UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER

School of Mechanical, Aerospace & Civil Engineering

MACE 20037

Plastics: Design, Materials & Manufacture Laboratory Report

Report on an Experiment to Investigate the Stress & Time Dependence of the Creep of Polypropylene

Prepared by: Shuhaib Maudarbaccus Second Year Mechanical Engineering

Experiment performed on: February 8, 2011 Report Submitted on: February 22, 2011

Table of Contents
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Theory .................................................................................................................................... 1 Experimental Procedure ......................................................................................................... 3 Apparatus & Equipment ......................................................................................................... 3 Procedure ................................................................................................................................ 3 Experimental Results ............................................................................................................... 4 Calculation of the conversion factors ..................................................................................... 4 Results from isochronous test ................................................................................................ 5 Results from isometric tests ................................................................................................... 6 Interpolation of two more creep curves .................................................................................. 7 Discussions ................................................................................................................................ 9 Analysis of the link between theory and experimental results ............................................... 9 Possible sources of experimental errors ................................................................................. 9 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 10 Appendix I Experimental Data .......................................................................................... 11 References ............................................................................................................................... 11 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 11

List of Figures
Figure 1: The ICI Creep Machine .............................................................................................. 5 Figure 2: Lever arrangement of creep machine ......................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Mirror arrangement of extensometer .......................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Isochronous stress-strain graph at 30s ....................................................................... 8 Figure 4: .................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4: .................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4: .................................................................................................................................... 8

List of Tables
Table 1: ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 2: ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 3: ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Table 4: ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 5: ..................................................................................................................................... 8 (ii)

Abstract
The experiment was carried out to investigate the stress and time dependence of the creep of polypropylene at room temperature. Appropriate tests, namely isochronous and isometric tests, were performed to generate data required to analyse those dependencies. Isochronous stress-strain graphs and isometric curves (creep curves) were also produced. Conclusions reached were that firstly, the strain at a particular time was higher for a larger stress but the proportional relationship as suggested in theory was less obvious and secondly, the creep rate decreased significantly within a very short time to support the idea of back stress building up to oppose the applied stress and slow down the creep. A number of possible sources of errors have also been identified, accounting for the scattering in the plots produced. The change in room temperature was also identified as a source of error but its effect on the results was less obvious than that of other sources identified. Further investigation into the effect of temperature on creep is therefore required to support results from this experiment.

Introduction
In this experiment, the creep variations of polypropylene with stress and time have been investigated. To determine those variations, creep specimens of polypropylene were subject to 2 types of tests, namely isochronous and isometric tests. The isochronous test involved finding the strain of a specimen after 30 seconds under a range of stresses. The resulting data was then used to plot an isochronous stress-strain curve from which the 30s-creep-modulus of the polypropylene specimen could be estimated. The isometric test involved observing the change in strain with time under a constant stress and then plotting the strain against a logarithmic time scale to obtain a creep curve. The test was then repeated under another applied stress to be able to produce a second creep curve. It has to be noted that the creep curves had to be forced to agree with the isochronous stress-strain curve at 30s and the corresponding stress by determining correction factors and using them to correct the data from the isometric test. The corrected data was then used to plot new creep curves and also to interpolate two more creep curves at different stresses. The findings from those two tests, their implications and possible experimental errors have been explained in the Discussions section. The background theory and main concepts needed for the experiment have also been outlined in the subsection below. Theory Polypropylene, being a polymer, is made up of long chains of covalently bonded carbon atoms. These chains are tangled together and are held by secondary forces like Van der Waal forces which can be compared to weak cross-links at regions of entanglement (1). The presence of those secondary forces causes polymers to exhibit glass transition which occurs at a temperature known as the glass transition temperature, TG. At temperatures well below TG, polymers can be very stiff but as the temperature increases, the polymer molecules gain enough thermal energy to begin sliding past one another (2). Therefore, under the application of stress, the polymer undergoes an instantaneous strain according to Hookes Law accompanied by an increase in strain as polymer chains slide past one another, 1

overcoming the secondary forces between them (1). This change in strain is termed creep and is a property of polymeric solids known as viscoelasticity. Creep experiments to investigate time and stress dependence of strains have revealed the linear relationship between strain and stress at an arbitrary time after application of the stress, which in turn led to the definition of the creep compliance at time t, (3). However, this property, termed linear viscoelastic creep, is only observed at low stresses (sufficiently low to cause strains below 0.005) (3). In this experiment, strains observed were less than 0.005 and based on the previous fact, a straight line passing through the origin could be fitted in the isochronous stress-strain plots as shown later in the report. This allowed the creep modulus for a specific time to be calculated for the polypropylene specimen. On the other hand, various models have been made to describe creep and one of them is the Zener Model which leads to the following equation for strain of a material at time, t, and under stress, :

where and represent spring constants and represents viscosity of the system of springs and dashpot used to model creep (4). Clearly, the above equation reveals the non-linear relationship between strain and time and creep curves, plots of strain-log t under constant stress, will therefore also be non-linear. Although the exact relationship is not known, exponential curves have been fitted through the strain-log t plots from the isometric tests as they provide a very good agreement with the plots. Finally, another factor which had to be considered was the room temperature at which the experiment was performed. In fact, unlike metals, polymers undergo significant creep at room temperature. The higher the temperature is above the TG of the polymer, the greater the viscoelastic behaviour. The creep specimen used in this experiment was polypropylene, which has a TG of around -10C (5) and the room temperature was around 20C. Therefore, any changes in temperature during the experiment would need to be taken into consideration when analysing the results from the creep tests performed.

Experimental Procedure
Apparatus & Equipment An ICI Creep Machine, shown in Fig. 1, was provided to carry out the investigation. This machine features an extensometer with a set of three mirrors, one of which is fixed while the other two rotate by an amount proportional to the extension of the specimen being tested. The mirror system deflects a light beam from a slit and the image of a hairline then appears on a curved scale (labelled A in Fig. 1). The displacement of this light spot (hairline image) can be simply read off the scale which is accurate to 1mm, and then used to calculate the strain in the specimen. The creep machine also uses an electromagnetic loading system (labelled B on Fig. 1) to allow the load to be released quickly and start timing at the same time. A damper is also required to ensure that the load is applied without shock and overshoot.

Figure 1: The ICI Creep Machine

A vernier calliper, accurate to 0.1mm, was also provided to measure the thickness and width of three creep specimens to be used during the experiment while timing was done using a stopwatch accurate to 1 second. Procedure Before starting the experiment, the thickness and width of three creep specimens were measured using the vernier calliper and an average value for both dimensions determined. The loading bearings were fitted onto each end of one of the specimens. The specimen was then mounted onto the extensometer using a jig to ensure the knife edges of the extensometer were 80mm apart. The specimen could then be placed into the creep machine and was allowed to creep under the pre-load for about 5 minutes, following which the fixed mirror of the extensometer was rotated so that the light spot was approximately on the zero line. This was done to remove any errors in extension induced by the weight of the loading mechanism (excluding the hanger) and which would otherwise be carried forward into the measurements taken. The first part of the experiment was the isochronous test. This involved applying a load to the specimen and recording the displacement of the light spot just before the load was applied and 30s later. The test was done with loads ranging from 5N to 45N, in steps of 5N and between each loading cycle, the specimen was allowed to recover for 2 minutes so that the displacement of the light spot could return close to the zero line before the next cycle could be started. The measurements have been used to plot an isochronous stress-strain curve in the next section.

For the second part, an isometric test was carried out. Another specimen was loaded into the creep machine following the same steps as outlined earlier and again the specimen was left to creep under the pre-load for 5 minutes. A load of 40N was set into the machine and timing started as it was released. Readings of the displacement of the light spot were taken at 10s intervals for the first 2 minutes, then at 30s intervals for the next 3 minutes and finally at 1 minute intervals till the last reading at 900s. The same experiment was carried out with a load of 20N by another group of students from whom a second set of measurements was obtained. The data collected has been used to plot two creep curves which can be found in the next section.

Experimental Results
Calculation of the conversion factors To simplify the calculation of stress and strain under the different load and time conditions, conversion factors relating the stress and the strain to the corresponding independent variable can be determined and then used to evaluate all the stress and strain values. The conversion factors are each defined by the equations and , where F refers to the weight of the sets of loads used, including the hanger, and X is the displacement of the light spot along the curved scale. The conversion factors thus depend on the dimensions and arrangement of the creep machine and the extensometer. a b The schematic in Fig. 2 shows the lever arrangement translating the load F to the force T applied on the specimen. It is known that the ratio is 5:1 and by equating the moments at the pivot to 0, T can expressed in terms of F as follows:

Specimen

It is also known that , where A is the crosssectional area of the specimen and that . Equating the two expressions above and using :

