Young's Modulus, Stress/Strain graph and Calculating Energy

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating energy absorption using Young's Modulus and analyzing stress/strain graphs. A participant calculated energy absorption for a 2-day sample as 0.35 MJ based on counting 33 whole squares, equating to 0.0106 MJ per square. For a 28-day sample, they estimated energy absorption at 0.323 MJ, resulting in a percentage reduction of approximately 7.6%. However, discrepancies arise as the expected reduction falls between 12% and 15%, prompting questions about the counting method and potential errors in estimation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Young's Modulus and its application in material science
  • Familiarity with stress/strain graphs and energy calculations
  • Knowledge of basic geometry, specifically area calculations for trapeziums and triangles
  • Experience with data interpretation and error analysis in experimental results
NEXT STEPS
  • Research methods for accurately calculating areas under curves in stress/strain graphs
  • Learn about energy absorption in materials and its significance in engineering
  • Explore advanced techniques for error analysis in experimental data
  • Investigate the relationship between Young's Modulus and energy absorption in different materials
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in materials science, civil engineering, and mechanical engineering who are involved in energy absorption calculations and stress analysis of materials.

trew
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
as below
Relevant Equations
as below
ym.JPG

ym2.JPG


For part (b), I counted the number of squares underneath the 2 day sample to be roughly 33 'whole' squares (the 5by5 tiny squares is 1 whole sqaure).

I then equated 33 whole square = 0.35 MJ to calculate 1 whole square to be 0.0106 MJ.

I then counted the number of whole squares underneath the 28 day sample to roughly be 30.5 so the total absorbed energy is (30.5)(0.0106)=0.323..MJ

And found the percentage reduction to be around 7.6%. But then answer scheme has it between 12% and 15%.

No matter how many times I count the squares I can't get close to their answer. What am I doing wrong?

I know I could estimate the area by using the area of trapezium and triangle rules but I want to get this simple method right first.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
trew said:
counted the number of squares underneath the 2 day sample to be roughly 33 'whole' squares (the 5by5 tiny squares is 1 whole sqaure).
Seems a bit low. I get closer to 36.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: trew

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K