ENG 60503

Lab 1: Hardness Testing

Name

: TEE HON YI

Student ID

: 0322754

Course

: Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering (Hons)

Group Members:
Hesam Eftekhari
Lee Chi Zhuang

Date of Experiment:
Report due date:

Nor Sakinah Binti Sepuan

Naviin A/L Munusamy

Report submission date:

Checked by:

Item/marks
Format/10

School of Engineering
Taylors University
Malaysia

Abstract and Introduction/10

Figures and Diagrams/15
Materials and Method/10
Results Discussions/45
References/10
Total

CONTENT
1

Abstract.. 3
1.0 Introduction..3
2.0 Experimental Design6
2.1 Chemicals and Apparatus.6
2.2 Methods... 7
2.3 Procedure. 7
3.0 Results and Discussions8
4.0 Further Discussion and Error Analysis ...16
5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 17
References..18

ABSTRACT
By conducting this experiment, the hardness of different types of materials is determined
through the Brinell hardness test. In this experiment, there are 4 different types of metal
samples being tested: mild iron, brass, copper and aluminium. The metals being tested are
indented on the Gunt Universal Hardness Testing Machine WP 300, with a metal ball being
used as an indenter. The diameter of indentation for each metal is recorded and the Brinell
Hardness Number (BHN) or hardness value is calculated with all the parameters given in the
experiment.
The hardness values for each type of metal obtained from the experiment is then compared to
the theoretical results given and the results are analysed. From the experiment, it is found that
the hardness value of mild steel, brass, copper and aluminium are 170.9452, 85.3910,
68.4923, and 62.9025 respectively. By comparing the experimental results and the theoretical
results, it is found that the experimental values have a large difference apart from the
theoretical values of the experiment. Thus, the relative percentage error of the experiment is
high as well. This could be caused by a number of different factors such as random errors and
human errors. This will be further discussed in the error analysis section. The results of the
experiment can still be further improved by minimising the errors.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This experiment is conducted to determine the hardness of different types of metals by testing
the materials through the Brinell Hardness Test. Hardness is one of the most important
mechanical properties and an important aspect that should not be overlooked when choosing
a material for manufacturing products and construction, as for a product to be sustainable for
a long period of time, the material must be strong and tensile enough to withstand a high
pressure or force acting against it. The hardness of a metal is a measure of a materials
resistance to permanent deformation of plastic, (e.g. a small dent or a scratch).
In this experiment, the Brinell hardness test is used. The Brinell hardness test is
invented in 1900 by a Swedish engineer named Johan August Brinell. This test is an effective
way in gauging the hardness of a metal because the damage to the specimens surface is
reduced when the material is being tested in this test.
In the Brinell hardness test, the hardness of materials are tested by pressing a steel ball
indenter into the surface of specimen for 15 seconds by a standard load, which in this case, is
10kN. Then, the diameter of the indentation on the surface of the sample is measured after the
load is removed.
The results of the experiment is then recorded and the hardness of the material can be
determined by using the following equation to find the Brinell hardness number:

2F
HB =

D ( D D d
2

Where:
D

= Diameter of the steel ball (mm)

= Diameter of indentation on the surface of specimen (mm)

= Force applied (N)

When calculating the Brinell hardness number in this experiment, however, 0.102 must be
multiplied into the formula. The formula used to calculate the BHN for the results of this
experiment is shown below:

HB =

0.102

2F
D ( D D2d2 )

Where:
D

= Diameter of the steel ball (mm)

= Diameter of indentation on the surface of specimen (mm)

= Force applied (N)

This is because 0.102 is the specific coefficient in the Brinell Hardness Test and the formula
has to be modified in order to find the specific value of the BHN for the specimen in this
experiment.

Figure 1. Basic illustration of the Brinell Hardness Test.

