young's Modulus seems to decrease with the deformation performed before the hysteresis.
Do you have any ideas or references about : - why the initial slope and the hysteresis slope differ so much from 207 GPa - why Young's Modulus seems to decrease as the inital deformation increases.
I have done search on the Web with google and Copernic, but got no helpful answer.
Thank you very much for your help,
Michel
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michel PIETTE wrote:

Young's modulus of polycrystalline materials depends on crystallographic texture. 207 GPa is just a typical value for bcc iron.
Michael Dahms
f'up2 sci.materials
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michael Dahms wrote:

Young's
expected
materials
crystallographic
Can the anisotropy of steel's young's modulus really be as high as a factor of two? I'm looking on the web for a numeric range but haven't found one yet.
Michael, When you say initial slope what exactly do you mean? You are not looking at the very short low-slope portion that may be because of minor alignment problems are you? I've interpreted your question to refer to the slope of the stress strain line essentially to the yield condition.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@newarts.com wrote:

I doubt. 140 GPa looks like an austenitic steel.
Michael Dahms
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michel PIETTE wrote:

If you go here and look at the slide near the very end.... titled anisotropy....
http://www.me.polyu.edu.hk/subject/me3302 (yliu)/notes/chapt1.
you will find listed the claim that the elastic modulus for Iron in the face edge 100 directions is about 135 Gpa and the modulus for Iron in the cell diagonal 111 direction is about 273 Gpa.
Very nice presentation.
--
...............................


Keepsake gift for young girls.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jbuch wrote:

the
Thanks Jim, it is just what I was looking for unfortunately he link is broken.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@newarts.com wrote:

Email the author......
snipped-for-privacy@polyu.edu.hk
Ask if he will give you the link to his excellent materials notes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the link is: http://www.me.polyu.edu.hk/subject/me3302 (yliu)/notes/chapt1.pdf

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
http://www.me.polyu.edu.hk/subject/me3302 (yliu)/notes/
try this, you can get all chapter listed there. I think link was missing .pdf

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I fully agree that E depends on orientation. Nevertheless, our steels are mainly Quenched and Tempered types, and I don't expect them to be textured. But maybe I'm wrong... What's your opinion ?
Michel

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michel PIETTE wrote:

Sheets are usually rolled, and do generally have texture from the planar nature of the cold work.
You can partly eliminate texture by examining tensile specimens cut parallel to the rolling direction and 90 degrees to it, parallel to the axis of the rolls used to produce the sheet.
Tough to take specimens in the thickness direction, but if you were to be careful, you might be able to get a compressive Young's modulus from the through thickness direction.
You could perhaps even investigate ultrasonic modulus measurements to dig into the question of texture....... and some metallography would always be informative.
If it isn't texture, then your measuring techniques are called into question as otherwise potentially a waste of time and money.
You don't want to be in that position.
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michel PIETTE wrote:

Measure it!
Michael Dahms
And stop top-posting.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michel PIETTE wrote:

Young's
expected
materials
independently
they
after 2%

obtained is

Young's
207 GPa

increases.
helpful
Mike,
Check out "Fundametals of Cyclic Stress and Stain" by Bela I Sandor
What you are experiencing is cyclic softening (low cycle fatigue), sometimes this is addressed as the "Bauschinger effect"for large strains (see Mechanical Metallurgy by G. Dieter).
As for the root cause of you poor Young modulus slope do a sensitivity analysis (uncertainty analysis - if your A2LA accedited you should know of this) on the modulus slope itself I think you will find the major errors are involved with measurement and determination of area (stress=F/AF/(thickness*width) and strain e=dl/L (change in length/orginal: plud into error differential form of "Youngs modulus equation": E=F*dl/(A*L)
dE/E = [ (dF/F)^2+(ddl/dl)^2+(dA/A)^2+(dL/L)^2)^(1/2) where d = partial differential NOTE dA/A = [(dw/w)^2+(dt/t)^2]^(1/2) for flats
You would think the manufactures of the stress frame would know...HA HA they got rid of the ol' timers and saved money...make you and us pay the cost.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Two years ago I did some tensile tests of aluminium and copper foils and found that the moduli were significantly smaller than quoted values. It is quite difficult to test foils though, so my colleague took the foils to another place and performed some sensitive three point bend instead. The values he got were similar to the quoted values. So perhaps you could perform a three point bend test (apparently you can design it to be very sensitive) to check.
At the same time, we were also interested in the yield values, and it was surprising to me that it was such a difficult measurement. Further depending on how the stress-strain curve is fitted, e.g. power law/bilinear, the yield value varies significantly. Now, I am more of a soft matter person and was not so experienced with stiff, plastically deforming materials, so I was generally surprised to find that those whom I was working with (whom I presumed were more well verse with the problem) were scratching their heads over this matter. Does anyone have similar experience on measuring yield stress/strain?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 06:56:50 +0100, "Michel PIETTE"

There are stories here of a crusher shaft that(1) bent in service or (2) had a low natural frequency. The steel reportedly test OK chemically, but demonstrated low modulus during some physical tests.
I'm trying to find out more, but in my mind I'm clutching to the Bauschinger effect as a >>possible<< explanation. Is it possible if the test sample was cut from a peculiarly yielded piece of the shaft an odd, low modulus might be measured?
thanks,
Dan T
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.