Designation: E 1012 – 05
Standard Practice for
Verification of Test Frame and Specimen Alignment Under
Tensile and Compressive Axial Force Application1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 1012; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 Included in this practice are methods covering the
determination of the amount of bending that occurs during the
application of tensile and compressive forces to notched and
unnotched test specimens in the elastic range and to plastic
strains less than 0.002. These methods are particularly appli-
cable to the force application rates normally used for tension
testing, creep testing, and uniaxial fatigue testing.
2. Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards: 2
E 6 Terminology Relating to Methods of Mechanical Test-
ing
E 8 Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials
E 83 Practice for Verification and Classification of Exten-
someter System
E 251 Test Methods for Performance Characteristics of
Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain Gages
E 466 Practice for Conducting Force Controlled Constant
Amplitude Axial Fatigue Tests of Metallic Materials
E 1237 Guide for Installing Bonded Resistance Strain
Gages
3. Terminology
3.1 Definitions of Terms Common to Mechanical Testing:
3.1.1 For definitions of terms used in this practice that are
common to mechanical testing of materials, see Terminology
E 6.
1
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E28 on Mechanical
Testing and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E28.04 on Uniaxial Testing.
Current edition approved June 1, 2005. Published July 2005. Originally approved
in 1989. Last previous edition approved in 1999 as E 1012 – 99.
2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
1
3.1.2 notched section—the section perpendicular to the
longitudinal axis of symmetry of the specimen where the
cross-sectional area is intentionally at a minimum value in
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
order to serve as a stress raiser.
3.1.3 nominal percent bending in notched specimens—the
percent bending in a hypothetical (unnotched) specimen of
uniform cross section—equal to the minimum cross section of
the notched specimen, the eccentricity of the applied force in
the hypothetical, and the notched specimens being the same.
(See 11.1.5.) (This definition is not intended to define strain at
the root of the notch.)
3.1.4 reduced section—the specimen length between the
fillets.
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
3.2.1 alignment—the condition of a testing machine and
fixturing (including the test specimen) which can introduce
bending moments into a specimen during the application of
tensile or compressive forces.
3.2.1.1 Discussion—This is the overall state of alignment
comprising machine and specimen components.
3.2.2 apparatus—the components of the machine and fix-
turing to be used for testing. This includes all components that
will be used repeatedly for multiple tests.
3.2.2.1 Discussion—While the strain gaged specimen is not
used for subsequent specimen testing it is included as part of
the apparatus.
3.2.3 axial strain—the average of the longitudinal strains
measured at the surface on opposite sides of the longitudinal
axis of symmetry of the specimen by multiple strain-sensing
devices located at the same longitudinal position as the reduced
section.
3.2.3.1 Discussion—This definition is only applicable to
this standard. The term is used in other contexts elsewhere in
mechanical testing.
3.2.4 bending strain—the difference between the strain at
the surface and the axial strain (see Fig. 1). In general, the
bending strain varies from point to point around and along the
 E 1012 – 05
NOTE 1—A bending strain, 6B, is superimposed on the axial strain, a, for low-axial strain (or stress) in (a) and high-axial strain (or stress) in (b). For
the same bending strain 6B, a high-percent bending is indicated in (a) and a low-percent bending is indicated in (b).
FIG. 1 Schematic Representations of Bending Strains (or Stresses) That May Accompany Uniaxial Loading
reduced section of the specimen. Bending strain is calculated
as shown in Section 11.
3.2.5 eccentricity—the distance between the line of action
of the applied force and the axis of symmetry of the specimen
in a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the
specimen.
3.2.6 machine alignment—the condition of the testing ma-
chine and all rigid parts of the load train which can introduce
bending moments into a specimen during subsequent force
application.
3.2.7 maximum bending strain—the largest value of bend-
ing strain at the position along the length of the reduced section
of a straight unnotched specimen at which bending is mea-
sured. (For notched specimens, see 4.9.)
3.2.8 percent bending—the bending strain times 100 di-
vided by the axial strain.
3.2.9 rated force—a force at which the alignment is being
measured.
3.2.10 specimen alignment—the condition of the test speci-
men including the non-rigid parts of the fixturing and the
positioning of the specimen within the grips which can
introduce bending moments into the specimen during subse-
quent force application.
4. Significance and Use
4.1 It has been shown that bending stresses that inadvert-
ently occur due to misalignment between the applied force and
the specimen axes during the application of tensile and
compressive forces can affect the test results. In recognition of
this effect, some test methods include a statement limiting the
misalignment that is permitted. The purpose of this practice is
to provide a reference for test methods and practices that
2
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
require the application of tensile or compressive forces under
conditions where alignment is important. The objective is to
implement the use of common terminology and methods for
verification of alignment of test machines, associated fixtures
and test specimens.
4.2 Unless otherwise specified, axiality requirements and
verifications should be optional when testing is performed for
acceptance of materials for minimum strength and ductility
requirements. This is because any effects especially from
excessive bending, would be expected to reduce strength and
ductility properties and give conservative results. There may be
no benefit from improved axiality when testing high ductility
materials to determine conformance with minimum properties.
Whether or not to improve axiality should be a matter of
negotiation between the material producer and the user.
5. Verification of Alignment
5.1 For ease of reference in other practices, test methods,
and product specifications, the most commonly used methods
for verifying alignment are listed in Section 6.
