You are on page 1of 9

NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.

Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
Designation: G 105 – 89 (Reapproved 1997)e1

Standard Test Method for

Conducting Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Tests1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation G 105; 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.

e1 NOTE—Section 12 was added editorially in November 1997.

1. Scope 1.1 This test method covers laboratory procedures for determining the resistance of metallic materials to scratching abrasion by means of the wet sand/rubber wheel test. It is the intent of this procedure to provide data that will reproducibly rank materials in their resistance to scratching abrasion under a specified set of conditions. 1.2 Abrasion test results are reported as volume loss in cubic millimeters. Materials of higher abrasion resistance will have a lower volume loss. 1.3 Values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Inch-pound units are provided for information only. 1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 2. Referenced Documents 2.1 ASTM Standards: D 2000 Classification System for Rubber Products in Automotive Applications2 D 2240 Test Method for Rubber Property—Durometer Hardness3 E 11 Specification for Wire-Cloth Sieves for Testing Purposes4 E 122 Practice for Choice of Sample Size to Estimate a Measure of Quality for a Lot or Process4 E 177 Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in ASTM Test Methods4 G 40 Terminology Relating to Wear and Erosion5 2.2 Other Standard: SAE J200 3. Terminology 3.1 abrasive wear—wear due to hard particles or hard
1 This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee G-2 on Wear and Erosion and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee G02.30 on Abrasive Wear. Current edition approved Aug. 25, 1989. Published October 1989. 2 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vols 09.02. 3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 09.01. 4 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 14.02. 5 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.02.

protuberances forced against and moving along a solid surface (Terminology G 40). 3.1.1 Discussion—This definition covers several different wear modes or mechanisms that fall under the abrasive wear category. These modes may degrade a surface by scratching, cutting, deformation, or gouging (1 and 2).6,7 4. Summary of Test Method 4.1 The wet sand/rubber wheel abrasion test (Fig. 1) involves the abrading of a standard test specimen with a slurry containing grit of controlled size and composition. The abrasive is introduced between the test specimen and a rotating wheel with a neoprene rubber tire or rim of a specified hardness. The test specimen is pressed against the rotating wheel at a specified force by means of a lever arm while the grit abrades the test surface. The rotation of the wheel is such that stirring paddles on both sides agitate the abrasive slurry through which it passes to provide grit particles to be carried across the contact face in the direction of wheel rotation.

FIG. 1 Schematic Diagram of the Wear Test Apparatus

4.2 Three wheels are required with nominal Shore A Durometer hardnesses of 50, 60, and 70, with a hardness tolerance of 62.0. A run-in is conducted with the 50 Durometer

6 Available from Society of Automotive Engineers, 400 Commonwealth Dr., Warrendale, PA 15096. 7 The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of this standard.

Copyright © ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.

1

6. impact or corrosive elements). in order to obtain a ranking of materials. 5. 9 An apparatus design that is commercially available is depicted both schematically and in photographs in Figs. Contact ASTM International (www. and 70 Durometer wheels in order of increasing hardness. 2 Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Test Apparatus wheel. Significance and Use (1-7) 5. a suitable lever arm system to apply the required force. The value of the test method lies in predicting the ranking of materials in a similar relative order of merit as would occur in an abrasive environment.1 Fig.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued. 1-4. be compared with test data obtained from a material whose life is known in the same environment.org) for the latest information. it incorporates what may be considered a design flaw. Unless the tangent to the wheel at the center point of the area or line of contact between the wheel and specimen also passes through the pivot axis of the loading arm.1 The severity of abrasive wear in any system will depend upon the abrasive particle size. It is necessary to convert the mass loss to volume loss. the magnitude of the stress imposed by the particle. Volume loss data obtained from test materials whose lives are unknown in a 2 specific abrasive environment may. it should not be used to predict the exact resistance of a given material in a specific environment. Specimens are weighed before and after each run and the loss in mass recorded. (See Ref (4).) Several elements are of critical importance to ensure uniformity in test results among laboratories. pressure. Abrasion is then reported as volume loss in cubic millimetres. and uncompensated torque about the pivot will be caused by the frictional drag of the wheel against the specimen. Apparatus 8 6.0 Durometer. shape. a variable. These are the type of rubber used on the wheel. however. In this test method these conditions are standardized to develop a uniform condition of wear which has been referred to as scratching abrasion (1 and 2). Since the test method does not attempt to duplicate all of the process conditions (abrasive size. the type of abrasive and its shape. 8 Present users of this practice may have constructed their own equipment.9 and test material uniformity. . Therefore. 3 and 4 are photographs of a test apparatus. The logarithms of mass loss are plotted as a function of measured rubber wheel hardness and a test value is determined from a least square line as the mass loss at 60. due to wide differences in density of materials. and the frequency of contact of the abrasive particle. The comparison will provide a general indication of the worth of the unknown materials if abrasion is the predominant factor causing deterioration of the materials. 2 shows a typical design and Figs. uniformity of the test apparatus. Rubber wheels or remolded rims on wheel hubs can be obtained through the manufacturer(s). Although it has been used by several laboratories (including those running interlaboratory tests) to obtain wear data. shape and hardness. Rubber wheel abrasion testing equipment is commercially available. followed by the test with 50. undefined. the true loading of specimen against the wheel cannot be known. The location of the pivot point between the lever arm and the specimen holder is not directly in line with the test specimen surface.astm. 60. G 105 FIG.

