Download - Result and Discussion
4.1 TENSILE STRENGTH
4.1.1 TENSILE STRENTH FOR VIRGIN PP :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length115Gauge Length50
Sample Width25Sample Thickness3
Speed of testing (mm/min) 3
* All dimensions are in mm.Table 4.1
Fig 4.1 Graph for Tensile strength of virgin PP.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area0.75cm
2Yield Force43.00Kg
3Yield Elongation4.02mm
4Break Force26.0Kg
5Break Elongation18.36mm
6Tensile Strength at Yield57.33Kg/cm
7Tensile Strength at Break34.67Kg/cm
8% Elongation15.97%
Table 4.2
4.1.2 TENSILE STRENGTH FOR PP+CaCO3 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length115Gauge Length50
Sample Width25Sample Thickness3
Speed of testing (mm/min)5
*All dimension in mm
Table 4.3
Fig 4.2 Graph for Tensile strength of PP+CaCO3.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area0.75cm
2Yield Force30.00Kg
3Yield Elongation1.69mm
4Break Force30.0Kg
5Break Elongation1.69mm
6Tensile Strength at Yield40.00Kg/cm
7Tensile Strength at Break40.00Kg/cm
8% Elongation1.47%
Table 4.4
4.1.3 TENSILE STRENGTH FOR PP+TiO2 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length115Gauge Length50
Sample Width25Sample Thickness3
Speed of testing (mm/min)5
*All dimension in mm
Table 4.5
Fig 4.3 Graph for Tensile strength of PP+TiO2.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area0.75cm
2Yield Force40.00Kg
3Yield Elongation3.01mm
4Break Force39.0Kg
5Break Elongation3.12mm
6Tensile Strength at Yield53.33Kg/cm
7Tensile Strength at Break52.00Kg/cm
8% Elongation2.71%
Table 4.6
4.1.4 TENSILE STRENGTH FOR Al2SiO5 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length115Gauge Length50
Sample Width25Sample Thickness3
Speed of testing (mm/min)5
*All dimensions are in mm.Table 4.7
Fig 4.4 Graph for Tensile strength of PP+Al2SiO5.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area0.75cm
2Yield Force38.00Kg
3Yield Elongation2.96mm
4Break Force37.0Kg
5Break Elongation3.12mm
6Tensile Strength at Yield50.67Kg/cm
7Tensile Strength at Break49.33Kg/cm
8% Elongation2.71%
Table 4.8
4.2 FLEXURAL STRENGTH
4.2.1 FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR VIRGIN PP :Sample details 1Span Length (mm)135
2Thickness (mm)3
3Width (mm)15
4Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Table 4.9
Fig 4.5 Graph for Flexural strength of virgin PP.
Results
1MOD 1 FORCE1.20 Kg
2MODE 1 DEFLECTION1.91mm
3MOD 2 FORCE1.00Kg
4MOD2 DEFLECTION3.64mm
5Stress 11.80
6Stress 21.50
7FLEXURAL MODULES153.01N/mm2
Table 4.10
4.2.2 FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR PP+CaCO3 :Sample details 1Span Length (mm)135
2Thickness (mm)3
3Width (mm)15
4Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Table 4.11
Fig 4.6 Graph for Flexural strength of PP+CaCO3.
Results
1MOD 1 FORCE1.59 Kg
2MODE 1 DEFLECTION4.06 mm
3MOD 2 FORCE1.32Kg
4MODE 2 DEFLECTION5.29mm
5Stress 12.39
6Stress 21.97
7FLEXURAL MODULES205.80N/mm2
Table 4.12
4.2.3 FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR PP+TiO2 :Sample details 1Span Length (mm)135
2Thickness (mm)3
3Width (mm)15
4Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Table 4.13
Fig 4.7 Graph for Flexural strength of PP+TiO2.
Results
1MOD 1 FORCE1.10Kg
2MODE 1 DEFLECTION1.12mm
3MOD 2 FORCE0.70Kg
4MOD2 DEFLECTION4.74mm
5Stress 11.65
6Stress 21.05
7FLEXURAL MODULES298.61N/mm2
Table 4.14
4.2.4 FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR PP+Al2SiO5 :Sample details 1Span Length (mm)135
2Thickness (mm)3
3Width (mm)15
4Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Table 4.15
Fig 4.8 Graph for Flexural strength of PP+Al2SiO5.
