Portable Hardness Testing Book

Portable Hardness Testing
Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Portable Hardness Testing
Theory, practice, applications, guidelines
Screening Eagle Technologies AG
Ringstrasse 2
8603 Schwerzenbach
Zurich
Switzerland
ScreeningEagle.com
Directed by Sonia Giron

Lead contributing author: Dr. Dariusz Burnat
Contributors: Logesh Raj, Dr. Stefan Frank, Tom Ott
Edited by Jane Sandy
Designed by Jenny Chillingworth
Printed by Vario Press Limited, England
Published by Screening Eagle Technologies AG, Switzerland
Every effort has been made to ensure that the content of this edition
is accurate but the publisher accepts no responsibility for effects
arising therefrom.
Copyright © Screening Eagle Technologies AG 2022

Foreword
As well as being a definitive guide to portable hardness testing, this book is
a celebration of continuous innovation and achievement in this specialist
field. Since the dawn of civilization, humans have striven to learn more
about their world and the materials they use. The need to know about
material hardness values sprang from the early beginnings of the industrial
age, when mass production began and demand for products progressively
expanded, creating new markets. At each stage, engineers have embraced
the latest methods and tools to deliver leading edge results. Today, we are
able to harness the power of digital technologies to satisfy our need for
knowledge and advance our capabilities.
In a world where protecting our planet – notably from the effects of climate change – has
become a number one priority, it is essential that we have access to the best and latest data
about our built environment and the quality of the materials we rely on. It is an era in which we
must focus relentlessly on reducing our carbon footprint and this means making the things we
build endure through preventative inspection and maintenance – or, ultimately, repurposing or
strengthening existing structures, using only those materials absolutely necessary for the task
and recycling wherever possible. Good engineering, driven by quality data, can help us here.
This is where Screening Eagle Technologies comes in – with its innovative, software first,
connected and portable testing solutions, which offer the most comprehensive data about
structures and materials of many types. Although the company was created relatively recently,
the Screening Eagle story actually began in the 1950s, with the foundation of Proceq in Zurich,
Switzerland. This was a company formed to provide high quality Swiss-engineered equipment
to support the construction industry and evolved to specialize in portable Non-Destructive
Testing (NDT) equipment used in many further industries. From manufacturing to aviation
and automobiles to paper and beyond, the company’s offering radically changed the way
we worked. It may be interesting to note and perhaps a sign of things to come, that Proceq
became a world leader with its first innovation – the pioneering concrete test hammer which
was developed in collaboration with the civil engineer and bridge builder Ernst O. Schmidt and
which, for the first time, used a patented rebound measuring process.
Since those early days, Proceq continued to develop an astonishing range of innovative new
portable testing instruments, for example the hugely versatile Equotip – which, since Proceq
invented the Leeb hardness test principle in 1975, has become established as a globally
recognized brand for portable hardness testing and a de facto industry standard.
Through the years, Equotip and the whole family of portable NDT products – responding to
the needs of many different industries and materials – further evolved to embrace digital
technologies and even greater user-friendly features.
Meanwhile, in 2015, Screening Eagle Dreamlab Pte Ltd was established and based in
Singapore’s state-of-the-art Fusionopolis cluster. This software and robotics company
was working on cross-disciplinary R&D projects, leveraging the novel technologies and capabil-
ities of various Singapore-based research platforms. The premier initiative of Screening Eagle
Dreamlab was the Virtual Inspection Platform – a vision to create a holistic software based
platform for asset data visualization and management that today, powers all of Screening Eagle
Technologies inspection tech products and solutions to help ensure optimal performance of
infrastructure investment worth around US$57 trillion globally. In addition to tapping into global
trends of virtual and augmented reality, the Internet of Things, mobile computing, big data,
cloud computing and wearable technology, this new facility also fostered frequent interactions
with customers and partners in the region.
Then, in a move which was to totally revolutionize the portable NDT sector, Proceq and Screen-
ing Eagle Dreamlab became part of Screening Eagle Technologies in 2019 in order to address
the challenges facing our assets and infrastructure with leading edge inspection technology.
Now, Screening Eagle products are a perfect and harmonious blend of hardware and software.
Our goal is the leveraging and democratization of data to drive preventative inspection and
maintenance decisions using augmented reality, artificial intelligence, sensors and a software
first approach. There’s a huge mountain to climb if we are to meet global carbon reduction
targets, but by taking those first difficult steps together – as a global community of experts
– it can be done.
Meanwhile, in this book, we invite you to explore with us the nature of hardness and why it’s
important, along with examples of the many industries which rely on hardness testing to
achieve the required quality in their work. Then, you can discover the range of hardness test-
ing methods – from the early stages to state-of-the-art testing capabilities. Next, parameters
for testing are defined in the chapter about optimal method selection, followed by a chapter
on standardization for portable hardness testing. The all-important issues of instrument
verification and data management are also examined in depth. There’s a wealth of
information about practical applications too, answering many questions about issues that
might be encountered while preparing for and performing hardness testing. Along the way,
there are helpful tips and case studies.
In publishing this comprehensive guidebook, we hope also to inform, educate and inspire all
who work in the inspection field to continue their vital work and encourage them to use only
quality solutions. More than anything, we hope you will enjoy reading this definitive work on
portable hardness testing and that you will join us on the Screening Eagle mission to Protect
the Built World.
Marcel Poser
CEO & Co-founder, Screening Eagle Technologies
“The measure of
intelligence is the
ability to change.”
Albert Einstein
Contents
01
Why is hardness interesting? 01
What is hardness? 03
Why is hardness one of the most important parameters? 04
Applications for hardness testing 05
‑ Driving quality for the automotive sector 07
‑ Maximizing quality for all streams 09
‑ Keeping the wheels of industry turning 11
‑ Looking to the skies 13
‑ Into space and down to Earth 15
‑ Hardness testing in and around the built environment 17
02
Hardness testing methods 21
Abrasion methods 23
Indentation methods 24
Benchtop hardness testing methods 25
Portable hardness testing 29
Leeb method 31
Portable Rockwell method 36
Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) method 38
03
Standardization for portable hardness testing 41
Standards for the Leeb method 44

Standardization on the metrology level 45
Standards for Portable Rockwell method 46
Standards for Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) 46
04
Optimal method selection 47
Mass and wall thickness limitation 50

Surface preparation 52
User dependency – human influences on
measurement for portable hardness testing (NDT) 53
Material dependency – material-specific calibration 54
05
Instrument verification 55
Leeb method 57
Portable Rockwell method 58
The UCI method 59
06
Data management 61
Reporting and documentation of hardness values 63

Evolution of the documentation procedures 64
07
Practical applications 67
Execution of measurements 69
Conversion of hardness measurements 73
How accurate is hardness testing? 75
How many readings should I take? 77
Surface preparation 79
Influence of temperature 80
Combination of two methods 82
Non-flat surfaces 83
Troubleshooting for hardness testing 85
Sources and references 89
Glossary 90
1 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines
01
Why is hardness interesting?
The requirements relating to metallic materials and their practical application
in different constructions, components, installations and machines are
increasing continuously. Aspects like safety and economic efficiency are the
major focus, along with potential liability issues, which must also be considered.
2
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
What is hardness?
For these reasons, a reliable characterization of the materials used –
including a quantitative assessment of the corresponding parameters
and material properties – plays a predominant role. Ultimately, materials
testing and characterization not only increases the lifetime and, thus, the
efficiency of metallic parts and products, but also leads to greater safety
and reliability!
The selection, as well as condition monitor- As a result, there is no single hardness test-
ing, of a material for a specific application is ing method or scale which can be used for all
Abrasion method
mainly based on the physical, chemical and potential hardness testing applications. The Hardness of materials can be
primarily mechanical properties. The main many hardness scales existing today are a assessed by resistance to
scratching or cutting. This is an easy
purpose and goal of materials testing is to result of historical development, but also show
method for determining the relative
quantitatively characterize the properties of that, for different materials and applications, hardness of materials. This is why
the different materials using specific param- different hardness testing methods have to it has been used for many years,
although the use of this method
eters and concrete numerical quantity values. be used. As a matter of fact, there is no sin-
does not provide accurate numeric
Hardness testing, due to its quick and easy gle hardness testing method that is perfectly data or scales especially for modern
execution, remains the most frequently used suitable for all applications. metals or materials.
method for obtaining information about the Hardness can be described as a measure
mechanical properties of the material. This of the resistance to localized deformation
guide will help the user find the best-suited tool induced by either mechanical indentation or
Indentation method
for the specific application and highlight what abrasion. Derived from this definition, there are Hardness can also be determined
has to be considered to get reliable results. two general methods for measuring hardness by measuring the resistance of the
material against the penetration
Hardness is not a fundamental property of – abrasion and indentation.
of a specific indenter – the indenter
a material itself, but rather a response to a However, the term ‘hardness’ is also used to must be harder, else it is the indenter
particular test method. describe the wear resistance of materials. which is "tested" not the material.
Depending on the indentation system,
Basically, hardness values are arbitrary and For example, hard optical lenses are more
which includes the indenter itself as
for that reason no absolute standards for resistant to potential scratches, heat-treated well as the test load applied, different
hardness exist. Hardness has no quantitative gear teeth wear down more slowly, hardened hardness values or scales are used in
the practical field.
value, except in terms of a given load applied blades or knives stay sharp for longer. Never-
in a specific, reproducible manner and with theless, in some cases a higher hardness is
a specified indenter shape. Therefore, the correlated with an increased brittleness, which
Rebound method
definition of hardness clearly differs from that unfortunately is the trade-off. A high hardness
of strength, which describes the resistivity value is not always beneficial – for example, in A third general method, which is
later on described extensively within
of a specific material against deformation weld inspection and HAZ (heat affected zone).
this book is a rebound method that
and separation. In summary, hardness testing is a quick, rela- is based on a loss of velocity of the
tively inexpensive non-destructive test which impact body after it rebounds from
the inspected surface.
is used to characterize materials and deter-
mine if they are suitable for their intended use.

Why is hardness one of the
most important parameters?
Often it’s not hardness in isolation that is Portable hardness testing is a non-destructive
of interest. Hardness is often measured for method, which allows a good estimation of
its correlation with other material parame- the material’s strength.
ters that are otherwise difficult to measure Furthermore, other material parameters
or require destructive testing in order to be such as texture variation, wear characteris-
characterized. The most important of these tics, fatigue resistance, toughness or even
parameters are tensile strength, ductility and corrosion can be monitored using portable
elasticity. hardness testing methods.
Strength, for example, correlates to hardness Every day tens of thousands of companies
and hence can be established through approx- conduct hardness measurements to ensure
imation from the hardness measurement. that the specific requirements of a product are
Direct measurement of tensile strength is a reached or maintained to ensure the required
destructive and time-consuming method. quality and safety.
4
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Applications for
hardness testing
Hardness measurements are used in a wide variety of industries at many
production levels, from process control to quality control of manufactured
products to the regulated monitoring of material performance during use,
for example condition monitoring or lifetime assessment and extension.
Many industries regularly carry out hardness testing and, typically, these are
businesses within the automotive, oil and gas, machinery and manufacturing
and aerospace sectors. However, there are also many less conventional users
of and uses for hardness testing. The following pages offer an insight into
both the traditional and not-so-traditional applications for hardness testing.

6
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Driving quality for the

automotive sector
Automotive manufacturing involves many different components and routine
hardness testing is carried out in several areas. Components where quality
of materials and manufacture is regularly subjected to hardness testing
include engine blocks and cylinders, shafts, gears, brake systems, coils
and panels.
The production and assembly of a whole range of high quality, precision-engineered compo-
nents is required in automobile manufacture. Hardness testing plays a crucial role in ensuring
that these parts have been manufactured correctly and that they will perform according to
specification during the operational lifetime of that vehicle.
The following paragraphs describe the three foremost examples of where hardness testing
is used in the automotive sector.
Combustion engines
Engine cylinder blocks and cylinder heads are heat treated to optimize their resistance to
excessive wear and tear – and to ensure a long lifetime for the whole engine.
Hardness tests are most commonly carried out on aluminum components and determine
whether or not they meet the required parameters. Wrong hardness values not only compromise
the lifetime, but can also damage tools during the next steps in the manufacturing process.
It is also common practice to conduct hardness testing on used engine parts, after repairs
for example, to check whether long-term exposure to heat has caused any change in the
hardness or materials integrity.
Shafts
Hardness is an important parameter for ensuring the quality of cam- and crankshafts of
automotive engines.
A hardness value which is too low indicates problems during the quenching process. This
results in low strength and low abrasion performance of the crankshaft. On the other hand, if
hardness values are too high, then this can lead to brittleness and failure.
Therefore, the hardness must be carefully checked and monitored constantly to find and solve
problems quickly. Otherwise, entire crankshaft batches may need to be scrapped.
1 Cylinder head block –
hardness testing is used Gears
to determine whether
components meet the
required parameters. Transmission gears are not only present within this sector but also belong to the machinery
2 Inspection of automotive sector too. For example, gears are used in cranes too – where they require hardness testing
shaft with Equotip UCI. before being installed onto the main unit. If the hardness is not within the specified standard,
3 Whether for automotive or
industrial use, transmission
damage to the whole crane system may be caused.
gears must be hardness
tested, else risk damage to
the whole installation.

1
2 3
8
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Maximizing quality
for all streams
The oil and gas industry touches just about every area of our lives –
producing fuel for vehicles and heating installations, as well as playing a
role in the creation of many other products – from medicines to sporting
equipment and cosmetics. Typically, hardness testing is carried out for
plants and pipelines, pressurized vessels, flanges and wellhead equipment.
Plants and pipelines
Power plant inspectors and operators place a high value on checking that the hardness of
pipes and welds lies within certain ranges for steel with different alloy contents.
The reason is that the hardness of the material is related to its brittleness. If the hardness is
too high, then the material is too brittle. If the hardness is too low, the material is insufficiently
strong to withstand loading conditions typical during operation. Both cases can lead to cracks
and, in a worst case scenario, dangerous failures.
However, checking only once is insufficient. The hardness of pipes and welds in power plants
can also change over time due to cyclic thermal loading. Heat treatment or even uncontrolled
thermal history leads to microstructural changes and thus also the change of mechanical
properties. The most obvious example here is Heat Affected Zones (HAZ), which are affected
by the thermal history of the metal joint and surrounding material.
Power plant environments offer a wide array of accessibility challenges for those tasked with
monitoring and maintenance. For example, pipes and welds are typically located at great
heights or in confined locations without much space for sensing devices.
Pressurized vessels and wellhead equipment
Similarly to pipelines and plants, pressurized vessels and wellhead equipment represent areas
where the components must meet rigorous safety criteria before installation and throughout
the entire service life of the components. Hardness checks are conducted before and after
forming, as well as during operation of the equipment
1 Inspectors in the oil and gas

industry place a high value
on checking that the hardness
of pipes and welds lies within
certain ranges for steel with
different alloy contents.
2 Flange test with the Equotip
Leeb D and wrist-mounted iOS
device to enhance manual
maneuverability.