2 Rubber Wheel—Each wheel shall consist of a steel disk with an outer layer of neoprene rubber molded to its periphery.2. 4 Test Apparatus in Operation 6. An appropriate weight must be used to apply a force of 222 N (50 lbf) between the test specimen positioned in the specimen holder and the wheel. 6. The rubber will conform to Classification D 2000 (SAE J200). Other drives producing 245 rpm under load are suitable. Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 50 6 2. It is recommended that the incremental counter have the ability to shut off the machine after a preselected number of wheel revolutions or increments up to 5000 revolutions is attained. Z3.2 The 60 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with 2BC615K11Z1Z2Z3Z4 where: Z1. 3 Test Apparatus with Slurry Chamber Cover Removed FIG. 5 Rubber Wheel 6. 2 and Fig.2.5 Wheels are molded under pressure. 6.2.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.5 63 10 Maglite D (Merck) Kadox 15 (New Jersey Zinc) C ASTM Grade N762 FIG.5 37 10 70 100 2 10 2 0. and Z4—Medium thermal black reinforcement. Wheels are nominally 178 mm (7 in.2.4 The compounds suggested for the 50.1.1.astm.4 Wheel Revolution Counter—The machine shall be equipped with a revolution counter that will monitor the number of wheel revolutions as specified in the procedure.2. Contact ASTM International (www.5 20 14 Content (pph) 60 100 2 10 2 0. 6.3 Motor Drive—The wheel is driven by a 0.5 Specimen Holder and Lever Arm—The specimen holder is attached to the lever arm to which weights are added so that a force is applied along the horizontal diametral line of the wheel.2. 60. and 70 Durometer rubber wheels are as follows: Ingredient Neoprene GW MagnesiaA Zinc OxideB Octamine Stearic Acid SRF Carbon BlackC ASTM #3 Oil A B 50 100 2 10 2 0. Z3—Not less than 50 % rubber hydrocarbon content. The weight has a mass of .3 The 70 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with 2BC715K11Z1Z2Z3Z4 where: Z1. Cure times of 40 to 60 min at 153°C (307°F) are used to minimize “heat-toheat’’ variations. and Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 70 6 2.75-kw (1-hp) electric motor and suitable gear box to ensure that full torque is delivered during the test. 6. 6. 5). 3 6. The rate of revolution (245 6 5 rpm) must remain constant under load. The rubber is bonded to the rim and cured in a suitable steel mold.1 The 50 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with 2BC515K11Z1Z2Z3Z4 where: Z1—Elastomer—Neoprene GW. 6. and Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 60 6 2.2.) wide (see Fig.) diameter by 13 mm (1⁄2 in. Z3. and Z4 are the same as for 6. G 105 FIG.org) for the latest information. and Z4 are the same as for 6.

