ECH 3101 (Material Science) – Semester 1 2020/2021

Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering

Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia

Serdang, Selangor 43400, Malaysia

Submission

Homework 2

Date

December 15, 2020

By

Wan Nur Atikah Bt Wan Md Jalal Azmi (207540)

Low Jian Zhou (205793)

Ealvina A/P Seenivasan (206611)

Siti Aisyah Binti Mohd Isham (207026)

Instructor

Dr. Mohamad Rezi Bin Abdul Hamid

Homework question (Lecture 3)

1. Callister 9th Ed
(7.12)
(7.13)

(8.1) What is the magnitude of the maximum stress that exists at the tip of an internal
crack having a radius of curvature of 1.9 10–4 mm (7.5 10–6 in.) and a crack length
of 3.8 10–2 mm (1.5 10–3 in.) when a tensile stress of 140 MPa (20,000 psi) is
applied?
(8.3) If the specific surface energy for aluminum oxide is 0.90 J/m2 , then using data
in Table 12.5, compute the critical stress required for the propagation of an internal
crack of length 0.40 mm.
(8.7)

(8.9)
(8.13) The following tabulated data were gathered from a series of Charpy impact
tests on a tempered 4340 steel alloy.
(8.22) The fatigue data for a brass alloy are given as follows:

(a) Make an S–N plot (stress amplitude versus logarithm of cycles to failure) using
these data.

(b) Determine the fatigue strength at 4 x 10^6 cycles.

As indicated by the “A” set of dashed lines on the plot, the fatigue strength at 4 x
10^6 cycles [log (4 x 10^6) = 6.60 ] is 100 MPa.

(c) Determine the fatigue life for 120 MPa.

As noted by the “B” set of dashed lines, the fatigue life for 120 MPa is about 6.3 x
10^5 cycles (the log of the lifetime is about 5.8 ).
(8.24)
Homework question (Lecture 4)

1. Callister 9th Ed
(6.2)
(6.3) A specimen of copper having a rectangular cross section 15.2 mm * 19.1 mm
(0.60 in. * 0.75 in.) is pulled in tension with 44,500 N (10,000 lbf) force, producing
only elastic deformation. Calculate the resulting strain.
(6.7) For a brass alloy, the stress at which plastic deformation begins is 345 MPa
(50,000 psi), and the modulus of elasticity is 103 GPa (15.0 x 10^6 psi).

(a) What is the maximum load that can be applied to a specimen with a cross-
sectional area of 130 mm^2 (0.2 in.^2 ) without plastic deformation?

(b) If the original specimen length is 76 mm (3.0 in.), what is the maximum length to
which it can be stretched without causing plastic deformation?

(6.10)
(6.13)
(6.14) Using the solution to Problem 6.13, rank the magnitudes of the moduli of
elasticity for the following hypothetical X, Y, and Z materials from the greatest to the
least. The appropriate A, B, and n parameters (Equation 6.31) for these three
materials are shown in the following table; they yield EN in units of electron volts and
r in nanometers:
(6.15) A cylindrical specimen of steel having a diameter of 15.2 mm (0.60 in.) and
length of 250 mm (10.0 in.) is deformed elastically in tension with a force of 48,900 N
(11,000 lbf). Using the data contained in Table 6.1, determine the following:

(a) The amount by which this specimen will elongate in the direction of the applied
stress.

(b) The change in diameter of the specimen. Will the diameter increase or decrease?

(6.26)
(6.30) A cylindrical specimen of stainless steel having a diameter of 12.8 mm (0.505
in.) and a gauge length of 50.800 mm (2.000 in.) is pulled in tension. Use the load–
elongation characteristics shown in the following table to complete parts (a) through
(f).

(a) Plot the data as engineering stress versus engineering

First Graph:
Second Graph:

Method to obtain the second graph

First Method:

Or second method : 0.2% Offset Method

(6.38) Calculate the moduli of resilience for the materials having the stress–strain
behaviors shown in Figures 6.12 and 6.22
(6.47) The following true stresses produce the corresponding true plastic strains for a
brass alloy:

What true stress is necessary to produce a true plastic strain of 0.21?

(6.62)

(6D1)
2. Draw qualitative engineering stress-engineering strain curves for a ductile
polymer, a ductile metal, a ceramic, a glass, and natural rubber. Label carefully.
Rationalize your sketch for each material.
3. Define ‘‘true stress’’ and ‘‘true strain.’’ Compare with engineering stress and
engineering strain.
4. What factors contribute to 1986 NASA challenger incident? Try to relate to what
we learnt in Lecture 4. Provide necessary references. I expect you to provide
sufficient description and explanation based on your literature search

Based on the investigation done by NASA, the disintegration of space shuttle

Challenger began right after its joint in the right solid rocket booster (SRB) failed to
liftoff which is actually caused by the failure of O-ring seals because the fuel tanks
collapsed and tore apart resulting the release of oxygen and hydrogen creating a
huge fireball. O-ring seals at SRB joint of Challenger was designed to function at
warmer temperature estimated ranging at 65˚F to 80˚F ( 18˚C – 27˚C ) and to
prevent leaks from the fuel tank during liftoff.