Figure 2: Lever arrangement of creep machine

To find the second conversion factor, the rotation of the mirrors attached to the rollers of the extensometer and the displacement of the light spot, X (refer to Fig. 3), need to considered. Fig. A1 in Appendix I shows that the rollers rotate through a distance for an overall extension of . If the angle through which they both rotate is , and is the radius of the rollers, then:

Figure 3: Mirror arrangement of extensometer (6) 4

Also, the rotation of the mirrors deflects the light beam through an angular displacement of . A light beam incident on a mirror which rotates by an angle and which would deflect the beam through has been shown in Fig. A2 in Appendix I. With an additional mirror rotated through , the beam would therefore be deflected through a total angle of 4 . The displacement X which can be read off from the curved scale is related to by , where R is the radius through which the light spot moves along the curved scale. Finally, from the definition of strain, it is known that .

From the measurements of the thickness and the width of 3 specimens, the average thickness and width were found to be 3.31mm and 4.99mm respectively. The area A is therefore 16.52mm 2. Also known are the values , and . Replacing the above values in the expression for the conversion factors, the following is obtained:

Results from isochronous test Table 1: Data from isochronous test with strain and stress values The measurements made during the isochronous test have been tabulated in Table 1 to the right. X is the difference between Xf and Xi and the strain and stress values for each set of readings have been calculated using the previously calculated conversion factors. F/N
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Xi / mm
0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
14 12 10

Xf / mm
2.0 6.5 13.0 22.5 34.0 44.0 49.0 53.0 56.0

X / mm
2.0 6.5 12.5 21.5 33.0 42.5 47.5 51.5 54.5

[30s]
1.56E-04 5.08E-04 9.77E-04 1.68E-03 2.58E-03 3.32E-03 3.71E-03 4.02E-03 4.26E-03

/ MPa
1.51 3.03 4.54 6.05 7.56 9.08 10.59 12.10 13.61

Stress, / MPa

An isochronous stress-strain graph has been plotted in Fig. 4. Assuming linear viscoelastic creep as outlined in the Theory section, a line passing through the origin can be fitted through the points plotted using the least-squares analysis. This analysis leads to the equation for the best-fit line. Since the modulus of a material is determined by taking the ratio of stress to strain, in this case, the 30s-creep-modulus is therefore the gradient of the line of best-fit and is equal to:

= 3037.7

8 6 4 2 0

0.002

0.000

0.001

0.003

0.004

Strain at 30s, [30s]

Figure 4: Isochronous stress-strain graph 5 at 30s

0.005

Results from isometric tests Table 2 shows the readings from the isometric tests carried out with loads of 20N and 40N. It also contains values of lg (t) for the values of t at which readings were taken, except for t = 0s for which lg (t) is undefined. The strain values tabulated have been calculated using the conversion factor K and the displacement X. The empty cells under the displacement and strain columns indicate that no reading was taking at the corresponding value of time, t. The data from Table 2 has been used to plot two graphs of strainlog t, also known as creep curves, for the two applied loads of 20N and 40N. The corresponding stresses for these applied loads can be calculated using the conversion factor, K, and are equal to 6.05MPa and 12.11MPa respectively. Exponential curves have been used to fit the plots as shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6, as seen in the Theory section.
0.002 0.0019 0.0018

Table 2: Data from isometric tests with strain values t/s

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780 840 900 960

X / mm F = 20N F = 40N
0.0 17.5 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.0 20.0 0.0 50.0 51.0 51.0 51.5 52.0 52.0 52.5 52.5 53.0 53.0 53.5 53.5 54.0 54.0 54.5 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.5 56.0 56.0 56.5 56.5 56.5 57.0 57.0 57.0 57.0

lg (t/s)
1.00 1.30 1.48 1.60 1.70 1.78 1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00 2.04 2.08 2.18 2.26 2.32 2.38 2.43 2.48 2.56 2.62 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.82 2.86 2.89 2.92 2.95 2.98

Strain, F = 20N F = 40N

0.00E-00 1.37E-03 1.45E-03 1.48E-03 1.52E-03 1.56E-03 1.56E-03 0.00E-00 3.91E-03 3.98E-03 3.98E-03 4.02E-03 4.06E-03 4.06E-03 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 4.14E-03 4.14E-03 4.18E-03 4.18E-03 4.22E-03 4.22E-03 4.26E-03 4.30E-03 4.30E-03 4.30E-03 4.34E-03 4.38E-03 4.38E-03 4.41E-03 4.41E-03 4.41E-03 4.45E-03 4.45E-03 4.45E-03 4.45E-03

20.5

1.60E-03

21.0 21.5 21.5 22.0 22.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 23.0 23.0 23.5 24.5 25.0
0.0045

1.64E-03 1.68E-03 1.68E-03 1.72E-03 1.72E-03 1.76E-03 1.76E-03 1.76E-03 1.80E-03 1.80E-03 1.84E-03 1.91E-03 1.95E-03

= 0.0012e0.1645*lg(t)
Strain,

0.0044 0.0043 0.0042 0.0041 0.004 0.0039 0.0038

= 0.0036e0.0739*lg(t)

Strain,

0.0017 0.0016 0.0015 0.0014 0.0013 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

1.5

2.5

lg (t/s)

lg (t/s)

Figure 5: Creep curve for F=20N (=6.05 MPa)

Figure 6: Creep curve for F=40N (=12.11 MPa)

Interpolation of two more creep curves Due to the variations in the properties of the specimens used in the isochronous and isometric tests and errors like differences in cross-sectional areas of specimens, the strains from the creep curves at t=30s do not agree with the strains from the isochronous stress-strain curve for the same applied loads. To resolve this problem and reduce errors carried into the interpolated creep curves, the two existing creep curves have been corrected using two correction factors. For this purpose, the equation of the best-fit line for the isochronous graph has been used to find the strains at stresses of 6.05MPa and 12.11MPa. The conversion factors have then been calculated by taking the ratio of the strains from the isochronous curve to that from the isometric tests. The strain values used and the correction factors have been tabulated in Table 3 below. Table 3: Strain values from the tests & the correction factors
F/N 20 40 / MPa 6.05 12.11 from isochronous curve 0.001993 0.003986 from isometric tests 0.001484 0.003984 Correction Factor 1.34271 1.00045

Table 4: Corrected and interpolated strains values

t/s 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780 840 900 960 lg (t/s) 1.00 1.30 1.48 1.60 1.70 1.78 1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00 2.04 2.08 2.18 2.26 2.32 2.38 2.43 2.48 2.56 2.62 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.82 2.86 2.89 2.92 2.95 2.98 Original Strains F = 20N F = 40N 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.37E-03 3.91E-03 1.45E-03 3.98E-03 1.48E-03 3.98E-03 1.52E-03 4.02E-03 1.56E-03 4.06E-03 1.56E-03 4.06E-03 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 1.60E-03 4.14E-03 4.14E-03 4.18E-03 1.64E-03 4.18E-03 1.68E-03 4.22E-03 1.68E-03 4.22E-03 1.72E-03 4.26E-03 1.72E-03 4.30E-03 1.76E-03 4.30E-03 1.76E-03 4.30E-03 1.76E-03 4.34E-03 4.38E-03 1.80E-03 4.38E-03 4.41E-03 1.80E-03 4.41E-03 4.41E-03 1.84E-03 4.45E-03 4.45E-03 1.91E-03 4.45E-03 4.45E-03 1.95E-03 Corrected Strains F = 20N F = 40N 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.84E-03 3.91E-03 1.94E-03 3.99E-03 1.99E-03 3.99E-03 2.05E-03 4.03E-03 2.10E-03 4.06E-03 2.10E-03 4.06E-03 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 2.15E-03 4.14E-03 4.14E-03 4.18E-03 2.20E-03 4.18E-03 2.26E-03 4.22E-03 2.26E-03 4.22E-03 2.31E-03 4.26E-03 2.31E-03 4.30E-03 2.36E-03 4.30E-03 2.36E-03 4.30E-03 2.36E-03 4.34E-03 4.38E-03 2.41E-03 4.38E-03 4.42E-03 2.41E-03 4.42E-03 4.42E-03 2.47E-03 4.46E-03 4.46E-03 2.57E-03 4.46E-03 4.46E-03 2.62E-03 Interpolated Strains F = 30N F = 35N 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.87E-03 3.39E-03 2.96E-03 3.47E-03 2.99E-03 3.49E-03 3.04E-03 3.53E-03 3.08E-03 3.57E-03 3.08E-03 3.57E-03

