Fig. 13.2 Range of properties of steels grouped according to their ultimate strength and ductility (measured by elongation) for some steels used for formed parts in automotive industry. IF: interstitial free; LC: low carbon; IF-HS: interstitial-free high-strength IF steels; BH: bake hardening More

Figure 12.26 Typical relationship between the ultimate strength of bolted, bonded, and combined double-lap joints between aluminum and a boron/epoxy laminate at room temperature ( Advanced Composites Design Guide , 1973 ). More

Figure 12.27 Typical relationship between the ultimate strength of single- and double-taper scarf joints at room temperature ( Advanced Composites Design Guide , 1973 ) More

Fig. 12.2 Yield and ultimate strengths of U-720 nickel-base superalloy showing obvious peaking (a) and lack of peaking (b) for two different processing options More

Figure 7.6 Strain-hardening behavior of copper: yield and ultimate strengths and elongation vs. temperature ( Carreker and Hibbard, 1953 ). More

Fig. 11.1 Effect of carbon content on steel strength. UTS, ultimate tensile strength; YS, yield strength More

Fig. 2.36 Strength across fusion weld joint. Ultimate tensile strength values are estimated from hardness readings. Source: Ref 2.26 More

Fig. 8.51 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS), yield strength (YS), and elongation of Ti-6Al-4V alloy produced using various additive manufacturing processes. DMD, direct-metal deposition; HIP, hot isostatic pressing; HT, heat treatment; LENS, laser-engineered net shaping ( Ref 8.16 ); DMLS More

Fig. 1 Effect of carbon content on steel strength. UTS, ultimate tensile strength; YS, yield strength. Source: Ref 1 More

Fig. 8.6 Tensile strength and formability during hot forming. UTS, ultimate tensile strength. Source: Ref 8.6 More

Fig. 40 Approximate effect of microstructure on the ultimate tensile strength of low-carbon, low-alloy steels More

Fig. 9.17 Effects of T6 heat treatment on 7075 Al. YS, yield strength; UTS, ultimate tensile strength. Source: Ref 2 More

Fig. 4.4 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) of sintered 409L as a function of lubricant type and sintered density. Source: Ref 6 . Reprinted with permission from MPIF, Metal Powder Industries Federation, Princeton, NJ More

Fig. 15 Ultimate tensile strength versus hydrogen porosity for sand-cast bars of three aluminum alloys More

Fig. 6.10 Relationship between ultimate tensile strength and proof stress for a Ni-Cr-Mo carburizing steel. Derived from Ref 3 More

Fig. 6.11 Relationship between the ultimate tensile strength and the 0.2% proof stress (offset yield) of carburizing steels (0.08-0.18% C). Note that with carbon contents of over 0.18%, the ratio can be as low as 1.15 for strengths over about 200 ksi (44 HRC). Data from Ref 3 More

Fig. 14.13 Ultimate tensile strength for ferrite/pearlite microstructures as a function of steel carbon content for plain carbon steels and steels microalloyed with V and V plus Nb. Source: Ref 14.20 More

Fig. 18.23 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) as a function of temperature-time tempering parameter for 43xx steels tempered for various times at 150 °C (300 °F), 175 °C (350 °F), and 200 °C (390 °F). Temperature is in Kelvin and time in seconds. Source: Ref 18.4 More

Fig. 18.24 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) versus hardness for LTT 43xx specimens tempered in the temperature and time ranges noted in the figure. Source: Ref 18.4 More

Fig. 18.34 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) as a function of temperature-time tempering parameter for quenched 43xx steels tempered at various times and temperatures. Courtesy of Young-Kook Lee. Source: Ref 18.31 More