Ross Jenkinson 201008365

University of Hull ME1.4

Abstract.
Some elemental properties of materials such as hardness, roughness and softness are very important in the engineers world. This report will discuss and analyse a set of results that were obtained whilst doing some simple tests and calculations to find out the above, Hardness and roughness. By recording the angle of incline before the material began to move of several different surfaced, to work out the friction coefficient, and a scratch test for using Mohs scale for hardness.

Table of contents.
Abstract..2 1.0 Background..4 2.0 Experimental procedure.5 2.1 Equipment list..5 2.2 Procedure...5 3.0 Results..7 4.0 Discussion..11 5.0 Conclusion..12 6.0 References.12

1.0 Background.
The aim of this experiment is to investigate some properties of engineering maters using simple techniques in two parts. In part A, things such as what the material is and the frictional values will be identified. Part B will determine the structure of the material. By using the eutectoid reaction, where a solid solution of a compound decomposes in the solid state into a mixture of phases, will allow different properties to be found. The eutectoid reaction is defined at: Eq.1

This is a invariant reaction, the Gibbs Free energy is equal to zero because the liquid and solids exist at the same time so they are in chemical equilibrium.. The Mohs scale, first developed by Friedrich Mohs in 1822, I a scale used to measure the hardness of a material. The basic idea is that because some materials are harder than others, by giving them a ranking system of harness against each other, therefore some of the individual properties of each can be worked out. Diamond will scratch rubber, whereas rubber could not scratch diamond, this is because diamond is a much harder material. There are three different types of structures involved in metals; 1. Pure metal crystals are metals which only consist of the element after which it is a name. These metals only contain one type of atom throughout. 2. Alloys are a combination of two different metals such as brass. They will keep the same atomic structure as the solvent metal but use some of the atoms of the other element changing its properties. 3. Compounds also are a mixture of different atoms. The properties of compounds can be very different to that of their component metals.

An equation commonly used in friction calculations is Eq.2,

F = Force = coefficient of friction. R = the normal reaction force.

The coefficient of frication can easily be found by Eq.3

Where is the angle of incline on the plane. This equation is derived from Eq.2: Resolving up the plane:

Resolving perpendicular to the plane:

In limiting equilibrium, where F=R

2.0 Experimental Methods.

2.2 Procedure. Part A, using the inclined plane apparatus was a very simple experiment. The materials were identified originally just by using the senses and general knowledge. The next part is placing the material on the inclined plane apparatus. The apparatus is then tilted until the material moves, just before this moment, is the value for which should be used. This is because just before it moves is the maximum possible friction. All values should be taken 3 times, because this is not a digital reading, or a particularly accurate reading in any way, by taking the reading 3 times, the percentage error will be significantly lower. The coefficient of friction can then easily be calculated by using Eq.3.

Part A also consists of a scratch test. A scratch test is when different materials are scratched against one another; this is a measure of hardness. A material will not scratch another material if it is softer. For this part of the experiment all that needs to be one is the scratching and recording of results, however often it was difficult to tell if a material had been scratched due to them having been used several times before and being very scratched already. Part B involved four new materials: 1. 2. 3. 4. X1 = Cast zinc. X17 = full perlite. X34 = hot rolled steel. X19 = low carbon mild steel.

Each of the test samples is taken and placed under the microscope and observed. The magnification must initially be at 50x magnification and focused, then moved to 100x magnification and finally 400x magnifications. The actual lenses are only 5x magnification, 10x magnification and 40x times magnification, however the eye piece is also of 10x magnification and that is why the magnifications shown above are all multiplied by 10. The grain structure should be sketched down and compared to the images provided. The samples have all been polished and chemically treated to make the grain more visible.