3.15E-03

3.64E-03

3.19E-03 3.24E-03 3.24E-03 3.28E-03 3.30E-03 3.33E-03 3.33E-03 3.35E-03 3.39E-03 3.41E-03 3.46E-03 3.51E-03

3.69E-03 3.73E-03 3.73E-03 3.77E-03 3.80E-03 3.81E-03 3.81E-03 3.84E-03 3.89E-03 3.92E-03 3.96E-03 3.98E-03

Table 4 above shows the corrected strain values under 20N and 40N loads and interpolated values of strains under stresses of 9.08MPa, equivalent to F=30N, and 10.60MPa, equivalent to F=35N. The corrected strain values were obtained by multiplying the raw data by the appropriate correction factors while the interpolated values were determined through linear interpolation between the strain values for F=20N and F=40N using the equation below for each set of readings. The subscripts denote the force applied, F, and i needs to be replaced by 30 or 35 to give the strains for F=30N or F=35N.

The assumption made when interpolating was that the specimen had been tested within the linear viscoelastic region. This means that strain should vary proportionally with stress at any specified time within the time-frame used and that the ratio of stress to strain should correspond to the creep modulus at that same time (or the inverse of the compliance, J, at that specified time). This would therefore also comply with the isochronous stress-strain curve in Fig. 4. The data from Table 4 was then plotted and an exponential curve fitted through each set of points to generate the four creep curves in Fig. 7 below.
0.0045

F = 40N = 12.11MPa F = 35N = 10.60MPa (interpolated) F = 30N = 9.08MPa (interpolated)

0.004

0.0035

Strain,

0.003

0.0025

F = 20N = 6.05MPa

0.002

0.0015 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

lg (t/s)

Figure 7: Two experimental and two interpolated creep curves 8

Discussions
Analysis of the link between theory and experimental results For the first part of the experiment, results from the isochronous test were used to plot an isochronous stress-strain curve in Fig. 4. The plots appeared to follow a smooth curve but theory suggested that for strains less than 0.005, the creep can be taken to be in the linear viscoelastic region such that a straight line can be fitted through the plots. Doing so reveals scattering of the plots on both sides of the best-fit line, indicating that the measurements could have been prone to random errors. As far as the significance of the graph in Fig. 4 is concerned, it shows that the strain at a particular time, in this case 30s, definitely varies with the applied stress. However, the proportionality between them is less obvious due to the scattering of the points and therefore had to be assumed by fitting a best-fit line. Unlike for the isochronous test, for the isometric one, the variation of strain with lg (t) is not exactly known, although it is known that the variation is non-linear, as seen in the Theory section. For this reason, the best option was to fit an exponential curve which clearly agreed with the plots as seen in Fig. 5 & 6 and again, the scattering of the points can be justified by the presence of experimental random errors. Possible errors which could have affected the experiment have been listed in the next subsection. The first observation made by comparing the creep curves in Fig. 5, 6 & 7 is that the strain is higher at higher stresses, which is line with the deduction from the isochronous test. The second observation is that a rather straight line on a strain-log t scale implies that the strain rate is very high for short lengths of time but then reduces significantly as the time scale increases. This idea agrees with the concept of back stress which builds up with time to oppose the applied stress and therefore reduce the creep rate (3). At some point, the back stress equals the applied stress such that the net stress is then zero and the polymer ceases to creep. Regarding the interpolation of two more creep curves, some corrections had to be made to the original creep curves before proceeding. In fact, since the isochronous curve was constrained by having to pass through the origin, it was easier to force the isometric plots to agree with the isochronous curve rather that the other way round. This ensured that the concept of compliance, , in the region assumed to be linear viscoelastic, was respected since, for corresponding stresses, the points along the isochronous curve and the isometric plots at t=30s corresponded to the same points and had to agree as closely as possible. In other words, if a vertical line is drawn at in Fig. 7 and the points at which the line intersects with the creep curves are plotted on a stress-strain scale, the resulting straight line should closely match with that in Fig. 4. Therefore, the main assumption made for the interpolation was that the creep observed during the test was always linear viscoelastic. This can be proved by repeating either the isochronous test for different values of time or the isometric test at different stresses and comparing the results with the graphs in Fig. 7 or Fig. 4 respectively. Possible sources of experimental errors The main source of errors dealt with recording the measurements of displacement X. In fact, the scale is accurate to 1mm and measurements could only be made to the nearest 0.5mm by estimation and the fact that the light spot was around 1mm thick made it more difficult to estimate the readings. Performing the experiment with a thinner slit and taking the readings in a darker environment would have reduced the risk uncertainties in the measurements.