The original version of the Brinell Hardness Tester involves a complicated and manual way
of measuring the diameter of the indentation including the usage of different apparatus, such
as the vernier callipers or microscope to observe and measure the diameter. Because of the
manual way of measuring data, certain human errors cannot be avoided and this would affect
the accuracy and precision of the experiment. Hence, the modern Brinell Hardness tester is
built in with a microscope probe, connected to the computer. Any slight indentation of the
material will be displayed on the computer screen and accurate and precise readings can be
obtained automatically. Through the inbuilt calculating system, the hardness value of the
material will also be obtained easily. This modern way of conducting the experiment will
increase the accuracy of the diameter analysis dramatically, which indirectly decreases the
deviation of the hardness value from the theoretical value by reducing random errors and
human errors from occurring. In other words, the results of the experiment can be improved
and it would be more accurate and precise than the traditional way of Brinell Hardness Test.

Figure 2. Measurement of the indentation using a computing software.

The main advantage of Brinell Hardness Test is that it causes a minimum amount of damage
to the specimen surface being tested. The material being tested with a small indentation on
the surface can be reused again, which causes the reduction in the cost of materials.

2.0 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Deformation
displacement
gauge

Upper cross-member
Load gauge

Gripping heads
Frame pillars

Lower cross-member
Main hydraulic
cylinder

Hand wheel
Base with rubber feet

Figure 3. The Gunt Universal Hardness Testing Machine WP 300.

2.1 MATERIALS AND APPARATUS

Gunt Universal Hardness Testing Machine WP 300

4 metal specimens of mild steel, brass, copper, and aluminium
Microscope
Vernier callipers

2.2 METHODS
In this experiment, an indentation was made by using the steel ball indenter of the Gunt
Universal Hardness Tester WP 300, and the diameter of the indentations is measured for each
material. The Brinell Hardness Value (HB) is then calculated using the equation stated in the
8

introduction section where the values of all 4 of the metal being tested were being compared
with the theoretical hardness values given. The difference and percentage difference between
the experimental and theoretical values were also calculated and tabulated in the results.

2.3 PROCEDURE
1.
2.
3.
4.

The needle arrow in the load gauge was calibrated to the zero position.
The diameter of the steel ball used as the indenter is measured.
A piece of mild steel specimen was put onto the compression testing platform.
The hand wheel was turned clockwise to apply load force on the surface of the

specimen until the load gauge shows 10 kN.

5. The specimen was compressed by the indenter for 15 seconds before releasing the
load force applied on the surface of the specimen.
6. The specimen was removed from the compression testing platform and the diameter
of the indentation was measured. The result was recorded in Table 1.
7. Step 1 to 5 was repeated with the metal specimens of brass, copper, and aluminium.
8. The results are calculated and further analysis were done.

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Table 1. Tabulated results of the diameter of the indentation of different materials.
In this experiment, the initial diameter of the specimen is 10mm and the force applied is
10kN.
Materials

Force, F

Diameter of indentation, d (mm)

Number , BHN (N/mm2)

(kN)
Mild Steel
Brass
Copper
Aluminiu

Brinell Hardness

d1

d2

davg

10
10
10

2.760
3.800
4.300

2.700
3.850
4.200

2.730
3.825
4.250

170.9452
79.8526
68.4923

10

3.900

4.100

4.000

77.7808

m
3.92 3.82 3.87 83.34
Brinell Hardness Number ,
2

Materials

BHN (N/mm )
Experimental Theoretical

Deviation of BHN (N/mm2)

Difference (|

% Error

ExperimentalTheoretical|)
Mild Steel
170.9452
120.00
50.9452
42.45
Brass
85.3910
60.00
25.3910
42.31
Copper
68.4923
35.00
33.4923
2.03
77.7808
75.00
2.7808
16.12
Aluminium
Table 2. Experimental and theoretical Brinell hardness number.
Hardness value (F = 10 kN):
Mild Steel
HB=

0.102 F
0.102 F
=
2
2
AB
0.5 D ( D D d )

0.102 10 000
0.5 10 ( 1010 22.732 )