5.2 A numerical requirement for alignment should specify
the force, specimen dimensions, and temperature at which the
measurement is to be made. An alternate method employed
when strain levels are of particular importance may be used as
described in Practice E 466. When this method is used, the
numerical requirement should specify the strain levels, speci-
men dimensions and temperature at which the measurement is
to be made.
5.2.1 The force at which the bending strain is specified may
be stated in terms of a yield strength or other nominal specimen
stress.
NOTE 1—For a misaligned load train, the percent bending usually
 E 1012 – 05
decreases with increasing applied force. (See Curves A, B, and C in Fig.
2.) However, in some severe instances, percent bending may increase with
increasing applied force. (See Curve D in Fig. 2.)
5.3 Alignment requirements and results can refer to either
an overall test machine capability or to a specific test. This
distinction should be noted in the results.
5.3.1 Verifications of overall test machine capability should
be made using a specimen and apparatus made to a similar
design and of similar materials as those that will be used during
testing, except that any specimen notches may be eliminated.
The same specimen may be used for successive verifications.
The materials and design should be such that only elastic
strains occur at the rated force. In cases where the expected test
specimen material is not yet known, use good engineering
judgement to select a specimen made of a commonly used
material for verification.
NOTE 2—To avoid damage to the verification specimen, the sum of the
axial strain and the maximum bending strain should not exceed the elastic
limit.
5.3.2 Verifications of specific specimens that are to become
test specimens following the alignment procedure shall be
made on the specimen to be tested just prior to or during the
NOTE 1—Curve A: Machine 1, threaded grip ends (11)
NOTE 2—Curve B: Machine 2, buttonhead grip ends (11)
NOTE 3—Curve C: Machine 3, grips with universal couplings (7)
NOTE 4—Curve D: schematic representation of a possible response from a concentrically misaligned load train (16)
FIG. 2 Effects of Applied Force on Percent Bending for Different Testing Machines and Gripping Methods
3
testing without removing the specimen from the testing ma-
chine or making any other adjustments that would affect
alignment during the period between verification and testing.
These type of verifications provide the best measure of the true
bending strain in a specific test specimen.
NOTE 3—Maintaining a small force on the specimen between verifica-
tion and testing may be necessary to retain alignment on test machines
with non rigid fixturing.
6. Methods of Verification of Alignment
6.1 Use this method for verification of machine alignment
and for measurement of specimen alignment on a particular test
or at specified test conditions.
6.1.1 Machine Alignment—This part of the method de-
scribes the initial alignment of the rigid parts of the fixturing.
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
Machine alignment is initially established when first installing
a test machine and when setting up a particular type of rigid
fixturing configuration on a testing machine. While it may not
change appreciably over time, catastrophic failures in the load
train (fixturing or test specimen) or wear may establish the
need to measure and readjust the machine alignment. The
machine alignment should be performed any time a change in
 E 1012 – 05
the rigid fixturing is required. Machine alignment is often
viewed as a “coarse” alignment.
6.1.2 Specimen Alignment—This part of the method de-
scribes the positioning and subsequent alignment of the speci-
men and all the non-rigid fixturing in the load train. It requires
the use of either a strain gaged specimen of specific geometry
or a mechanical alignment fixture that uses other types of
displacement gages to measure the strain applied to the
specimen. The strain-gaged specimen is discussed in Section 8.
The mechanical alignment fixture is described in Section 7. A
description of the type of alignment measuring configuration
(that is, strain gaged specimen or mechanical alignment fix-
ture) should be included in the report. Strain gaged specimens
usually provide better resolution of strain readings, particularly
at low levels, than do alignment fixtures so they are more
commonly used for this method of measurement. Specimen
alignment is often viewed as a “fine” alignment.
7. Apparatus
7.1 When multiple strain sensors are used as in 6.1.2,
specimen size limitations may dictate the use of electrical
resistance strain gages rather than extensometers or alignment
fixtures employing mechanical linkages. Strain sensors, such as
mechanical, optical, or electrical extensometers, as well as wire
resistance or foil strain gages, can provide useful displacement
data. The sensitivity of displacement measurement required by
an applicable standard or specification depends on the amount
of bending permitted.
7.2 For verification using an alignment fixture as in 6.1.2, a
single extensometer of the nonaveraging type may be used by
rotating it to various positions around the perimeter during
successive force applications and repeating the measurements
as described in 10.5. In general, repeated force applications to
strain levels approaching yielding are not good laboratory
practice because they may affect the subsequently measured
results by deforming or fatiguing the specimen.
NOTE 4—Repositioning the extensometer around the specimen does not
usually give highly precise and reproducible results, but nevertheless is a
technique which is useful for detecting large amounts of bending.
7.3 Mechanical fixturing for measurement of strain on a
specimen can be an effective way to measure and allow for in
situ adjustments to improve alignment on a test specimen.
Fixtures that attach to the specimen shoulders and measure
displacements at four equally spaced positions around the
NOTE 1—w equals width of specimen.
NOTE 2—d equals distance from edge of specimen to centerline of strain sensor.
FIG. 3 Locations of Strain Sensors on Specimens of Rectangular Cross Section (Numbers Indicate Positions of Strain Sensors)
4
circumference of a cylindrical specimen have been effectively
used for this purpose. Displacement measurement devices need
to have sufficient resolution to detect very small differences in
displacements around the specimen. If this method is used
these displacements must be converted to strain before apply-
ing the bending calculations. Strain should be calculated using
an effective gage length as described in ASTM E 21.
NOTE 5—When multiple extensometers are used, the strain may be
determined by arithmetically averaging outputs. Electrical outputs are
thought to be more accurate and reproducible than mechanical outputs.
