Strength Coefficient and Strain-Hardening Exponent

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the strength coefficient (K) and strain-hardening exponent (n) for a metal subjected to a tensile test. Key data points include an initial gage length of 2.0 inches, with corresponding engineering stresses of 24000 psi and 28000 psi at gage lengths of 2.5 inches and 3.2 inches, respectively. The calculated strain-hardening exponent is determined to be 0.52, which is slightly above the typical range for metals. The strength coefficient is calculated to be 218304 psi, although a participant suggests a potential error in the calculation, indicating that using log(1) instead of log(X) could yield a more reasonable value around 123 psi.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensile testing and plastic deformation
  • Familiarity with engineering stress and strain concepts
  • Knowledge of true stress and true strain calculations
  • Ability to interpret true stress-strain curves
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the calculation methods for true stress and true strain in tensile testing
  • Study the significance of the strain-hardening exponent in material science
  • Learn about the implications of using fewer data points in slope calculations
  • Explore the relationship between true stress and strain in different materials
USEFUL FOR

Materials engineers, mechanical engineers, and students studying material properties and tensile testing methodologies will benefit from this discussion.

eku_girl83
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Here's the problem:
A metal is deformed in a tension test into its plastic region. The starting specimen had a gage length = 2.0 in and an area .50 sq. in. At one point in the tensile test, the gage length = 2.5 in and the corresponding engineering stress = 24000 psi; at another point in the test prior to necking, the gage length = 3.2 in and the corresponding engineering stress = 28000 psi. Determine the strength coefficient and strain-hardening exponent.

To summarize,
L0 = 2.0 in
A0 = .50 sq. in.
L1 = 2.5 in engineering stress = 24000 psi
L2 = 3.2 in engineering stress = 28000 psi
Here's my solution:

*At the first point given, we can find engineering strain by e = (L1-L0)/L0 = (2.5 - 2.0)/2.0 = .25
-We can then use the engineering stress and the engineering strain to find the true stress by the relationship:
true stress = engineering stress (1+engineering strain) = 24000(1+.25) = 30000 psi
-The true strain is given by ln (L1/L0) = ln (2.5/2.0) = .22

* For the second point, engineering strain = (L2-L0)/L0 = (3.2-2.0)/2.0
= .6
- Hence, true stress = engineering stress (1+engineering strain) =
28000(1+.6) = 44800 psi
- True strain is ln (L2/L0) = ln (3.2/2.0) = ln 1.6 = .47

*So we now have two points on our true stress-strain curve: (.22, 30000) and (.47, 44800).
The book plots these points using a log scale and then finds the slope to determine the strain hardening exponent. So n = (log 44800 - log 30000)/(log .47 - log .22) = .52
Does this seem right...I know n for most metals is between 0 and .5, so is .52 a reasonable result?


*The strength coefficient, K, equals the value of true stress at a true strain value equal to 1.
Using the point slope equation with the x-coordinate (true strain) equal to 1, I get:
y - y1 = m(x-x1)
log y - log 30000 = .52 (log x - log .22)
log y - log 30000 = .52 (1 - log .22)
log y - log 30000 = .8619402
y = 218304 psi
K = 218304 psi

Does this seem correct? It seems a little large!

Thanks for reading! Any help much appreciated!




I apologize for
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Calculations for n look fine.. I'd say the question is the problem ;)

In fact I'm surprised the answers are even close to reasonable, I'd be worried any time you'd have to do a straight line fit between just two points.

Most the time I have to calculate a slope from data I use 3 to 5 points to smooth out results due to inevitable noise/errors

shaterzadeh said:
Hi dear
I think that you mistake in calculation k,beacuse stead(log X)you should write (log 1)that means(0),but you write log X=1. !
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1460020&postcount=2

yeah I think this is the error here.. with log 1 you get something like 123 psi
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
10K