10

1020
5.97

170.9452 N mm2

Brass
HB=

0.102 F
0.102 F
=
2
2
AB
0.5 D ( D D d )
0.102 10 000

0.5 10 ( 10 10 3.825
2

1020
11.945

85.3910 N mm2
Copper
HB=

0.102 F
0.102 F
=
AB
0.5 D ( D D 2d 2 )
0.102 10 000

0.5 10 ( 10 10 4.250
2

1020
14.892

68.4923 N mm

Aluminium
HB=

0.102 F
0.102 F
=
2
2
AB
0.5 D ( D D d )

11

0.102 10 000
0.5 10 ( 10 10 4.550
2

1020
16.2155

62.9025 N mm

Pecentage Deviation:
Mild Steel
expLit

Difference
PD =
PD =

1.6647
100
86.5647

PD =1.92

Brass
expLit

Difference
PD =
PD =

1.5526
100
79.8526

PD =1.94
12

Copper
expLit

Difference
PD =
PD =

1.3923
100
68.4923

PD =2.03
Aluminium (F = 10 kN)
expLit

Difference
PD =
PD =

1.4808
100
77.7808

PD =1.90

13

3.2 Discussion
From the result obtained from the experiment, we can conclude that the hardest metal among
all the materials is mild steel, followed by brass, aluminium and finally copper as the softest
metal. The hardness of the metals differ from each other due to the factors that determine
their hardness, ranging from their metallic crystal structure, their alloy properties, and
ultimately to their grain boundary.

Hardness in terms of metallic crystalline structure

The hardness for different types of metal depends on the type of metallic crystalline structure
formed in the metal.

The primary metallic crystalline structure of an element is a type of classification for metal in
terms of their internal structure. It describes the arrangement of the metallic atoms at atomic
level, known as crystal unit cell structures or lattices. There are altogether 14 different types
14

of crystal unit cell structures exist in nature, but most of the metal element fall into the
category of the main three crystal unit cell structure, which are body centred cubic (BCC),
face-centred cubic (FCC) and hexagonal closed packed (HCP). For the metals being analysed
in this experiment, the mild steel has a disrupted BCC structure, called BCT structure, while
brass, copper, and aluminium has a FCC structure.

Figure 4. Graphic representation of Cubic, BCC and FCC crystalline structure (Lower,
2015).
The properties of a metal depends on the crystalline structure form in the element. To
determine the hardness of an element, the atomic packing factor, as well as the shape of the
unit cell are important factors that defines the ability of the element resist to deformation
(NDT, 2015). The atomic packing factor is the fraction of volume of the atoms to the total
volume of a unit cell. It is a way to describe how pack a unit cell is. A unit cell with higher
atomic packing factor tends to be deformed easier because its arrangement allows slippage to
occur more easily. Thus, plastic deformation are more likely to occur in element with unit cell
that are more pack. On the other hand, cubic unit cell exhibits a better ductility (the opposite
of hardness) compare to other shape of other unit cells, such as the hexagonal-shape unit cell
found in HCP. This is due to the fact that cubic unit cell provide a better geometry for closed
packed planes in several directions, which indirectly promotes slippage to occur.
Since only BCC and FCC structure present in the sample metals used in the experiment, only
the characteristic of BCC and FCC unit cell will be compared. BCC structure has a whole
atom inside the crystal unit cell and it is surrounded by the corners of eight different cells. It
has a cubic unit cell shape and atomic packing factor of 0.68. FCC structure has four-half
atoms in the middle of the crystal unit cell and it is also surrounded by the corners of eight
cells; it has a cubic unit cell shape and atomic packing factor of 0.74. Hence, comparing the
hardness of BCC and FCC structure unit cells, it is clear to say that metal with BCC structure
has a better hardness because it is a cubic unit cell, and also it has an atomic packing factor of
15