Similarly, the use of the stopwatch might have introduced errors but its impact would have been more noticeable at the start of the tests, when creep rate was quite high. One way to reduce errors in this case would be to perform the experiment under the same conditions and then average the results. The experiment involved the use of 3 creep specimens and an average cross-sectional area for the 3 specimens was determined before the experiment. However, to improve accuracy of the results, average cross-sectional area of the specimen used for each test should be determined and recorded and then used to evaluate the stresses applied in each test separately, although this would make the calculations longer. Another source of errors would be concerned with the weights used as the applied force, F. Firstly, it has to be noted that the mass of the hanger is around 0.47kg but for simplicity it was considered to be 0.5kg. The weights used were also quite rusty, such that their mass could have been a little lower that stated. Besides, the gravitational constant, g, was approximated as 10m/s2 to simplify the calculation of the force, F, but since this force is actually multiplied by 5 due to the lever system, any error in F would also be increased by a factor of 5. While this would not affect the shape of the creep curves, it would however affect that of the isochronous stress-strain curve and consequently the value of the 30s-creep-modulus. A possible improvement would be to determine the mass of the loads used and use g=9.81m/s2 but this would inevitably require more time and would make calculations of F longer. Finally, it has to be pointed out that this experiment investigated creep as a function of time and stress but it is also known, as seen in the Theory section, that creep depends on ambient temperature as well. Since the temperature dependence was not being investigated, this meant that temperature had to be maintained constant throughout the experiment. However, this was not the case and the temperature rose from around 19C to around 22C during the course of the experiment. While this seemed to be a very small change, its effect on the creep of the specimen could have been more important. This can only be confirmed by further investigation on the effect of temperature on creep and if it is found that the changes in creep and creep rates around 20C is negligible, the temperature factor could be ignored. Otherwise, the experiment should be repeated under controlled conditions or the room temperature should be noted at the beginning and at the end of the different tests performed and then a correction factor be used, based on the effect of temperature on creep, to correct the measurements and account for the temperature change.

Conclusions
The first conclusion from the experiment was that the strain of the polypropylene clearly increased with increase in stress but it was less clear whether the relationship was proportional. Secondly, the creep rate of the polymer visibly decreased with time, supporting the idea of back stress opposing the appied stress. The results from the experiments have shown some degree of scattering, as discussed earlier. Considering the possible sources of errors outlined previously, this scattering can be clearly justified and therefore, the graphs produced using the results should be used with some degree of tolerance. However, their reliability can be further assessed and hence increased by doing the same tests under different time and stress conditions and then verifying the agreement between the isochronous and the creep curves. Correction factors can be determined as before and the closer they are to unity, the more reliable the results are. Doing the experiment again with the improvements suggested earlier would also lead to more accurate results and might also reveal other sources of errors which have been overlooked.

10

Appendix I Roller & Mirror Arrangements of Extensometer

p is the angle through which the reflected light beam rotates as mirror rotates by angle .

Figure A1: Schematic view of extensometer showing the 2 rollers (6)

Figure A2: Angle of deflection of a light beam incident on a mirror rotated by angle (6)

References
1. Methven, J. Topic 1: Bonding & Structure. s.l. : University of Manchester, 2011. lecture notes for the module Plastics: DMM - MACE 20037. 2. Robello, D. R. Chem 421: Introduction to Polymer Chemistry. Polymer Properties and MW. [Online] 2002. [Cited: 21 February 2011.] http://chem.chem.rochester.edu/~chem421/propsmw.htm#tg. 3. N. G. McCrum, C. P. Buckley, C. B. Bucknall. Principles of Polymer Engineering. 2nd Edition. New York : Oxford University Press, 1997. pp. 117-120. 4. Methven, J. Topic 2: Polymer Viscoelasticity. s.l. : University of Manchester, 2011. lecture notes for the module Plastics: DMM - MACE 20037. 5. Scott, C. E. PolymerProcessing.com. Polypropylene. [Online] 2001. [Cited: 21 February 2011.] http://www.polymerprocessing.com/polymers/PP.html. 6. Methven, J. Engineering Manufacturing & Materials Laboratory. s.l. : University of Manchester, 2011. laboratory sheets.

Bibliography
M. F. Ashby, D. R. H. Jones. Engineering Materials 1. 2nd Edition. Oxford : ButterworthHeinemann, 1997. pp 61-62, 193-194. 11