7.4 Additional Machine and Fixturing Considerations:
7.4.1 Poorly made components and multiple interfaces in a
load train can cause major difficulty in attempting to align a test
system. All components in the load train should be machined
within modern machine shop practices with attention paid to
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
perpendicularity, concentricity, flatness and surface finish. The
number of components should be kept to a minimum.
7.4.2 Situations can arise where acceptable alignment can-
not be achieved for a given machine, fixturing and specimen. In
these cases, redesign and fabrication of any of the components
may be needed to achieve acceptable alignment.
8. Test Specimen
8.1 This practice refers to cylindrical specimens, thick
rectangular specimens, and thin rectangular specimens. The
actual specimen geometry is dictated by the test standard to be
used. These specimens are usually hourglass shaped with a
reduced gage section, although other specimens such as those
used for compression testing are acceptable.
8.2 This practice is valid for metallic and nonmetallic test
specimens.
8.3 Quality of machining of test specimens is critical.
Important features include straightness, concentricity, flatness,
and surface finish. In particular, specimens used for compres-
sion testing may be of the type that uses two parallel plates to
apply compression to the ends of the specimen. In these cases,
the parallelism of the specimen ends is extremely important as
described in ASTM Method E 9.
8.4 The design of a strain gaged specimen should follow the
same guidelines as design of standard test specimens. For static
(tensile, compressive and creep) testing, specimens conforming
to Test Methods E 8 are appropriate. For fatigue testing
applications, specimens conforming to ASTM E 606 are ap-
propriate. The strain-gaged specimen should be as close
 E 1012 – 05
dimensionally to the expected test specimens as possible so
that the same grips and fixturing to be used during testing will
be used during alignment. The material used for the strain-
gaged specimen should be as close as possible to expected test
specimen materials. If the expected test material is not known,
it is acceptable to use a specimen of a common material that
has similar elastic properties to expected test materials. The
alignment specimen should be carefully inspected and the
dimensions recorded prior to application of the strain gages.
8.5 Strain Gages should be selected that have known stan-
dardized performance characteristics as described in Test
Methods E 251. Strain gage manufacturers provide detailed
information about the strain gages available. Gages with gage
lengths of approximately 10 % of the reduced section of the
specimen or less should be selected. The gages should be as
small as practical to avoid any strain averaging effects with
adjacent gages. Temperature compensated gages that are all of
the same type and from the same batch should be used.
8.6 Strain gages should be installed according to procedures
outlined in Guide E 1237. A commonly accepted method is to
make precision shallow longitudinal marks by scribing where
the strain gages are to be applied. The gages are then applied
with the scribe marks as the longitudinal axis. This can also be
used to mark the transverse axis. This method has the added
benefit that the gage placements can be inspected at any time
after the installation. Note that surface preparation is often
required for mounting strain gages that can have an influence
on subsequent mechanical properties. For this reason, the strain
gaged specimen should not be expected to supply standard
mechanical properties as a normal test specimen would.
8.7 Strain gages are to be arranged in at least two sets of
four with each set mounted on one of two strain measurement
planes. For cylindrical specimens, the gages are equally spaced
at 90 degrees to one another around the circumference of the
specimen. For thick rectangular specimens (that is, those with
width to thickness ratios of less than three), gages are to be
mounted in the center of each of the four faces. For thin
rectangular specimens (that is, those with width to thickness
ratios of three or larger), the gages are to be mounted on the
two larger faces in pairs of back to back sensors that are
equidistant from the specimen center line. Strain gage place-
ment is shown in Fig. 3 for rectangular specimens. The sets of
gages are to be spaced at a distance of 0.753 the reduced
section length with each set positioned equidistant from the
longitudinal center of the specimen.
NOTE 6—While the maximum bending strain is usually best measured
using gages placed near the ends of the reduced section, a third set of
gages located at the geometric center of the reduced specimen may also be
used.
NOTE 7—For thick rectangular specimens, the differences in adjacent
dimensions of the gage section can lead to differences in the sensitivities
of gages on these surfaces. This in turn can lead to difficulties in making
adjustments to bring a test setup into good alignment.
NOTE 8—Arrays of three gages at 120 degree spacing on cylindrical
specimens are acceptable if there is a compelling reason to use this
configuration. Caution should be taken with this configuration as adjust-
ments to the test machine and fixturing become more complicated and less
intuitive. In addition, it is more difficult to detect a malfunctioning gage.
NOTE 9—Geometry and dimensions of test specimens taken from
5
different product forms are described in the Test Specimen section of Test
Methods E 8.
9. Calibration and Standardization
9.1 All conditioning electronics and data acquisition devices
used for the determination of testing system alignment shall be
calibrated where applicable. The calibration results shall be
traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) or another recognized National Metrology Institute.
9.1.1 Calibration of strain gaged specimens is very difficult
and is not required by this standard. However, great care
should be taken in the manufacture of strain gage specimens
used for the determination of alignment. With the exception of
cases where the gaged specimen is bent, the sources of
measurement error due to individual gage misalignment and
differences in gage sensitivity can be minimized by acquiring
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
rotational and repeatability data runs.
9.2 Extensometers should be verified in accordance with
Practice E 83. Typically extensometers that meet the ASTM
classification B-2 are adequate for most determinations of
alignment.
9.3 Strain gages should conform to the requirements of Test
Methods E 251.
10. Procedure
10.1 Temperature variations during the verification test
should be within the limits specified in the methods or practices
which require the alignment verification.