1
10
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Keeping the wheels of

industry turning
The machinery and manufacturing sectors are broad and highly-diversified.
Their output consists usually of items destined for post-processing, that are
used within multiple branches across various industry segments. As such,
hardness testing acts as a crucial guide to the quality and characteristics of
the goods on their production lines. Typical applications are shown below.
Coils
Many companies in this field need a solution to quickly verify roll hardness throughout the
various processes involved in roll production. Constant quality control of these products
guarantees the high quality of the final product, prevents molding machine failures – and saves
a huge amount of money, manpower and machine downtime.
Bars and pipes
Steel bars made of different types of steel are widely used in construction. The initial hardness
test determines whether the required mechanical properties are met. This is easily conducted
through non-destructive hardness testing which, in contrast to conventional analysis, does not
involve cutting of the test piece, transportation and subsequent analysis.
It is also important to highlight that different materials provide different strengths which are
required for different areas in construction. Thus, it is essential to confirm the material type
of a certain batch of steel bars and ensure they are delivered to the right place. However, it is
sometimes difficult to figure out the steel type from the appearance of steel bars. Hardness
values are normally used as an indication for distinguishing different steel types, for example
during incoming goods inspection.
Heat-treated products
Heat treatment changes the material properties through microstructure modification during
pre-defined and programmed thermal processing.
There are various heat treatment processes – such as annealing, quenching, carburizing,
nitriding, case hardening etc – that require verification of heat treatment and process control
by monitoring the hardness values of processed materials.
1 Rolls of cold-rolled steel
stored in the form of coils Wires and rods
– constant quality control in
the various processes
involved in their production Manufactured wires are very often post-processed into various products. The mechanical
guarantees a high quality properties are again key role parameters, not only for ensuring the product quality, but also
final product. for preventing equipment failures and extending equipment life.
2 Bulky bar being tested with
Equotip Leeb G probe. Due to its small size, wire testing is a not a trivial process – but can be easily executed by
3 Portable Rockwell mounted non-destructive hardness testing. It is worth noting that even wires for medical applications
into a clamp adapter for rods are successfully tested with Equotip Portable Rockwell testing equipment on a daily basis.
and wires inspection.

1
2 3
12
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Looking to the skies

Turbine blades, casings and housings, panels, cast objects and landing
gear are all prime candidates for hardness testing within the aerospace
industry. As well as during their initial manufacture, these components are
also the subjects of routine hardness testing during the service life of an
aircraft. Here, as for many industry applications, portable hardness testing
is a crucial part of everyday operations.
Hydraulic lines
Metal hydraulic lines must be bent into shape to fit the application. This bending can lead to
work hardening and subsequent brittleness that can lead to cracking. Portable hardness testers
can test each bend to confirm that the hardness level is appropriate for the service design.
Heat exchangers
Heat exchangers in the aerospace industry are required to keep critical electronics within
specified operational temperature, as well as to ensure passenger comfort. The various com-
ponents within a heat exchanger must be brazed or welded together, such as supply tubes
to the tube sheet. These connections must not be too hard or else the resulting brittleness
leads to premature failure. The Equotip Portable Rockwell is ideally suited for testing these
thinner materials.
Landing gear
Aircraft landing gear must perform under severe loading conditions and this requires precise
heat treatment to achieve the needed strength and durability. Hardness testing of landing
gear can give an indication of the carbon content in the landing gear alloy which is important
to meet design goals. Too little carbon (decarburization) will be soft and lead to a weak spot
that can cause fatigue failure overload cycles. Too much carbon (carburization) can cause
brittleness and serve as a starting point for stress cracking. Portable hardness testing ensures
that the landing gear itself is fit for purpose instead of relying upon test coupons processed
alongside the landing gear.
1 Quality and precision

engineering in the aerospace
industry is supported by
hardness testing in a number
of specific areas.
2 Aircraft landing gear is
subjected to portable
hardness testing during
regular maintenance
schedules to ensure
continued safe performance.

1
14
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Into space and down to Earth

From outer space to ocean-going products and core samples from deep
beneath our planet's surface, there are many further applications where
hardness measurements are needed. For inspiration and to demonstrate
how versatile hardness measurement can be, the following examples are
shared to show some of the most interesting and unconventional solutions
that have been implemented using portable hardness testing devices over
recent years.
Space exploration industry
The Equotip Portable Rockwell hardness tester has been used to quality assure the SpaceX
rocket, which is now regularly taking a new generation of astronauts into space, opening up
new horizons for exploration.
Meanwhile, Ana Pires, researcher and astronaut, has tested the Equotip Leeb D device in lunar
gravity conditions. She was working on a project targeted to fit a remote probe/drone with an
Equotip product for future on-site investigation of rocks on the moon.
Marine and shipping industries
Back on Earth and thanks to their portability, simple operation and high accuracy, Equotip
portable hardness testers are also proving to be handy instruments for checking the hardness
of incoming raw materials and finished goods for quality control purposes.
Rock core testing for oil and gas sector
Before drilling, oil and gas companies pull sample rock cores from the planned drill site and
perform a thorough geophysical evaluation of the rock structure. The hardness test is one of
the key methods for categorizing the rock cores.
From the results of the rock structure categorization, a detailed plan can be created to optimize
the extraction of the resource. In order to properly evaluate the rock structure, thousands of
1 Quality assurance for the data points have to be collected every day. This requires that the test be easily and quickly
SpaceX program has been
supported by Equotip performed and the results are highly repeatable.
Portable Rockwell hardness Screening Eagle customers use Equotip Leeb D not only to quickly and accurately check the
testing. Pictured here is the hardness of rock cores, but also to manage through build-in web data storage the massive
Dragon spacecraft being
propelled into orbit by a number of data points gathered daily.
Falcon9 rocket, both parts of
the fleet being developed and
manufactured by SpaceX.
2 Hardness testing of rocks in a
lunar gravity simulated
through parabolic flights on
board Falcon Aircraft.
3 A massive number of rock
core samples obtained
through drilling can be
evaluated efficiently with
portable hardness testing.

1
2 3
16
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Hardness testing in and

around the built environment
Hardness testing has a major role to play in ensuring the safe and continued
performance of many kinds of structure within the built world.
Post-tensioning systems
Building and specialist engineering companies use hardness testing to measure the hardness
of post-tensioning tendons and steel beams during both construction and rehabilitation of
buildings and bridges.
Load-carrying components such as anchor heads and bearing trumplates are of key impor-
tance for post-tensioning (PT) systems for buildings and bridges. Before being shipped to
customers and installed on-site, the hardness of these components should be checked to
ensure they are of sufficient strength. Normally a certain number of samples from each batch
are checked – and, if one of the samples does not meet the hardness requirement, then the
entire batch gets scrapped.
Screening Eagle customers use Equotip 550 Leeb D to measure the hardness of batches of
anchor heads and bearing trumplates in, for example, the storage room or workshop of a plant.
The rebound method gives accurate results on large and heavy load-carrying components. While
at the same time, instead of taking the large parts to a benchtop machine, it is very convenient
for inspectors simply to carry the portable device with them and do the measurements quickly
on different samples from different batches.
Fire damage assessment through structural steel hardness testing
After a fire in a building, it is nearly impossible to assess through visual inspection whether the
steel beams underwent any deformation or microstructural changes that affect the material's
parameters. However, with the aid of an Equotip portable hardness tester, this question was
answered and conclusive evidence was provided showing that the steel beam had retained
its original design strength at 275 N/mm2 (275 MPa) after the fire incident.
Archaeological investigations
1 Hardness testing is used to
measure hardness of the
post-tensioning tendons and Researchers at the UNESCO World Heritage Site at Mogao Caves in China were studying the
steel beams during the conservation of ancient sites with rebound hammers. They came to the conclusion that the
construction or rehabilitation impact energy for a safe assessment of these ancient ruins was too high. A solution was found
of structures.
2 Design strength of beams, in Equotip – using less impact energy and a smaller impact body. The device worked perfectly
following a fire, can be for this application and the researchers really appreciated its ease of portability.
verified with portable
hardness testing.
3 Important load bearing
components of post-
tensioning systems can be
checked for strength before
shipping and installation
on site.
4 The UNESCO World Heritage
Site at Mogao Caves in China.

1
2 4
18
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Testing on gigantic saws
Gigantic saws are used in stone mills to cut rocks into different shapes and sizes. It is essential
for saw manufacturers to check that the hardness of the product is within the specifications
to ensure the best cutting performance and guarantee a sustainable product life time. Using
stationary testing machines is always challenging due to the mechanical dimensions of these
saws. Of course it is also not feasible to cut out a sample piece for hardness testing. For this
particular application the Equotip 550 Portable Rockwell offers easy-to-use testing solutions
for measurements on site without needing to move the test object. Its uniquely designed probe
is well-suited to collect hardness readings at different test locations on the object and at the
same time provides users with unmatched data accuracy.
Rolling mills
Rolling is a metal forming process in which metal stock is passed through one or more pairs
of rolls to reduce the thickness and to make the thickness uniform. Rolls are easily worn out
during the metalworking process due to metal fatigue, stress and temperature change. The
Leeb hardness testing method is commonly used to monitor performance of rolls and to signal
roll change when surface hardness deviates from specification.
Generator stator wedges
Loose stator wedges inside a turbine generator can lead to vibration of stator coils and pre-
mature wear of the insulation. This can eventually lead to electrical failure of the generator,
causing a forced outage of the power plant. The traditional, empirical approach for checking
the tightness requires tapping each wedge with a hammer, listening to the sound and then
judging the tightness based on prior experience with the method. Unsurprisingly, the results
produced by this way are highly open to subjective interpretation by methods experts, making
it practically impossible to achieve quality assurance in a scalable and reliable manner. Our
customer now utilizes Equotip 550 Leeb D/G to measure the tightness of stator wedges in
power plants across the USA.
Testing of forging dies
Testing and verifying the hardness of forging dies weighing 100 kg (440 lbs) or more is a
very cumbersome and heavy task. Each die requires lifting, transportation by a fork truck and
extensive manual labor upon a measurement on a benchtop device. The entire procedure
can be speeded up with the application of the portable hardness testing method. The Equotip
550 Portable Rockwell and Equotip 550 UCI hardness testers meet all requirements to per-
form such testing – they replace the awkward process of lifting each die using a fork truck,
1 Portable hardness testing and enable testing to be carried out directly on the part. The Equotip 550 Portable Rockwell
overcomes the challenges
associated with testing large
requires no change in the current surface preparation method; however, the major benefit is
items, such as these gigantic the saving of much time and the resolution of any potential safety issues that may otherwise
saws used in stone mills. arise through manual heavy load handling. The instrument’s versatility allows a quick change
2 Forging dies are an obvious
case where portable hardness
of testing methods, thus ensuring an even faster test on other components that do not share
testing delivers great benefits. the same test method requirements.
3 The tightness of stator
wedges in power plants can
be measured with the Equotip
550 Leeb D/G.
4 Industrial-scale rolling mills.

1
2 3
20
02
Hardness testing methods
As mentioned earlier, generally there are three types of hardness testing
methods – abrasion, indentation and rebound. This section looks at these in
more detail, as well as benchtop hardness testing methods and portable
hardness testing options, along with the many different scales used for
hardness measurement.
22
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Abrasion MoHs hardness Mineral
methods
Abrasion methods are based upon the
resistance to abrasion. These methods
1 Talc
Mg3[Si4O10/(OH)2]
2
are easy to implement, but do not provide
accurate numeric data or scales particu- Gypsum
larly for modern day metals and materials. CaSO42H2O
Therefore these testing methods are lim-
ited in practical use. There are two basic
3 Calcite
abrasion methods.
CaCO3
MoHs test
For example, material B scratches mate-
4
rial C, but not material A. Alternatively,
material A scratches material B slightly Fluorite
and scratches material C heavily. Relative CaF2
hardness of minerals can be assessed by
reference to the MoHs scale that ranks
5 Apatite
the ability of materials to resist scratching
by another material.
Ca5[(PO4)3/(F,CI,OH)]
File test
6
Similar methods of relative hardness
assessment are still commonly used
Feldspar
today, even for metallic materials. An KAISi3O8
example is the file test where a file tem-
pered to a desired hardness is rubbed on
the test material surface. If the file slides
without biting or marking the surface, the
test material is considered to be harder
7 Quartz
SiO2
than the file. If the file bites or marks the
8
surface, the test material is considered
to be softer than the file.
Topaz
AI2(SiO4/F2)
9 Corundum
AI2O3
10 Diamond
C

Indentation In material science, and specifically here This quite general definition allows for
for metals, hardness tests and measure- different testing methods and principles
methods
ment methods are used which are based for measuring the hardness. As a result of
on measuring the penetration hardness. this, the hardness with respect to metallic
In this case, a standardized indenter is materials is measured in (many) different
pressed into the material under defined scales including hardness according to
conditions like test load, penetration time Vickers, Brinell and Rockwell.
or even inspection speed. After releasing However, the numerical hardness values
the load, in most cases the geometry, sur- generated by the different hardness test
face or depth of the remaining indentation methods are not (or only conditionally)
is evaluated. comparable.
There is no mathematically universal
relation between the different hardness
scales, therefore a conversion from one
scale to another is only possible using
empirical conversion tables.
It is only possible to correctly compare
Hardness testing methods
hardness testing results, if both values
have been determined with the same test
Abrasion Indentation
method under similar conditions includ-
ing test load, indenter and indentation
Portable
evaluation. In other cases, the relation
Stationary
(fixed location) Static between different scales must be con-
Static Rebound
firmed by comparative measurements
using the different scales involved. See
Conversion of hardness measurements
Rockwell
Rockwell
File test
Vickers
Brinell
MoHs
LEEB
on page 73 for more detailed information.

UCI
The indentation methods generally differ

Overview of most common hardness testing methods. in the way the indentation is produced,
measured and evaluated. Depending on
the material to be measured, the optimal
method might vary. Hardness testing
methods can also be classified, according
to the use-case, into benchtop hardness
testing methods and portable hardness
testing methods. Nevertheless, the most
critical issue is selection of the best suited
method.
Diamonds are the hardest mineral known to man – and rated 10 on MoHs hardness scale.
24
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Benchtop hardness
testing methods
The benchtop hardness testing methods are based on traditional
heavy and bulky laboratory equipment whereby a sample of material
for testing is brought to the machine. On the following pages is
an overview of the background, principles and suitability of the
three most commonly used testing methods – Rockwell, Brinell
and Vickers.
Image of a Brinell benchtop testing machine.

