Delft University of Technology

Faculty of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science

Section Mechanical Behaviour of Materials

The determination of the

true stress-strain curve
using hardness indentations

Graduate report

Carel ten Horn

Supervisors:
Prof. dr. ir. A. Bakker
ir. R.W.J. Koers

Delft, April 1997

Table of Contents

7. CONCLUSION
8. RECOMMENDATIONS
9. REFERENCES
LIST OF SYMBOLS
APPENDIX 1: MEASURED DATA
APPENDIX 2: THE IMPROVED ASTM SECANT METHOD

51
53
55
57
59
63

1. INTRODUCTION
The aim of the research was to derive the true stress-strain curve from hardness
measurements.
The stress-strain curve is usually obtained by a tensile test. In order to perform a tensile test a
large amount of material is needed. Moreover expensive equipment is needed for the test.
The amount of material needed for a tensile test is not always available; in such cases small
tensile specimens may be used.
When there is little or no material available for tensile tests, a 'non'-destructive method is
needed to evaluate the stress-strain curve.
Hardness indentation are easy, quick and cheap to perform and are virtually non-destractive.
This makes it an interesting alternative to the tensile test. Another advantage is that hardness
measurements can be carried out on site with a portable hardness tester.
In this report the references to the literature are in square brackets, e.g. [1], and references to
equations are given in round brackets, e.g. (1).
This research was conducted as a graduating project in Materials Science at the Delft
University of Technology.

Experimental

details

A protective box around the set-up was used in case the indenter disintegrated under the
applied load.

a.

Pressure plates of testing

machine
Aluminium plates
Ball support v/ith ball
Specimen
Clip gauge
Coil spring

b.

Figure 9. Schematic overview ofthe set-up used. Figure a displays the tensile testing
machine used. Figure b shows the set-up used for the indentation tests.
The small aluminium plates were used in order to avoid damage to the pressure plates of
the testing machine. The clip gauge was fitted with a small coil spring to prevent it
falling off. For maximum indentation this spring was not completely impressed.

18

Experimental

details

In order to obtain accurate measurements from the clip gauge the knife edges on the
specimen and on the ball support had to be aligned. This alignment was performed by
placing the specimen and the ball support against a flat piece of steel, as indicated in
figure 10. The alignment was performed on two surfaces in order to get the indentation
in the centre of the specimen. The alignment was primarily on the side with the knife
edges.

Alignment
block

Figure 10. The alignment ofthe specimen with the ball support.

Two methods of controlling the indentation were used:

computer control;
Instron stress-strain function panel.
Using computer control, only the loading could be performed and recorded. The
unloading of the specimen had to be done 'by hand'.
Using the Instron stress-strain function panel the loading, holding at maximum
displacement and unloading of the specimen could be performed, while the computer
recorded the force and displacement.
The first specimens were loaded under computer control. Later specimens were tested
using the Instron stress-strain function panel.
The specimens were loaded to 48kN. This value was chosen because at that load the
indentation would be approximately 90%. The ball support should only deform
elastically due to the higher load used to make it.
3.3.4 Indentation measurement
For the depth measurement using the microscope, the microscope was focused on the
surface of the specimen near the edge. Relative to this position the height of the pile-up
and the depth of the indentation could be measured. This was done by focusing on the
part in question, the displacement of the objective being the height or depth.

3.4 Equipment used

For all tests a Instron 4505 testing machine was used. This tensile testing machine was fitted
with a stress-strain function panel. The data was recorded by a computer using 'Series I X
Automated Materials Testing System 5.04' software, which was also used in some
experiments to control the testing machine.
In order to measure the displacement of the indentation specimens an Instron clip gauge of
12.5mm 5mm was used. This clip gauge was also used for the tensile tests but the gauge
length was increased to 30mm.
The diameter of the ball-bearing balls and the diameter of the tensile specimens was
measured using a micrometer screwgauge. The gauge length of the tensile specimens was
measured using sliding callipers.
The diameter of the indentation was measured using a microscope. This microscope was
fitted with three micrometer displacement gauges: two perpendicular to each other in the
plane of the table of the microscope and one to measure height.

19

Experimental

details

The height of the pile-up and the depth of the indentations were measured using both the
microscope and a micrometer calliper.