10.2 Machine Alignment—This section describes the initial
alignment of the rigid parts of the fixturing. Machine alignment
is usually established when setting up a particular type of rigid
fixturing configuration on a testing machine. While it often
does not change appreciably over time, shock from cata-
strophic failure in the load train (within the fixturing or test
specimen) or wear may establish the need to measure and
readjust the machine alignment. Before continuing with sub-
sequent fine alignment activities, one should always be sure
that the machine alignment is acceptable.
10.2.1 Inspect all tooling for the ability of the force bearing
surfaces to properly mate with one another and with the
alignment specimen and subsequent test specimens. This
includes but is not limited to concentricity, perpendicularity
and parallelism measurements. Other measurements may be
needed for specific types of grips and tooling. Re-machine
specific parts of the fixturing if necessary.
10.2.2 Assemble the rigid portion of the fixturing, and
inspect the position of the tooling on one end of the specimen
attachment point with respect to the position of the tooling on
the other end of the opposite specimen attachment point. This
is often done with a dial indicator setup that allows the user to
establish both linear (concentric or parallel) and angular
differences between the centerlines of the tooling on each end
of the specimen attachment points. Fig. 4 illustrates linear
(concentric and parallel) and angular differences between the
tooling on the two ends of the rigid portion of the test machine.
Special alignment fixtures may also be employed. Specific
tolerances are beyond the scope of this standard, but should
adequate alignment be unachievable, misalignment of these
components may be the reason. Test machines that allow the
 E 1012 – 05
FIG. 4 Illustration of Test Machine Frame and Fixturing (A) Properly Aligned (B) With Concentric Misalignment
and (C) with Angular Misalignment
user to adjust the position of the normally fixed crosshead
should be set up in the position that will be used during testing.
Movement of the normally fixed crosshead during testing can
affect alignment results. If moving the normally fixed cross-
head during routine testing (that is, between specimens) is
needed, the inspection should be performed several times to
assure that movement can be made and the crosshead reposi-
tioned to the same location without appreciably affecting
alignment.
10.2.3 Adjust the position of the tooling on one end of the
specimen attachment point with respect to the position of the
tooling on the other end of the opposite specimen attachment
point to minimize the perpendicularity and the concentricity
(cylindrical specimens) and parallelism (flat specimens). This
may require loosening the attachment hardware of the fixturing
of one end, tapping or shimming it into position and retight-
ening it. Alignment adjustment fixturing is commercially
available to facilitate this often-tedious process.
10.3 Specimen Alignment—This section describes the posi-
tioning and subsequent alignment of the specimen and all the
non-rigid fixturing in the load train. It requires the use of either
a strain gaged specimen of specific geometry or a specialized
alignment fixture that uses other types of displacement gages to
measure the strain applied to the specimen. The strain-gaged
specimen is discussed in Section 8. The specialized alignment
fixture is described in Section 7.
10.3.1 Inspect any tooling not already inspected as in 10.2.1
(the non-rigid parts of the assembly). Establish the position of
the specimen for fixturing setups with non-rigid members by
assembling the inspected parts of the load train. Connections,
6
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
including the specimen should fit smoothly together with no
extra play. Re-machine specific parts of the fixturing if neces-
sary.
10.3.2 Mark the position of any portion of the fixturing that
will be moved (that is, unthreaded or otherwise repositioned)
during the course of normal testing relative to the fixed portion
of the fixturing. This is to assure that the components can be
put together the same way each time.
10.3.3 Inspect cylindrical specimens for concentricity and
perpendicularity between gage section and loading surfaces.
Inspect flat specimens for parallelism and perpendicularity
between the gage section and the gripping surfaces. This is
most often done using a machinist microscope or an optical
comparitor. Other measurements may be needed for specimens
of unusual configuration. Document results.
10.3.4 If a strain gaged specimen is to be used, select a
suitable specimen based on inspection results and apply strain
gages as described in Section 8. Since this can be a time
consuming and expensive process it is best to have this step
planned out well in advance of needing the strain gaged
specimen.
10.3.5 Install the strain-gaged specimen or the specimen
and the alignment fixture into the assembly. Zero the strain
readings with no force applied to the specimen. It is best to do
this with the specimen unattached from one of the sets of grips.
The act of gripping a specimen on both ends can be enough to
introduce unwanted bending.
10.3.6 Attach the specimen to the remaining grip.
10.3.7 Apply a small force to make sure all sensors are
reading properly and then remove the force (see Note 3).
 E 1012 – 05
10.3.8 Plan the force application cycle such that the ma-
chine applies the maximum force expected during routine
testing, unless this force induces plasticity in the test specimen.
If the maximum expected test force is enough to induce
plasticity in the test specimen, apply only enough force to well
describe the alignment within the elastic region of the speci-
men. The actual force level in these cases should be agreed
upon with the customer and well documented. This may be a
tensile force, a compressive force, or both. The force may be
applied either manually or automatically.
10.3.9 Apply the force cycle while recording strain mea-
surements continuously if the recording equipment has the
capability. If this is not possible, at least ten discrete points
between zero force and the maximum force should be re-
corded. These should be evenly spaced through the force cycle.
If both tension and compression are to be used, record data in
a similar manner for both. At a minimum, record the strain at
zero applied force when the specimen is attached to the grips
on both ends and at the maximum force conditions (tensile or
compression) expected during upcoming testing. If mechanical
or hydraulically actuated grips that lock the specimen in place
are used, record the strain at zero applied force both before and
after the locking mechanisms have been engaged. This shows
the influence of the locking mechanism on the bending of the
specimen.