Rockwell benchtop The test cycle begins with the indenter allow for elastic recovery of the material
hardness testing being brought into contact with the test under test. The final depth of indentation
piece. A minor test force is applied to is measured once the elastic recovery of
Rockwell hardness testing originated in the indenter and, after waiting for a the material is complete. The Rockwell
the 1920s and is standardized for testing specified dwell time, the baseline depth hardness number is then calculated from
metallic materials according to ASTM E18 of indentation is measured. The applied the difference between the baseline and
and ISO 6508. test force is then increased to the total final depth of indentation.
The Rockwell test method was conceived test force and held for a specified dwell The Rockwell hardness test has 30
to be faster and leave a smaller indenta- time. Once the specified dwell time has different combinations of test force
tion than the Brinell test. Rockwell testing been reached, the test force applied to and indenter type, denoted by a simple
uses a differential depth measurement to the indenter is decreased to the minor letter for the standard scales and by a
calculate the hardness number. test force and held for enough time to combination of number and letter for the
superficial scales. The most commonly
used Rockwell scales are Rockwell C and
Rockwell B. The hardness number derived
from a Rockwell test uses the notation
HR (for Hardness Rockwell) followed by
the letter or number-letter combination
to note the Rockwell scale (e.g. HRC for
a Rockwell C scale test result).
Rockwell indenters are either a sphero-
conical diamond (diamond cone with a
radiused tip) or tungsten-carbide ball. The
total test force of a Rockwell test is 60 kgf,
100 kgf or 150 kgf for the standard scales.
Superficial Rockwell scales use forces of
15 kgf, 30 kgf, or 45 kgf.
When comparing the result of a Rock-
well test to the result from Leeb, UCI, or
Portable Rockwell test, it is important to
note that there can be some correlation
differences due to the difference of the
indentation size. Rockwell tests, espe-
cially the Rockwell C scale (HRC) whereby
a preload equal to 98 N must be used,
will generally have a larger and deeper
indentation than the Leeb, UCI and Por-
table Rockwell tests. These differences
are especially pronounced when deal-
ing with materials that have a shallow
surface layer like work hardening (e.g.
cold rolled steel) or a decarburized layer.
It is important to highlight here that the
Rockwell method does not measure the
surface hardness due to the existing
pre-load force.
Example of a Rockwell tester.
26
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Brinell benchtop The Brinell test method can use any one
hardness testing of four different indenter diameters from
‘It is very important
1 mm to 10 mm and 21 test forces from
to consider the Brinell hardness testing, developed in the 1 kgf to 3,000 kgf. Therefore, it is import-
force-diameter ratio early 1900s, is standardized for testing ant to note the combination of ball
when comparing or metallic materials according to ASTM E10 diameter and test force because the dif-
and ISO 6506. ferent combinations do not necessarily
correlating Brinell
A Brinell testing machine uses a tung- produce the same Brinell number. Only
hardness numbers.’ sten-carbide ball indenter, which makes when the force-diameter ratio (ratio of
it a non-linear scale. the test force to the square of the ball
The Brinell test method brings the ball diameter) is the same can the Brinell
indenter into contact with the test surface hardness number be considered com-
and applies the specified test force for parable. It is very important to consider
a specified dwell time. The force is then the force-diameter ratio when comparing
removed, the diameter of the resulting or correlating Brinell hardness numbers.
indentation is measured and the Brinell The Brinell test is well suited for testing
hardness number calculated. This optical metals with large grain structures (e.g.
measurement of the indentation can lead castings) because of the larger test
to inaccuracies if the edges do not have forces and indenter diameters. However,
enough contrast with the surrounding the large indentation can also prevent
metal, or if the optics used in the mea- the tested part from being used for its
surement are of low quality. intended purpose.
The dent from Brinell hardness testing on the hardness sample plate. Hardness is 96.5 HB 10/1000/10. Image courtesy of IGW, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Vickers benchtop The Vickers test machine brings the
hardness testing indenter into contact with the test surface
‘Vickers testing
and then applies the specified force for
Vickers hardness testing was created the specified dwell time. The force is then leaves a relatively
in 1921 and is standardized for testing removed and the diagonals of the result- small indentation
metallic materials according to ASTM E92 ing square indentation are measured. Like when compared to
and ISO 6507. The Vickers hardness test the Brinell test, this optical measurement
Brinell and Rockwell
has only one indenter – a diamond pyra- is time consuming and subject to the
mid – but can use many different forces. accuracy of the optical edge detection and, therefore, can
The diamond pyramid indenter results and measurement. be preferred …’
in a linear test and it has been shown Vickers testing leaves a relatively small
that Vickers test results with test forces indentation when compared to Brinell
greater than 1 kgf are generally compa- and Rockwell and, therefore, can be
rable when different test forces are used. preferred over the other two methods if
Vickers tests using forces of 1 kgf and the part must be used after the test. It is
less are considered micro-indentation hence well suited for surface hardness
hardness tests and can be used to iden- tests for such materials as heat treated
tify individual grain structures and other components.
small regions in materials.
X
148.11° 16º
Quick Tips
t
Rockwell annotations
The Rockwell hardness test has 30
different combinations of test force
and indenter type, denoted by letter
for the standard scales and by number
and letter for the superficial scales
y e.g. HRC indicates a Hardness
Rockwell C scale test.
d2
d1 Smallest indentations with

Vickers
x
Vickers testing leaves a relatively
small indentation when compared
to Brinell and Rockwell and, thus is
preferred if the sample must be used
Substrate Diamond Tip Tip Holder after the test and well suited for
surface hardness tests for heat treated
components.
Schematic representation of Vickers test indenter displaying the relevant measurement distances
(d1 and d2) and angles for measuring Vickers hardness and the depth of the indent (t). The angle between
the opposite faces at the vertex of the diamond pyramid must be 136° ±0.5°. The angle between the opposite
faces is determined by the angle between the opposite edges and must be equal to 148.11° ±0.76°.
Image courtesy of Bob Clemintime, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
28
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Portable hardness testing

The development and application of hardness testing instruments is
characterized by the shifting of the testing tasks from using stationary
machines in the laboratory to mobile, on-site measurements during Quick Tips
the production process.
Equotip set the global standard
Equotip, developed in the mid-1970s,
Large parts, or those with surfaces that conventional Rockwell, Vickers or Brinell quickly became the first widely-
accepted portable instrument for
are difficult to access, are the prime to a portable unit. For that reason, dif- measuring the hardness of large
reasons for considering portable hard- ferent physical test methods have been components located in the field in a
ness testing. In response to the need for developed and standardized for reliable, matter of seconds.
testing products that are too large for portable hardness testing.
conventional Rockwell, Brinell or Vickers Mobile hardness testing instruments
hardness testing methods, quality and will not replace the conventional bench-
manufacturing, professionals are making top machines, but nevertheless, they
more use of portable hardness testers. have become an indispensable addition
For production testing, the ability to test for hardness testing units. During the last
complex shapes and access difficult test decades, several portable instruments
areas allows portable testers to comple- based on different physical methods
ment stationary testers. were developed. Today, mobile units
Due to the physical principle and the test are widespread and accepted tools
load applied, it is not easy – or in most for portable, on-site hardness testing
cases even impossible – to downsize a applications.
The advent of portable hardness testing has shifted tasks out of the laboratory and onto site, leading to greater productivity.

Commonly used portable
hardness testing methods
The three methods most commonly used by portable hardness testing instruments are:
• Leeb (also known as Rebound) method

• Portable Rockwell method
• Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) method.
Leeb Rockwell UCI

HL (Leeb) HR (Rockwell) HV (Vickers)
Hardness testing can be considered as equipment allows measurements on Equotip equipment allows measurements
portable if the test equipment can be difficult to access positions or during in different positions and directions with-
transported by one person without any the production, manufacturing or assem- out having to think about any corrections
additional support or utilities. In addition bly process. Furthermore, in contrast or adjustments. The only limitation to be
to this, the determination of the hardness to typical stationary hardness testing considered here is that the hardness
value has to take place directly on site machines using the Vickers, Brinell or probe must be positioned perpendicular
after the actual measurement on the Rockwell principle, the use of portable with respect to the surface of the test
component. equipment is not limited to the vertical piece. With the Equotip 550, Proceq is
The main advantage of portable hard- position. now offering a solution for a wide range
ness testing equipment is – as the Today, several portable hardness testing of portable hardness testing applications.
name suggests – the portability of the instruments based on different physical The instrument now combines the three
test equipment. The test piece no lon- methods are already particularly rec- most established and widely spread
ger needs to be cut and to be brought ognized in the practical field and solve test methods and, thus, solves the vast
to the hardness tester – today mobile plenty of mobile hardness testing tasks. majority of conventional hardness testing
handheld instruments allow measure- However, each method is limited – more problems and tasks.
ments to be made on the spot. Even or less – to a specific application area A detailed description of each of the three
large or heavy components can be tested and, therefore, the decision as to which most commonly used portable hardness
without having to be moved. In addi- method and instrument to use strongly testing methods can be found on the
tion to this, portable hardness testing depends on the testing application. following pages.
30
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Leeb method ‘Within just a few

years after the
The Leeb (also known as rebound) method was developed in the invention of the
mid-1970s at Proceq S.A. by Dietmar Leeb and Dr. Marco Brandestini. Equotip method,
The Leeb (rebound) method during its early years was called rebound hardness
"the Equotip method" and came from the abbreviation of Energy testing became a
QUOtient and TIP, i.e. ratio of energy and tip. The first devices global standard…’
produced by Proceq became the first widely-accepted portable
instruments for measuring the hardness of large components
located in the field in a matter of seconds. Within just a few years
after the invention of the Leeb method, rebound hardness testing
became a global standard and is widely-used within various branches
of many industrial sectors.
Nowadays, Equotip stands for the range of high quality, portable
hardness testing devices developed and produced by Proceq –
inventor of the Leeb method.
Portable hardness testing is a non-destructive method, which allows a good estimation of the material’s strength.

How it works impact speed. The third letter in the Leeb
hardness unit indicates the impact device
The designation ‘rebound’ comes from used, D for impact device D etc. This value
the basic nature of the test which is based can then be converted to conventional
on the loss of velocity of the impact body HRC, HV or HB scales along with others.
before and after impact. At the time, this tester was considered
In an instrument using the rebound prin- to be revolutionary. When used for the Quick Tips
ciple, a spring propels an impact body appropriate application, these devices
through a guide tube toward the test are accurate, very simple to use and the Advantages of Leeb
piece. As the impact body travels unim- repeatability is high. Coarse-grained microstructures
peded toward the test piece, a magnet The most critical variables affecting the require many measurement points
to obtain a representative statistic.
contained within generates a voltage in a test are part thickness and mass. As The Leeb method ‘averages’ the
coil system that encircles the guide tube. described above, there is an impact body response of the test object in the
Typically, a tungsten carbide or diamond that is released at a given velocity onto best way and may deliver savings
on time and service.
ball indenter, located on the end of the the surface of the object under test. If the
impact body, strikes the material, caus- material thickness is too thin, with little Back at you: rebound principle
ing the impact body to rebound from the mass, then the material actually flexes In instruments using the rebound
surface at a slower velocity. on impact. This influences the rebound principle, a spring propels an impact
body through a guide tube to strike the
The softer the material, the bigger the velocity and in turn affects the reading test piece and rebound. By measuring
indentation and thus larger plastic defor- obtained. Details can be found on page the velocity in both directions of travel,
mation, causing a larger loss of energy 44. This method is especially suited for a hardness value can be calculated.
and a slower rebound speed which, in coarse grained parts as well as forg-
turn, produces a proportionally lower ings and cast materials with a certain
voltage as the magnet returns through minimum thickness and mass. More
the coil. details about specific requirements can
The hardness value (HL) is calculated be found in the instrument’s Operating
from the ratio of the rebound speed to the Instruction Manual.
HL = B x 1000 = Vr x 1000
A~Vi A Vi
Time
B~Vr
Impact phase Rebound phase
Velocity signal measured by the Equotip Leeb probe, illustrating the impact and rebound phase. World’s first IoT Equotip Leeb D wireless probe.
32
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Range and function of Leeb probes

Since those early days, a full range of Leeb probes has been
developed, in order to cover the different requirements.
The adjacent table compares Leeb probes in use and differentiates
them by impact energy, impact body materials and impact ball
Quick Tips
diameter. The table opposite describes the range of Equotip Leeb Precision from quality
probes in greater detail. When purchasing Leeb equipment,

bear in mind that it’s the workmanship
and material quality that make the
instrument so precise – reliable
sourcing ultimately saves time and
money!
Important note: The Leeb D+15 probe, although still in use by several
customers, has been superseded by the DL probe. Longer service life
It’s worth considering Leeb E and
Leeb S for materials that are harder
than 820 HLD (~ 61 HRC) as they will
deliver a much longer service lifetime.
D DC DL G C S E
Standard Restricted Restricted Cast and Smaller Ultra Very hard
surfaces areas areas forgings parts durable surfaces
Impact energy 11.5 N/mm 11.5 N/mm 11.1 N/mm 90 N/mm 3 N/mm 11.5 N/mm 11.5 N/mm
Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Silicon Polycrystalline

Material/impact
carbide carbide carbide carbide carbide Nitride diamond
Body size 3 mm 3 mm 2.8 mm 5 mm 3 mm 3 mm 3 mm
Native scale HLD HLDC HLDL HLG HLC HLS HLE
Comparison of various Leeb probes currently in use.