2 Test Specimen—The test specimens are rectangular in shape. for example. .256 0. heat input of welds. having a level surface at least 50.00 6 0.5 in. A test surface without square (90°) edges.6. where A is the type of Durometer.0117 in. powder metals. P. is acceptable if it can be positioned to show the full length and width of the wear scar developed by the test.3 Wrought and Cast Metal—Specimens may be machined to size directly from raw material. The test surface should be flat within 0.0083 in.) wide.4 Weld deposits are applied to one flat surface of the test piece.) long and 19.625 in. Excepting coatings.0001 g.940 kg of deionized water and 1. castings.8 mm (2.4 6 0. heat checks. especially of those less than about 0.3 mm (0.). The finished surface should be free of artifacts of specimen heat treatment or preparation such as unintentional carburization or decarburization. The direction of the grinding should be parallel to the longest axis of the specimen. This force may be determined by calculation of the moments acting around the pivot point for the lever arm or by direct measurement.8 mm (1. Reagents and Materials 7. demagnetize each steel specimen.005 in. Procedure 9. 9. Then clean each specimen of all dirt and foreign matter.9 mm (0.) 300 µm (0.3 mm (0.0165 in.1 Multiple use of the sand may affect the test comparisons. wear resistance. 9.0059 in. to prevent distortion. Sieves (Specification E 11).00 in.) minimum suggested. forgings. 7. can penetrate the coating or cause it to be so thin that it will not survive that test without penetration.15 mm (0. 8. flat and free of scale.01 in.6 Finish—Test specimens should be smooth.0001 g.1 mm (0.4 Weigh the specimen to the nearest 0.8 lbf). Test Specimen. 4 10 Available from Ottawa Silica Co.) wide by 57.5 Coatings—This test may be unsuitable for some coatings..5 mm thick (0. If distortion occurs.astm. Sieve Size 40 50 70 100 Sieve Opening 425 µm (0. porosity.4 6 3. gas voids. U.005 in.5 kg (21 lb) and must be adjusted so that the force exerted by the rubber wheel on the specimen with the rubber wheel at rest has a value of 222. and the flame adjustment of gas welds will have an effect on the abrasion resistance of the weld deposit. Take gage readings after a dwell time of 5 s.2 Install the rubber wheel of nominal 50 Durometer and measure and record its hardness. 25. Double-weld passes are recommended to prevent weld dilution by the base metal. Materials with surface porosity (some powder metals or ceramics) must be dried to remove all traces of the cleaning agents that may have been entrapped in the material.7 mm (0.) %Retained on Sieve None 5 max 95 min None Passing 7. cermets. depending on their thickness.1 Thin coatings may be tested in the as-coated condition since surface grinding. 8. Sampling. 9.1 Abrasive Slurry—The abrasive slurry used in the test shall consist of a mixture of 0.2 6 0. The criterion for acceptability is the ability of the coating to resist penetration to its substrate during conduct of the test.375 in. 48.500 kg of a rounded grain quartz sand as typified by AFS 50/70 Test Sand (−50/ +70 mesh. 8.0 6 0.03 in. 8. This includes wrought metals. 9. or −230/ +270 µm) furnished by the qualified source.2 AFS 50/70 test sand is controlled by the qualified source to the following size range using U.01 in.3 Prior to testing. A150 g capacity balance is recommended to accommodate thicker or high density specimens. Ottawa. etc.) 212 µm (0. and Test Units 8. bond to the substrate.1 Test Unit—Use any metallic material form for abrasion testing by this method.25 to 0. The 5-s dwell time for the pressure foot in contact with the rubber rim should be rigorously adhered to. electroplates.org) for the latest information. slag inclusions. by noting the load required to pull the specimen holder away from the wheel. 8.5 mm. Modified procedures for coatings may be developed based on this procedure.5 to 0.1 In order to develop a suitable wear scar.125 mm (0. Report average hardness in the form: A/48. or with a proving ring.03 in. Note that welder technique.) thick.6. the last 0.1 Thoroughly rinse the slurry chamber before the test to eliminate any remnants of slurry from a previous test.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued. 12. etc.2.6 the average of the readings.O.6 N (50. IL 61350. thermal spray deposits. Surface defects such as porosity and roughness may bias the test results. G 105 approximately 9.6 Analytical Balance—The balance used to measure the loss in mass of the test specimen shall have a sensitivity of 0.10 7. Box 577.4. 9. the specimen may be mechanically straightened or ground or both. 8.2. Weld deposits should be made on a thick enough substrate.S.) maximum. level surface. 8.8 mm (2.4 to 15.S.1 Take at least four (preferably eight) hardness readings at equally spaced locations around the periphery of the rubber wheel using a Shore A Durometer tester in accordance with Test Method D 2240. The finish of the substrate test surface prior to coating should be such to minimize irregularities in the coated surface.) 150 µm (0.6 is suggested for coatings less than 0.) arithmetic average as measured across the direction of grinding.) of stock on the test surface (or surfaces in cases where both major surfaces are to be tested) should be carefully wet ground to a surface finish of about 0. 9.) long by 6.) thick. 6. and degrease in acetone immediately prior to weighing. and such specimens should be avoided unless the surface itself is under investigation.75 in.) thick. 8. weld overlays.5 Set the revolution counter to shut off automatically after 1000 wheel revolutions. use a shim in the specimen holder to bring the specimen to a height of 9. the surface to be abraded must be ground flat to produce a smooth.2 The type of surface or surface preparation shall be stated in the data sheet. Grinding of this surface as directed in 8. Contact ASTM International (www.1 For specimens less than 9. 8.2. 8.75 µm (20 to 30 µin.6/5. and other factors. and 5 the time in seconds that the pressure foot of the tester is in firm contact with the rubber rim surface.

