3-& 4-Point Bending Test

Enas Yousef, 421437

-Weibull distribution
 3-point bending test (Si3N4)
With L = 40 mm

No. b [mm] d [mm] P [N] σ [MPa] ln(σ) lnln(Ps)

(fracture load) (orderd; Low
to high)

1 4,02 3,06 321,523 512,501 6,239 -2,97

2 4,01 3,04 349,269 565,483 6,337 -1,82
3 4,02 3,03 349,453 568,105 6,342 -1,25
4 4,02 3,05 380,747 610,886 6,415 -0,84
5 4,02 3,03 423,62 688,678 6,535 -0,51
6 3,99 3,04 458,783 746,515 6,615 -0,23
7 4,02 3,04 464,201 749,694 6,619 -0,05
8 4,05 3,06 474,012 749,967 6,620 0,33
9 4,01 3,04 472,815 765,510 6,641 0,64
10 4,01 3,03 494,024 805,137 6,691 1,1

Slope (m) = 7,35

σ0 = e^(-intercept/m) = e^(48,37/7,35) = 721,22 MPa

 4-point bending test (Si3N4)
With L = 40 mm

P [N] σ [MPa]
No. b [mm] d [mm] (fracture load)
(orderd; Low to ln(σ) lnln(Ps)
high)

1 4,02 3,07 343,608 272,071 5,606 -2,97

2 4,02 3,03 393,253 319,655 5,767 -1,82

3 4,02 3,06 402,203 320,551 5,770 -1,25

4 4,00 3,04 405,667 329,219 5,797 -0,84

5 4,02 3,00 407,895 338,221 5,824 -0,51

6 4,00 3,03 489,412 399,807 5,991 -0,23

7 4,00 3,07 504,595 401,539 5,995 -0,05

8 4,00 3,07 523,14 416,296 6,031 0,33

9 3,99 2,98 522,983 442,796 6,093 0,64

10 3,99 3,03 550,392 450,749 6,111 1,1

M = 6,97

σ0 = e^(41,673/6,97) = 395,01 MPa

Error Analysis (Si3N4):

Potential sources of errors and uncertainties that could influence the measured
mechanical properties of the material:
- irregularity in the positioning of the pores and defects in the material.
- the quality of the prepared sample; samples may have internal stresses as a result
of the manufacturing process.
- improper positioning of the samples in the testing machine can lead to uneven
stress distribution affecting the measured flexural stress.
Although the Weibull modules are relatively low (m < 10), the silicon nitride
samples have relatively consistent strengths, even when comparing testing
results from 3-point and 4-point flexural tests, which results in relatively
similar Weibull module between the two (m ≃ 7).
The most noticeable difference between the two test types is that the σ0
(characteristic strength for which Ps = 0, 37) values are different by around a
factor of 2.
 3-point bending test (Birch)
With L = 74 mm

P [N] m (ΔP/Δδ)
No. b [mm] d [mm] Ef [MPa]
(fracture load) [N/mm]

1 18,34 4,8 358,872 147,27 7355,7

2 18,5 4,75 401,686 155,62 7951,5
3 18,32 4,91 565,895 277,85 12980
4 18,33 4,22 488,949 218,62 16077,7
5 18,33 4,62 262,034 110,81 6210,5

P-δ Diagram
 4-point bending test (Birch)
With L = 74 mm

P [N] m (ΔP/Δδ)
No. b [mm] d [mm] Ef [MPa]
(fracture load) [N/mm]

1 18,36 5,13 991,798 302,82 12376,42

2 18,27 4,33 764,171 252,64 17255,8
3 18,31 4,68 647,193 216,37 11679,02
4 18,32 4,64 486,245 148,71 8231,82
5 18,31 4,63 891,383 255,87 14263,41

Birch Flexural Modulus Data Analysis:

To determine a material's flexural modulus, the measurements need to still be

within the material's linear- elastic region.
The two force- displacement diagrams of the 3- & 4-Point Bending tests show us
where the linear-elastic regions are.
For this analysis, I have chosen regions where the elastic deformation has only
just started, therefore an evaluation of the flexural module in these regions
will most likely still result in reasonable values.
Error Analysis (Birch):

Wood is a natural material, and there can be significant variability between different
samples due to factors like tree species, growth conditions, and wood grain patterns.
It is also anisotropic, so its properties can vary with the direction of the wood grain.
Environmental conditions, such as temperature and humidity, can affect the
mechanical properties of wood.
Woods are composites, displaying both brittle and ductile behaviors
(after the outer "casing" has been broken, their
structural integrity is mostly held by fibers, especially when the fiber's
tensile strength is greater than that of the matrix', thereby showing ductile
behavior).