Probe type Description
D
The D type probe was the first invented and remains the most commonly used probe for all
round applications. It is suitable for the vast majority of the tests. It also comes with the
most comprehensive set of conversion curves for multiple materials. This probe is also
suitable for the testing of rocks and minerals. The D probe features a tungsten carbide ball
indenter, which is the best choice for materials of average hardness levels.
DC
This is a shorter version of the D probe that can easily fit into tight spaces such as
bore holes, pipes, tubes and similar. Use it whenever the D probe seems too large for
the application.
DL The narrow indenter of the DL probe is suitable for hard to reach areas such as gear teeth,
complex flanges and similar items.
G
The G probe has the largest impact energy and is appropriate for heavier forgings, castings
and bulky objects. Due to its high impact energy, it is suitable for heavy objects starting from
5 kg (on solid support) and up to 15 kg and beyond (objects of compact shape).
C
Similarly to probes described above, the C probe indenter is equipped with a tungsten carbide
ball, which covers the vast majority of applications. However due to its ultra-low impact energy,
the ‘excitation volume’ of the test piece is much lower, hence this probe thrives on measuring
specimens which are surface-hardened, thin-walled or impact-sensitive.
S
With the same impact energy as the D probe, the S probe has a harder indenter made from
silicon nitride, this probe is perfect for testing of objects which are expected to show higher
hardness levels. The benefit of using such a probe is the much longer lifespan of the impact
body, whereby the same impact body delivers longer, more accurate results when compared
to the conventional D probe.
E
The E probe features a polycrystalline diamond indenter and is designed to cope with objects
of extreme hardness ranges, such as high carbide-content tool steel, for example. Despite its
higher initial purchase price, dictated by the material cost, it offers the longest service lifetime
for the hardest materials.
34
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Importance of impact bodies

During purchase, many users pay atten- Low quality impact bodies typically show
tion to the quality of the probe, but accuracy drift at the early stage of the
Quick Tips
overlook the importance of the impact device’s service lifetime and require
body. The impact body is the core of replacement and recalibration much
the instrument. The impact body and its earlier than genuine, high quality prod-
Quality at the core:
workmanship, as well as the quality of ucts. It is not uncommon for tests made impact bodies
the materials used, are what make the with newly purchased low quality impact The impact body is not just a part
instrument so precise. bodies to generate measurements at the that needs to be replaced regularly,
The Leeb measures the velocity of the tolerance limit even during verification, but it is the core of the instrument
– workmanship and quality of the
impact body before and after the impact, because their parameters are different materials used – that make the
and this directly determines the hardness from the reference ones or they do not instrument so precise.
measurement. All possible defects, the match the parameters of the impact body.
quality of the impact body and lastly dirt The graph below shows an extreme
will clearly affect the accuracy of the Leeb scenario where a low quality probe and
instrument. It requires high precision of low quality impact body are compared to
finishing, material selection, accurate a genuine Proceq Equotip Leeb D probe.
weight and dimensions to meet the exact It is evident from this plot that a much
same impact energy, low and constant longer lifespan is achieved with a high
internal friction with the guiding tube and quality product – which saves money
slow wear of the materials to ensure con- spent on the replacement and servicing,
stant and reliable reading. time spent upon the repetition of the
The production of this inconspicuous device, process-shut down, unnecessary
looking design is actually a difficult task. extensive quality control and so on.
For example, changing the properties of
steel by changing the chemical composi-
Genuine Equotip Leeb D/DC impact body.
tion, cooling processes, or even improper
processing can lead to the appearance
of unwanted phases, such as Ferrite or
Martensite, which alter the magnetic
permeability of the steel and therefore
the signal supplied to the solenoids,
thus changing the performance of the
instrument. Highly rigorous criteria are Low quality impact body
also placed on the selection of ceramic
Equotip
materials for integration into the front part Leeb D device
of the impact body.
∆ HLD
Users do not immediately notice the dif-

ference, because it is rare for a user to
compare two identical instruments with
different impact bodies in parallel in order
to verify the quality of the impact body.
Number of impacts
Comparison of the value drift (HLD) between a genuine Equotip impact body and a low quality version.

Portable Rockwell method
The Portable Rockwell metal hardness tester is based, as its name
suggests, on the static Rockwell measuring principle. The portable
method was developed in the early 1990s in order to enable users of Quick Tips
heavy benchtop devices to take their measurements outside of the
Think thin with Portable
laboratories, since even the lightest benchtop Rockwell machines are Rockwell
very heavy and cannot be transported easily. Currently the Portable If you have thin sheets of metal, or thin
objects such as wires that you want to
Rockwell is standardized in ASTM E3246 and DIN 50157. inspect, the Portable Rockwell has no
competition as it has the lowest
thickness limitations.
How it works The difference ∆ reflects the plastic
deformation and therefore is a direct
The Rockwell method measures the measure of the hardness of the material.
penetration depths under a defined minor The Portable Rockwell method covers
force before and after application of a a wide range of applications like hard-
larger force. ness measurements on small, light, thin,
During measurements with the Portable walled or tubular test objects, but also
Rockwell probe, a diamond cone indenter large and heavy objects as long as the
is forced into the test piece to be mea- surface roughness and grain size are
sured and then released back out of the small enough.
material. The Portable Rockwell conversion curve
The indentation depth of the diamond is on the opposite page shows the penetra-
continuously measured while the load is tion depth of the diamond cone indenter
being applied and released. depending on the hardness of the mate-
From the indentation depths d1 and d2 rial. Test objects should have at least 10
recorded at the two moments the test times the thickness of the penetration
cycle reaches the minor load, the differ- depth to avoid influences on the mea-
ence is calculated: ∆ = d2 – d1. surement value.
Preload Total Load Preload
1
2
4
3
d1 d2
Schematic diagram representing the different indentation phases during the measurement with the
Portable Rockwell method.
36
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
The indenter
The ASTM E3246 standard describes

three possible indenter shapes:
• truncated diamond cone indenter
• diamond spheroconical indenter, or
• tungsten carbide ball indenter.
The indenter, after the sensor, is the
most important part of the machine as
it is in direct contact with the material.
As with the Leeb and UCI methods, low
quality indenters – as well as damaged
indenters – will cause measurement
errors. In addition, these indenters are
particularly susceptible to damage.
Although diamond is generally considered
to be a very hard metal, its location at the
end of the probe's stylus and the range
of motion that operators have to make,
mean that it is necessary to handle this
type of equipment with particular care. A Proceq Equotip Portable Rockwell probe.
Penetration Depth [µm]
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
950
900 68
850
800
750
700 60
650
Rockwell C Hardness [HRC]
600
Vickers Hardness [HV]
550
500 50
450
400 40
350
300
250 20
200
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800
Minimum Sample Thickness [µm]
Correlation between the indentation depth and minimum thickness depending on the sample hardness in HRC and HV scales.

Ultrasonic Contact
Impedance (UCI) method
The Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) method was commercialized Quick Tips
in early 1970s by Krautkrämer as the alternative to conventional
Prioritize quality indenter
Benchtop Vickers method. Its primary use back then was focused
Resonance is key, so ensure that
mainly on heat-treated surfaces and later on weld inspection. indenter diamonds used in UCI
testing are not wrongly embedded,
Currently the first generation of UCI devices developed in the mid- poorly polished or even fractured,
1970s are still in use, whereas the second generation introduced otherwise you may have higher
measurement deviation values and
to the market in 2016 is a modern UCI concept and is becoming worse repeatability.
more-and-more popular due to its versatility.
Conventional (first generation) UCI probes fair accuracy and repeatability and are
feature a spring which applies the load, still in use nowadays.
typically ranging in force from 1-10 kg. The second generation of UCI devices
In this pure-mechanical system, the mea- features additionally a force sensor
surement is triggered after reaching the which replaces the spring and precisely
necessary force, defined by the spring’s measures the current force that is being
force. Despite the fact that the proper- applied. These probes can be used
ties of springs may change over time for various loads – for example, one
and that one probe can measure with probe can measure HV1, HV5 and HV10
one test load only, these systems offer loads.
Comparison between UCI probes
Parameter First generation Second generation
Measurement trigger Spring Force sensor
Typical loads used HV1-HV10 HV1-HV10
Several test loads in one probe No Yes
Accuracy and repeatability Good Very good
Smooth measurement across

Other System features a ‘click’
the entire range of loads
38
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
How it works and this limits their ability to accurately

measure in this area. It is also an excel-
In the UCI method, a resonator excites a lent tool for looking at the hardness of
rod with a Vickers diamond into longitu- gear teeth due to the small indentation.
dinal ultrasonic oscillation (solid line in Case hardened materials can also be
image below). As the diamond is forced analyzed since the lighter test force does
into the material, the frequency of the not cause the indenter to penetrate into
rod oscillation changes (dashed line the softer substrate.
in the image below) in response to the The frequency shift is not only propor-
contact surface between the diamond tional to the indentation size made by the
and the material under test. The instru- Vickers indenter, but is also dependent
ment detects the shift in frequency and on the Young’s modulus of elasticity for
then converts the measured frequency the material. Factory calibration is per-
shift to a hardness value which is imme- formed on unalloyed and low alloy steel
diately displayed on the screen. The softer test blocks with a Young’s modulus of
the material, the bigger the indentation about 210 GPa – a material-specific
size (at a given load) and the higher the calibration is required when testing mate-
frequency shift of the system’s resonant rials with a different Young’s modulus,
frequency. as described on page 54 in the Optimal
UCI testers can be used for different method selection.
applications and are typically used as To calibrate the instrument, samples
a portable equivalent to conventional of the specific material to be examined
benchtop Vickers machines. One of the are needed. These samples should have
main applications is the measurement of hardness values defined using stan-
hardness in the heat affected zone (HAZ) dard Rockwell, Brinell or Vickers testers.
of welds. Due to the small footprint of the To compensate for Young’s modulus
Vickers diamond, it is quite effective at differences in the material, the UCI must
measuring up to the toe of a weld. Other be adjusted to the values measured using
portable testers have a larger footprint the conventional tester.
Schematic representing the Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) method.

The solid line shows the original resonator's frequency, the dashed line shows the resonator's frequency during indentation.

While many producers promote this The indenter
method as suitable for coarse-grained
microstructures, it should be highlighted The UCI method uses the same pyra-
that this method was originally developed mid-shaped diamond as a conventional
for fine-grained materials, which typically Vickers hardness tester. Unlike Vickers
show homogeneous microstructures. testing, no optical evaluation of the inden-
With UCI testers only a small area of the tation is required, thus enabling fast and Quick Tips
material is examined, hence much larger portable measurements.
data sets are required to representa- It is crucial to ensure the highest quality of No striking or sliding!
tively describe possibly inhomogeneous the diamond, which acts as the interface Under no circumstances should you
coarse-grained materials. Coarse-grained between the material and the resonator strike the indenter against the material
or make any sliding motions while the
microstructures such as castings are and thus the signal amplifier. A resonator indenter is in direct contact with the
typically bulky, for which the Leeb method of poor quality – such as where a dia- material. This type of damage will
is much more suitable. mond has been wrongly embedded on top require the equipment to be repaired,
regardless of manufacturer.
The surface condition must also be pol- of the resonator, poorly polished or even
ished to a specified surface roughness. fractured – is expected to cause higher
Therefore, raw castings and forgings are measurement deviation values and worse
generally ruled out since the surface hard- repeatability, whereby a higher spread of
ness varies from one location to the next measurement values is observed. This
– in which case, the rebound method may is even more pronounced for diamonds
be preferred. Large errors in measurement embedded on the probes with a test load
can also occur if the object is of small size of lower than 49 N, for which harsher
with respect to its weight, as the object preselection criteria are described by
can also vibrate during indentation. DIN ISO EN 6507-2.
High quality UCI diamond tip complying to IN EN ISO 6507-2.
40
03
Standardization for
portable hardness testing
Although portable hardness testing has been applied in the practical field for
several decades, there was a lack of standardization for the specific physical
test methods for a period of time after they were developed.
42
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Most commonly, portable equipment to be inaccurate and suitable only for a Recent activities with respect to training
was used and the test results compared rough estimation of the ‘real’ hardness and – even more importantly – standard-
with the hardness values obtained with value – rather than used as a measuring ization of the different portable hardness
conventional bench-top hardness tes- device. testing methods now provide the basis
ters like Vickers, Brinell or Rockwell The root cause of this wrongful reputa- for reliable, repeatable and comparable
machines. When doing this, the specific tion is not based upon the capability of hardness results. This markedly increases
properties and the limitations of the the portable hardness testing equipment the acceptance of hardness test results
portable hardness testing equipment itself but upon erroneous utilization of the measured by portable instruments and
were not appropriately noted, which instruments. However, the user was not facilitates the use of those devices.
resulted in potential but avoidable really to blame, because the necessary Currently there are several national as well
‘inaccuracies’ or measurement deviations. documentation, standardization, training as international standards for portable
For this reason, in the past portable hard- and application support were not avail- hardness testing available.
ness testing equipment was considered able at that time.
Most widely used standards for portable hardness testing
Standard organization Standard Name Method
ISO 18265 Metallic materials — Conversion of hardness values All
DIN EN 16859* Metallic materials — Leeb hardness test Leeb
ASTM A956 Standard test method for Leeb hardness testing of steel products Leeb
A370 Standard test methods and definitions for mechanical testing of steel products Leeb / UCI
Standard hardness conversion tables for metals relationship among Brinell Hardness,
E140 Vickers Hardness, Rockwell Hardness, Superficial Hardness, Knoop Hardness, All
Scleroscope Hardness and Leeb Hardness
A1038 Standard test method for Ultrasonic Contact Impedance UCI
Portable
E3246 Standard test methods for differential indentation depth hardness of metallic materials
Rockwell
Hardness testing with portable measuring instruments operating with mechanical Portable
DIN DIN 50157
penetration depth – Part 1: Test method Rockwell
DIN 50159 Metallic materials – Hardness testing with the UCI method UCI
GB/T 17394 Metallic materials. Leeb hardness test Leeb
34205 Metallic materials – Hardness testing – Ultrasonic Contact Impedance method UCI
State system for ensuring the uniformity of measurements. Metals and alloys.
GOST R 8.969 Leeb
Leeb hardness test
* Previously used within German-speaking countries DIN 50156 is superseded by DIN EN ISO16859

Standards for the ‘Recent activities
Leeb/Rebound method with respect to
training and – even
more importantly
ASTM A956 Standard Test Method for Leeb Hardness Testing
of Steel Products – standardization
of the different
This standard was originally approved and published in 1996 and remains the only portable hardness
ASTM standard that currently addresses testing with the Leeb method.
testing methods now
The Leeb method measures the ratio of rebound velocity to impact velocity of a
defined impact body launched against a surface at a defined velocity. Therefore, the provide the basis for
Leeb method measures the loss of kinetic energy during impact (energy lost making reliable, repeatable
an indentation in the test surface), and this is considered a dynamic technique. The and comparable
accuracy of Leeb test is dependent on proper test conditions – surface roughness,
hardness results.’
test piece thickness and mass – which are defined in the A956 standard.
The A956 standard is not known to be specifically referenced by any current API stan-
dard. However, a modern testing device conveniently converts hardness measurement
values and displays the results in other hardness scales, such as Brinell, Rockwell and
Vickers. The ASTM standards governing these test methods are generally mentioned
in API standards.
It is important to note that the title of the A956 standard specifically refers to steel
products. This means that, within ASTM, the A956 standard only applies to steel
products. Therefore the DIN EN ISO 16859 standard should be referenced when
testing products other than steels.
DIN EN ISO 16859 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test
This standard covers the determination of the Leeb hardness of metallic materials
using seven different Leeb scales (HLD, HLS, HLE, HLDL, HLD+15, HLC, HLG).
It consists of three different parts, in which the test method, the verification and
calibration procedure of testing devices and reference blocks are described.
44
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Standardization on ‘Proceq became the

the metrology level market leader and
the main actor in the
development
The invention of the Leeb hardness test method by Proceq also required Proceq to
create tools and a method to standardize the Leeb hardness scale. Proceq became process of the
the market leader and the main actor in the development process of the rebound rebound method.’
method. Special tools such as drop-tubes, primary hardness test blocks, conversion
tables for various materials and angle correction factors were created for the purpose
of the standard development and disseminated. Hence Proceq has created the entire
measurement ecosystem that was quickly adapted on a global scale and which is
in use nowadays.
The drop tubes rely on gravity for propulsion of the impact body against the metal
surface instead of a spring force. Furthermore, the tolerance for the electric coil and
guide tube is much tighter than a commercial grade standard impact device. This
makes the tools highly accurate and repeatable, with the gravitational propulsion of
the impact body leading to them being called ‘Equotip Drop Tubes’.
Primary hardness standardizing machines are used to define hardness scales at the
national metrology level. In order to ensure the consistency of hardness scales world-
wide, international comparisons between the metrology labs are carried out regularly.
On the national level, hardness scales are disseminated to calibration laboratory level
and eventually to user level through a well-established chain of metrology.
Insight
Equotip Drop Tubes
Equotip Drop Tubes, invented and produced by Proceq, have been serving as
primary hardness standard machines at Proceq’s headquarters since the very
invention of the Equotip Leeb hardness test method.
Due to the consistency of Equotip instruments over 35 years, many institutes
worldwide historically used Equotip series production instruments for calibration
purposes. But in the interests of protecting the integrity of the Leeb hardness
test on a global basis, Proceq now makes the Drop Tubes available to national
metrology institutes for more precise Leeb standardization requirements.
Many nations now rely on Drop Tubes from Proceq to protect the integrity of their
chain of metrology for the Leeb hardness test.