0.68, which is less packed than metal with FCC structure. This is the reason why mild steel is
the hardest metal among all other sample metals because it is the only metal here having a
BCC structure, which means that slippage and deformation are less likely to occur in this
metal.
Hardness in terms of alloy properties
Aside from metal having the body-centred crystal structure, another characteristic that makes
metal resist to deformation is their alloy property. Alloy is a mixture of two or more type of
different metal atoms. When the main metal of an alloy is melted and mixed together with an
alloying agent (atoms of another metal element), the composition of the main liquid metal is
changed. This causes the arrangement of the main metal atoms to be disrupted, making the
main metal atoms to arrange themselves and form a different crystal structure arrangement
which consists of new alloying agent atoms present in the void spaces between the main
metal atoms when it cools down. This phenomenon prevents the main metal atoms to slide
onto each other, thus increase the hardness of the main metal element (Woodford, 2008).
There are two types of alloy that are widely use in the industry, namely the substitution alloys
and the interstitial alloys. Substitution alloys are formed when the main metal atoms are
being replaced by the atoms of the alloying agent that has the same or almost similar atomic
radius. This type of alloy can only exist between metals that has their constituent element
quite close to each other in the periodic table. An example of this type of alloy is brass, which
is a mixture of 67% copper and 33% zinc (Helmenstine, 2014).
The interstitial alloys also has alloying agent atoms mixed into the main metal, but they slip
into the gaps between the main metal atoms instead of replacing them. Thus, it is clear that in
order to fit themselves inside the gaps, the alloying agent atoms has to be relatively smaller
compare to the main metal atoms. An example of this type of alloy is steel, which consist of
99% iron and 1% carbon (Robert D., 2002).

16

Figure 5. Substitution alloy (a) and interstitial alloy (b).

From this experiment, we can notice that there are 2 types of pure metals and 2 types of
alloys being used to study their hardness. The 2 pure metals are copper and aluminium,
whereas the 2 alloys are mild steel and brass. From the result, we can clearly see that mild
steel and brass are much harder than copper and aluminium. This is due to the fact that they
are alloy which already has their slipping abilities disrupted. For example, take copper (100%
copper) and brass (99% copper + 1% zinc) and compare their hardness. Although brass is
only a substitution alloy with addition of 1% zinc, the effect of the zinc atoms that prevent the
slipping from occurring is already significant compare to the pure copper base on the results
obtained. Thus, this proves that the addition of only a small amount of alloying agent is
already essential to harden up a soft metal.

In terms of the hardness between alloys, which are brass and mild steel, we can see that mild
steel is much harder than brass, and this is also proven to be correct theoretically. Brass is a
type of substitution alloy where their main metal atoms (copper) are only being replaced by
the alloying agent (zinc). Thus, the structure of brass does not significantly prevent the
slipping of the metal atoms to occur. On the other hand, mild steel is a type of interstitial
alloy where their main metal atoms (iron) are fixed at their original crystalline positions, and
the alloying agent atoms (carbon) fills in the gaps in between the iron atoms. This creates a
network of grip which holds the iron atoms together, and in the same time prevent the iron
atoms to slip on top of each other, which subsequently increase their hardness (Woodford,
2008).

Hardness in terms of grain boundary

Grain boundary in a solid crystalline structure is defined as the region of division which
separate two crystals of the same phase (Gottstein, 2011). It has been known as a major
defect in metal which greatly determines the hardness of metal. They only exist in amorphous
solid since only in this type of solid, multiple crystals having no continuous long-range order
are found. Grain boundary form due to the arrangement of particles during cooling process.
From the study of matter phase, we know that liquid particles arrange themselves from
energetic moving particles into less energetic static particles when undergoing solidification
17

process (Splung.com, 2015). When hot molten liquid is poured into a mould and allowed to
cool, cooling process take place and it triggers the liquid particles to arrange themselves and
form small crystals, known as grains. Due to even temperature distribution throughout the
molten metal, these grains can start to crystallise at any location in the molten metal
simultaneously. As a result, the crystals grow bigger through the arrangement of the
surrounding liquid particles on the surface of the crystals, but it eventually comes to a stop
when they meet an adjacent crystal by the side. When this happen, a clear boundary, known
as grain boundary is form between the two crystals that has different orientation in terms of
arrangement. The grain boundary is one of the biggest reason that affect several properties of
a material, including ductility, strength, rigidity, and of course also the hardness.

Figure 6. Grain boundary of metal.

