M.E.

3300 Lab Memo

TO: Sameer Nandikar

FROM: Mohammad Yusuf (u0945221)
DATE: 2/15/2017
SUBJECT: Torsion lab
CC: Dr. Newell
Attachments: 2

Results:

The experimental and calculated results are presented in the table below. The analysis of the
experiment is presented as graphs and discussions in the attachment section.

Material Aluminum Cast Iron

Radius, r (in) 0.1505 0.162
Gage length, L (in) 4.048 4.419
Polar moment of inertia,J (in4) 8.0587E-4 1.0819E-3
Torque at fracture, Tf (lbin) 465.14 519.52
Angle of twist,Θf (radians) 67.792 0.83776
Yield shear strength, τy (psi) 59683 26685
Shear stress at fracture, τf (psi) 86866 77791
Shear strain at fracture, γf 2.5204 0.03129
Shear modulus, G (Msi) 2.1335 2.4429

Table 1. Data Table

Conclusion:

The objectives of this lab are to determine the shear properties of 6061-T6 aluminum and cast
iron and obtain a general understanding of how different specimens behave under torsional
loading. In the lab, some shear properties are determined and other properties are calculated
based on data acquired during the experiment. However, when compared to the actual data from
text and online resource, there are big differences between the experimental and actual data.
Hence, the first objective was not achieved and this is maybe due to error during the process of
measuring the diameter and gage length of the specimens, which using a less accurate
equipment. The experiment can be improved by taking more than 1 data and average the values
obtained to get more accurate result.

1
 M.E. 3300 Lab Memo

Attachment 1: Figures
Graphs

Below are two graphs used to calculate and determine the variables in Table 1.

100000

90000

80000

70000 Point of failure

Yield point
Shear Stress (Psi)

60000

50000

40000

30000 Elastic region

20000

10000

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Shear strain (in/in)

Figure 1. Plot of shear stress vs. shear strain for aluminum

2
 M.E. 3300 Lab Memo

90000

80000

70000

60000
Point of failure
Shear Stress (Psi)

50000

40000

30000 Yield point

20000

10000 Elastic region

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035
Shear Strain (in/in)

Figure 2. Plot of shear stress vs. shear strain for cast iron.

3
 M.E. 3300 Lab Memo

Attachment 2: Questions

1. Compare the values of the modulus of rigidity, shear stress at failure, and the yield shear
strength with the accepted values found in the text or online. Be specific (include %
differences) and explain any discrepancies.

Aluminum Cast Iron

Experiment Text % difference Experiment Text % difference
Shear
modulus, G 2.1335 3.7 42.3 2.4429 4.1 40.4
(Msi)
Shear stress at
fracture, τf 86866 24000 72.4 77791 35000 55.0
(psi)
Yield strength,
τy (psi) 59683 20000 66.4 26685 - -

Based on the above table, there is a big difference between experiment and actual data acquired
from textbooks and online resources. All of the differences are more than 5 %. For cast iron’s
yield shear strength, the actual data is unavailable. The discrepancies between the experimental
and actual results from the text are because the experiment was only conducted once. If the same
material is tested multiple times, the average results may be approximately similar to the actual
values from the text and the percentage of differences can be reduced.

2. Discuss how the final shapes of the specimens differ. What can be determined, as far as
failure mode and mechanics, from these observations?

Cast iron fracture surfaces have angles. During failure, the specimen immediately propagates
after necking occur, leaving a rough surface on the crack. Cast iron failed in tension and then
shear. For aluminum, the specimen looked like it is “pulled apart” and leaving smooth surface on
the crack. From this information, we can determine that there is a lot of plastic deformation in
aluminum before its failure. Aluminum failed in tension.