Standards The DIN 50157 standards not only cover the determination of the hardness value of
metallic materials but also provide useful information regarding the requirements of the
for Portable
test piece, surface preparation, as well as the test procedure, instrument verification/
check and the documentation of the results including calculation of the uncertainty
of the measurement.
Rockwell This standard consists of two parts, these are:
method • DIN 50157-1 Metallic materials – Hardness testing with portable measuring
instruments operating with electrical penetration depth – Part 1: Test method
• DIN 50157-2 Metallic materials – Hardness testing with portable measuring
instruments operating with electrical penetration depth – Part 2: Verification and
calibration of the testing devices
ASTM E3246 introduced in 2021 covers the determination of hardness of metallic

materials by the differential indentation depth method, which is the method used by
the Portable Rockwell machine. This standard further defines the test method as well
as verification procedures and limitations.
Standards for ASTM A1038 This standard covers the Ultrasonic Contact Impedance (UCI) method,
which uses a calibrated rod with a diamond indenter (typically a Vickers indenter)
Ultrasonic
attached to one end. The rod is vibrated ultrasonically to a resonance frequency and
pressed into the test surface with a predefined force (usually Vickers forces). The
instrument measures the shift in harmonic frequency which varies according to the
Contact depth of penetration. This frequency shift is converted and displayed directly into a
common hardness scale like Rockwell, Brinell or Vickers.
Impedance This method is affected by a change in material Young's modulus, and therefore
requires a material-specific calibration, if a non standard material (i.e. with an E Mod-
(UCI) ulus other than 210 GPa) is being inspected. It cannot use the concept of material
groups like the Rockwell method, as the relationship between the frequency shift and
the common hardness scales is strongly material dependent.
DIN 50159 This German standard covers the hardness testing of metallic material
with the UCI test method as well as verification and calibration of the testing devices.
This standard consists of two parts, these are:

• DIN 50159-1 Metallic materials – Hardness testing with the UCI method –
Part 1: Test method
• DIN 50159-2 Metallic materials – Hardness testing with the UCI method –
Part 2: Verification and calibration of the testing device
If conversions to other hardness scales are used, testing on reference samples is

strongly recommended to verify the accuracy of the conversion. These reference
measurements can then be used to reach intercompany/inter-laboratory agreement
on the testing procedures and inspection records.
46
04
Optimal method selection
Choosing the appropriate portable method depends on the task and on the
requirements according to the particular specification. Selection is often based
on controlling the indentation size, indentation depth and overcoming certain
mass and wall thickness limitations of the method. The time and cost allowed
for one measurement will also have an influence on which method should
be selected.
48
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
The decision regarding which tester and The relatively small indentation created
method to use must be determined by by the Portable Rockwell or UCI methods Important note:
analysis of the application in its entirety. means they are best suited (but not lim-
It should be evident from the
Each of the major variables present in the ited) to testing fine-grained materials and
above discussion that there
examination must be evaluated to deter- variously shaped and sized thin parts or
is not one general-purpose,
mine which portable hardness testing metal sheets. Rebound testers produce
portable hardness tester
instrument and method are least affected. larger indentations than other instruments
capable of handling every
In addition, requirements for electronic for more consistent results when testing
test. Each of these methods
documentation and the permanence of large coarse-grained materials typical of
is utilized for its specific
any indentation on the test surface are forged and cast components. Certain
application range. A general
also factors that must be considered. applications, such as testing inside the
application overview is
Reliable test results require, in most small width of a heat affected zone (HAZ)
illustrated in the adjacent table.
cases, the indentation size to be large in to determine whether a welding process
comparison to the material’s microstruc- was correctly performed, require the
ture. Therefore, rebound instruments, with smaller indentation of the Vickers-based
their larger indentation, should be given UCI method or the penetration measur-
first consideration over UCI or Porta- ing Portable Rockwell principle. Here, the
ble Rockwell instruments when testing purpose of the examination is to detect
coarse-grained materials. However, UCI the high hardness peak. With a rebound
as well as the rebound method can be method, the large indentation can be
influenced by the mass and thickness of impaired by the weld or base material and
the part to be tested. it may not be possible to detect this peak.
Application overview
Leeb method Portable Rockwell UCI
Impact devices/probes D DC DL S E C G 50 N 10-100 N
Thin objects
Light objects
Objects with limited/difficult accessibility
Polished objects1)
Small round objects2)
Mid-size objects
Very hard objects
Large objects
Large cast objects
1) If only small indentation are allowed. 2) Leeb probes in combination with correct support ring.

Mass and wall
thickness limitation
The wall thickness and mass of the
test object can influence hardness test-
minimum thickness of at least ten times
the indentation depth is required. If these
Quick Tips
ing according to Leeb or UCI methods. minimum requirements are not fulfilled, Use Leeb as first option
Applicable standards require a minimum the object under test can go into a state The Leeb method has minimum
wall thickness and minimum mass. If of self-oscillation and biased readings will weight and wall thickness
these requirements cannot be fulfilled, then result. requirements, but if your test object
complies to these requirements, try it
additional measures such as coupling or Specimens with a mass of less than first to avoid user-generated errors.
supporting the specimen are necessary the minimum mass specified in DIN EN
– or alternatively a more suitable method ISO 16859 and ASTM A956 for Leeb, or Caution when coupling
must be selected. in DIN 50159-1 for UCI – or specimens Coupling solves many problems
related to wall and mass limitations,
Requirements for the Leeb method with sufficient mass, but with areas however it should be borne in mind
(impact devices D, DL, DC, E and S) thinner than the indicated minimum that wrong coupling (ultra-small object,
are that parts must weigh at least 5 kg thickness – require a heavy support objects of complex shape etc.) may
also generate wrong measurements.
(11 lbs) and have a minimum thickness and/or coupling to a solid object. The A more suitable method for thin walled
of 25 mm (0.98 inch) to prevent them requirements for coupled objects for Leeb or light objects, e.g. Portable Rockwell,
from yielding or flexing under the large testing can be taken from the table on the should be selected instead if possible.
force created during the time of impact. following page.

For the Leeb G, this is accordingly higher For Portable Rockwell this is different,
with a mass of 15 kg (33 lbs) and a thick- as this is a purely static measurement
ness of 70 mm (2.73 inch), while for method. The object cannot oscillate
Leeb C, a mass of 1.5 kg (3.3 lbs) and a and vibrations are not caused by the
thickness of 15 mm (0.59 inch) are already instrument. A certain thickness must
sufficient. be provided to prevent the object from
For the UCI method, the standards ask for being punctured. The minimum thick-
a mass of at least 0.3 kg (0.66 lbs) and ness must be ten times the indentation
a minimum thickness of 5 mm (0.2 inch) depth. The typical indentation depths for
(DIN 50159) or 15 mm (0.6 inch) (ASTM the Portable Rockwell can be seen in the
A1038). For coatings or surface layers, a conversion curve graph on page 37.
50
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Input devices
D, DC, DL, E, S C G UCI
Min. weight of samples
of compact shape 5 kg/11 lbs 1.5 kg/3.3 lbs 15 kg/33 lbs 0.3 kg/0.66 lbs
on solid support 2 kg/4.5 lbs 0.5 kg/1.1 lbs 5 kg/11 lbs
coupled on plate 0.05 kg/0.2 lbs 0.02 kg/0.045 lbs 0.5 kg/1.1 lbs
Min. thickness of samples
uncoupled 25 mm/0.98 inch 15 mm/0.59 inch 70 mm/2.73 inch 5 mm/0.2 inch*
coupled 3 mm/0.12 inch 1 mm/0.04 inch 10 mm/0.4 inch
surface layer thickness 0.8 mm/0.03 inch 0.2 mm/0.008 inch
*According to DIN 50159-1, ASTM A1038 requires 15 mm/0.6 inch.
Minimum requirements for mass and thickness of samples according to DIN EN ISO 16859/DIN 50159-1 and ASTM A956.
Overcoming mass limitation

If a sample is too light, it must be coupled to a larger mass prior to testing.
The following steps should be followed:
Step 1 The contact surface of the sample and the surface of the solid support must be level, flat and ground smooth.
Step 2 The sample must exceed the minimum sample thickness for coupling. Then, the coupling procedure should
be followed:
• Apply a thin layer of coupling paste to the contact surface of the sample.
• Press the sample firmly against the support.
• Push the sample in a circular motion to push out excess coupling paste and eliminate any trapped air bubbles.
• Carry out the impact in the usual way, perpendicular to the coupled surface.

Surface preparation
The same material may be investigated Another consideration would be the hard-
by several methods, however some meth- ness of the material. Harder material will
Quick Tips
ods may require more intensive surface have a lower penetration depth which will
preparation for a high accuracy. require better surface finishes. Tools such
Basically, all hardness testing methods as flap wheel grinders with P120, P240
UCI: save time on surface prep
need certain surface conditions and, and P320 or finer grits can be utilized. Pol-
Use higher loads for UCI
in most cases, preparation is required. ishing can be started with P120 grit and measurements, if circumstances
Some methods, however, require a better then completed with the finest grit. Care (object size and dimensions, test
surface quality (roughness) than others should be taken during the grinding pro- procedure) allow, to save time on the
surface preparation. By using HV10
and surface preparation may therefore be cess to ensure that excessive heat is not instead of HV5 you may receive
more time-consuming. generated on the material surface since similar test results on a slightly
Inadequate surface preparation is perhaps it might change the hardness gradient. rougher surface.
the most common root-cause of errors. The adjacent table shows guidelines for Corrections for exotic material
Ensuring a smooth surface finish is an surface roughness for different types of You can use a material-independent
integral part of hardness testing – and this hardness testing. method (e.g. the portable or stationary
applies to the traditional bench type test- For quick assessment on-site, the Sur- Rockwell method) to define correction
for exotic material which you can then
ing method too. It is important to achieve face Roughness Comparator Plate shown apply to UCI or Leeb methods.
high accuracy with good repeatability. below can be used as a reference. Sim-
For example, hardness testing with ply compare the given roughness on the
Portable Rockwell or Leeb C method will component under test with the different
require a finer surface finish than Leeb G roughness areas of this plate in order to
since the indentation depth of Portable get an idea about the quantitative value
Rockwell, UCI HV1 or Leeb C is much for the surface roughness and whether
shallower than Leeb G. the surface is prepared adequately.
Surface roughness guide according to ASTM A1038
Min. roughness Average roughness depth

Test method Min. grit size
class ISO Ra, µm/µinch
Leeb C N5 0.4/16 P180
Portable Rockwell N7 2/80 P120
Leeb D, DL, DC, E, S N7 2/80 P120
Leeb G N9 7/275 P80
UCI HV1 N8 5/125 P80

Average maximum recommended roughness
UCI HV5 N10 10/500 P60 comparator plate for quick on-site assessment
of the inspected surface. For most of the test
methods Proceq recommends same or lower
UCI HV10 N10 15/590 P60 maximum average surface roughness values
than those depicted within the standards.
52
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
User dependency –
human influences on
measurement for portable Quick Tips
hardness testing (NDT) Balancing out dependencies
If several methods can be used to
perform measurement, try to balance
Currently, there is no formal requirement Less prone to measurement error is the out between user dependency, surface
for training, qualification and certification Leeb method, that requires a full con- preparation time, device longevity and
within ISO 9712 or ASNT TC standards, tact of the probe’s support ring with the suitability to measure coarse-grained
microstructures.
but ensuring that qualified personnel use surface of the inspected object. An
portable hardness testing is strongly exception is the Leeb DL probe (long
recommended. nose probe) that may introduce some
Training courses might be offered by inertia into the measurement procedure
local training centers (as is the case for due to the construction of the probe.
non-destructive testing), by equipment The Portable Rockwell, as the direct
manufacturers or national institutions. indentation method, is less prone to
Insufficient qualifications or lack of gen- operator-generated errors and requires
eral knowledge about the measurement only some measurement familiarity.
procedure and method are two very com-
mon sources of error. All measurement
methods do require a certain understand-
ing of the physical method, limitations
and operation of the instrument, as well
as the handling of the probe.
Of all the portable hardness testing meth-
ods, UCI is the most prone to user error.
This is due to lack of experience, obser-
vation abilities and understanding of the
correct procedure for the hardness test-
ing. For example, when measuring with
UCI method, it is vital to place the probe’s
indenter perpendicular to the test piece.
Only an angle deviation within a range of
+/- 5° is acceptable. This is because the
surface of the diamond indenter, which
is a symmetrical pyramid, has a different
contact with the material. When conduct-
ing a UCI test, the probe must be held
firmly, then appropriate pressure needs
to be applied for indentation purposes,
after measurement has been completed
the probe can be released.
With no formal requirement for training or qualifications within international standards and the
need for material-specific calibration, the choice of portable hardness testing instrument becomes
a crucial consideration.