In this experiment, the hardness of the metal specimen involved, which are mild steel, brass,
copper, and aluminium, are also dependent on the grain boundary form in the specimens. The
process of manufacturing the specimen plays an important role in determining the quality of
the specimen. The lesser the grain boundary, the harder the material is, considering the
crystalline structure and the constituent of the metal as the major factor. Besides that, the
grain boundary is also one of the factor that causes the inaccuracy and changes obtain
between the 2 readings. If the metal is indented at the grain boundary, the part will be softer
and thus the diameter of the indentation will be bigger.
4.0 FURTHER DISCUSSION & ERROR ANALYSIS
Comparing the hardness values obtained from the experiment and the data from, the
difference of Brinell Hardness Number is not significant, and it also appears as well that the
literature values are always smaller than the experimental values. This phenomenon can be
caused by several errors pertaining to the specimens and also the procedure to obtain the
18

values. The first factor that affect the value can be due to the sensitivity of the Gunt Universal
Hardness Testing Machine WP 300. From the machine setup, we can see that the gauge used
to measure the amount of force acting on the specimens has a fairly large scale. This will
decrease the sensitivity of the measured force acting on the samples, causes error to occur.
Besides this, the use of the simple microscope can also causes parallax error due to the fact
that the microscope can be misplaced at a different height, which can causes a difference in
the actual diameter. Thirdly, the way of manufacturing each type of metal can also cause
changes to the hardness of the specimens. The internal structure, such as the amount of grain
boundary found in the specimens used in this experiment may differ from the overall quality
of the specimens used to produce the literature value, which is why the values are allowed to
differ away slightly from the published literature value. Aside from these error, the location
chosen to get indented is also a factor that affect the results of the experiment. When a metal
is being indented, the particular surface will be harden up due to the dislocation of the grain
accumulate to the side of the indentation due to compression. This can cause the next
indentation near the indented hole to have an inaccurate reading because the hardness around
the indented region has been reinforced by the previous indentation. Most of the specimens
used in this experiment were used previously by other lab groups which means that multiple
indentations have already been made on the surface of the specimen. Thus, certain possibility
occurrence of error is inevitable.
Besides that, it can be noticed that when the load force acting on the surface of the aluminium
specimen increases, the difference of Hardness values as well as their percentage deviation
increases. This could be due to the limitation of the indenter. When more load force is applied
on the test surface, the indenter is being pushed into the specimens even deeper. Due to the
fact that the steel indenter is a metallic sphere, the maximum diameter it can offer for the
indentation can only happen at the circumference along the longest edge of the metallic
sphere. Hence, inaccuracy of results can occur when the metallic sphere is indented pass its
diameter limit. From this, we can state that the higher the load force on the indenter, the
higher the percentage deviation, the higher the inaccuracy of the results.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Through this experiment, it can be concluded that the experimental hardness value of the
specimens are almost identical to their theoretical counterpart. The hardness value obtained
19

via experimental approach is slightly higher than the theoretical literature values, with a
maximum percentage deviation of 3.47 %. It has been found out that the hardness values of
mild steel, brass, copper and aluminium are 86.5647, 79.8526, 68.4923, and 77.7808
respectively, and also hardness value for aluminium as 78.4848 and 78.9483 for 15 kN and 17
kN. However, this experiment should be improved by considering the error occurred for
better results.

REFERENCES
1. England, G. (2015). The Brinell Hardness Test. Available:
http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/hardness/brinell.htm. Last accessed 22th May 2015.
2. NDT. (2015). Hardness. Available: https://www.ndeed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Materials/Mechanical/Hardness.htm.
Last accessed 22th May 2015.
3. Helmenstine, A. M.. (2014). What Is Brass. Available:
http://chemistry.about.com/od/alloys/f/What-Is-Brass.htm. Last accessed 22th May
2015.
4. Woodford, C. (2008). Alloys. Available: http://www.explainthatstuff.com/alloys.html.
Last accessed 22th May 2015.
5. Pehlke, Robert D. (2002). "Steel Manufacture." McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of
Science and Technology , 19th edition, Vol. 17. New York: McGraw-Hill.
6. Splung.com. (2015). The Phases of Matter. Available:

http://www.splung.com/content/sid/6/page/phasesofmatter. Last accessed 22th May

2015.

20