Material Analysis of Mild Steel and Aluminium Alloy using a Table Tensometer as Applied in Metallurgy

655 Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 p ISSN: 2635-3342; e ISSN: 2635-3350 Original Research Article Material Analysis of Mild Steel and Aluminium Alloy using a Table Tensometer as Applied in Metallurgy *1Aliemeke, B.N.G., 2Audu, L.M. and 2Iyafokhai, O.J. 1Department of Welding and Fabrication Engineering, School of Engineering, Auchi Polytechnic, Nigeria. 2Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering, Auchi Polytechnic, Nigeria. *[email protected] http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18062164 ARTICLE INFORMATION ABSTRACT Article history: Received 07 Nov. 2025 Revised 07 Dec. 2025 Accepted 09 Dec. 2025 Available online 30 Dec. 2025 The material analysis of mild steel and aluminium alloy using a table tensometer has been duly investigated. The machined specimen was placed in the specimen holder of the tensometer and subjected to variable loads that fractured the metallic material. The mechanical properties experimentally investigated were tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity. The tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity of the aluminium alloy were determined to be 281.8 N/mm2, 273.5 N/mm2, and 9125 N/mm2, respectively, while for the mild steel specimen, the parameters were determined to be 406.6 N/mm2, 366.3 N/mm2, and 10,238.5 N/mm2, respectively. A comparative analysis showed that the calculated mechanical properties of the mild steel specimen had larger values than those of the aluminium alloy. However, aluminium alloy displayed more ductility and lower density than its mild steel counterpart. The research findings underscore the significance of comprehending the mechanical properties of materials before they are selected and deployed for component design and manufacturing needs. It will be a laudable means for metallurgical and manufacturing engineers to assess and optimize design and fabrication data before actual production application. © 2025 RJEES. All rights reserved. Keywords: Tensile strength Tensometer Modulus of elasticity Mild steel Aluminium alloy 1. INTRODUCTION The astronomical increase in the world of manufacturing engineering and industrial production of parts and components is as a result of huge the dependence on the proper selection and application of materials (Mohammed et al., 2020). Materials ordinarily are composed of two main types namely, metallic and non-metallic. This study is geared towards analyzing the influence and characteristics of ferrous and non-ferrous alloys as they are applied in metallurgy. Metals are generally influential in the manufacture of engine components. Metals such as mild steel and aluminium alloys are replete with properties and characteristics that are really applied in metallurgy (Atzori et al., 2010). 656 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 Some notable mechanical properties have made metals very attractive and essential in the manufacturing, construction, and transportation industries (Mathai et al., 2015). Mechanical properties such as high strength, fatigue strength, hardness, weldability, tensile strength and wear resistance among others, have made mild steel widely acceptable in the component production sector (Nukman et al., 2014). It has been applied in automotive engineering to engender the production of metallic car parts and other engineering materials. Conversely, aluminium alloys have enjoyed prominence and patronage as a result of its excellent mechanical properties. The aluminium alloy, Silumin (AA6061) has been the most widely used alloy in terms of metallic engine components (Azhagan et al., 2014). The aluminium alloys are reputed to be light weighted, corrosion resistant, and good formability which makes them very suitable for automotive and aircraft components. The knowledge of mechanical properties of materials is a vital tool in metallurgy needed for the prediction behavioural patterns of applied loads and stresses on metallic materials (Bedkowski, 2014). Destructive and non-destructive testing are important in the determination of the chemical constituents, strength, ductility, malleability and viability of materials (Shoukat et al., 2019). Tensile test is an example of destructive testing. It is mainly conducted by a table tensometer and Universal testing machine in Material Science laboratory. The table tensometer is an important tensile stress testing machine used to determine the tensile properties of small metallic specimen in the laboratories (Wang et al., 2007). Tensile testing remains the most appropriate test for determining stress and strain relationship of ductile materials (Carvelheira and Goncalves, 2007). The comparative analysis of the mild steel and aluminium via tensile testing underscores the basis for selection of materials in metallurgical engineering (Dibia and Ojotule, 2018). It is worthy of note that despite the wide application of both aluminum alloys and mild steel, comparative analysis of table tensometer are still very limited (Kharthik et al., 2019). This study is presented to bridge the gap by experimentally determining the tensile stresses between the ferrous and non-ferrous metals been examined within some controlled conditions. However, despite the wide use of both mild steel and aluminium alloys, comparative analyses using table tensometers remain limited in localized research contexts. This study bridges that gap by conducting a detailed tensile analysis of both materials under controlled laboratory conditions, thereby providing empirical data for metallurgical applications and enhancing the understanding of their structural performance. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS The materials used in this study are samples of silumin AA 6061 and mild steel rod machined to the dog bone specimen of ASTM E8 specifications of destructive testing (Eugene and Marks, 2007). The equipment deployed are table tensometer, micrometer screw gauge and vernier caliper (Gbasouzor et al., 2013). The initial length and diameter of the metallic samples were duly recorded. The digital tensometer shown in Figure 1 has an affixed specimen holder which bears the machined dog bone like specimen shown in Figure 2 during the tensile experimentation. The axial tensile load was gradually applied at a stipulated strain rate pending till when fracture of specimen occurs (Shashidhar et al., 2016). The applied load and developed extension were recorded after each experiment. 657 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 Figure 1: Tensometer Figure 2: Tensile specimen The stress of the metallic material was determined by Equation (1) obtained from (Khurmi and Gupta, 2014). 𝜎 = 𝐹 𝐴𝑠 (1) Where σ=stress F=maximum force As=area of specimen The area of specimen was determined by Equation (2). 𝐴𝑠=𝜋𝐷𝑜 2 4 (2) Where Do =diameter of the metallic specimen The strain is the deformation of the material caused by the application of stress. It is calculated by Equation (3) obtained from Martin et al. (2016). 𝜀 = 𝐿 − 𝐿𝑜 𝐿𝑜 (3) Where ɛ=strain L=length after load was applied Lo=original length The modulus of Elasticity, EA was calculated by Equation (4). 658 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 𝐸𝐴=𝐹 × 𝐿𝑜 𝐴𝑠× ∆𝐿 (4) Where ΔL=change in length Also, the Modulus of Elasticity of the aluminium alloy specimen was estimated from the slope of the limits of elasticity in Figure 3. It was estimated as shown in Equation (5) obtained from (Sharma and Aggarwal, 2013). 𝐸𝐴=∆𝜎𝐴 ∆𝜀𝐴 (5) Where EA=modulus of elasticity of aluminium alloy ΔσA=change in stress of aluminium alloy Δɛ=change in strain of aluminium alloy The Modulus of Elasticity of the mild steel specimen was calculated from the slope of the limits of elasticity in Figure 7 as shown by Equation (6). 𝐸 = ∆𝜎 ∆𝜀 (6) Where E=modulus of elasticity of mild steel Δσ=change in stress of mild steel Δɛ=change in strain of mild steel 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1. Tensile Test results for the Aluminium alloy specimen The dimensions of the aluminium alloy specimen before and after fracture are shown in Table 1. The specimen had an initial and final diameter of 8.30 mm and 6.40 mm, respectively shown in Table 1. The experimental tensile test result of the aluminium alloy specimen depicting the various loads, extensions, stresses, and strains is presented in Figures 3, 4, and 5. The tensile test shown in Figures 3 and 4 had the regular stress-strain relationship obtained for ductile materials. The yield strength and tensile strength were determined to be 273.5 N/mm2 and 281.8 N/mm2, respectively as shown in Figure 3. The relationship between the load and the extensions was seen to be in accordance with the pattern portrayed by the stress and strain relationship of a ductile material. In addition, a matrix plot shown in Figure 5 was developed among the tensile test parameters of stress and load against strain and extension. The modulus of elasticity of the aluminium alloy specimen was determined to be 9125 N/mm2 as shown in Equation (7). The results obtained were found to be similar to those reported by Sulamet-Arbbimo et al. (2016). 