Material dependency –
material-specific calibration
It is evident that for certain hardness for testing on different material, the
testing methods the accuracy or even instrument must be calibrated with the
the correctness of the measurement is equivalent E-Modulus range.
more susceptible to differences in mate- Similar conclusions can be drawn with
rial properties. respect to the Leeb method. Modern
A common denominator for the Leeb and devices offer solutions to these prob-
UCI test principles is their dependency on lems as they feature either a built-in
the material elasticity (Young’s modulus, group of material-specific conversion
elastic Modulus, E) which is due to the tables or enable the users to implement
nature of the test principle itself. their own calibration values – even for
For example, in the UCI method, the prototype and custom materials. The The frequency shift can be
instrument monitors the resonance fre- Portable Rockwell method, which is the generally described as:
quency and calculates the frequency direct indentation method, is free from
shift when required test loads have been those issues and can be used as a
∆f = f (Eeff • A)
reached. The frequency shift is a func- reference method to apply for the
tion of the indentation size of the defined above-mentioned methods, for exam-
indenter at a given E-Modulus. By default, ple through the HRC scale. The HRC
∆f = freq. shift
the UCI instrument is usually calibrated on obtained with Portable Rockwell is A = indentation area
non/low alloyed steel with E-Modulus directly comparable with the conventional Eff = effective E-Modulus (indenter and sample)
of 210 GPa +/- 10 GPa. Hence, to allow HRC scales.
Elastic moduli of commonly used materials
Material name Young’s Modulus (Elastic modulus, E/GPa)
Low-alloy steel 210
CuZr (2.158) 100
P91 (1.4903) 218
Quick Tips
X750 (2.4669) 215
SS304L (1.4307) 200

How about measurement in Leeb
and its native scale?
Cast iron lamellar 78-110
Leeb requires conversion tables to
recalculate the hardness into other
Cast iron spherical 160 scales, e.g. HB. However, if the test
object fulfills the requirements of the
Leeb method and your quality
Incoloy 825 (2.4858) 195 assurance can be based solely on that
method, e.g. HLD, there is no need for
recalculating it into other scales.
Titanium (6Al-4V) 114
54
05
Instrument verification
All applicable standards recommend performing a simple equipment test
before and after material testing. In this indirect check, measurements are
performed on certified hardness reference blocks in the corresponding
hardness range, to verify the sound operation of the test equipment.
56
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Leeb method
The DIN 50156 and DIN EN ISO 16859 The standard also highlights the impor-
requires a test consisting of at least tance of evenly spread measurements
three indentations on a hardness refer- across the surface of the reference test
ence block calibrated in line with DIN EN block.
ISO 16859. If the difference between the According to the ASTM A956-17, the
mean value for the read hardness and the test instrument should be tested with
hardness of the reference block is ≤ 5% two indentations on a standardized test
and the maximum span must be ≤ 5%, block. These two readings must fall within
then the instrument can be considered ±6 HL of the reference value, to verify that
satisfactory. If not, indirect verification the instrument is working properly.
should be performed.
Verification of an Equotip device using a calibrated reference block.

A simple test should be performed on the reference block are less than or equal to
test equipment according to DIN 50157 the tolerance limit of 3 HRC. If not, the
Annex D each day before the start of instrument should not be used and a
testing and after testing. In this indirect complete indirect test should be per-
check, measurements are performed on formed in accordance with DIN 50157.
certified hardness reference blocks in the For the verification according to
corresponding hardness range. ASTM E3246, at least two measure-
The test consists of at least three inden- ments on a hardness test block must
tations on a hardness reference block be performed. The hardness of the
in accordance with DIN 50157 in the test block must be within 30 % of the
range of 20 HRC to 70 HRC. The average hardness number that the Rockwell probe
value should be determined from these is expected to measure on the test piece.
three readings. The probe is considered to be validated
The test equipment can be considered to if the E error and the R Range (when
be satisfactory if the difference between using Rockwell scales) or repeatability A certified Equotip Portable Rockwell hardness
the average of the hardness value read are within maximum tolerances given in reference block.
off and the hardness of the hardness the table below.
Maximum allowable range and error for Rockwell C probe according to ASTM E3246
Maximum repeatability, r
Range of standardized reference Maximum range, R Maximum error, E
Scale r = HMAX – HMIN 100 %
standards R = HMAX – HMIN E = H AVG – HSTD
HAVG
< 35 4.0 ±2.0
≤ 0.03 % or 1.0 HRC

HRC ≥ 35 and < 60 3.5 ±1.5
whichever is larger
≥ 3.0 ±1.5
RMAX = highest hardness number; RMIN = lowest hardness number;

EAVG = average of measurements taken; HSTD = certified average hardness number of the reference.
58
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
The UCI method

The test according to DIN 50159-1 con- The ASTM A1038 standard defines
sists of at least three indentations on a verification as a procedure of making at
Quick Tips
forged hardness reference block manu- least three indentations on a standard
factured to (DIN EN) ISO 6507-3. reference block of the selected hardness.
The hardness reference blocks must have A maximum of two measurements may
Native scale verification
a diameter of at least 80 mm and a thick- be discarded if the user determines there
Whenever possible always use native
ness of at least 16 mm. The material used was an error made during application scale to verify the equipment. By using
for the hardness reference blocks should of the test force during measurement. non-native scales the user introduces
have a Young’s modulus of (210 ±10) GPa. The instrument is considered verified additional error that stem from
empirical unit conversion.
The adjacent table summarizes the max- if the calculated E value falls within the
imum tolerable errors for measurement tolerance levels shown in the adjacent
deviation and repeatability thresholds. table, specific for each hardness level
The test equipment can be considered to and test load range.
be satisfactory if the difference between The test according to the GB/T 34205-
the average of the hardness value read- 2017 standard specifies that verification
ings and the hardness shown on the consists of taking the arithmetic mean
reference block is less than or equal to the of not less than three measured values.
tolerance limit – these are summarized In cases where there are special require-
in the adjacent table showing maximum ments, it should be confirmed through
tolerable errors for UCI measurement consultation between the relevant parties.
deviation. If not, a complete indirect test
should be performed in accordance with
DIN 50159-2.
Important note:
The one-and-only usage of
the reference block is to verify
the instrument and probe
combination. It must not be
used to calibrate or change
the probe settings. If the
measurements on the block
fail – i.e. they are out of
tolerance – then the root cause
must be analyzed.
Equotip UCI hardness testing kit, including (on the left) a certified hardness reference block.

Maximum tolerable errors for UCI measurement deviation
for indirect verification conducted by the users
Max. measurement deviation (E) in % DIN 50159. GB/T 34205 & ASTM A1038
<250 HV 250-500 HV 500-800 HV >800 HV
Scale DIN & GB/T ASTM DIN & GB/T ASTM DIN & GB/T ASTM DIN & GB/T ASTM
HV 0.1 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9
HV 0.3 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9
HV 0.8 5 6 5 7 6 8 6 9
HV 1 5 5 5 5 6 7 6 7
HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 5 7
HV 10 5 5 5 5 5 7 5 7
The operator using the UCI method and Equotip 550 to measure the hardness of thick plate.
60
06
Data management
Hardness testing produces a wealth of valuable information about structures,
components or materials. Thus, the methods by which data is managed must
be effective and efficient to enable proper analysis and later access. In this
section you will find some information about the type of data which should
be captured and the options for managing it.
62
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Reporting and documentation

of hardness values
Documentation of the tests • A reference to the standard used

conducted is as important as the
correct execution of the • Details which clearly identify the test object
measurements themselves.
• Details and result of the instrument verification
A record (hardness testing report)
should be prepared on the
• Name of tester
examinations performed in which
all test parameters should be • Date and time of test
documented.
All of the following details should be • Test instrument with type and serial number of
taken into account and recorded: display unit and probe, if available
• Inspection data
• Each single measurement reading in the native

unit and, if available, in the converted unit
• Statistical values, such as mean value, standard

deviation, span, etc.
• Any significant detail, such as sample preparation,

coupling, impact direction, test force, test location,
temperature, etc.
• Information about measurements uncertainty

according to specification or national/international
requirements
• Any notes and/or photos
• Conversion tables used

Evolution of the ‘Over the years,
documentation the way we handle
data has changed
procedures dramatically – we
now have options
which promote
Over the years, the way we handle data has changed dramatically
greater productivity
– we now have options which promote greater productivity and
and quality.’
quality. It is worth taking a few moments to reflect on the options
available and their advantages or disadvantages.
Paper method Digital tabularized data
A few decades ago, when the first With the development of digitalization,
instruments were introduced to the measuring devices now feature more
market, users had to manually fill in the advanced capabilities for generating
data for individual measurements as and storing data in electronic form. The
well as calculate the necessary statisti- procedure of data export usually consists
cal values to evaluate the quality of the of connecting the measuring device to the
measurements. Nowadays, manufac- PC, copying the data and further process-
turers from different industries usually ing to fit the local production standards.
introduce their own internal data archiving Although translation errors are eliminated,
protocols to comply with global or this process is also time-consuming and
national standards. requires manual work.
This method, although one of the sim-
plest, is fraught with the risk of translation Pre-defined reporting
errors, where handwritten values can
be misread by subsequent reviewers. Another more advanced process that
Moreover, the process of preparing the simplifies the management of quality
report, even though we already have and production processes is the use of
pre-prepared forms, is extremely time- predefined forms that can be easily
consuming. Just filling out the report and adapted to the needs of the production
entering the necessary measurement process. For example, the Equotip 550
data, as well as generating statistical device has a built-in report generation
data, can be a very time-consuming function that can be adapted to virtu-
process. In addition, reports prepared ally any quality management process.
in this way are most often archived in In this case, a report with a user-defined
the classic way – on sheets of paper. format is automatically generated after
Collecting data in this way often results the measurement is completed. This
in data loss. eliminates translation errors and signifi-
cantly reduces data processing time. The
output data are ready for storage after
the last measurement has been taken. It
is estimated that this reduces the report
preparation time by at least 20 times, gen-
erating considerable cost savings.
64
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Internet-of-Things (IoT) – (temperature, surface condition, mea- In this way, users can analyze the qual-
Cloud-connected data storage surement anomalies, etc.) along with ity and quantity of measurements at a
and metadata photos of the objects under test. glance and, above all, react quickly. This
Equotip instruments are also provided is especially important if a production pro-
Currently, the most advanced solution with a state-of-the-art logbook, in which, cess does not deliver satisfactory quality
that simultaneously eliminates all data alongside user data, the geolocation of results and its continuation may entail
storage problems is the coupling of the measurement can be added and considerable losses due to incorrectly
measuring devices to the Internet. The all changes carried out during the manufactured products.
Internet-of-Things (IoT), as this technol- measurement can be traced, including Also, in the rare and unfortunate case of
ogy is called, is the connection of a series deletion of individual measurements loss or accidental destruction of the test-
of instruments in an efficient ecosystem considered as erroneous, conversion ing device, its data remains available in the
that enables the secure storage, exchange of units, as well as the continuation of cloud and is automatically retrieved – a
and management of data. Proceq, as a the measurement by the next inspector. great increase to data security which also
leader and inventor, has been offering this The data is automatically synchronized maximizes productivity in the workplace.
service since 2017, and it is available for with the server with the highest stan- The IoT option is now state-of-the-art
Equotip UCI and Equotip Leeb D. dard of data security. Access to the data technology, significantly increasing effi-
This IoT technology enables the gener- is almost instantaneous and is possi- ciency and collaboration at every stage
ation of reports containing additional ble from anywhere in the world, from of the quality process – from the first
information, including metadata such as the office, home, laboratory or from the measurement to data storage. It sets
voice notes, annotation of measurements quality control room. new standards in quality management.
With IoT, cloud-connected data storage and metadata, a significantly more effective way of Equotip Leeb D test results and further data shown on a
managing test data has arrived. smartphone – and stored in the cloud.

Webtool
Collaboration
Schematic showing the Screening Eagle ecosystem – with IoT data storage and where data exchange and collaboration is facilitated.
Efficiency/functionality of documentation methods
Documentation method
Conventional Exporting of Customizable

Parameter Cloud storage
paper reporting text data (txt, csv) reporting (pdf)
Time commitment Large Medium Low Very low
Estimated process efficiency (1 low, 10 high) 1 4 8 10
Risk of accidental data manipulation High Medium Low None
Risk of data loss High Medium Low Very low
Collaboration Low Low Medium Very high
Ease of integration Fair Modest High Very high
Integration into Quality Assurance (QA) systems Manual Semi-manual Automatic Automatic
Metadata, images, global statistics, annotations, geolocation No No No Yes
66
07
Practical applications
In this section you will find some helpful information about how to obtain the
best results from hardness testing. Included here are some basic guidelines
for conducting tests, plus useful hints on sample preparation. There are also
some reference tables which provide users with additional data. The conversion
of results to different hardness scales and methods for measuring on non-flat
surfaces are also covered.
68
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Execution of 1 Perpendicular test angle

The test must be performed by holding the device
measurements
perpendicular to the test surface, i.e. at an angle of 90°.
Deviations of > 5° from the right angle to the test surface
will result in errors which cannot be ignored and are
therefore unallowable.
Generally, there are a number of
points to bear in mind when taking
hardness measurements. Here are
2 Uneven surfaces
Support rings are available to provide a stable position for
the probe, please see page 83 for more information.
some of the basic principles:
3 Vibration or movement prevention

The specimen and/or the probe should be stationary
during the hardness test, as movements or vibrations can
affect the result.
4 Test load application

For Portable Rockwell or UCI measurements, this should
be applied with a steady increase and smoothly, following
the instructions on the instrument’s display.
5 Determining hardness
The arithmetic mean of at least three measurements per
measuring point should be calculated to determine
hardness.
6 Minimum edge distance

The distance of the center of each test indentation from
the edge of the specimen should be at least 5 mm.
7 Distance between indentations

The distance between the centers of two adjacent test
indentations must be at least three times the indentation
diameter.
8 Read the user manual

Care should be taken during the test to ensure that the
measuring instrument is operated in accordance with the
user manual.
9 Recording results
The hardness values determined by the test should be
clearly documented.
10 Incorrect function
If this is suspected, a comparison measurement should
be performed on a hardness reference block conforming
to the appropriate standards. Should this be confirmed,
the measurement should be interrupted and repeated with
a different device.

Among the points to bear in mind when carrying out portable hardness testing is that the test must be performed by holding the device perpendicular to the test surface.
Indentation of different methods (diameter/depth) at given hardness of steel
Measurement method Indentation diameter / Indentation depth at given hardness on steel
~570 HLD, ~300 HV, ~46 HRC ~760 HLD, ~600 HV, ~55 HRC ~840 HLD, ~800 HV, ~63 HRC
Leeb D, DC, D+15, DL, S, E 0.54 mm / 24.5 µm 0.45 mm / 17 µm 0.35 mm / 10.2 µm
Leeb G 1.03 mm / 53.6 µm 0.9 mm / 40.8 µm -
Leeb C 0.38 mm / 12.1 µm 0.32 mm / 8.6 µm 0.3 mm / 7.5 µm
Portable Rockwell 53.6 µm / 22.5 µm 26.2 µm / 11 µm 16.7µm / 7 µm
UCI HV1 79.1 µm / 11.3 µm 56 µm / 8 µm 48.3 µm / 6.9µm
UCI HV5 177.1 µm / 25.3 µm 125.3 µm / 17.9 µm 108.5 µm / 15.5 µm
UCI HV10 248.1 µm / 35.4 µm 175.4 µm / 25.1 µm 151.9 µm / 21.7 µm
70
“Simple can be
harder than complex
– you have to work
hard to get your
thinking clean to
make it simple.”
Steve Jobs

72
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Conversion of
hardness measurements
Quick Tips Working with different hardness test
methods often requires the hardness
Because of the necessary experimental
determination of the conversion curves for
Use native scale measured by one method to be con- different materials, errors should be taken
Conversion of units adds additional verted to that for a different method or into account here, due to which there will
measurement uncertainty. To avoid strength (tensile strength in N/mm2). If a be a corresponding factor of uncertainty
this try using the native scale measured hardness value is meant to be when converting into another scale.
whenever possible.
converted into another scale (i.e. into the Empirical values have therefore been
result of a completely different hardness determined based on a large number of
testing method), there is no mathematical comparison measurements, conversion
equation for doing this. Generally there tables prepared and the values standard-
are no applicable relations for convert- ized in the corresponding ASTM E140 or
ing hardness values from one method to DIN EN ISO 18265 standard (formerly
another. However, so-called conversion DIN 50156). While in DIN EN ISO 18265
tables, which have been determined conversion tables are available between
through experiments and measurements, the different stationary hardness scales,
enable an easy conversion of scales. ASTM E140 also contains portable Leeb
To do this, the hardness of a specific scales.
material is measured using the different The requirements and limitations in accor-
test methods and the relation between dance with these standards must – in all
the individual scales is then established. cases – be followed for any further conver-
Such conversions can only be carried out sion from one hardness scale to another
if the conversion relation has been statis- or into strength values (tensile strength
tically safeguarded by a sufficient number in N/mm2) as occasionally required.
of comparison measurements. Equotip devices do make this step eas-
Moreover, it should be taken into account ier for customers, as they offer different
that conversion relations taken from options with fast and easy options for
national and international standards are the user to create their own conversion
restricted to certain material groups and curve which fits perfectly onto the mate-
should be applied to these specific material under test. An example of this can be
rial groups only. found on page 86, ‘Combination of two
different measuring methods’.

