Correlation between metal strength and melting point?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the correlation between metal strength and melting points, specifically questioning whether stronger metals like steel and titanium have higher melting points than softer metals. Participants conclude that while there is a relationship, it is not straightforward; tensile strength varies with temperature, affecting melting points differently across materials. Additionally, the conversation touches on calculating energy used in moving objects, emphasizing the relationship between force, distance, and kinetic energy.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensile strength and its relation to temperature.
  • Familiarity with basic physics concepts, including kinetic energy and work.
  • Knowledge of formulas for calculating work and energy, such as W=Fd and kinetic energy equations.
  • Basic understanding of material properties, particularly in metallurgy.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the relationship between tensile strength and temperature in metals.
  • Learn how to calculate kinetic energy using the formula W=1/2 mv².
  • Explore the properties of different alloys, focusing on their melting points and tensile strengths.
  • Study the impact of temperature on material strength and failure modes in engineering applications.
USEFUL FOR

Materials scientists, mechanical engineers, physics students, and anyone interested in the properties of metals and energy calculations in physical systems.

Physics quest
Messages
88
Reaction score
5
I am unsure of this matter and so I am curious, do stronger metals more than likely have higher melting/heating points? Does a metal that takes more force/pressure to break or snap have a higher melting/heating point as well? Do metals/alloys like steel or titanium have higher melting points than a softer metal due to their strength? or is it deeper than that?

Also, although not technically related I thought another matter was not worth a new thread, I was just interested in how to calculate, if its possible the energy used in moving an object based on weight and distance/time it took to travel.

Thank you for your time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1. Its one of those yes and no things - you can look up tensile strengths and melting points for different metals and see for yourself.

2. you do work whenever you accelerate an object equal to the change in kinetic energy, which is also the applied force multiplied by the distance moved.
 
Simon Bridge said:
1. Its one of those yes and no things - you can look up tensile strengths and melting points for different metals and see for yourself.

2. you do work whenever you accelerate an object equal to the change in kinetic energy, which is also the applied force multiplied by the distance moved.

1. So its not really related? strong metals may melt quicker than softer metals and its really just specific to the metal?

2. So how do I find the change in kinetic energy? Let's say I picked up say a bowling ball, assuming all I got was its weight and the speed I accelerated it to, distance it went etc could I find out how much energy I was dealing with?
 
1. Its one of those yes and no things - you can look up tensile strengths and melting points for different metals and see for yourself.

It's a bit more complicated than this since tensile strength is itself a function of temperature as was found at great cost when the 'Liberty Ships' broke up due to cold induced brittle failure.
 
Physics quest said:
1. So its not really related? strong metals may melt quicker than softer metals and its really just specific to the metal?
Like the guy said - the strength of materials also depends on temperature - and depend differently for different materials so material a is stronger than material B at temp T1, but it is reversed at T2. Like I said - go look.
2. So how do I find the change in kinetic energy? Let's say I picked up say a bowling ball, assuming all I got was its weight and the speed I accelerated it to, distance it went etc could I find out how much energy I was dealing with?

You can do it directly from difference of kinetic energy:
W=\frac{1}{2}mv_2^2 - \frac{1}{2}mv_1^2

... for your example, you'd have to find the initial speed from kinematics.

v_1^2=v_2^2-2ad

But I'd reason like this:

W=Fd but F=ma so W=mad ;) and your example has all these. (Note: the KE method will produce the same formula.)
 
Hm these formulae are a bit beyond me. Do you mind breaking it down as basic as possible? without any abreviation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
9K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
13K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K