20

4. T E S T PROGRAMME
4.1 Material
The material used for all indentation and tensile tests was Fe 510 Nb. This steel was warmrolled and cooled for 2^/2 days. It was rolled to a thickness of 30 mm and subsequently normal
annealed. This material complies with Fe E355 KT according to Euronorm 113-72.
The composition of the material is given in table 1.
Table 1. Composition of Fe 510 Nb [10].
Element

Mn

SI

Al

Nb

0.187

1.297

0.014

0.007

0.398

0.048

0.0053

0.029

4.2 Ball-bearing ball tests

Steel ball-bearing balls of 7 and 10 mm diameter were used to test their resistance to
deformation. Table 2 shows the tests performed on the ball-bearing balls. After the loading
the balls were examined for any deformation.
Table 2. Test programme for the ball-bearing balls.
Maximum indentation depth
(mm)

Ball diameter
(mm)

10
10
7
7

first loading
second loading
first loading
second loading

1
1.25
1
2

The maximum indentation depth of the second loading of the 7 mm ball was chosen to
maximise the indentation diameter and indentation force.
The cross-head speed used for these tests was 0.600 mm/min.

4.3 Tensile tests

For the tensile test 6 specimens were used. The first specimen was used to find the best
cross-head speed, which was then used for the other 5 specimens. The speed used to measure
the yielding was 0.500 mm/min. After yielding the speed was increased to 1 mm/min.
The engineering and the true stress-strain curve were calculated from the recorded data.
The following engineering and the corresponding true values were also calculated:
the yield point,
the lower yield point,
e the yield elongation,
e Young's modulus,
e the ultimate tensile strength,
e the ultimate tensile strain,
the break stress.
The engineering break strain and the necking were calculated and the power-law parameters
were derived from the true stress -strain curve.
The necking, 4', was calculated using equation (32)
A A
VJ/ = ^ 0
^"
(32)
Ao
where AO is the cross-sectional area of the specimen before the tensile test and An is the
smallest cross-sectional area in the region where necking has occurred.

21

Test Programme

4.4 Indentation tests

In order to obtain hardness measurements at different strain levels the loading of the
specimen was split into steps.
Each step consisted of loading and unloading of the specimen. Before the next step was
executed the indentation was measured. Using the microscope the diameter of the indentation
was measured in four directions, at 45 intervals. The depth of indentation and the height of
the pile-up were measured with the microscope as well as with a micrometer clockgauge.
By measuring after each step, the hardness at different strain levels could be evaluated using
only one specimen.
Some specimens were loaded in one step to see i f this one loading would provide the same
results as would be obtained by loading in several steps.
In order to determine the influence of the surface condition, the number of loadings and the
loading method, the test programme was conducted as shown in table 3. The maximum loads
used with each step are given in table 4 for the various groups of indentation tests.
Table 3. Test programme for the indentation tests.
Group
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1
J
K
L

Surface Steps taken Number of

condition
to 48 kN
reloadings
grit 600
8
1
grit 600
8
1
grit 600
8
1
grit 600
8
1
grit 600
9
2
grit 600
11
1
grit 600
1
2
grit 600
8
2
ground
1
2
ground
4
2
ground
1
2
ground
1
4

hold time at max.

displacement
O.Osec
lO.Osec
eo.Osec
120.0sec
30.0sec
SO.Osec
SOsec
SOsec
SOsec
SOsec
SO.Osec
5min

Loading
method
Instron
Instron
Instron
Instron
Instron
Instron
computer
computer
computer
computer
Instron
computer

Spec no.
19
20
2S
25
7
10
4
S
5
2
6
1

22
24
26
8
11
17
9
12
1S

27
16
18
15
14

Table 4. Load levels used with the various steps of loading.

Group
A
B
0
D
E
F
G
H
1
J
K
L

a
6
6
6
6
6
1.5
48
6
48
12
48
48

b
12
12
12
12
12
3

c
24
24
24
24
18
4.5

48

48

12

24

48

48

24

48
48

Loading step
d
e
30
S6
SO
S6
SO
S6
30
36
21
24
6
9

with maximum load in kN

f
h
i
9
42
48
48
42
48
48
42
48
48
42
48
48
30
36
42
48
12
15
18
24

30

36

42

S6

48

48

48

48
48

48

48

48

48

48

48

36

48

48

48

For the specimens using Instron control a schematic loading diagram is shown in figure 11.

22

Test Programme

Maximum
displacement

8
ro
Q.
w
Q

, Hold time

,|

jime^

Figure 11. The loading programme used for the indentation tests.

The cross-head speed used for the loading and unloading of all indentation tests was 0.200
mm/min. This value was chosen because it worked well for the manufacture of the ball
support. Also it was low enough to simulate a series of static hardness measurements and fast
enough to be practical. At this speed the single step loading of a specimen would take
approximately 10 minutes. In the ASTM standard for the Brinell test no speed of indentation
is specified. It only specifies that the force to the indenter should be applied smoothly and
without impact forces. The standard states that the full test force should be applied for 10 to
15 seconds.
For specimens using computer control the first block of loading is identical. The holding
stage is similar for both control methods but the time at maximum displacement is not as
accurate with computer control as with Instron control. With computer control the unloading
is not well defined since it had to be done manually.
The stepped loading should also provide a relationship between the indentation depth at
maximum load and the indentation diameter in unloaded condition.
For the evaluation of Underwood's method, equation (23), the derivative of the loaddisplacement record was needed. This derivative can be obtained in two ways;
the derivative is calculated from point to point;
a straight line is fitted through the plastic loading region of the load displacement record.
For the calculation from point to point the improved ASTM secant method was used. This
procedure is described in appendix A2. The interval used was 50 points.

23

Test

Programme

5. RESULTS
5.1 Ball-bearing ball tests
Table 5 shows the results of the ball-bearing ball tests.
Table 5. Resul ts of the ball-bearing ball tests.
Ball
diameter
(mm)

Cross-head
displacement
(mm)

Maximum
load
(kN)

Indentation
diameter
(mm)

d/D

10
10
7
7

1
1.25
1
2

61.06
79.17
48.22
95.15

4.82
5.52
4.27
5.98

0.482
0.552
0.610
0.854

After loading the 7 ram ball to 95 kN, the ball showed some deformation. The maximum
diameter was 7.1 mm while the minimum diameter was 6.9 mm.
Due to this deformation the 7 mm ball was rejected for use with the indentation tests.
In order to be able to record the stress-strain curve as far as possible, the diameter of the ball
had to be smaller than or equal to 7 mm. Therefore a ball diameter of Va inch (6.35 mm) was
chosen. In order to avoid deformation the ball to be used had to be harder than the ballbearing ball. A tungstencarbide ball of Va inch was chosen to be used for the indentation tests.

5.2 Tensile test

The engineering stress-strain curves derived from the tensile test are shown in figure 12.
600E+6 T

Tensile Testing Fe 510 Nb

500E+6

OOOE+O
0.15

0.2

0.35

E (m/tn)

Figure 12. The engineering stress-strain curve ofFe 510 Nb.

The true stress-strain curves are shown in figure 13.

25

Results

200E+6 -V,

100E+6 4

OOOE+O - I ' ' ' I ' ' ^ I ' ' ' I ' ' ' I ' ' I ' ' ' I ' ' ' I 1 I I I I .
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

I
0.18

Tl (m/m)

Figure 13. The true stress-strain

curve ofFe 510 Nb.

The steep drop at the end of the curve of specimen tenslc is caused by the clip gauge running
out of its range.
Results from the tensile tests regarding the engineering properties are given in table 6. The
true strength properties are given in table 7. The true stress-strain curves are shown up to
maximum load. Above maximum load the equations used (1) and (2) are no longer valid due
to necking.
In the averaged values of the ultimate tensile strain and the break strain the value from
specimen tens3 is not included due to the absence of yield elongation. The values for tensS
are therefore shown in italic type.
In tables 6 and 7 the row 'st. dev.' contains the standard deviation. The row 'error' contains the
error for a 95% confidence interval. The row 'rel. error' contains the relative error.
Table 6. Engineering properties.

tens1
tens1b
tenslc
tens2
tensS
tens4
tens5
tens6
average
St. dev.
error
rel. error

26

Yield
Lower
Yield
E
C^UTS
Point
yield point elongation
MPa
MPa
m/m
GPa
MPa
359.3
356.4
0.0166 211.4

359.1

366.4

0.0203

EUTS

m/m

Break
stress
MPa

Break
strain
m/m
0.7507

212.3
208.8
209.6
211.4
211.0

540.7
539.1
545.7
537.7
540.8
536.7

0.1737
0.1627
0.1765
0.1828
0.1794

335.1
332.8
347.6
334.8
327.0
330.6

0.282
0.347
0.299

0.7531
0.7354
0.7488
0.7513
0.7426

0.1340

0.289
0.263

0.203

370.9
373.0
364.7

364.0
366.5
363.2

0.0193
0.0197
0.0186

365.4

363.3

0.0189 210.8

540.1

0.1750

334.7

0.281

0.7470

6.4
8.0
0.022

4.1
5.1
0.014

0.0014
0.0018
0.092

3.2
3.3
0.006

0.0077
0.0095
0.054

7.0
7.4
0.022

0.047
0.049
0.176

0.0068
0.0071
0.009

1.3
1.4
0.007

Results

Table 7. 'rue stress properties.

tens1
tensib
tenslc
tens2
tens3
tens4
tens5
tens6
average
St. dev.
error
rel. error

Yield
E
Yield point Lovi^er
OUTS
yield point elongation
GPa
MPa
m/m
MPa
MPa
0.0165
211.7
359.5
360.1

euTs

m/m

Break
stress
MPa

0.0191
0.0195
0.0184

212.7
209.1
209.9
211.7
211.3

634.7
626.8
615.5
632.6
639.6
633.0

0.1626
0.1679
0.1650

1344
1348
1314
1333
1315
1284

367.0

0.0187

211.1

630.4

0.1613

1323

4.6
5.7
0.016

0.0014
0.0017
0.092

1.3
1.4
0.007

8.4
8.8
0.014

0.0065
0.0081
0.050

24
25
0.019

359.7

370.8

0.0200

371.5
373.7
365.3

367.7
370.5
366.4

366.1
6.4
8.0
0.022

0.1602
0.1508

0.1205

In order to fit the power-law to the true stress-strain curve, the yield elongation was extracted
from the curve. For the fit only the data above approximately 1.5% strain were used. This
provided the best fit over the largest interval. The power-law parameters thus derived are
shown in table 8.
Table 8. Power-law parameters.
k
MPa
tensi
tens2
tens3
tens4
tens5
tens6
average
stdev
error
rel. error

893
863
824
859
863
857

0.175
0.156
0.138
0.157
0.157
0.158

860

0.157

22
25
0.029

0.012
0.013
0.085

In principle the true ultimate tensile strain should be equal to n. It can be seen from table 7
and 8 that this is indeed the case (within 3%).

5.3 Indentation tests

The measured data of the indentation tests can be seen in appendix A l .
5.3,1 Manufacture of ball support
To find the best indentation speed parameters the seating of the ball was done in three
stages. The ball support was not removed from the machine between loadings. A typical
load-displacement record is given in figure 14.

27

Results

70E+3 T

O.OE+00

1.0E-03

2.0E-03

3.0E-03

4.0E-03

Displacement of cross-head (m)

Figure 14. Load-displacement

record for the manufacture ofthe ball support.

During the seating of the ball in the ball-support, the indentation was monitored. A t 68
k N the ball was almost half in the ball support.
After the second reloading to 68 kN, the force-displacement curve showed hardly any
plastic deformation.
After the ball support was unloaded it showed pile-up on its surface and a pattern of
small lines, see figure 15.

Figure 15. The line pattern as found on the ball support.

In order to find out i f the diameter of the ball had changed permanently during the
loading the ball was removed from the ball support and was measured with a micrometer
screwgauge. No deformation was measured. Also after the first loading of specimen 1
the ball was removed from its support. This can be seen from the next loading step of the
specimen, figure 16. Since the ball was not seated correctly, this meant that extra
displacement was needed to seat the ball.

28

Results

50000 T

O.OOE+00

2.00E-04

4.00E-04

6.00E-04

8.00E-04

1.00E-03

1.20E-03

1.40E-03

1.60E-03

1.80E-03

Depth (m)

Figure 16. The load-displacement curve for specimen 1.

5.3.2 Load-displacement record
In the load-displacement record, figure 17, six stages are visible:
I.
onset effects,
n . elastic loading region,
IH. transition from elastic to plastic loading region,
r v . plastic loading region
V. relaxation region,
V I . unloading region.

Figure 17. The six regions which can be identified in the load-displacement

record.

Underwood assumed that the plastic loading region was Unear. Up to the maximum load
of 17.5 k N used by Underwood the load-displacement record is approximately linear.

29

Results

For loads above 17.5 k N the non-linearity starts, as can be seen from the loaddisplacement records. Underwood used a 6.35 mm tungstencarbide ball for the
indentations, performed with A327 steel of 1000 to 1200 MPa ultimate strength.
When maximum load is reached and the cross-head position is kept constant, relaxation
of load occurs, figure 18. This causes the displacement to increase, figure 19.
If the cross-head position is kept constant after unloading of the specimen, the load is
seen to increase. This may be due to relaxation of displacement.

-1200 -J-

Figure 18. Load relaxation during maximum displacement

at which the holding stage is started.

The origin ofthe plot is the point

10E-6 T

Time (s)

Figure 19. Depth of indentation increases during the time at maximum

30

displacement.

Results

5.3.3 Offset correction

In oder to correct for any onset effect of the loading, the starting-point of loading was
calculated. A straight line was fitted to the elastic part of the load-displacement record.
For the first loading step, which does not have an elastic loading region, a second-order
polynomial was fitted to the loading curve. The intersection of the fitted line and the
displacement axis was declared to be the starting-point. The elastic loading region of the
first loading step, if present, is obscured by the onset effects. This means that no elastic
loading region can be seen in the first loading step.
From the load-displacement record of the specimens it can be seen that the clip gauge
could not be replaced exactly. This is visible as an offset in the displacement of the loaddisplacement curves. This offset was corrected for using the following method, see
figure 20. The slope of the elastic part of loading was subtracted from the point at
maximum load of the previous loading step. The point found was declared to be the
ending-point of loading. Next the load-displacement curve for the step was moved so
that the starting-point was equal to the ending-point of the previous loading.

5
a. Intermediate loading step

b. First loading step

Figure 20. The method used to correct for the offset in the displacement

5.3.4 Tabor's equations

Tabor's equations (14) and (15) were applied to all loading steps of all specimens. The
calculated stress-strain data can be seen in figure 21. In view of the fact that specimen 25
produced so much higher stresses, the results were discarded from further investigations.

31

Results

800.0E+6 T

700.0E+6 +

Stress strain from

Tabor's equations
2%

600.0E+6 +

500.0E+6

400.0E+6

300.0E+6

200.0E+6

100.0E+6

OOO.OE+0
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

e (m/m)

Figure 21. The stress-strain data calculated with Tabor's equations (14) and (15).
5.3.5 Microscope depth measurement
Depth measurements using the microscope may be inaccurate, due to the depth of field.
In order to determine this inaccuracy the depth measurements performed with the
microscope and the micrometer calliper were compared, figure 22. It can be seen that for
small variations in height, the amount of spread in the results increases. This means that
small variations cannot be accurately measured using the microscope.
1.60E-03

1.40E-03

Accuracy of depth measurement

using a microscope

1.20E-03 +

O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00

2.00E-04

4.00E-04

6.00E-04

8.00E-04

1.00E-03

1.20E-03

1.40E-03

1.60E-03

Height (m) measured with microscope

Figure 22. Accuracy ofthe microscope to measure variations in height. Depth measured with
a micrometer calliper as function of depth measured with the microscope.

32

Results

5.3.6 Depth-to-diameter conversion

From the measurements during and after indentation an indentation depth-diameter
curve was obtained, figure 23.

0.1 - - /

0 -I
0

1
0.05

1
0.1

1
0.15

i
0.2

1
0.25

8/D (m/m)

Figure 23. The relative diameter of indentation as a function ofthe relative depth of
indentation.
It is clear that the theoretical relation, (20), underestimates the diameter, while the
Underwood equation, (21), overestimates the diameter. The power law fitted to the data
describes the data only reasonably.
In order to obtain a better f i t the theoretical relationship was extended as seen in
equation (33).
2

= a

+ b' ^ 1

(33)

where a and b are fit parameters. For the theoretical relationship the value of these
parameters are 4 and -4 respectively.
Figure 24 shows the data from the hardness measurements. The parameters of the fitted
curve are given in table 9.

33

Results

Table 9. Parameters of the fitted depth-to-diameter relationship, equation (33).

Parameter

a
b

Fit value

4.44
-4.59
0.998

The relation thus obtained could be used to convert the load-displacement record in a
stress-strain curve. Figure 25 shows the converted stress-strain curve for some
specimens. The stress-strain points, calculated with Tabor's equations (14) and (15), are
added as a reference.
800E+6 T

300E+6 +

200E+6 +

100E+6 +

Extended theoretical
depth-to-diameter conversion

X Measured

OOOE+O
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

8 (m/m)

Figure 25. Stress-strain curve as obtained by the conversion ofthe

record.
34

load-displacement

0.2

Results

S.3.7 Underwood's method

The derivative of the load-displacement record as a function of the load applied is given
in figure 26 for the step-loaded specimens.

40E+6

35E+6

30E+6

25E+6

20E+6

o
15E+6

.4
-

10E46

5E+6 +

- 3
- 7
8
9

Slope for single-step

and multi-step loading

OOOE+O
OOOE+O

5E+3

10E+3

15E+3

20E+3

25E+3

30E+3

35E+3

40E+3

45E+3

50E+3

F(N)

Figure 26. The slope ofthe load-displacement

record for specimens loaded in several steps.

Figure 27 shows the derivative for specimens loaded in one step. It can be clearly seen
that the derivative shows a maximum. Between 5kN and 20 k N the derivative is
approximately constant. This is the range in which Underwood carried put his research.

40E+6 T

35E+6

30E+6

25E+6

f
20E+6

u.

15E+6

10E+6

5E+6

Slope for single-step loading

OOOE+O
OOOE+O

5E+3

10E+3

15E+3

20E+3

25E+3

30E+3

35E+3

40E+3

45E+3

50E+3

F(N)

Figure 27. The slope ofthe load-displacement

secant method.

record calculated with the improved ASTM

35

Results

The stress-strain curve using the derivatives is shown in figure 28. This stress-strain
curve also shows a maximum.
700E+6 T

I9c

9d

9g

14a.

9h

4a
600E+6 +

500E+6 --

400E+6

ra
Cl.

300E+6

200E+6 +

100E+6 +

Underwood's method for

single-step and multi-step loading

OOOE+O
0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

e (m/m)

Figure 28. Stress-strain curve as obtained using Underwood's

0.2

method.

The derivative calculated for the elastic part of the loading shows strange steps on some
specimens, figure 29.

O.OE+OO
OOOE+O

5E+3

10E+3

15E+3

20E+3

25E+3

30E+3

35E+3

40E+3

45E+3

50E+3

F(N)

Figure 29. Steps in the slope ofthe load-displacement

record for specimen 3i.

These steps seem to appear only in the second reloading at maximum load. The steps in
the derivative are caused by steps in the load-displacement record, figure 30. The steps
are approximately 1 |j,m in length. The steps in the displacement cannot be caused by the
clip gauge; a slipping clip gauge would cause the displacement to decrease rather than

36

Results

increase. The width of the steps in the derivative is caused by the improved ASTM
secant method. As the interval used is 50 points, the step in the displacement influenced
the derivative over an interval of 50 points.
50E+3 J

3i
45E+3 -40E+3 -35E+3 -30E+3-

o
u.

25E+3 -20E+3 "

15E+3 -10E+3 -5E+3 OOOE+O -1.32E-3

1.33E-3

1.34E-3

1.35E-3

1.36E-3

1.37E-3

1.38E-3

1,39E-3

1.40E-3

1.41 E-3

1.42E-3

Displacement (m)

Figure 30. Steps in the load-displacement

record for specimen 3i.

5.3.8 Power-law parameters

The stress-strain points, obtained by using Tabor's equations (14) and (15), were used to
fit a power law. A power law was fitted to all the data of all specimens as well as to each
group of specimens. For group D two power law calculations were performed; one
including specimen 25, the other without 25. The results from specimen 25 were
excluded from the average, as specimen 25 produced values very different from the
other specimens.
The results for the power law fits are shown in table 10. The average of the power-law
parameters as shown in table 10 is the average parameters of the groups of specimens
excluding specimen 25.

37

Results

Table 10. Power-law parameters as derived from stress-strain points of the indentations.
k
(MPa)
1101
1136
1076

A
B
C

n
0.274
0.292
0.266

1061

0.240

D (excl. 25)
E
F
H
J
All data
All but 25
average
St. dev.
error
rel. error

1130
1039
1026
1031
976
1059

0.286
0.250
0.251
0.257
0.247
0.259

1057
1056

0.261
0.260

49
41
0.039

0.017
0.014
0.055

When these power-law parameters are compared with the values obtained by the tensile
test, both power-law parameters are overestimated (23% for k and 66% for n).
5.3.9 Stress-strain curve evaluation
In figure 31 the stress-strain curves are shown as obtained by the following methods:
o the tensile test
Tabor's equations
Underwood's method
e the power-law parameters obtained from the f i t to the hardness data points.
800E+6

Evaluation of stress - strain curve

obtained by different techniques

700E+6 +

600E+6

500E+6

300E+6 -H

200E+6

Tensile test
Power law fitted through hardness
A Hardness measurements
X Underwood

100E+6

OOOE+O
0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

il(m/m)

Figure 31. Stress-strain data as obtained by: the tensile test, Underwood's method. Tabor's
equations and the power law fitted to data points calculated with Tabor's equations.

38

Results

Although the yield elongation is not represented, the stress-strain curve for the powerlaw parameters and Tabor's equations give a good estimate for the first part of the curve.
Near the ultimate tensile strength the stresses are overestimated by both methods.
The stress-strain curve obtained from Underwood's method does not fit the true stressstrain curve as obtained by the tensile test.
5.3.10 Line patterns
A pattern of lines on the surface of the specimen was first discovered on the ball
support, figure 15. When the line pattern also appeared on specimens 1 and 2, it was
decided to sand specimen 3 to ASTM GRIT600 in order to make the line pattern more
visible.
The characteristic pattern of lines was seen in all but two specimens. Specimens 7 and
25 did not produce these line patterns.
The line patterns on all specimens looked very similar. In figure 32 a few examples are
given of the line patterns as observed on the indentation specimens.

c.
d.
Figure 32. Examples ofthe line pattern found on the specimens. Figures a, b, c and d show
specimens 9, 14, 17 and 20 respectively.

From the specimens loaded in steps it could be seen that after the first loading the line
pattern was already present. For loads as small as 1.5 k N the line pattern was very small
but nonetheless visible.
On specimens 7 and 25 there was no line pattern visible after the first loading step. The
line pattern did not appear after following loading steps. The data from these specimens
also showed some differences compared with the rest of the specimens.
In figure 33 a typical line pattern is shown. The geometry of the line pattern did not
change with increased or repeated loading. The size of the line pattern did, however,
change with the indentation diameter.

39

Results

5.3.11 Effects influencing the indentation test

Effect of time at maximum displacement
In figure 34 the stress-strain curves are shown for the specimens with varying time at the
maximum displacement. A l l the curves are within the spread between duplicates. This
means that no effect of the time at maximum displacement could be measured.
700E+6 J
680E+6- -

Effect of time at
maximum displacement

660E+6
640E+6 +
620E+6
'ra'
.
^ 600E+6 f
580E+6
560E+6
540E+6 - -

xOsec (19, 22)

A 10 sec (20)
60 sec (23, 24)
120 sec (26, 27)

520E+6 - 500E+6
0.060

-+-

0.080

0.100

0.120

-+0.140

0.160

0.180

e (m/m)

Figure 34. The effect ofthe time at maximum displacement on the stress-strain point from
Tabor's equations.

Effect of loading method

In figure 35 the stress-strain curves for specimens with different loading methods are
shown. It can be seen that any influence of the loading method is within the spread
between of the duplicates. Therefore the influence of the loading method is negligible.

40

Results

700E+6
680E+6 -

Effect of control method

specimens with ground surface

,6

660E+6 --

Vf2

13

640E+6 -620E+6
S i 600E+6

580E+6
560E+6

a Computer-controlled (3,9)
o Computer-controlled (5,12,15)
X Instron-controlled (7,8)
Instron-controlled (6,13,14)

540E+6
520E+6
500E+6
0.060

0.080

-+0.140

0.120

0.100

-+-

0.160

0.180

e (m/m)

Figure 35. The effect ofthe control method on the stress-strain point from Tabor's

equations.

Effect of surface condition

In figure 36 the stress-strain curves for specimens with different surface conditions are
shown. It can be concluded from this figure that there seems to be some influence of the
surface condition on the stress-strain points. The ground specimens appear to have a
smaller indentation diameter than the sanded specimens at the same load. Smaller
indentation diameters cause a higher hardness and a higher stress.
700E+6

Effect of surface condition

single-step loading

695E+6
690E+6 685E+6 -680E+6
2 675E+6
b
670E+6

14

665E+6
660E+6
655E+6 +

.ASTMGrit600 (4,17,18)
I Ground (5,12.15,6,12,13)
-+-

650E+6
0.170

0.171

0.172

0.173

0.174

0.175

0.176

0.177

e (m/m)

Figure 36. The effect ofthe surface condition on the stress-strain point from
equations.

Tabor's

41

Results

Effect of number of loading steps

Figure 37 shows the stress-strain curve for specimens with different numbers of loading
steps. The points above the rest are the data for specimen 7. As specimen 7 did not
produce a line pattern, this specimen can be discarded. It can be seen that the number of
loading steps does not seem to influence the stress-strain curve derived from the
hardness indentations.
700E+6

Effect of number of load applications

specimens with ASTM Griteoo surface
650E+6 +

eOOE+6 +

S. 550E+6

500E+6

o 1 loading (4,17,18)
+ 8 loadings (3,9)
& 9 loadings (7,8)
x l l loadings (10,11,16)

450E+6

400E+6
0.000

-I-

0.020

0.040

0.060

0.080

0.100

0.120

0.140

0.160

0.180

E (m/m)

Figure 37. The effect ofthe number of steps taken on the stress-strain point from
equations.

Tabor's

5.3.12 Equations previously proposed

Hertz' equation
Using the measured indentation depth and diameter, the radius of curvature of the
indentation was calculated. It was assumed that the indentation was spherical, as Tabor
previously had discovered. Equation (34) was used to calculate the radius of curvature.
r . = ^ 5 ^

(34)

When Hertz' equation was used with Young's modulus for tungstencarbide, Ei=630 GPa,
the relative error in the estimate was approximately 22%. I f Young's modulus for the
indenter was taken to be the same as for steel, the relative error of the estimate dropped
to approximately 11%.
The estimate for specimen 25, however, is better i f Young's modulus for the indenter
taken to be that of tungstencarbide. In figure 38 the estimate of the indentation diameter
is plotted against the diameter of the indentation. A trendline is fitted to the data. Ideally
the fitted curve should have a slope of 1 and an abscissa of 0. Specimen 25 is not
included in this figure in order to enhance the readability of the plot.