10.3.10 The force application cycle shall be repeated sev-
eral times with the specimen in the same position to assure
repeatability. Repeatability must be within acceptable limits
related to the testing standard’s requirement for total bending.
For example, if the overall allowable bending strain as pre-
scribed by a testing standard is 62 %, an acceptable demon-
strated repeatability might be 60.25 % depending on other
error contributing factors.
10.3.11 Since the bending measurements are to be made
under the same conditions as those seen in a test, it is important
to simulate the various ways of installing the specimen and the
non-rigid portion of the fixturing. To simulate this, the align-
ment specimen should be removed and repositioned in the
grips. Installing the specimen in the same orientation as it
previously was installed will provide information on repeat-
ability of the specimen. Installing the specimen in another
orientation (that is, rotating it or inverting it) will further
characterize the alignment of the fixturing. Strain gaged
specimens always have some eccentricity, though preparation
as described in Section 8 will minimize this. Alignment
specimens can get damaged or bent over time and use. Careful
handling and storage will minimize this. Still, measurements
should be made such that eccentricities to the alignment
specimen can be characterized and separated from the fixturing
contribution to the overall alignment. This can be accom-
plished by measuring strains under the force cycle described in
10.3.8 in the original orientation, 180 degrees and again back
in the original orientation. In addition, rotating the specimen
and measuring the alignment at 90, 180 and 270 degrees
relative to the original position will simulate all possible
specimen installation positions. Inverting the specimen and
repeating these measurements will add to the confidence level
of the overall alignment.
7
10.3.12 Calculate the percent bending either for the entire
force cycle or for the discrete force intervals using the formulas
given in Section 11.
10.3.13 If the calculated percent bending does not meet
requirements from the test specification, adjustments will need
to be made. The commercially available alignment adjustment
fixturing facilitates this process.
10.3.14 Small adjustments can have a significant effect on
the measurements. Adjustments are typically made at 90-
degree intervals around the specimen.
10.3.15 Specimens bent in the shape of an “S” (see Fig. 5)
require adjustments to be made to the concentricity (for
cylindrical specimens) or perpendicularity (for flat specimens)
of the fixturing.
10.3.16 Specimens bent in the shape of a “C” (see Fig. 5)
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
require adjustments to the angularity of the fixturing.
NOTE 10—A combination of the concentricity and angularity adjust-
ments are often required to achieve good alignment.
10.3.17 When adjustments are completed, perform force
application cycle again as in 10.3.5, record strain information
as in 10.3.6 through 10.3.11 and perform calculations as in
10.3.12. Reassess alignment quality as in 10.3.13 and readjust
again as necessary.
10.4 Specific Test Specimen Alignment—The highest level
of alignment is achieved by direct alignment of a specific test
specimen. This can be performed by carefully applying strain
gages to the specimen or by using a high precision alignment
fixture that uses other types of displacement gages to measure
the strain applied to the specimen. In either case, the presence
of the strain measuring devices can have some impact on the
true specimen behavior. Since this level of alignment requires
gages to be put on each individual test specimen, it can be very
costly and is often not necessary if the previous steps show
acceptable alignment. The need for this level of alignment
should be agreed upon with the customer before attempting it.
11. Calculation and Interpretation of Results
11.1 Results of interest usually include axial strain, local
bending strains, maximum bending strain, and percent bend-
ing.
11.1.1 Cylindrical Specimens, Three Strain Sensors—For
three strain gages or extensometers, equally spaced around the
circumference of a specimen of circular-cross section in a place
perpendicular to and at the center of the gage length, see the
following equations:
axial strain, a 5 ~e1 1 e2 1 e3!/3 (1)
where:
e1, e2, and e3 = measured strains at the three locations, and
where e1 $ e2 $ e3.
b1 5 e1 2 a (2)
b 2 5 e2 2 a
b3 5 e3 2 a
where:
b = bending strain.
u 5 tan21@~2/=3!~b2/b1 1 1/2!# (3)
 E 1012 – 05

FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
FIG. 5 Illustration of Strain Gaged Specimen (A) Properly Aligned, (B) With Concentric Misalignment and (C) With Angular Misalignment

where: 11.1.3.1 For thick specimens of rectangular cross section

u = direction of maximum bending and is measured from with strain sensors placed as shown in Fig. 3a, see the
the highest-reading strain sensor toward the next following equation:
highest-reading strain sensor. Finally, axial strain, a 5 ~e1 1 e2 1 e3 1 e4!/4 (10)
B 5 b1/cos u (4) where e1 and e3 are measured strains at the center of the
where: specimen thickness on opposite faces, and e2 and e4 are
B = maximum bending strain. corresponding values for the wide faces.