50 in. and 70 Durometer rubber wheels.1-9.7 mm (0.017 in. The rubber wheel should be cross-fed at 0.13 Wheel Dressing Procedure—A recommended dressing procedure for the periphery of the rubber rim is to mount the wheel on an expandable arbor in a lathe and grind it square with a freshly dressed grinding wheel such as a Norton 38A60J5VBE. Fill the slurry chamber with 1. Each 1000 revolutions produces 558.). Store wheels so that there is no force on the rubber surface. 60.! 10. The concentricity of the rim shall be within 0. repeating steps 9. while the rubber wheel rotates at 86 rpm.05 mm (0. or with another 50 Durometer rubber wheel.7 Start wheel rotation. After dressing.6 m (1832. Normalize mass loss values to correspond to the travel of a wheel having a diameter of 177. and place a cover over the top of the slurry chamber to prevent the slurry from splashing out. 9. or when they wear unevenly so as to develop trapezoidal or uneven wear scars on the test specimen. 6). 60. then install the holder in position for testing. Drain the slurry from the chamber and discard it. 10. Convert mass loss to volume loss as follows: Volume Loss. The wear scars shall be rectangular in shape and of uniform depth at any section across the width (Fig. and 70 Durometer rubber wheels.000 3 0.11 Follow the same procedure as used for the run-in. The run-in removes the surface layer and exposes fresh material that is not affected by the surface preparation.6 ft) of lineal abrasion assuming a 177.) using the following formula: Normalized Mass Loss in Grams 177.7 3 Actual Mass Loss ~g! 5 Actual Diameter ~mm.1 The precision and bias of the measurements obtained with this test procedure will depend upon strict adherence to 5 .). in order of increasing hardness. rotating at a speed of 3500 rpm. using an appropriate shim if the specimen surface is less than 9.) and a width of 12. 9. It is essential to install the specimen in the specimen holder with the same orientation and position each time. The shelf life of the rubber rim may not exceed two years. and reweigh the specimen to the nearest 0. The rubber wheels are rotated at 245 rpm. An example of the procedure is presented in Appendix X1.! or 7. mm3 5 Mass Loss ~g! 3 1000 Density ~g/cm3! 11. A wear scar is run-in for 1000 wheel revolutions. 9.8 mm (7.12 Preparation and Care of Rubber Wheels—Dress the periphery of all new rubber wheels and make concentric to the bore of the steel disk upon which the rubber is mounted.10 9. 10.500 kg of the quartz sand and 0.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.28 m/s (449 ft/min) peripheral surface speed. 6 Typical Uniform Wear Scar 11.) total indicator reading on the diameter. measure each rubber wheel carefully to determine the diameter and width of the rubber rim.org) for the latest information. Experience has shown that more than 6000 revolutions may have an adverse effect on the reproducibility of results.astm.000 in. Calculation of Results 10. The intent is to produce a uniform surface that will run tangent to the test specimen without causing vibration or hopping of the lever arm.9 with the normally 50.12. The final test result is obtained by fitting a least square line to the three data points and solving the equation of the line for the mass loss corresponding to a rubber hardness of exactly 60 Durometer.2 Plot normalized mass loss values (that is.12. three values for each sample material) on a logarithmic scale against the corresponding rubber wheel hardness plotted on a linear scale.8 m diameter wheel. 9.) per revolution. 9.500 3 Actual Mass Loss ~g! 5 Actual Diameter ~in.940 kg of deionized water at room temperature. 9.1 It is recommended that rubber wheels be dressed again after accumulating approximately 6000 revolutions during testing. Precision and Bias FIG. Contact ASTM International (www. dry.9 Following the run-in.! 3 Actual Width ~mm.8 Lower the specimen holder carefully against the wheel to prevent bouncing and to apply a force of 222 N (50 lb) against the test specimen.6 Install the specimen in the specimen holder.3 The rubber wheel may be used until the diameter is reduced to 165 mm (6. G 105 9.8 3 12.500 in. or 2.12.2 Dress rubber wheels whenever they develop grooves or striations.002 in.5 mm above the holder seat surface. having dimensions of approximately 130 3 13 3 13 mm (5 3 1⁄2 3 1⁄2 in. 9. Clean. 9.10 The actual abrasion test is conducted on the same wear scar starting with either the same 50 Durometer rubber wheel used for the run-in.! 3 Actual Width ~in.3 Volume Loss—While 60 Durometer normalized mass loss results should be reported and may be used internally in test laboratories to compare materials of equivalent or near equivalent densities.0001 g.43 mm (0. New rubber rims may be mounted on steel disks by the qualified source. it is essential that all users of the test procedure report their results uniformly as volume loss in reports or publications so that there is no confusion caused by variations in density.1 Test results obtained are three mass loss values in grams corresponding to the three average Durometer hardness values obtained for the nominally 50. 9. remove the specimen from the slurry chamber.