74
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
How accurate is ‘…hardness tests

hardness testing? must never be
performed in the
exact same spot
Many users ask the question, when assessing the potential outcome
due to deformation
of the measurement or when comparing it to other (stationary)
of the material and
hardness testers: “How accurate is the instrument?”
microstructural
However, the actual question which everyone should be asking is
changes induced by
whether or not the measured value is correct! It is therefore needed
the measurement.‘
to define the term ‘accuracy.’ The factors to be considered here are
systematic and random errors, as well as the possible subjective
influences of the user. So, when evaluating measurement accuracy,
the following points must be considered:
Errors caused by the test object Absolute accuracy, systematic

errors or ‘comparability’
There’s naturally no such thing as the
‘ideal test object’ – especially not in Absolute accuracy is the instrument’s
hardness testing! The ideal test object capability to display the correct reading.
would have a perfectly homogeneous ‘Correct’ in this connection means true
microstructure on the test surface, on an absolute scale. This requirement
hardness homogeneity and nearly no is based on calibration using certified
surface roughness. Although the test test blocks, i.e., traceable to a univer-
blocks are considered ideal test objects sal standard. To recognize systematic
– and indeed they are high-quality test deviations, reference specimens are
pieces – in practice, even they cannot needed. Typically these are calibrated
offer ideal hardness homogeneity, which hardness reference blocks of speci-
stems from the process of their produc- fied size, thickness and hardness. The
tion. Hence these parameters play an absolute accuracy of the equipment can
important role in assessing the accuracy, be controlled using a verification process,
irrespective of the test method used. for example a verification wizard which
Errors caused by the test object are often is found on the Equotip 550 instrument.
(or even mostly) responsible for propel- It is recommended that this verification
ling inspectors and operators into a state be carried out once a day or on each
of uncertainty, as any possible variation shift. Also, the material-specific cali-
of measured values caused by the test bration (UCI) or material groups (Leeb)
object’s properties can be mistaken for play an essential role in relation to sys-
instrument characteristics such as com- tematic errors.
parability and repeatability.
But what can be done to get reliable hard-
ness values? Statistics will help here!

Repeatability, random errors or Subjective Influence by the
‘precision’ user or ‘inter-equipment
reproducibility’
Random influences (e.g. mechanical fric-
tion, electronic noise, ambient conditions) The user also represents a potential
lead to random errors of the measuring source of errors. Different handling of
instrument. The measured values vary or the instrument may occasionally lead to Quick Tips
scatter – even when correctly calibrated deviating results. The less the results of
hardness testers are used for measure- one device depend on other users Blame instrument last!
ments on an ideal test object with perfect making measurements, the better the If your results are not what you
expected, but the probe passes the
surface roughness and homogeneity of inter-equipment reproducibility. verification, the instrument should be
surface hardness. the last to be blamed. Test piece
These errors cannot be corrected Number of measurements (weight, thickness, materials, surface
and foremost the production process
because they occur incidentally, i.e. in of the test piece), instrument settings
different directions and sizes—the smaller Due to the reasons mentioned above, a (scale, conversion), operator and probe
the variation or scattering, the better the single reading is not a reliable criterion in handling should all be revised instead.
repeatability. The repeatability (precision) relation to the hardness of the test object!
is a characteristic of the instrument and The representative hardness value can
is typically below 1 % with hardness tes- only be determined after conducting and
ters. An exception is the UCI method, averaging several measurements of the
whereby an impact of the user cannot be same test piece. The larger the num-
subtracted from the test itself, and hence ber of measurements, the more reliable
these values are typically higher, as antici- the determined hardness value will be.
pated by the international standards. A consequence of this statistical con-
Furthermore, repeatability is checked on a templation of hardness testing is that
reference block, which due to the produc- the errors mentioned above, which may
tion process, also has inhomogeneities occur both as positive and as negative
as far as surface hardness is concerned. deviations from the ‘real hardness value’,
Hence the repeatability computed for any are also partly reduced by averaging many
hardness measurement series (includ- single readings.
ing benchtop devices) is, in fact, a ‘quasi
repeatability’ procedure.
Important note: The repeatability check commonly requires the

measurements to be performed under the same conditions (place,
operator, time, measurement spot, exact microstructure etc.).
However, hardness tests must never be performed in the exact same
spot due to deformation of the material and microstructural changes
induced by the measurement.
76
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
How many If more individual readings are used to obtain the final result, we can be more confident
that the calculated average is closer to the actual hardness of the test piece. However,
readings
performing more measurements requires extra effort, and the overall improvement
of the data will become marginal at some point.
should I take? • As a rule of thumb, anything between 3 and 10 readings is generally acceptable
unless stated otherwise in the standard or measurement procedure specifically
designed for a process or test object.
• Taking 10 readings is a common choice as this reduces the statistical
uncertainty, averages outlays and makes the arithmetic easy. In some cases,
taking 3 readings is sufficient. This practice is common where test pieces are
comparatively homogeneous in hardness.
• Using 20 or even 50 only results in a slightly better estimate than 10.
However, a detailed evaluation of the measurement uncertainty is quite extensive,

considering all the influencing factors mentioned above, e.g. according to DIN 50157
or DIN 50159. The less the results of one device depend on other users making
measurements, the better the inter-equipment reproducibility related to the distribution
of the readings.
It should be mentioned here that the standard deviation for a small number of
measurements can only be estimated. A correction can be made for small mea-
surement series using the so-called Student’s f-distribution (or simply f-distribution).
The standard measurement uncertainty u is thus calculated as follows:
u = f·s
√n
u = standard measurement uncertainty
s = standard deviation
n = number of measured values
f = t factor
If, for example, 5 measurements are made for each hardness testing measuring point,
the corresponding t factor of 1.14 will be accounted for, while in case of 3 readings,
the t-factor is 1.32.
Mean or average value Mean or average value Mean or average value

Probability of occurance
Probability of occurance
Value of reading Value of reading Value of reading

Practical example
On a test block with a given hardness value of 630 HLD, the following five values were
measured – 628, 631, 636, 624, 633
The arithmetic mean H is: 630.4 HLD

The standard deviation s is: 4.62 HLD
n is: 5
f is: 1.14
With these parameters, the standard measurement uncertainty can be calculated

using the formula given above. The value is thus:
u = f·s = 1.14 · 4.62 HLD = 2.36 HLD

√n √5
This means that now the real hardness value lies within the range of H +- u, that is
628.04 – 632.76 HLD.
78
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Surface One of the biggest mistakes is trying to Surface roughness has a significant
test a surface without smoothing it out, effect on the repeatability of the mea-
preparation
cleaning off grease or removing paint. surement, thus rough surfaces must be
As hardness testing is a surface-related prepared accordingly.
test, anything that gets between the metal First, all foreign material – such as rust
and the hardness test indenter will influ- and scale – should be removed from the
ence the hardness measurement and, in surface which should then be ground and
a worst case scenario, lead to marked polished. Tools such as flap wheel grind-
measurement deviations. ers with P120, P240 and P320 or finer
The following points regarding the test grits are typically used.
object, surface preparation and per- This work begins using P120 grit and
formance of the measurement should is completed using the finest grit. Each
be observed in order to obtain reliable grinding step is carried out perpendicular
measurement results: to the previous one – and, indeed, is not
completed until all of the marks from the
• Hardness testing using portable previous step have been ground away.
equipment can be performed on The individual grinding steps should be
objects with differing shapes performed with light pressure only on
provided that the hardness tester the machine.
can be positioned vertical to the There is no defined relationship between
test surface and the area for testing the grit of the grinding medium and the
is flat and smooth. For non-flat achievable surface roughness Ra. The
surfaces, please see page 83. maximum allowable surface roughness
• The test area must be prepared such depends on the test method used and
that changes to the surface due to the force applied. Detailed data regard-
heating or cold deformation remain ing the desired (or acceptable) surface
restricted to a minimum. Scale, roughness values can be taken from
foreign objects or other surface the adjacent table showing ‘Roughness
imperfections must be completely requirements’.
removed. In particular, the surface A Surface Roughness Comparator Plate
should be free from lubricants. helps to estimate the actual roughness
of a test object.
To find out more about the influence of
the roughness on hardness readings, the
experiment on page 81 illustrates the
impact of the surface preparation on the
data accuracy and scattering.
Surface roughness has a significant effect on the repeatability of the measurement, thus rough
surfaces must be prepared accordingly.

Roughness requirements depending on the international standard
Min. roughness Average roughness

Test method Minimal grit size
class ISO depth Ra
Leeb C N5 0.4 µm/16 µinch* P180
Portable Rockwell N7 2 µm/80 µinch P120
Leeb D, DL, DC, E, S N7 2 µm/80 µinch* P120
Leeb G N9 7 µm/275 µinch* P80
UCI HV1 N8 5 µm/125 µinch (0,5 μm/20 μinch) P80
UCI HV5 N10 10 µm/500 µinch (0,8 μm/31 μinch) P60
UCI HV10 N10 15 µm/590 µinch (1 μm/39 μinch) P60
Average roughness values according to DIN EN ISO 16859 and ASTM A956. (The values for DIN 50159 are shown in parentheses.) Please note the differences in DIN and
ASTM standards for roughness values.
Influence of temperature
Temperature has some influence on The influence of elevated temperatures
hardness measurements. There are dif- of the object under test was researched
Quick Tips
ferent cases which have to be treated in a study carried out by Proceq. During the
differently. These are mainly the tem- study, different test blocks were heated
perature of the instrument itself and the up. While the temperature dropped, sev-
Preparation workaround
temperature of the probe. eral measurement series were taken. In
As a general rule for hardness tests,
The temperatures in which the instrument summary, it was proven that hardness the better the surface condition, the
can be used without any negative influ- readings are lower if the temperature of more accurate and reproducible the
ence on the hardness readings is specified the test block is higher. This behavior is measurement results. During
surface preparation, however, it is
as being within the -10°C – +50°C range. dependent on the specific material under critical not to alter the hardness
If this range is exceeded, correct values test, therefore no correction value can through hot or cold working. If surface
can no longer be guaranteed. be provided. conditioning has to be limited for
economic reasons, utilities such as
elimination of systematic bias or
adaptations of the testing procedure
should be considered.
80
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Sample preparation
The surface of a Mn-Cr-V tool steel sample was prepared using grinding paper of grit
sizes P40, P80, P120, P150, P180, and P240. After each grinding step, the surface
roughness Ra was measured using a commercially available surface roughness
tester. The hardness measurements were taken with Proceq’s Equotip Leeb D Probe.
Case study Results

• The scatter of hardness readings taken with impact device D increases quickly
Impact of surface preparation with rougher surfaces.
• The rougher surface may not represent entirely the correct value, if a sufficient
on data accuracy/scattering.
number of measurements are not implemented.
• The rougher the surface, the higher the data span (min. and max. values).
• It is recommended to at least obtain a P120 grit surface finish.
Further provisions
• In order to overcome the increased uncertainties of the results due to scatter
on rough surfaces, the number of readings should be increased and/or the most
suitable impact device should be selected.
• If the readings deviate systematically from the actual sample hardness, the
bias may be accounted for through a user-specific conversion (e.g. an offset).
This is possible with most Equotip instruments. This correction should apply
solely to the same objects featuring same material and properties such as
hardness and dimensions! The individual bias correction needs to be worked
out through measurements on two samples: one rough and one smooth with
optimal surface finishing.
450
400
Converted Brinell Hardness [HB]
Grinding Paper P240
350
Grinding Paper P180
Grinding Paper P150
Grinding Paper P120
Grinding Paper P80
300
Grinding Paper P40
250
200
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Surface Roughness Ra [µm]
Brinell hardness vs. surface roughness obtained using an Equotip Leeb D Impact Device D.

Combination A combination of hardness testing tech- For example in the Leeb testing method,
niques helps to improve accuracy and the test piece geometrical properties
of two
reliability of portable hardness tests. The such as thickness, material and mass
default standard for hardness testing is can introduce bias in hardness measure-
laboratory-based bench top instruments ment. Hence by combining the Portable
methods that cannot be easily used for field work.

The combination of two methods opti-
Rockwell method, a compensation can
be introduced to negate the bias. At first,
mizes the efficiency by bringing the best a baseline measurement needs to be
properties of portable test methods taken to compare the Leeb and Portable
together with minimum disturbance to Rockwell measurements as shown below.
the test piece. Thereafter the bias can be calculated and
With this respect Portable Rockwell compensated in the Leeb measurements.
complements other hardness test
methods since it is similar to bench top
∆ = + 22 HBW
Rockwell method, the Portable Rockwell
hardness test principle is based on the
penetration depth difference. Effectively, Hence the combination hardness test-
the Portable Rockwell hardness method ing method can increase efficiency by
is material independent in comparison enabling most testing to be performed
to UCI and Leeb, which are affected by with the faster Leeb test methods.
Young’s Modulus.
Correction factor for Leeb elaborated on the basis of

HLD uncorrected Portable Rockwell

Measurement
(HBW 10/300) (HBW 10/300)
Quick Tips 1 178 193
Independence with direct 2 177 201

indentation
Portable Rockwell is a material-
3 179 168
independent method which requires
no material corrections.
4 179 192
5 177 212
6 172 210
7 175 196
8 173 193
Average 176 198
82
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Non-flat UCI Leeb
surfaces Placement of probes or indenters per- There are much greater options for
pendicular to the test piece is absolutely adjusting the probe to the object’s cur-
crucial for achieving an accurate and vature through the application of support
repeatable measurement. When testing rings, when using the Leeb method.
on flat samples with standard support Equotip Leeb hardness testers provide
rings or foot, the special foot tip is located accurate measurements if the impact
precisely on the test surface. However, body has a certain position in the guide
when testing curved samples this may tube at the moment of its impact onto the
not always be the case. To ensure accu- test surface. Many manufacturers offer
rate measurements in all cases, the their own support rings. Proceq, now
appropriate support rings designed for part of Screening Eagle Technologies,
measurements on curved sample sur- was the inventor of the Leeb method.
faces must be used. In this subchapter, Screening Eagle is
An example would be the special foot proud to share around 50 years of experi-
that is used with a UCI probe – see ence in the development and optimization
adjacent schematic diagram – which of the Leeb method.
adapts to both flat and curved surfaces. When testing flat samples with standard
Quick Tips For curved surfaces, there are two dif- support rings, the spherical test tip is
ferent apertures, one for samples with located precisely at the end of the guide
Mid-air loading for longevity diameters between 5 mm to 25 mm and tube. However, when testing curved
Always load the Equotip Leeb probe the other for larger diameters between samples with the standard support
in the air – and not on the surface 20 mm and 70 mm. This special foot rings, this may not always be the case.
of the test object. This will minimize
the measurement deviation by is also fitted with magnets that provide To ensure accurate measurements in all
markedly extending the lifespan of maximum stability and help to keep the cases, Screening Eagle offers a range of
the support ring. measurement angle within +/- 5° as special support rings designed for mea-
required by standards. surements on curved sample surfaces.
Overview of Equotip 550 Leeb Impact Devices and usage of some support rings.