Figure above shows the tested temperature for space shuttle

(number of incidents versus calculated joint temperature [O-rings])

Green dots represent tested flights with zero incidents.
Red dots represent estimated incidents.

The original launch of the shuttle was on the 27 th January 1986 but was postponed as the
temperature was about -7 °C. On the actual launching day, it was about 28.0 to 28.9 °F (−2.2
to −1.7 °C) which was way lower than the tested temperatures.

Originally, the O-ring joints in the SRBs were supposed to close very tightly due to
forces generated during ignition. However, the primary O-ring had become very hard
due to the cold weather and could seal closely and properly in time.

Apart from that, the temperature had also fallen below the glass transition
temperature of the O-rings. Below glass transition temperature is where the
materials that undergoes elastic or plastic deformation changes to being brittle, rigid
and hard, thus having relatively low mobility. Above the glass transition temperature,
the O-rings has the properties of elasticity and flexibility. Brittle material will fracture
with little to no deformation at all causing a catastrophic event.

Therefore, the secondary O-ring was not seated properly in its position
because of metal bending. Since there were no barrier to the gases and both O-rings
were vaporized, Al2O3 sealed the joint temporarily replacing the O-ring seal before
flames enters the joint.
 These factors caused both of the fuel tanks to collapse and explosions lead
to huge fireball but the orbiter of Challenger itself remained momentarily intact and
continue to move upwards (liftoff). Without its boosters and fuel tanks beneath it
soon caused the powerful aerodynamic forces to pull the orbiter apart.

The compressed air from the motor’s ignition would cause the primary O-ring
to extrude into the gap, thereby sealing the opening. If the primary O-ring did
not seal, the intent was that the secondary would pressurize and seal the joint
by extruding into the gap behind its groove.

The O-rings of Challenger had problems with its resilience. Resilience is the capacity
of a material to absorb energy when deformed elastically and when the stress is
removed, the energy would recover back. Since the O-rings became brittle due to
the cold weather (extreme low temperature ) and it can no longer deform elastically,
it is no longer resilient.

In conclusion, when we, engineers are to design a material of an object, we

should always consider the safety features first like economics, previous experience,
the accuracy with which mechanical forces and properties. For this incident, we need
to consider the magnitude of forces, pressure, and temperature that can be applied
to the fuel tank. Besides that, we should also find out the yield strength, tensile
strength, ductility, resilience and toughness used. The proportionality limit of the is
crucial as it can tell us the stress level that can be maintained by the material before
it begins to deform plastically. When it comes to brittle materials and ductile
materials, we should be more inclined to choose ductile material because it can warn
us before any catastrophic accidents occurs and can allow us to calculate the
percent of elongation and reduction in area. Lastly, resilience also plays a big part of
role when designing a material as it tells us the capacity of the material to absorb
energy during elastic deformation.

References:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster#White_Hous
e_response
2. https://priceonomics.com/the-space-shuttle-challenger-explosion-and-the-o/
3. https://www.nytimes.com/1986/05/13/us/nasa-had-warning-of-risk-to-shuttle-
in-cold-weather.html
4. https://www.simscale.com/blog/2019/01/space-shuttle-challenger-
disaster/#:~:text=The%20Space%20Shuttle%20Challenger
%20Launch&text=The%20temperature%2C%20as%20predicted%2C
 %20was,and%20not%20provide%20sufficient%20sealing.&text=However
%2C%20due%20to%20low%20temperatures,a%20glassy%20and%20brittle
%20manner
5. https://www.simscale.com/blog/2019/01/space-shuttle-challenger-disaster/

5. What factors contribute to the sinking of the Titanic? Try to relate to what we learnt
in Lecture 4. Provide necessary references. I expect you to provide sufficient
description and explanation based on your literature search

Titanic was built between 1911 and 1912 and started its journey on 10 April
1912. At 2:20 a.m. on April 15, 1912, Titanic struck an iceberg which damaged the
hulls of the six compartments ahead. These compartments got flooded caused the
ship to sink, but the actual failure that caused the ship to sink was the material failure
of the rivets getting used within the sealing of the hull plates. The ship sank within 2
hours and 40 minutes. In addition, the Titanic is also believed to have sunk due to
multiple contributing factors as shown in the figure below.