11. however. (A satisfactory reference material for this test has not yet been established through laboratory testing. standard deviation.4. or obvious test specimen anomaly.6 Reference materials should be used for periodic monitoring of the test apparatus and procedures in individual laboratories.2 The degree of agreement in repeated tests on the same material will depend upon material homogeneity. p.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.30 formed a task group with the objective of producing an ASTM Standard Practice. While the single test results and simple arithmetic averaging may in some few cases be useful in individual laboratories. As the need for standardization became apparent.5 While two or more laboratories may develop test data that is within the acceptable coefficient of variation for their own individual test apparatus. Not only must the test method.2 In any test series all data must be considered in the calculation.1 The coefficient of correlation (r) for the three mass loss values determined in a test shall be calculated in accordance with Annex A1. ASTM. the machine operation shall be considered out of control and steps taken to eliminate erratic results. and individual operator generate correct results (bias) but the test results must be consistently reproducible (precision) within an acceptable 6 narrow range. 11. Data giving r values between 0. 11. 2 to 10) = R/d2 = standard deviation (any sample size) (1) (2) . in 1962 The Society of Automotive Engineers established a division (No.4. In previous round-robins conducted by the SAE group.95 and −0. This was not accomplished and in 1983. metallic materials. The coefficient of variation shall not exceed 7 % in materials of the 2 to 60 mm3 volume loss range. their actual averages may be relatively far apart.3 Normal variations in the abrasive material. A number of variations of this test procedure have been used by several research and industrial laboratories in the United States who were faced with the problem of evaluating hardfacing alloys. More specifically this was the need for laboratories to agree on the number of times a test should be repeated on a given homogeneous material in order to obtain a meaningful average result. machine and material interaction.astm. To ensure uniformity among laboratories using the wet sand/rubber wheel test.) 12.1 Background—The wet sand/rubber wheel abrasion test as developed and described by Haworth. and ASTM STP 15D. it has been evident that the variability of experimental error inherent in each laboratory is a factor that must be considered. ANNEX (Mandatory Information) A1. and others (see Refs (1-4). scratching abrasion. Another important consideration in developing accurate and precise test results is the selection of adequate sample size. G 105 the stated test parameters.1 abrasive wear test. 18) has been in various stages of evolution and use over the last two or more decades. apparatus. 11. and close observation of the test by a competent machine operator.95 should be scrutinized for causes of scatter. Borik. The quantity r varies between −1 and +1. maintain a 7 % or less coefficient of variation of volume loss values that will characterize the abrasion resistance of materials (see Annex A1). rubber wheel. and procedure will tend to reduce the accuracy of the practice as compared to the accuracy of such material property tests as hardness or density. the standard deviation and coefficient of variation of results produced from a series of tests shall be calculated by the following formulas: s s = standard deviation (small sample size. subcommittee G02. Contact ASTM International (www.2 Statistical Formulas—Several formulas for the calculation of optimum sample size. castings. A1. STP 150. For example. Keywords 12. ASTM STP 150. and coefficient of variation are used in the statistical analysis of data. it is essential that statistical techniques and multiple testing of specimens be utilized for the qualification of each test apparatus.11 11. wet sand 11 Manual on Presentation of Data and Control Chart Analysis. The selection of sample size and the method for establishing the significance of the difference in averages shall be agreed upon between laboratories and shall be based on established statistical methods Practice E 122. Further information on statistical methods may be found in Practice E 122. and wrought products for their resistance to abrasive wear. an exceedingly high or low volume loss must not be disregarded except in the case of observed faulty machine operation.org) for the latest information. r = 0 means that there is no correlation. including outliers (data exceeding the obvious range). The test samples shall be taken from the same homogeneous material. 11. 1976.1 The standard deviation from the mean average shall be calculated from the accumulated test results and reduced to the coefficient of variation in accordance with Annex A1. 11. Properly conducted tests will. SOME STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN ABRASION TESTING A1.1. 11. Practice E 177. and in the references. If this value is exceeded. Individual laboratories set their own test parameters with the goal being the generation of reproducible test data within the laboratory.4 Initial Machine Operation and Qualification—The number of tests required to establish the precision of the machine for initial machine operation shall be at least five. rubber wheel characteristics. Either value means that the correlation is perfect. and for the comparison of materials. 18) of the Iron and Steel Technical Committee (ISTC) to achieve this end.