3.0 Results.
Test Piece.
Rubber Nylon Perspex PTFE Copper Wood Mild Steel Brass Stainless steel lead Aluminium alloy Cast iron GFRP

Identification number.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Part A. Table 1. Surface Smooth Perspex Material PTFE Stainless Steel lead GFRP PTFE Stainless Steel lead GFRP PTFE Stainless Steel lead GFRP PTFE Stainless Steel lead GFRP 1 10 14 18 16 16 21 16 19 13 17 14 16 19 16 17 21 2 15 14 16 22 18 17 13 24 14 17 13 17 22 18 18 20 3 14 14 19 21 21 17 16 23 16 14 17 20 24 20 21 27 Mean 13 14 17.7 19.7 18.3 18.3 15 22 14.3 16 14.7 17.7 21.6 18 18.7 22.6 0.23 0.25 0.32 0.36 0.33 0.33 0.27 0.4 0.25 0.29 0.26 0.32 0.4 0.32 0.34 0.42

Rough Perspex

Smooth steel

Rough steel

13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 3 2 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

13 12 11 2 9 8 7 2 5 2 3

3 12 3 3 9 8 7 3 5 3

13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5

5 12 5 5 9 8 7 5

13 12 11 7 9 8 7

7 12 7 7 9 7

8 12 8 8 9

9 9 9 9

13 12 11 9 8 7 7 5 10 3 2 10 10

11 12

12

11 9 8 7 11 5 11 3 11 11 11

12 12 9 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

12 11 13 9 8 7 13 5 13 3 13 13 13

Table 2

Order of hardness: Softest Hardest. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Rubber PTFE Lead Wood Nylon GFRP Aluminium Perspex Copper Brass Cast iron Stainless steel.

Part B:

X1: 50x magnification.

X17: 400x magnification.

X34: 400x magnification.

X19: 400x magnification.

10

4.0 Discussion.
In part A, the inverted plane apparatus is used to find out to coefficient friction of 4 different testing materials. The value of the coefficient friction is the value of the force of friction pushing the two surfaces together. The experiment is not very accurate; reasons for this include human error. The time taken for the human to see the movement, and then make a reading from the scale has a small time difference but will affect the value for by quite a bit. As well as that, the person who was moving the apparatus seemed to wobble when the material moved in an attempt to prevent if from moving further making the reading even less accurate. A solution to this problem would be to use an inverted plane which can be moved mechanically, something like a turning wheel which increases the incline, this way, the plane could become steeper at a more constant rate and if the operator stops moving the wheel, it will lock, so as soon as it has moved, they stop moving the wheel, and an accurate measurement can be taken. Another error which must be taken into account is that the friction coming from the surface of the apparatus is not the same all over, for it to be accurate the test materials would have to all start at the exact same point. The final error for this part of the experiment is one that cannot be helped. Between both of the surfaces, air can be sucked in. This allows the test material to move more freely and give it a smaller coefficient of friction than its actual value. One of the results was affected by this, the lead on the rough Perspex had a lower value of coefficient of friction than that of the smooth surface, and the only explanation for this is that air must have been sucked in. The only solution for this is for tiny holes to be pierced through the bottom of the surface, in the dips so it does not affect the roughness of the surface; however this would be extremely hard to do as they would be ting and have to be very precise. The results obtained seemed to reasonable. The materials that felt rougher to the hand tended to actually be rougher, but some of the values obtained to vary. For example, on the first 3 surfaces tested, PTFE had the lowest coefficient of friction, however when tested on rough steel, it had the highest, this is presumed to be down to human error. The scratch test in part A also carried some problems. A lot of the time, it was difficult to see the scratches, if any were made. This is because the materials being tested had been used many times before making a fresh scratch on one of them near impossible to be seen. New materials are the only fix for this. Another error could come from the point at which the scratch was made from. The corner on one of the materials may be much sharper than the one used on the other, this means that instead of scratching it, it may have cut it. The Mohs scale does not give any values for the hardness of the materials, however, it does give an idea of which are hardest. A better way to take the measurements would be to perform a Rockwell hardness test. This is where a load is applied to the material and the hardness is calculated from the resulting impression made on it. Although much more expensive, the results are vastly more accurate and then an actual value is obtained rather than just which material is harder than the other. The final Mohs scale seems to be in the order which was expected.

11

5.0 Conclusion.
Overall, the results obtained were fairly accurate. With the suggestions to improving the experiment mentioned in the discussion however, I feel that a vastly more accurate set of results would be obtained, the most notable of these, if a Rockwell hardness test was performed instead of using the Mohs scale. There were some surprises in the results, such as how air being sucked in can have such an effect on the coefficient of friction and how the different fibres in a metal cause much different fractures and strengths.

6.0 References.

12