The materials used for construction of Titanic are thousands of one-inch

thickness mild-steel plates, three million steel and wrought iron rivets and the plates
of streamline machine were product of low grade steel that were more brittle.
Titanic’s hull was triple riveted using mild steel rivets and double riveted using
wrought iron, within the central length of the barge where maximum stress was
assumed to be located.

The use of wrought iron rivets and mild steel rivets rather than using steel
rivets was ultimately one of the reasons for the titanic disaster. Steel rivet is a ferrous
metal and has good tensile strength, whereas the iron rivets are not as strong.
 When the Titanic collided with the iceberg, the wrought iron rivets failed due to
a brittle fracture which occurred within the hull of the ship. A type of catastrophic
failure in structural materials, brittle fracture occurs without prior plastic deformation
and is at certain conditions on which leads it to fracture instantly.

The causes of the brittle fracture include low temperature, high impact
loading, and high sulphur content, which made the metal more brittle. Before the
Titanic crashed into the large bulk of ice, the rivets would normally have deformed
before the failing that was due to their ductility, however the Titanic sailed through
very cold water in which on the night it sank the temperature was just below freezing,
so therefore the rivets became exceedingly brittle.

The makers of the Titanic may not have considered the effects of temperature
change in material behavior, but the steel underwent a ductile-to-brittle transition at
this lower temperature in the water. This gives the idea that metals of a particular
crystal structure that were ductile at a higher temperature will become brittle at lower
temperatures and fail under lesser loads as a result. Therefore, nowadays engineers
know more about this phenomenon and the composition of the steels used is way
more controlled, leading to a lower temperature at which the ductile to brittle
transition occurs.

Besides, The Titanic was travelling at a high speed on impact with the
iceberg, and the hull steel contained high levels of sulphur. It is here, where the
chunk of iron discovered during the expedition played a major role in providing the
hint that brittle fracture of the hull steel contributed to the disaster. The condition of
the edges of the recovered piece of steel was noted to be jagged, almost shattered
and sharp upon cleaning it as shown in diagram below. This brittle fracture of hull
steel is probably what the survivors of the disaster then described as a loud noise.
Today, typical high-quality ship steel is more ductile and deforms rather than breaks.
Also, scientists discovered that the metal pieces showed no evidence of bending or
deformation, they simply shattered.

The Titanic had of these factors contributing, which made it sink. In these
conditions even a small impact could have caused a large amount of damage. The
impact of an iceberg on the ship's hull resulted in brittle fracture of the bolts that were
holding the steel plates together.

From recent a study, it’s been claimed that the hull of the Titanic contained
low nitrogen content, this means that the steel wasn’t made by the proper processes
which is generally used to make the steel; it’s called the Bessemer process.
However, they used the hearth furnace, which was used to make steel, which
involves the steel being placed on a shallow hearth and burning of gases and hot air
over it.

As the properties of nickel say that when added to steel increases its
toughness even at low temperatures. As nickel was missing within the materials
being employed in manufacturing of Titanic, furthermore it can be argued that cold
surroundings caused the ship to sink. Hence the utilization of nickel would had made
the ship to float for a longer period.

To sum it up, the failure of the hull steel resulted from brittle fractures caused
by the high sulphur content of the steel, the low temperature water on the night of the
disaster, and the high impact loading of the collision with the iceberg. When the
Titanic hit the iceberg, the hull plates split open and continued cracking as the water
flooded the ship.

Low water temperatures and high impact loading also caused the brittle failure
of the rivets used to fasten the hull plates to the ship’s main structure. On impact, the
rivets were either sheared off or the heads popped off because of excessive loading,
which opened up riveted seams. Also, the rivets around the perimeter of the plates
elongated due to the stresses applied by the water, which broke the caulking and
provided another inlet for the water.

Therefore, in conclusion, The Titanic disaster serves as a perfect example of

how engineering flaws can have catastrophic effects. Analyzing the answers to the
question “What causes the Titanic to sink” takes us to the conclusion that had the
design of the ship and the materials chosen been better, the disaster could have
been easily warded off.

References:

1. https://www.slideshare.net/ravibhivra/material-failure-oftitanic-ship
2. http://writing.engr.psu.edu/uer/bassett.html
3.https://www.materials.unsw.edu.au/tutorials/online-tutorials/2ductile-brittle-
transition
4. https://ukdiss.com/examples/titanic-manufacturing-analysis.php
5. https://www.simscale.com/blog/2018/01/why-did-titanic-sink-engineer/
6. https://mechanical.illinois.edu/blogs/titanic-material-failure
7. http://www.mechead.com/engineering-approach-titanic-sink/