large numbers of test specimens are just not available...43 −0. However.847 2. or the variability of the hardfacing deposit was such to cause this large variation in test results.56 % A1.3367 0.1 In this particular test series the 7. 17.org) for the latest information. .1 In statistical analysis the estimated standard deviations of large sample sizes (over 10) are derived from the square root of the mean square of deviations from the average.75 5.96 V/e)2 (3) (4) where: s = V = x = x ¯ = (x = n = e = R = d2 standard deviation from the mean. the user may calculate the variability of results.. mean of arithmetic average for n tests.52 7. range of results. A1.7 mm3..45 2 x−x ¯ −0.45) 100 = 7.1375/9 = =0.2..5 mm3. The standard deviation was calculated from Formula 2 and the test data are set down in the following format: Test Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 x 6.01 −0. new users must deal with the concepts of mean averages. .5.5907 0. the percent coefficient of variation is attained by dividing the standard deviation by the average test value x ¯ and multiplying by 100..31 0. As more data are accumulated from the same homogeneous material and new data are accumulated from different materials.. sum total of all test values.1 of the standard.. and = deviation factor.5. 2 2 3 4 5 6 10 % . .. In addition to this a new user is concerned with evaluating the accuracy of his first few (2 or 3) test results during the initial test campaign which certainly should not inspire much confidence because of the small number of tests.0 %. 4. A1.31 0.. Once the standard deviation is obtained.64 6.56 % coefficient TABLE A1. .26 6.. 2 4 7 11 16 21 28 35 43 4% . For such samples the standard deviation is obtained by multiplying the range of available observations (the difference between the highest and lowest numerical value) by a deviation factor (Formula 1) that varies with the sample size.5 Large Sample Size (10 or Over): A1. .4873 = (s/x ¯ ) 3 100 = (0.693 2.1) A typical user of this test procedure will more likely start out with less than 10 test results. The deviation factor is obtained from Table A1. value of each test result (volume loss in mm3).. .4.13 .. . 2 3 4 6 8 10 13 16 6% .. . .1521 0.4 Small Sample Size (2 to 10): A1.. many abrasion test evaluations are made on a small number of samples.. While it is obvious that a large number of tests on the same material is desirable and will yield a high confidence level in evaluating test results. %.2 5 2..34 6...4..2 mm3.0961 0.0961 0. 13.58 (x − x ¯ )2 0. which may give a general indication of precision of the apparatus and test method.7 mm3.10 1.2 Factors for Estimating Standard Deviation from the Range on the Basis of Sampling Size Sample Size (n) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 d2 1.96 6. .1 Note that the 15.1849 0.36/15.1 Example 2—This example shows the analysis for the coefficient of variation of ten abrasion tests made upon normalized 1090 steel. .2.2 Example 1—This example shows typical analysis for standard deviation and coefficient of variation of actual data from three abrasion tests made upon a Co-Cr-C hardfacing alloy deposit.3364 2.128 1. 1 3 4 6 9 12 16 20 24 5% .36.3249 7 .3698 0. %.0100 1. 1 2 2 3 4 4 A1.2375 = 0. A1. 15. variability of test results.059 2.0169 0. This is due to the fact that in much abrasion work. and particularly the effect of sample size. Contact ASTM International (www. which varies with sample size (Table A1. even with this admittedly small sample size.3 Use of Statistical Methods—In evaluating the precision and accuracy of any test procedure.4857 0.. 15. 4.9 mm3. ..39 0.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued. Number of tests (n) Volume loss data (x) ¯) Average of volume loss (x Range of test Standard deviation (s) Coefficient of variation (v) = = = = = 3.. 1.534 2.20 −0.4.3946 0. . .078 1/d2 0...704 2.. A1. the accumulated variability values may be averaged to provide a better estimate of the precision of the apparatus and procedure. 2 2 3 4 5 7 8 8% .. standard deviation from the mean.0 % variation is well above the acceptable 7 % maximum as indicated in 11.07 x ¯ = 6. number of tests or observations.8865 0.4299 0..4873/6. variability of the test procedure..326 2.0400 0. allowable sampling error.astm..970 3. 2% 1 4 9 16 24 35 47 62 78 96 3% .. difference between the highest and lowest test value.1849 0.1 Minimum Acceptable Sample Size (n) for 95 % Confidence Level Allowable Sampling Error ( %) Coefficient of Variation (V) n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1% 4 16 35 62 96 .1375 = ((x − x ¯ )2 s V = =(~x 2 x ¯ ! /~n 2 1! = =2. 1 2 3 4 6 7 9 11 7% ..693 = (s/x ¯ ) 3 100 = (2..08 6..02 6.43 −0.3512 0. It is obvious that either this particular test apparatus or procedure was out of control.4. allowable sampling error.1..... TABLE A1. G 105 V n = =(~x 2 x ¯ !2/~n 2 1! = % coefficient of variation = (s/x ¯ ) 3 100 = sample size (95 % confidence level) = (1.....7) 3 100 = 15.85 6.0201 0.. In these cases the standard deviation(s) is more efficiently derived from the range (R) of the sample observation than from the root mean square..