11.1.3.2 The local bending strains b1, b2, b3, b4 are calcu-
PB 5 ~B/a! 3 100 (5)
lated by the equations in 11.1.2.
where: 11.1.3.3 The maximum bending strain, B, is calculated from
PB = percent bending. the following equation:
11.1.2 Cylindrical Specimens, Four Strain Sensors—For B 5 | b1 2 b3 | /2 1 | b2 2 b4 | /2 (11)
four strains gages or extensometers, equally spaced around the
circumference of specimens of circular cross section, see the 11.1.3.4 Percent bending, PB, is calculated as follows:
following equations: PB 5 ~B/a! 3 100 (12)
axial strain, a 5 ~e1 1 e2 1 e3 1 e4!/4 (6) 11.1.4 Thin Rectangular Specimens, Four Strain Sensors:
where e1, e2, e3, and e4 are the measured strains at the four 11.1.4.1 For thin specimens of rectangular cross section
locations and the subscript indicates the order around the with strain sensors placed as shown in Fig. 3b, see the
specimen. following equation:
local bending strain, b1 5 e1 2 a (7) axial strain, a 5 ~e5 1 e6 1 e7 1 e8!/4 (13)
b 2 5 e2 2 a 11.1.4.2 Equivalent strains at the center of the four faces, if
b 3 5 e3 2 a strain sensor placement were possible as shown in Fig. 3a, are
b 4 5 e4 2 a given by:
e1 5 a 2 [a 2 ~e5 1 e8!/2]@w/~w 2 2d!# (14)
and maximum bending strain,
e3 5 a 2 [a 2 ~e6 1 e7!/2]@w/~w 2 2d!#
B 5 1/2=~b1 2 b3! 2 1 ~b2 2 b4! 2 (8)
e2 5 ~e5 1 e6!/2
and
e4 5 ~e7 1 e8!/2
PB 5 ~B/a! 3 100 (9)
where, as shown in Fig. 3b:
11.1.3 Thick Rectangular Specimens, Four Strain Sensors:

8
 E 1012 – 05
w = width of the broad face, and
d = distance from edge of specimen to position of strain
sensor.
11.1.4.3 The maximum bending strain B, and the percent
bending, PB, are calculated from the equations in 11.1.3.3 and
11.1.3.4.
11.1.4.4 The equations for the rectangular cross section,
given in 11.1.3, are used to complete the calculation.
11.1.5 For tests on notched specimens of circular cross
section, the nominal percent bending at the root of the notch is
obtained by calculating the percent bending in the reduced
section as described in 11.1.1 or 11.1.2 and multiplying the
result by the ratio of the diameter of the reduced section to the
diameter at the root of the notch.
11.1.6 For tests on notched specimens of rectangular cross
section with the notch root axis in the thickness direction, the
nominal percent bending is calculated as follows:
@b1~h/h8! 1 b2#
a 3 100 (15)
where:
h = the distance between the notched sides adjacent to the
notch,
h8 = the distance between notch roots, and b1, b2 are
defined in 11.1.2.
11.1.6.1 Similarly, when the notches are in the width face,
the nominal percent bending is calculated as follows:
b1 1 [b2~h/h8!#
a 3 100 (16)
12. Report
12.1 Report the following information:
12.1.1 Values of bending strain or percent bending, the
corresponding forces (or strains) for these values, and method
used,
12.1.2 Test temperature,
APPENDIX
(Nonmandatory Information)
X1. SOURCES AND EFFECTS OF SPECIMEN MISALIGNMENT UNDER APPLIED AXIAL TENSILE
OR COMPRESSIVE FORCES
X1.1 Source of Misalignment Under Applied Axial
Tensile Forces
X1.1.1 The usual procedure in a uniaxial tension test is to
apply a tensile force to a specimen through grips attached to a
test machine with suitable fixturing and then correlate the strain
response of the specimen, as measured with an appropriate
strain measuring transducer, with the applied stress. In the case
of ideal alignment, the top and bottom grip centerlines are
precisely in line with one another and with the centerlines of
other components of the loading train. Moreover, they are
precisely in line with the specimen centerline. Finally, the
specimen is symmetric about its centerline. Departures from
the ideal situation are caused by poor alignment of the top and
9
12.1.3 Rated maximum force used in verification indicating
tension or compression. If tension and compression are used,
include rated maximum for both,
12.1.4 Description of specimen (material and dimensions),
12.1.5 Description of strain measuring equipment, includ-
ing:
12.1.5.1 Type of strain measuring device (strain gages,
extensometer, etc.),
12.1.5.2 Precision and sensitivity of the strain measuring
system,
12.1.5.3 Location (s) of the sensors on the specimen,
12.1.5.4 Method of attaching the strain sensor(s) to the
specimen, and
12.1.6 Description of fixturing, including method of grip-
ping, dimensions and types of couplings and joints, length of
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
load train, and any other pertinent details.
13. Precision and Bias
13.1 The precision of the measurement of specimen align-
ment under applied tensile forces varies with such test condi-
tions as temperature, stress, configuration of load train, and
material. At present, the available data are not of a type that
permits meaningful analysis of the precision of the measure-
ment. It is the intention of Committee E28 to obtain the
necessary data from an interlaboratory test program based on
this practice.
13.2 The bias of the measurement of specimen alignment
under application of tensile and/or compressive forces varies
with such test conditions as temperature, stress, quality of
machining of test specimens, fixturing and material. Since the
bending strains used to measure alignment are determined from
ratios of strain measurements from three or more strain
sensors, the absolute accuracy of the strain sensor calibration is
not important (see 9.1). No direct measure of bias is available,
because the identical test conditions cannot be duplicated
during a calibration run and an actual test.
bottom grip centerline, poor conformance of specimen center-
line to top and bottom grip centerlines, and asymmetric
machining of the test specimen itself. A combination of these
three sources of misalignment always operates in any test
under tensile forces. The occurrence of misalignment is recog-
nized in a wide range of Mechanical Testing and Fatigue and
Fracture activities dealing with a variety of materials.