𝐸𝐴=∆𝜎𝐴 ∆𝜀𝐴 =182.96 −36.96 0.024 − 0.008 =146 0.016 = 9125 𝑁 𝑚𝑚2 (7) The obtained results showed a good level of ductility as depicted by the graphical trend in Figures 3 and 4. It was noticed that Hooke’s law was obeyed until the material went beyond the elastic limit of the material (aluminium alloy). The obtained result is similar to that obtained by Sulamet-Arbbimo et al., (2016). Table 1: Geometry of Aluminium alloy specimen Specimen status Length (mm) Diameter(mm) Gauge length (mm) Specimen before fracture 190.00 8.30 175.00 Specimen after fracture 191.49 6.40 195.00 659 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 Figure 3: Plot of stress against strain in Aluminium alloy specimen Figure 4: Plot of load against extension in Aluminium alloy specimen Figure 5: Matrix plot for Aluminium alloy 3.2. Tensile Test Result for the Mild Steel Specimen The tensile test result for the load and extension values of the mild steel specimen is shown in Figure 6. The dimensions of the mild steel specimen before and after fracture are shown in Table 2. While the tensile test result showing the various stresses, strains, loads and extension is shown in Figures 6, 7, and 8. It was noticed that the yield strength and tensile strength of the mild steel specimen are 366.3 N/mm2 and 406.6 N/mm2, respectively as shown in Figure 7. The result is similar to that obtained in Wuryanti et al. (2020). The outcome of the load and extension values is similar to that of the stress against strain. The matrix plot shown 660 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 in Figure 8 is a compendium of the plots described by the experiment. The modulus of elasticity of the mild steel specimen was determined to be 10238 N/mm2 as shown in Equation (8). 𝐸 = ∆𝜎 ∆𝜀 =304.93 −100.16 0.031 − 0.011 =204.77 0.02 =10,238 𝑁 𝑚𝑚2 (8) The obtained values of the tensile test parameters show that the Hooke’s law was actually obeyed until the mild steel specimen exceeded the elastic limit. Again, this explains the high level of ductility inherent in the material as seen in the results obtained and the graphical trend portrayed in Figures 6 and 7. Similar results for mild steel were obtained in Wuryanti et al. ( 2020). The Modulus of Elasticity of the mild steel is noticed to be higher than that of the aluminium alloy which is 9,125 N/mm2. It is a sign that the strength of mild steel is higher than that of aluminium alloy as supported by Wuryanti et al. ( 2020). Table 2: Geometry of mild steel specimen Specimen status Length (mm) Diameter(mm) Gauge length Specimen before fracture 190.00 8.30 135.00 Specimen after fracture 192.44 6.20 175.00 Figure 6: Plot of load against extension in mild steel Figure 7: Plot of load against extension in mild steel 661 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 Figure 8: Matrix plot of load and stress against extension and strain in mild steel 3.3. Comparative Analysis of the Mild Steel and Aluminium Alloy Specimens It was noticed experimentally from the obtained results that there were some performance differences between the two metallic materials. The differences, as shown in Table 3, are that the tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity of mild steel are larger than those of aluminium alloy, as proven by the experimental result and analysis. The comparison of stress and strain curves shown in Figure 9 illustrates that the values obtained for mild steel are higher than those of the aluminium alloy. The obtained values of both specimens support the fact that the mild steel is a more ductile material than the aluminium alloy, as shown in the graphical trend. This implies that higher values of yield and tensile strengths show connotes great level of ductility as seen in Figure 9. Table 3: Comparative analysis of the mild steel and aluminium alloy specimens Parameters Mild steel Aluminium alloy Yield strength (N/mm2) 366.3 281.8 Tensile strength(N/mm2) 406.6 273.5 Modulus of Elasticity(N/mm2) 10238.5 9125 Figure 8: Comparison of stress against strain curves 4. CONCLUSION The material analysis of mild steel and aluminium alloy using a table tensometer has been conducted to ensure that certain decisions on rigidity, strength, low density, and ductility are understood before being 662 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 deployed for design and manufacturing purposes. In a bid to determine the mechanical properties, the machined specimen was placed in the specimen holder of the tensometer and subjected to selected loads that fractured the metallic materials. The mechanical properties experimentally investigated in this study were tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity. The tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity of the aluminium alloy were determined to be 281.8 N/mm2, 273.5 N/mm2, and 9125 N/mm2, respectively, while those for the mild steel specimen were determined to be 406.6 N/mm2, 366.3 N/mm2, and 10,238.5 N/mm2, respectively. A comparison of the obtained results showed that the calculated mechanical properties of the mild steel specimen had larger values than the aluminium alloy, but for a more weightsensitive usage aluminium alloy displayed more ductility and lower density than its mild steel counterpart. The research findings portray a great importance in the application of the mechanical and physical properties of metallic materials before been applied in engineering-related projects. 