28150 1 0. This corresponds to a 95 % confidence level which is an appropriate criterion for abrasion tests.1) where: Y = logarithm of weight loss = Log W.0 7.0)(0. AISI 1090 Steel plate normalized 900°C HRC 30 4.69680 X2 = 59.1.0 1 66.0)(−0. It indicates a 5 % probability that the difference between the sample estimate of the mean value x.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.006 Y3 = 0.01. Note. Y ¯ = average of X.1.36667. the minimum sample size (n) would be 8 in order to obtain a 5 % allowable sampling error.34679 2 Y 5 20. 304 Stainless Steel bar HRB 78 2.1)(−0.25 to 100 mm3.2 Table A1.69680 2 0. AISI D2 Tool Steel hardened and tempered HRC 60 Volume Loss. SAMPLE COMPUTATION OF MASS LOSS AT 60 DUROMETER HARDNESS BY MEANS OF A LEAST SQUARE LINE X1.523 Y2 = −0.astm. and that obtainable from averaging all values from a very high number of tests.84577.0)(−0.6.01. use of 5000 revolutions per rubber wheel.01 2 3 (X1.84 7. These test data were obtained in the last SAE round-robin and represent a population between different laboratories.0 + 66. however.2 6 0.0 1.1 Determination of Individual Terms in (Eq X1. The more abrasionresistant materials will develop the least volume loss.7 Typical Volume Loss Values—The wet sand/rubber wheel test will produce volume losses in metallic materials ranging from about 0. For example.01 10347.1 Least Square Line Equation: (XY 2 ¯1 Y5Y (X(Y N ~ (X! 2 (X 2 N 2 ¯! ~X 2 X (X1.28150 X3 = 66. (X2 ((X)2 = (50. (X(Y = (50.1 Given the following: X (Durometer Hardness) W (Weight Loss.0 5 58. 3 X1.1.1. for example.1. = (50.00260 5 2 3 0.1 As indicated previously the availability of multiple test specimens in abrasion testing is sometimes limited.1 W1 = 0. G 105 of variation indicated the test procedure was slightly outside of satisfactory control. Practice E 122 describes the choice of sample size to estimate the average quality of a lot or process.36667! 30660. Within the same laboratory. g) Y (Logarithm of Weight Loss) X1 = 50. Any material specifications involving this test method must be by agreement between the seller and the purchaser.2 Specific Gravity 8.00260) = 170. if the coefficient of variation of the test apparatus as determined by multiple testing is 7 %.2 By Substitution Into (Eq X1. Contact ASTM International (www. mm3 55 6 14 20 6 7 6. T-1 Low Alloy Steel bar HRC 24 3. A1. ¯ = average of Y.32523 1 2170. A1. When this occurs the user must have some criterion upon which to judge the minimum acceptable sample size for meaningful results. greater accuracy in material ranking may require a modified procedure.3 shows typical volume loss ranges that may be expected in the metals listed.6.6 APPENDIX (Nonmandatory Information) X1. reproducibility of test results will be better than the values shown.3 Typical Volume Loss Range Material 1.0 W2 = 0.0)2 + (66.1 is based upon this formula.1)2 + (59. When volume losses are less than 1 mm3.00260 X1. (XY = (50.6 Estimated Sample Size and Allowable Sampling Error: A1. The following formula takes into account the allowable sampling error and the inherent variability of experimental error of the test method (coefficient of variation).7 6 2.86 7.0 + 66.69680) + (59.1 + 59. X = durometer hardness.34679.28150 + 0. the test is not valid and corrective action must be taken.2) X1.96 v/e!2 A1. TABLE A1. n 5 ~1.201 Y1 = −0.00260) = 51.1): = 20.32523.1 + 59.28150) + (66. X N = 3 (number of points). and ¯ X = 50.69680 − 0. Table A1.0 W3 = 1. They are offered as guidelines only and not as purchasing specifications or as standard reference specimens.0)2 = 30660.0)2 = 10347.1 1 59.1): ¯ Y 251. that if the test results for the 8 samples does not generate a coefficient of variation of 7 % or less. and ( = Sum 8 . will exceed the allowable sampling error (e).84577 3 ~X 2 58.org) for the latest information.

