×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness
3

Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

(OP)
How to convert microhardness 0.3 kg Vickers to standard Brinell hardness !!

Thanks in advance
 

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

You will need a copy of ASTM E140 for the conversion charts and equations. Some of the conversions are dependent on material being tested. There are also several precautions to consider based on the condition of the material.

If you know the material and HV value, perhaps one of us can convert it for you if you do not have the standard.

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

ISO 18265 is the international equivalent of ASTM E 140.  Keep in mind that converting microhardness to macrohardness can be difficult if the microstructure is not homogeneous on the microscale.  Indenting on a hard area of martensite or bainite with 0.3 kgf Vickers will result in high hardness, but if this is a multiphase microstructure (say ferrite + pearlite + bainite), then the macrohardness would be much lower due to the combination of the hardness from the different phases.

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

TVP raises a very good point.  To say for example, that a reading of 248 HV-10 is equivalent to 237 Brinnel is somewhat misleading, although if you look in a reference book that is in fact what you'll likely see.  As TVP points out, because the Brinnel method makes a larger impression it averages harder and softer regions.  
I think recognition of this limitation is reflected in the fact that while many specs limit hardness of welds and HAZ's in P1 materials to 200 Brinnel, they  typically allow a maximum of 248 HV-10.       

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

Other things to consider, the titles of the tables in E 140.

"Approximate"  key word!

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

If you convert this make sure that you note that it is a conversion.  I have modified our practices to require always reporting in the native units, convert if you like but you have to report the original.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

Dear Friend,
Please keep in mind that this conversion is only applicable for Steel material as practicle exp. of my.
Drawing requirement should be strictly Microhardness Testing not the BHN. because it will hamper your quality requirement.
 

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

I have a related question about this and figured I could add it to this thread instead of starting my own.

In ASTM E140, there are both tables and conversion equations. We have an issue with our microhardness tester and I was curious if it is because of round off error. For example, 708HV is converted to 60.5HRC by the tester which would round up to 61. When converting by the tables in E140 708HV should be 60.478HRC, which rounds down to 60HRC... on the other hand, the equations would give 60.575HRC and that would clearly round up to 61HRC.

If I had a spec where the limit was 60HRC, would the 708HV pass that spec?

Aidan McAllister
Metallurgical Engineer
Automotive Enthusiast

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

AidanMc,
Technically, no, if the spec limit was 60HRC, you would be obliged to test the material with a Rockwell 'C' tester to determine conformance.  Any conversion is an approximation, so if you tested the material in HV to meet a requriement stated in HRC, at best you could say you approxiamtely meet the requirement (or approxiamtely do not meet the requirement).  If all you are trying to do is approximately meet the requirement, then does it really matter if your result is 60 or 61?  Both numbers approximately meet the requirement.

rp

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

redpicker

Well said, I gave you a star.

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

As I'm still new to this whole working world thing, I'm curious how that works on small parts then? Does that mean that if I have a part small enough to call for Vickers or even a Superficial Rockwell test, the customer should have supplied the requirement in those units rather than in HRC?

Aidan McAllister
Metallurgical Engineer
Automotive Enthusiast

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

AidanMc,

There are thickness and process requirements to consider when specifying a hardness scale or allowable conversion. For example, using your 60HRC number, the stock should be at least .030" thick to use a direct HRC test at that expected hardness. But if your .030" stock was not through hardened but carbonitrided instead, a different hardness scale like an HR15N or file hardness would be more appropriate.  

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

Quote:

I'm curious how that works on small parts then? Does that mean that if I have a part small enough to call for Vickers or even a Superficial Rockwell test, the customer should have supplied the requirement in those units rather than in HRC?
Technically, yes, the customer should specify the requirement in a manner that is actually possible to determine conformance.  Perhaps missing the mark a little, but specifying hardness of a 0.020" thick section in Rockwell 'C' is kind of like specifying a length in Watts.  Of course, customers are always right and if they want you to do a Vickers test to verify their 0.020" section meets the 60 HRC requirement, then that is what you do.  As mentioned upthread, however, you should report the results in the hardness scale you performed the test in and say "converted to XX HRC in accordance with ASTM E140".

rp

RE: Conversion from Microhardness to Hardness

Thanks everyone, that helps me out some. Yes we do make sure to show both the converted hardness as well as the actual hardness as read in Vickers.  

Aidan McAllister
Metallurgical Engineer
Automotive Enthusiast

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources