MEASUREMENT SOLUTIONS ADVICE FOR MATERIAL TEST SELECTION
From lightweight consumer electronics to high-performance polymers used in automotive and industrial settings, today’s materials must balance strength, durability, weight, manufacturability and cost. Yet, as materials evolve, the way they are tested must evolve alongside them. Here Fabio Lipari, materials engineer at materials testing instrumentation manufacturer Instron, explains how to select and apply the right materials tests to suit your application.
I
n recent years, materials engineers have faced a familiar but increasingly complex challenge: materials must do more, in more demanding applications, but with less margin for error. Selecting the wrong test method, or applying the right test in the wrong way, can lead to misleading results, expensive redesigns and, in extreme cases, real-world failures. Materials testing sits at the intersection of development, production and quality control (QC). During R&D, engineers rely on testing to understand how a material behaves, how it responds to stress and how changes in formulation or processing affect performance. Later, in QC laboratories, testing becomes a gatekeeper – confirming that each batch meets the properties promised on the technical data sheet and behaves consistently over time.
MATERIALS TESTING CHALLENGES In both R&D and QC applications, impact testing is often central, particularly for polymer-based materials that must withstand drops or sudden loads in service. However, engineers must recognise that impact resistance is not a single, universal property. Different tests measure different aspects of material behaviour, under different conditions, and with very different levels of detail.
impact energy or applying a standard written for a different class of material can all distort results. For polymers in particular, factors such as notch sensitivity, temperature and sample preparation play a critical role in determining whether a material behaves in a ductile or brittle manner under impact. Misunderstanding impact behaviour has consequences across the value chain. For example, a raw material producer may provide an impact resistance value that later proves unachievable in practice, leading to disputes. Or, a manufacturer may discover late in development that a material does not perform as expected, forcing expensive redesigns or production delays. Even during QC, unexpected results can halt production entirely while the root cause is investigated.
INFORMED MATERIALS TEST SELECTION Materials test selection should always be about choosing the right test for the job, not simply picking the test you are most familiar with. Test methods must align with material type, application and developmental stage. For routine QC, pendulum impact testing remains a fast, robust and standardised solution, particularly when comparing results directly against datasheet values. For R&D and advanced applications, instrumented testing offers deeper insight, enabling engineers to understand how and why a sample has failed under test. Equally important is everything that happens before testing. Sample preparation, especially notching, must be performed with precision and consistency. Even the method used to create a notch, whether by cutting or milling, can influence local material properties and, ultimately, test results.
Impact energy selection is another critical factor. Using a hammer that is too energetic may mask differences between materials, while too little energy can produce inconclusive data.
Simpler methods, such as pendulum impact tests, provide a single value that is easy to compare and ideal for high-throughput QC. Whereas advanced approaches, such as instrumented drop tower testing, generate rich datasets that reveal how force, displacement and energy evolve throughout the impact event.
Problems arise when tests are selected out of habit rather than intent. Engineers often apply a familiar standard without fully considering whether it reflects the real-world scenario they are trying to simulate. Small deviations can have large consequences. Changing specimen dimensions, using the wrong
24
As new materials continue to emerge, engineers will increasingly find themselves testing outside established standards. In these cases, building a meaningful correlation between test results and real-world performance is critical. That requires careful parameter selection, a clear understanding of limitations and collaboration between testing experts, like Instron, and material developers.
Ultimately, the right test is the one that answers the right question. By thinking first about the final application, the expected loading conditions and the decisions that will be made based on the data, engineers can ensure that material testing remains a powerful tool rather than a potential source of uncertainty.
Instron
www.instron.com
C
PICODAQ PRESSURE SCANNER LAUNCHED
hell Instrument have launched their smallest digital pressure scanner to date, the picoDAQ.
Measuring just 83.4mm by 14.8mm by 9.6mm, the tiny
dimensions of the picoDAQ make it ideal for high- accuracy pressure testing in applications where space is limited but precision remains critical. “Even the slightest variation in pressure can impact performance - meaning every part, place and condition must be measured with absolute accuracy. To give our customers even greater versatility, we are proud to introduce our smallest pressure scanner yet, built to fit into even the most confined testing environment!,” says Jamie Shanahan, director of Chell Instruments. Despite its ultra-compact size, the picoDAQ does not compromise on its measurement capabilities, delivering up to 0.03% FS accuracy output. As a fully configurable smart pressure scanner, the new device canoutput pressure data in engineering units over Ethernet and CAN, using both CAN-FD and ‘classic’ CAN. The picoDAQ makes use of 17 absolute transducers which are thermally compensated and conditioned to provide
16 absolute or differentialmeasurements relative to the one reference port. Due to its rugged outer casing and components that are sealed to IP67, the picoDAQ is especially valuable within automotive and aerospace testing. “From wind tunnel to on-track or in-flight testing, our pressure scanners are vital tools in the design, development and validation of aerodynamics in vehicle and aircraft testing. Given these sectors’ need for accuracy and continual improvements in speed and performance, we are confident the picoDAQ will give our automotive and motorsport clients new ways of enhancing aerodynamics,” adds Shanahan.
North Walsham-based Chell Instruments have been providing pressure, vacuum and gas flow measurement equipment since 1976. With their specialist technology supporting key sectors, including aerospace, pharmaceuticals, energy and motorsport, Chell Instruments regularly enhance their product range with new innovations. “At Chell Instruments, we never stand still and this is reflected in how we consistently introduce new innovations to satisfy more test applications. With the picoDAQ joining our range, we are giving customers even more opportunity for multi- point pressure scanning in the tightest and most demanding applications,” concludes Shanahan.
Chell Instruments
www.chell.co.uk
Winter 2025/2026 UKManufacturing
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