” Slurry Erosion: Uses. The American Society for Testing and Materials takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned in this standard. as given.. Eds. a measure of scatter around the least equal line is computed according to the following expression: r56 For X1 = 50.2. Society of Automotive Engineers. (5) Stolk.68987 Y2est 5 20. R. D.. the logarithm of the normalized weight loss can be computed from (Eq X1.32523 1 0.. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights. Y3est = 0.“ The Abrasion Resistance of Metals.” Transactions ASM.0.2.1.org (e-mail).36667! ¯ !2 (~Yest 2 Y ¯ (~Y 2 Y!2 (X1. ASTM STP 946. G.36667! Y 5 20. ((Yest − Y and ¯ )2 + (Y2 − Y ¯ )2 + (Y3 − Y ¯ )2 ¯ )2 = (Y1 − Y ((Y − Y X1. 610-832-9555 (fax). 1975. at the address shown below.. Y2est and Y3est are calculated as follows: Y1est 5 20. Schmidt. 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. United States. Ed... Merediz. ASTM. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards and should be addressed to ASTM Headquarters. Y2est = −0.32523 1 0. Subramanyam. r.2) and substituting values of X1. Frank. H.” SAE Paper 700687. A.org). R.org) for the latest information. (6) Saltzman. PO Box C700. “Classification and Precision of Abrasion Tests. J. E. 1949. Contact ASTM International (www. (2) Avery. 1978. 9 .. “The Nature of Abrasive Wear. S.. PA 19428-2959. (3) Haworth. (4) Borik.04411~60 2 58.25319 5 Log W W 5 0.1. “Wet Sand Rubber-Wheel Abrasion Test for Thin Coatings.astm.32523 1 0. S. D. Y1est = −0.“ Rubber Wheel Abrasion Test.4) For X3 = 66.NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards. A. and the risk of infringement of such rights. Jr.. ASM. Jr.04411~X1 2 58. T.01148 REFERENCES (1) Avery. Bayer. 819–854. X2 and X3. K. (7) Saltzman. and Avery.3) where: ¯ )2 = (Y1est − Y ¯ )2 + (Y2est − Y ¯ )2 + (Y3est − Y ¯ )2. Applications.. or through the ASTM website (www. This standard is copyrighted by ASTM. the Y1est. 1970.” Source Book on Wear Control Technology. 100 Barr Harbor Drive. 211–242. H.36667! Œ For X2 = 59. G 105 or Y 5 20.04411~X3 2 58.36667! At X = 60.04411~X2 2 58. which you may attend. G. W.04411 ~X 2 58. or service@astm. pp.1 The coefficient of correlation. pp. E. pp. “Experience with the Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Test.2 Coeffıcient of Correlation: X1. Society of Automotive Engineers. Society of Automotive Engineers. 1982. Miller and F. 1970. H. “Field and Laboratory Tests on Plowshares.0. either reapproved or withdrawn.32523 1 0.558 grams (X1.29729 Y3est 5 20. Vol 41.astm.” SAE Paper 700690. ASTM 1987. ASTM STP 769.32523 1 0. are entirely their own responsibility.2 Using Equation of the Least Square Line (Eq X1.2): Y 5 20.1.. 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). G.1..” Selection and Use of Wear Test for Coatings. West Conshohocken. A. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee. and Test Methods. O. S.36667! X1.” SAE Preprint 750822. 71–91.