X1.1.2 The characteristic elastic strain gradients resulting
from misalignment are such that the extreme elastic strains
occur at the surface. These gradients can significantly influence
the results of a tension test, especially results at strains less
than 0.002 where significant plastic strain and accompanying
strain hardening have not yet contributed to evening out the
 E 1012 – 05
gradients. Therefore, it is important to recognize the effects of
misalignment on the stresses and strains measured in studies of
the fracture strength of materials in a brittle state, stress-rupture
life, creep, notched-tensile specimens, fatigue, plastic micros-
train, alloy strengthening, and surface-sensitive strength.
X1.1.3 The objective of any effort to improve alignment is
to bring the centerlines of all pertinent fixturing into precise
alignment. Logically, the first piece of hardware on which to
focus attention is the testing machine itself. Testing machines
as-received from manufacturers may have deviations between
top and bottom grip centerline positions of 0.03 to 3.18 mm
(0.001 to 0.125 in.) or more. Moreover, further misalignment
may develop as applied forces cause machine frame deflection
or as nonaxial crosshead separation occurs. In the worst case,
deviations in this range have been reported to lead to eccen-
tricities resulting in a 50 to 100 % difference between extreme
surface bending strains and average strain.
X1.1.4 Another important factor in the alignment process is
the tolerances specified for the machining of fixturing and test
specimens. In ordinary machine shop practice, tolerances
usually range +0.05 to +0.25 mm (+0.002 to +0.010 in.). These
tolerances may not be tight enough and may contribute to poor
alignment when the components of a loading train are as-
sembled. In the worst case, these tolerances have been reported
to lead to eccentricities resulting in a 50 to 100 % difference
between extreme surface bending strains and average strain.
X1.1.5 There are two further considerations for the devel-
opment of good alignment. One deals with the type of fixturing
used. Some of these include threaded-vs-nonthreaded joints,
spherical seats and universal joints with low friction, cross
flexures, fluid couplings, and other couplings which tend not to
transmit a bending stress. The other relates to specimen design,
such as length and length-to-diameter ratio. The approach to
promoting good alignment has been discussed in several papers
(1-11).3
X1.2 Sources of Misalignment under Applied Axial
Compressive Forces
X1.2.1 Misalignment in compression takes on similar char-
acteristics to misalignment in tension, however different as-
pects of the test machine, fixturing and test specimen can cause
it. Compressive force application to a specimen usually makes
use of an entirely different set of mating surfaces than tensile
force application. Force is applied to threads on the opposite
side, grip surfaces can change, crossheads must be locked from
opposite sides, and actuators must be forced from opposite
sides to that of tensile force application. For this reason,
alignment in tension is often completely different from align-
ment in compression.
X1.2.2 Machine Lateral Stiffness—An additional com-
pounding problem in compression is the ability of the test
machine to maintain its rigidity during compressive force
application. If extreme difficulties are encountered in achieving
adequate specimen alignment in compression, it may be
because of poor lateral stiffness of the test machine. This can be
3
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of
this standard.
10
analyzed using a series of displacement gages and character-
izing the displacements encountered between the compressive
load bearing components. This can be a complex entity to
accurately measure as the surfaces may deflect in any of the
three orthogonal directions, and in a non-linear fashion (12).
X1.2.3 Acceptable alignment in both tension and compres-
sion can be difficult to achieve. Adjustments using alignment
enhancing fixturing often have the opposite effect in tension
than they do in compression. For this reason, a compromise
between the quality of alignment in tension and the quality of
alignment in compression may be needed.
X1.3 Effects of Misalignment on Test Results
X1.3.1 Bending stresses associated with misalignment be-
tween the fixturing and the specimen axes have been shown to
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
affect the results of tension, compression and combined
tension-compression tests (13-19). In routine tension tests of
most engineering materials, bending stresses will be insignifi-
cant if sufficient plastic flow occurs during the test to eliminate
the bending stresses. However, when testing under conditions
where plastic flow is limited by inherent brittleness of the test
specimen material, or by need for measurements near the
elastic limit, or when plasticity is confined to a small volume
(specimens with stress concentration such as notches), small
misalignment may give rise to variable bending stresses which
have noticeable effects on the test results. For example,
Morrison (8) noted that the yield stress of carefully machined
mild steel specimens tested in torsion exhibited a 61 %
variation from the mean, whereas the yield stresses of the same
steel specimens tested in tension exhibited a 65 % variation.
Morrison concluded that the larger variation in tensile yield
stresses resulted from misalignment rather than from micro-
structural variations, and he stated that “with the ordinary
standard of accuracy in cutting the screwed ends of the
specimens, the slackness in the thread was quite sufficient to
allow the specimen to take up and retain under load an
eccentricity in the shackles which would account for the
variation in results.”
X1.3.2 Schmieder et al (9, 10) found that bending ranged
from 5 to 27 % and depended on specimen attachment to the
fixturing, prior force application, and type of testing machine.
These authors concluded that “most of the nonaxiality of
loading appears to be due to loose threads or machining
imperfections in the couplings.” Jones and Brown (11) dem-
onstrated that, at fixed stress, simply rotating a load-train
component through 360° about the longitudinal axis changed
the percentage of bending by a factor of more than 5, from 8 to
43 %. In an experiment with other equipment, Jones and
Brown (11) found that bending could be varied between about
2 and 14 %, depending on the relative rotational positions of
the specimen and of the top and bottom grips. Hence, a fourth
item which influences bending might be added to the three
cited by Schmieder et al, namely, the rotational registry of the
components of the fixturing.
X1.3.3 Robinson (13) reported a 40 to 60 % decrease in the
uniaxial tension–tension fatigue life of steel bolts when the
bending microstrain increased by a factor of two. Jones et al
(14) demonstrated a continuous decrease (ranging from 80 to
 E 1012 – 05
90 %) of notch-rupture life of a chromium-molybdenum-
vanadium steel, at 414 MPa 538°C (60 ksi 1000°F), as
eccentricity increased from a negligible value to 2.5 mm (0.1
in.) Christ (15) showed that results of plastic microstrain
studies and other pre-yield studies are ambiguous unless effects
of misalignment on the average microstrain are recognized.
Attention was directed to this point by McVetty (16) as early as
1928, but it has been frequently overlooked since then.
X1.3.4 Kandil (17) demonstrated the effects of misalign-
ment on fatigue life results in an interlaboratory study aimed at
quantifying uncertainties in low cycle fatigue testing. This
work illustrates the difficulty sometimes seen in achieving
proper alignment and the effect it has on test results. In the
study, laboratories are categorized by the classification of
alignment they were able to achieve. The test results are shown
in relation to this classification. The laboratories with the best
alignment had the highest fatigue lives. It is clear from this data
that poor alignment causes artificially low lives in low cycle
fatigue testing. This work led to a VAMAS procedure that
includes the classification system for quality of alignment (18).

REFERENCES

(1) Christ, B. W., and Swanson, S. R., “Alignment Problems in the Tensile Creep Machines,” Elevated Temperature Testing Problem Areas,

Test,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, Vol 4, No. 6, November
1976, pp. 405–417.
(2) Wu, H. C., and Rummler, D. R., “Analysis of Misalignment in the
Tension Test,” Transactions: Series H, Journal of Engineering Mate-
rials and Technology, Vol 101, n.1, ASME January 1979, pp, 68–74.
(3) Holmes, A. M. C., “Continuous Servo-Controlled Alignment of
Specimens in Materials Testing,” Experimental Mechanics, Vol 15,
No. 9, September 1975, pp. 358–364.
(4) Webb, J. N., “A System For the Axial Loading in Creep Specimens,”
Structures Dept., Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, England.
Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London, 1977.
(5) Jones, M. H., Bubsey, R. T., Succop, G., and Brown, W. F., Jr., “Axial
Alignment Fixture For Tension Tests of Threaded Specimens,” Journal
of Testing and Evaluation, Vol 2, September 1974, p. 378.
(6) Jones, M. H., and Brown, W. F., Jr., “Note on Performance of Tapered
Grip Tensile Loading Devices,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, Vol
3, No. 3, 1975, pp. 179–181.
(7) Penny, R. K., Ellison, E. G., and Webster, G. A., “Specimen Alignment
and Strain Measurement in Axial Creep Tests,” Materials Research
and Standards, Vol 6, No. 2, 1966, pp. 76–84.
(8) Morrison, J. L. M., “The Yield of Mild Steel with Particular Reference
to the Effect of Size of Specimen,” Journal and Proceedings, The
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London, Vol 140, No. 3, 1940, p.
193–223.
(9) Schmieder, A. K., “Measuring the Apparatus Contribution to Bending
in Tension Specimens,” Elevated Temperature Testing Problem Areas,
ASTM STP 488, ASTM, 1971, p. 15.
(10) Schmieder, A. K., and Henry, A. T., “Axiality Measurements on Fifty
FOR INTERNAL USE AT THIS LOCATION ONLY, SUPPLIED BY BOOK SUPPLY BUREAU.
LICENSED TO BHARAT FORGE LIMITED - MUNDHWA, PUNE
ASTM STP 488, ASTM, 1971, p. 43.
(11) Jones, M. H., and Brown, W. F., “An Axial Loading Creep Machine,”
ASTM Bulletin, ASTM No. 211, January 1956, p. 53.
(12) Lohr, R. D. “Materials Testing Machine Design—Reducing Speci-
men Bending through Improved Alignment and Lateral Stiffness,”
Notes from The Effects of Misalignment on Uniaxial Testing, a
workshop sponsored by ASTM Committee E28, Norfolk, VA, Nov 4,
1998.
(13) Robinson, D., “Misalignment Detector for Axial Loading Fatigue
Machines,” Technical Note 480, National Bureau of Standards,
Washington, DC, 1972.
(14) Jones, M. H., Shannon, J. L., Jr., and Brown, W. D., Jr., “Influence of
Notch Preparation and Eccentricity of Loading on Notch Rupture
Life,” Proceedings, ASTM, Vol 57, 1957, p. 833.
(15) Christ, B. W., “Effects of Misalignment on the Pre-Macro Yield
Region of the Uniaxial Stress–Strain Curve,” Metallurgical Transac-
tions, AIME, Vol 4, No. 8, 1973, pp. 1961–1965.
(16) McVetty, P. G., “Testing of Materials at Elevated Temperatures,”
Proceedings, ASTM, Vol 28, 1928, p. 60.
(17) “Private Communication to B. W. Christ from H. S. Starrett,”
Southern Research Institute, Birmingham, AL, April 1979.
(18) Kandil, F. A., “Recent Intercomparisons on Low Cycle Fatigue and
Alignment Measurements,” VAMAS Report No. 41, ISSN 1016-2186,
Feb 2003.
(19) Kandil, F. A., “A Procedure for the Measurement of Machine
Alignment in Axial Testing,” VAMAS Report No. 42, ISSN 1016-
2186, Feb 2003.

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org).

11