5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors of this work wish to appreciate the management of the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), Abuja, and Auchi Polytechnic for providing the financial support for this research. 6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST There is no conflict of interest associated with this work. REFERENCES Atzori, B. , Meneghetti, G. and Ricotta, M. (2010) . Analysis of the Fatigue Strength under two Load Levels of a Stainless Steel Based on Energy Dissipation. EDP Sciences 6(1), pp. 1-8. Azhagan, M. T., Mohan, B. and Rajadurai, A.(2014). Optimization of Process Parameters to Enhance the Hardness on Squeeze Cast Aluminium Alloy AA6061. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 6 (1), pp. 183-190. Bedkowski, W. (2014) . Assessment of the fatigue life of machine components under service loadingA review of selected problems. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 2( 2), pp.443–458. Carvelheira, P. and Goncalves, P. (2007). FEA of Two Engine Pistons made of Aluminium Cast Alloy 390 and Ductile Iron 65-45-12 under Service Conditions. 5th International Conference on Mechanics and Materials in Designs, Porto, Portugal. Dibia, G. I. and Ojotule, D. I.(2018).The Impacts of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) Constraints on Teachers Effectiveness in Technical Colleges in Rivers State, Nigeria, International Journal of Innovative Education Research, 6(1), pp. 30-36. Eugene A. and Marks T.B. Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 11th Edition, McGraw-Hill Companies. , 2007, pp. 34-36. Gbasouzor A. I., Okeke, O. C. and Chima, L. O.,(2013) Design and Characterization of a Fatigue Testing Machine, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science,1(2), pp. 23-25 October, 2013. Kharthik, M. N., Rohit, B., Bahett, N. N., Rohan, M. and Bhaskar, A. (2019). Fabrication of Metallurgical Test Apparatus, International Journal of Science and Research, 8(4), pp.1863-1866. Khurmi, R. S. and Gupta, J. K. Machine Design, Revised edition, Eurasia publishing Ltd, New Delhi, 2014. Martin, K. V., Vipin, V. V. and Suneeth S., (2016). Fabrication and Analysis of Fatigue strength Machine, The International Journal of Engineering and Sciences, 5(7), pp. 4-10 Mathai, B., Mathew, C. , Pratheesh, K. & Varghese, C.K. (2015). Effect of Silicon on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Al-Si Alloys. International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 29(6), pp.299-305. Mohammed, A. K., Mohammed, I. K., Mohammed, M. G. Sajjad, M. A. and Shaik, J. (2020). Design and Fabrication of Fatigue Strength Machine, International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 7,(1), pp. 295-304. Nukman, Y., Hamdi, M., Ramesh, S., Chandra, D., Liew, H. L., & Purbolaksono, J. (2014). Fatigue crack growth of a corner crack in a square prismatic bar under combined cyclic torsion–tension loading. International Journal of Fatigue, 6(4).pp. 67–73. Sharma, P.C. and Aggarwal, D. K. A Textbook of Machine design, Twelveth edition, S. K. Kataria and sons Publisher, New Delhi, India, 2013. Shashidhar, M. B., Ravishankar, K. S. and Padmayya, S. N.(2018), Design and Fabrication of Destructive Testing Machine, International Journal of Novel Research and Development, 3(5), pp. 5-14. 663 B.N.G. Aliemeke et al. / Nigerian Research Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences 10(2) 2025 pp. 655-663 Shoukat A., Muhammad H. T., Muhammud A. S., Nouman Z. and Muhammad K. K. (2019). Development of A Specimen Destructive Machine for Testing Different materials. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management, 4(2), pp.8-15. Sulamet-Arbbimo, R. D., Soedarsono, J. W. and Prayitno, D. (2016). Tensile Properties Analysis of Aluminium Alloy and Mild Steel Using Standard Specimen. Journal of Applied Research and Technology, 14(1), pp.148-153. Wang, X., Chen, M., Pu, G., & Wang, C. (2007). Residual strength of 48MnV crankshaft based on safety factor. Journal of Central South University of Technology, 12( 2) pp. 145–147. Wuryanti S., Slameto, M. and Alvera, M. (2020). Investigation of Mechanical Properties of Mild Steel and Aluminium Alloys for Shaft Materials. Advances in Engineering Research, 19(2), pp. 55-58.