For convenience, particularly when used
with advanced Leeb impact devices,
these support rings can be rotated by
360° around the longitudinal axis of
the impact device. By means of a grub
screw, the user can freely align the
rectangular support ring to match the
Ø 40mm
orientation of the impact device handle

and to find the optimal position with
respect to the sample.
Most common test situations for Leeb
Schematic representation of smart foot accessory to be used with UCI probe on flat and curved surfaces Impact Devices D/DC, C, E, S and G
of various radii.
are with Standard Support Rings.
However, if cylindrical (e.g. boilers,
pipes), hollow-cylindrical, spherical,
hollow-spherical, concave and convex
surfaces of various dimensions can be
measured successfully with the help of
R the correct support ring.
max Universal Support Ring

-0.3 mm
The most versatile support ring is called
max
+0.3 mm
UN. This ring embraces the need to test
even more complex geometries. Some
concave convex
schematic examples of the use of UN
R
Usage of standard support rings on curved surfaces. support rings are adjacent.
Examples of Universal (UN) Support Ring usage.
84
Chapter
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Troubleshooting for
hardness testing
Quality and best practice are always at the heart of everything the
hardness testing community undertakes, but sometimes things may
not go as smoothly as they should. The adjacent chart is presented
as a quick reference guide to help practitioners troubleshoot and
also to act as a reminder of the aspects contributing to successful
hardness testing, all of which are contained within the pages of
this publication.
Six key considerations govern the outcome of hardness testing – instrument, method,
material, environment, measurement, plus data output and processing. When all
of these factors are in harmony, you are set to deliver reliable and accurate results
from your hardness testing project. As always, good preparation and planning are
fundamental.
Having reached this page, we hope that you have found the information which we
have gathered and published in this comprehensive book to be of interest and that
it will serve to inspire you as you continue your work in the hardness testing field.
Thank you for sharing our passion for the highest standards in the collection of data and
do not hesitate to reach out to us or other members of the hardness testing community.
This is a journey towards increased knowledge, higher quality standards and more
sustainable practices that we are all taking together as we work to Protect the
Built World.

Instrument
• Regular calibration and service

• Daily verification
• Impact body suited for anticipated hardness
• Indenter not damaged Method factors
• Dependence of the method on Young’s

modulus (E) of the material
• Anticipated and sufficiently small indentation
depth with respect to the thickness of the
material/coating
• Surface or bulk measurement
Material factors
• Heterogeneity of the microstructure

• Surface preparation – roughness
• Surface preparation grease, dust, debris
• Material dimensions – weight, wall thickness Measurement factors
• Material treatment – surface hardening
• Coated or composite material Procedure used
• Type of material – soft or hard • Number of impacts, standards to be followed
Human factors
Training of the operator:
• Awareness of the error sources
• Correct method selection
• Knowledge of conversion
Experience of the operator:
Environment • Correct application of the instrument
• Evaluation of the surface preparation
• Temperature • Evaluation of results
• Humidity
• Vibrations
• Electromagnetic and electrical noise
• Air dust
Data output and processing
• Statistics
• Measurement deviations
• Conversion to other scales
• Documentation of data
Reliable
and accurate
results
Instrument validation method selection material preparation actual measurement and procedure
human factors environmental data processing
86
“The world of reality
has its limits – the
world of imagination
is boundless.”
Jean-Jacques Rousseau

88
Sources and references
Publications and papers Standards and testing
01 Kompatscher, M. (2004) Equotip-Rebound Hardness Testing After 11 Metallic materials – Conversion of hardness values, ISO
D. Leeb – Hardness Measurements Theory and Application in 18265:2013, 2013
Laboratories and Industries paper presented at HARDMEKO 2004, 12 Metallic materials – Hardness testing – Ultrasonic contact
Washington, D.C., USA impedance method, GB/T 34205-2017, 2017
02 Leeb, D. (1986) Definition of the Hardness Value L in the EQUOTIP 13 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test – Part 1: Test method,
Dynamic Measuring Method, VDI Report No. 583 DIN EN ISO 16859-1:2015(en), 2015
03 Borggreen, K., D.H. Hansen, J.V. Hansen, P. Auerkari (1999) 14 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test. Part 1: Test method,
Acceptance Values for Equotip Hardness of some Pressure Vessel GB/T 17394.1-2014, 2014
Steels, Nordtest Technical Report 424 – Part 1, FORCE Institute,
Copenhagen 15 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test – Part 2: Verification and
calibration of the testing devices, DIN EN ISO 16859-2:2015(en),
04 Borggreen, K., P. Tønder, M. S. Lorentzen, J. V. Hansen, P. Auerkari 2015
(1999) Comparison of Portable Hardness Testers Performance
with Ideal Samples, Nordtest Technical Report 424 – Part 2, 16 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test. Part 2: Verification,
FORCE Institute, Copenhagen GB/T 17394.2-2012, 2012
05 Leeb, D. (1990) Dynamische Härteprüfung, in Härteprüfung an 17 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test – Part 3: Calibration of
Metallen und Kunststoffen, eds. W.W. Weiler, D.H. Leeb, K. Müller reference test blocks, DIN EN ISO 16859-3:2015(en), 2015
and D.M. Rupp., 2nd Edition, Expert Verlag, Ehningen bei Böblingen 18 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test – Part 3: Calibration of
06 Pollok, H.-H. (2008) Leeb-Härteprüfung als Alternative zu reference blocks, GB/T 17394.3-2012, 2012
traditionellen Verfahren (Leeb hardness testing as an alternative to 19 Metallic materials – Leeb hardness test – Part 4: Tables of
traditional test methods), Qualität und Zuverlässigkeit, Ausgabe hardness values conversion, GB/T 17394.4-2014, 2014
4/2008. 20 Metallische Werkstoffe – Härteprüfung mit tragbaren
07 Mennicke, R. T. (2009) Converting the Scales – Leeb as a Hardness Härteprüfgeräten, die mit mechanischer Eindringtiefenmessung
Alternative, Industrial Heating, Issue January 2009 arbeiten – Teil 1: Prüfverfahren, DIN 50157-1:2020-11, 2020
08 Leeb, D. H. (1978), New Dynamic Method for Hardness Testing of 21 Metallische Werkstoffe – Härteprüfung mit tragbaren
Metallic Materials, VDI-Report No. 308 Härteprüfgeräten, die mit mechanischer Eindringtiefenmessung
09 Low, S. (2001) Rockwell Hardness Measurement of Metallic arbeiten – Teil 2: Prüfung und Kalibrierung der Härteprüfgeräte,
Materials, Special Publication 960-5, National Institute of DIN 50157-2:2020-11, 2020
Standards and Technology, Washington 22 Metallische Werkstoffe – Härteprüfung nach dem UCI-Verfahren
10 Frehner, C. & R. Mennicke (2017) Advancements of Ultrasonic – Teil 1: Prüfverfahren, DIN 50159-1:2015-01, 2015
Contact Impedance (UCI) Hardness Testing based on Continuous 23 Metallische Werkstoffe – Härteprüfung nach dem UCI-Verfahren
Load Monitoring during the Indentation Process and Practical – Teil 2: Prüfung und Kalibrierung der Härteprüfgeräte, DIN
Benefits 15th Asia Pacific Conference for Non-Destructive Testing, 50159-2:2015-01, 2015
Singapore, November 13-17 24 Standard Hardness Conversion Tables for Metals Relationship
Among Brinell Hardness, Vickers Hardness, Rockwell Hardness,
Superficial Hardness, Knoop Hardness, Scleroscope Hardness,
and Leeb Hardness, ASTM E140-12B(2019)e1, 2019
25 Standard Test Methods for Differential Indentation Depth
Hardness of Metallic Materials, ASTM E3246-21, 2021
26 Standard Test Method for Leeb Hardness Testing of Steel
Products, ASTM A956/A956M-17a, 2017
27 State system for ensuring the uniformity of measurements.
Metals and alloys. Leeb hardness test. Part 1: Test method, GOST
R 8.969-2019, 2019
28 Standard Test Method for Portable Hardness Testing by the
Ultrasonic Contact Impedance Method, ASTM A1038-19, 2019
29 Uncertainty of measurement – Part 3: Guide to the expression of
uncertainty in measurement, ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008, 2008

Glossary
ASTM ASTM international (formerly American Society for HLG Unit of Leeb G Scale, hardness value in Leeb
Testing and Materials) measured with G type probe
Brinell Method of hardness testing named after its Inventor HLS Unit of Leeb S Scale, hardness value in Leeb
August Brinell measured with S type probe
Brittleness Property of a material that fractures when subjected HRC Hardness value expressed in Rockwell C scale
to stress, but has a little tendency to deform before HV Hardness value expressed in Vickers scale
rupture
Impact body Core of the Leeb method, which is fired against the
DIN The German institute for standardization surface of the test piece. The impact body has
(Deutsches Institut für Normung) precisely defined weight, magnetic properties and
E Young's modulus, also called Elastic modulus, geometry to provide always constant impact energy
describes how easily a material can stretch and ISO International Organization for Standardization
deform. It is defined as the ratio of tensile stress (σ)
to tensile strain (ε). Where stress is the amount of kgf Kilogram-force – a non-standard gravitational
force applied per unit area (σ = F/A) and strain is metric unit of force. One kilogram-force is by
extension per unit length (ε = dl/l) definition equal to 9.80665 N
Equotip Brand of hardness testing devices produced by lbs Pounds weight (avoirdupois system used in
Proceq S.A., the inventor of the Leeb method. English-speaking nations)
Name originates from "Energy QUOtient and TIP” Leeb Hardness testing method based on the rebound
(i.e. ratio of energy and tip), which was also used method princinple, named after one of the
simultaneously in the past as a synonym for the method's inventors
Leeb method N Newton, an SI unit of force. A Newton is defined as
GB/T National standards of the People's Republic of 1 kg·m/s2 (it is a derived unit which is defined in
China terms of the SI base units)
Hardness Measure of a material's resistance to localized Ra Average roughness depth
deformation, induced by either mechanical Rockwell Hardness testing method invented in the 1920s by
indentation or abrasion brothers Hugh & Stanley Rockwell
HAZ Heat Affected Zone – non-melted area of metal that Support ring Accessory used in rebound method which enables
has undergone changes in material properties as a solid and stable support of the drop tube on the
result of being exposed to high temperatures surface of the test piece, regardless of its curvature
HB Hardness value expressed in Brinell scale Tensile strength Maximum stress that a material can withstand
HL Hardness value expressed in Leeb scale while being stretched or pulled before breaking
HLC Unit of Leeb C Scale, hardness value in Leeb Toughness Ability of a material to absorb energy and plastically
measured with C type probe deform without fracturing
HLD Unit of Leeb D Scale, hardness value in Leeb UCI Ultrasonic Contact Impedance – method of testing
measured with D type probe hardness
HLDL Unit of Leeb DL, Scale, hardness value in Leeb Vickers Hardness testing method developed by R. L. Smith
measured with DL type probe and G. E. Sandland, at Vickers Ltd, a British
HLE Unit of Leeb E Scale, hardness value in Leeb engineering conglomerate
measured with E type probe
90
About Screening Eagle
Screening Eagle Technologies is a merger of Dreamlab, a Singapore-based
software and robotics company, and Proceq, a Swiss-based NDT company with
a 65+ year heritage as a market leader in portable sensors. The fragmented NDT
industry needs digitization and consolidation. Screening Eagle intends to acquire,
partner and expand in end-markets from buildings and infrastructure to energy
and aerospace, connecting more sensors to our software platform to accelerate
our pursuit of data-driven inspection and predictive asset healthcare.
We are a technology platform for intelligent inspection of the built environment.
ScreeningEagle.com

92

Portable Hardness Testing Book

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Portable Hardness Testing Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Portable Hardness Testing

Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Directed by Sonia Giron

Copyright © Screening Eagle Technologies AG 2022

Standards for the Leeb method 44

Mass and wall thickness limitation 50

Reporting and documentation of hardness values 63

Sources and references 89

3 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

5 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Driving quality for the

7 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Plants and pipelines

Pressurized vessels and wellhead equipment

1 Inspectors in the oil and gas

9 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Keeping the wheels of

Bars and pipes

11 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Looking to the skies

1 Quality and precision

13 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Into space and down to Earth

Space exploration industry

Marine and shipping industries

Rock core testing for oil and gas sector

15 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Hardness testing in and

Fire damage assessment through structural steel hardness testing

17 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Testing on gigantic saws

Generator stator wedges

Testing of forging dies

19 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Abrasion MoHs hardness Mineral

than the file. If the file bites or marks the

23 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

on page 73 for more detailed information.

The indentation methods generally differ

Image of a Brinell benchtop testing machine.

25 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Example of a Rockwell tester.

27 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

d1 Smallest indentations with

Portable hardness testing

29 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

• Leeb (also known as Rebound) method

Leeb Rockwell UCI

Leeb method ‘Within just a few

31 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Impact phase Rebound phase

Range and function of Leeb probes

probes in greater detail. When purchasing Leeb equipment,

Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Tungsten Silicon Polycrystalline

Body size 3 mm 3 mm 2.8 mm 5 mm 3 mm 3 mm 3 mm

Native scale HLD HLDC HLDL HLG HLC HLS HLE

Comparison of various Leeb probes currently in use.

33 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Importance of impact bodies

Users do not immediately notice the dif-

35 Portable Hardness Testing | Theory, practice, applications, guidelines

Preload Total Load Preload

The ASTM E3246 standard describes

Penetration Depth [µm]