Results
1MOD 1 FORCE2.40Kg
2MODE 1 DEFLECTION7.20mm
3MOD 2 FORCE1.81Kg
4MODE 2 DEFLECTION8.75mm
5Stress 13.60
6Stress 22.72
7FLEXURAL MODULES439.85N/mm2
Table 4.16
4.3 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
4.3.1 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FOR VIRGIN PP :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length65Gauge Length50
Sample Width65Sample Thickness9
Speed of testing (mm/min)6
*All dimension in mm
Table 4.17
Fig 4.9 Graph for Compressive strength of virgin PP.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area5.85cm
2Yield Force36.41Kg
3Maximum Force36.6Kg
5Total Deflection2.58mm
6Compre. Yield strength6.22Kg/cm
7Compressive strength6.26Kg/cm
8% Deflection3.97
24.01Mpa
Table 4.18
4.3.2 COMPRSSIVE STRENGTH FOR PP+CaCO3 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length65Gauge Length50
Sample Width65Sample Thickness12
Speed of testing (mm/min)5
*All dimension in mm.Table 4.19
Fig 4.10 Graph for compressive strength of PP+CaCO3.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area7.80cm
2Yield Force119.70Kg
3Maximum Force120.5Kg
5Total Deflection4.83mm
6Compre. Yield strength15.35Kg/cm
7Compressive strength15.45Kg/cm
8% Deflection7.43
34.38Mpa
Table 4.20
4.3.3 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FOR PP+TiO2 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length65Gauge Length50
Sample Width65Sample Thickness6
Speed of testing (mm/min)6
*All dimension in mm
Table 4.21
Fig 4.11 Graph for Compressive strength of PP+TiO2.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area3.90cm
2Yield Force1.10Kg
3Maximum Force40.0Kg
5Total Deflection2.80mm
6Compre. Yield strength0.28Kg/cm
7Compressive strength10.26Kg/cm
8% Deflection4.31
31.43Mpa
Table 4.22
4.3.4 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FOR PP+Al2SiO5 :Sample details Specimen codePT
Ref. StandardGIVEN SAMPLE
Grip Length65Gauge Length50
Sample Width65Sample Thickness9
Speed of testing (mm/min)6
*All dimension in mm
Table 4.23
Fig 4.12 Graph for Compressive strength of PP+Al2SiO5.
Obtained Results
Sr. No.ResultsValue
1Area5.85cm
2Yield Force44.79Kg
3Maximum Force45.6Kg
5Total Deflection2.04mm
6Compre. Yield strength7.66Kg/cm
7Compressive strength7.79Kg/cm
8% Deflection3.14
35.74Mpa
Table 4.24
4.4 IMPACT STRENGTHThe impact strength values were given in the following table :S.NoVirgin (PP)(Joule/cm)PP+CaCO3(Joule/cm)PP+TiO2(Joule/cm)PP+Al2 SiO5(Joule/cm)
17.621.626.401.29
28.631.957.631.51
37.122.37.621.95
47.631.737.841.21
57.822.178.121.4
Table 4.25
Fig 4.14 Graph for impact strength.
Fig 4.14 represents the impact strength values of PP and filled PP with various types of inorganic fillers. The graph also explain that impact strength of PP+TiO2 was equal to the virgin PP, when compare to other fillers. . The impact strength of PP+CaCO3, PP+Al2SiO5 was low, when compare to the virgin PP. The impact strength of PP+TiO2 was equal to the virgin PP, when compare to other fillers. The impact strength was good and material cost also reduced, by adding titanium di oxide (TiO2) with PP.
Average value for impact strength of PP and filled PP :SampleVirgin (PP)PP+CaCO3PP+TiO2PP+Al2SiO5
Impact strength (Joule/cm)7.7641.9547.5221.472
Table 4.26
Fig 4.13 Chart for Impact strength
4.5 HARDNESS MEASUREMENTThe hardness values (Shore-D) were given in the following table :S.NOVirgin (PP)PP+CaCO3PP+TiO2PP+Al2 SiO5
175826478
273836577
381796879
474826678
577816975
Table 4.27
Fig 4.16 Graph for hardness measurement.
Fig 4.16 represents the hardness values of PP and filled PP with various types of inorganic fillers. The hardness of PP+CaCO3 and PP+Al2 SiO5 was increased than hardness of virgin PP. The hardness of PP+TiO2 was slightly decreased than hardness of virgin PP.
Average value for hardness of PP and filled PP :SampleVirgin (PP)PP+CaCO3PP+TiO2PP+Al2SiO5
Hardness 7681.466.477.4
Table 4.28
Fig 4.15 Chart for hardness
4.6 WATER ABSORPTIONThe water absorption values given in the following table :SamplesConditioned weight (gm)Wet weight (gm)Increase in weight percentage (%)
Virgin (PP)1.141.140
PP+CaCO31.471.491.36
PP+TiO21.271.280.78
PP+Al2 SiO51.351.31.48
Table 4.29
Table 4.27 contains water absorption result for PP and filled PP with various types of inorganic fillers. The samples were immersed in water for 48 hours and weighed. The increase in weight percentage is to be calculated.
Fig 4.17 chart for water absorption
Fig 4.17 represents the water absorption values of PP and filled PP with various types of inorganic fillers. The virgin (PP) weight does not increase. So, it has good resistance to water. In the case of PP+CaCO3, PP+TiO2, and PP+Al2 SiO5 weight increased at 1%, this is acceptable amount of water absorption. So, the filled PP materials also have better resistance to water.