42

Results

6E-3 T

Hertz' estimate of the

indentation diameter

y = 0.8902X
= 0.9589

5E-3

y = 0.7777x
= 0.9589

4E-3
^

(U

E
m
3E-3

ra
E
2E-3

1E-3

El = EFe
X E, = Ewe
OOOE+O
OOOE+O

2E-3

1E-3

3E-3

4E-3

5E-3

6E-3

Measured diameter (m)

Figure 38. Estimate ofthe diameter of indentation from Hertz' equation.

Figure 39 shows the relative error between the estimated diameter and the measured
diameter.
0.4 X

Relative error for estimate of diameter

using Hertz' equation
0.3 +

^ 0.2

O
t~

0)
(U

> 0.1

1
-I-

4-

25E+3

30E+3

0)

000^+0
-0.1

5E+3<

+ X
e

10E+3I

15E+3

20E+3

35E+3

-+-

-+-

40E+3

45E+3

50E+3

: I
I

'1

-0.2 - -

XK
-0.3-

. E,= EFe
X E| = Ewe

-0.4

IVlaximum Load (N)

Figure 39. The relative error of Hertz' equation as a function ofthe load applied.
If the pile-up were also to be taken into account, the radius of curvature of the material
would be smaller than the radius of curvature of the indenter. This is not very likely.
Equation (17)
Equation (17) seems to provide a reasonable estimate of the ultimate tensile strength.
The ultimate tensile strength is calculated for every loading of every specimen. In table

43

Results

11 the average of these values can be found. Equation (17) is evaluated for both Brinell
and Meyer hardness.

800E+6 T

I
L i
X

700E+6

600E+6

500E46

t
.

B
I

'

II

OUTS = C Hg

ra
a.
&

400E+6

300E+6 +

200E+6 4-

100E+6 f

OOOE+O
OOOE+O

5E+3

-+10E+3

-+-

15E+3

20E+3

25E+3

30E+3

35E+3

40E+3

45E+3

50E+3

Maximum Force (N)

Figure 40. Ultimate tensile strength calculated with equation (17), as a fiinction ofthe
applied load.
A l l values calculated are also shown in figure 40. The values of specimen 25 are higher
than the rest.
It can be seen that the values using the Brinell hardness is vitually independent of the
load applied. There seems to be a slight dependence on the load at low loads, however.
Meyer hardness shows a slight rise in the value obtained over the whole loading range.
Table 11. Results from equation (17) for Brinell and Meyer hardness
(MPa)
St. dev. (MPa)
error (MPa)
rel. error
Gu

HB

HM

554
30
4.8
0.0087

641
62
10
0.0159

The estimate using Brinell hardness is approximately 2.6% higher than the value
obtained by the tensile test for the engineering ultimate tensile strength. The estimate
using Meyer hardness is approximately 1.7% higher than the true ultimate tensile
strength.
Meyer's equation
When Meyer's equation is used with the force and diameter data from the specimens, the
parameters as shown in table 12 are obtained. The value of the power-law parameter n,
as obtained by equation (11) and assuming x' = 1, is also displayed in the table. Tabor's
equation for the representative strain, equation (15), also assumes that x' = 1.

44

Results

Table 12. Meyer parameters.

6.044E+9
2.259

0.999
0.259

km

From equations (11) and (13) the parameters x' and 09(89)" can be derived. The powerlaw parameters needed for the equation can be taken from the tensile test, table 8, or
from the hardness measurements, table 10. These values are given in table 13.
Table 13. Values derived from the Meyer parameters.

x'
Ce(ee)"
Ee (if Ce = 3)
Ce (if ee = 0.2)

Tensile
parameters
1.65
2.41
0.251
3.11

Hardness
parameters
0.991
1.96
0.197
2.99

It is not surprising that Tabor's values for 89 and C9 are found if the hardness parameters
are used. The hardness parameters are calculated using Tabor's values.
The specimens which were loaded in one step can be used with Meyer's law. First the
depth measurements have to be converted to diameter measureirients. This is done with
equation (33) and the values as specified in table 9. Extrapolating the depth-diameter
curve may be dangerous, therefore the interval over which the conversion may be used is
set from 1.616 mm to 5.54 mm for the diameter of the indentation. This interval
excludes both the two highest and the two lowest values. These values were excluded in
view of the fact that the fit in these points may not be accurate.
Meyer's law was fitted against these force-diameter diagrams. The parameters of the
fitted curves can be used to calculate the power-law parameters. Assuming Tabor's
values for the x' en k' parameter are correct, the results as shown in table 14 are obtained.
Table 14. Meyer's law parameter values for several specimens.
i^m

4a
17a
18a
average
St. dev.
1

5a
12a
15a
average
St. dev.
K
6a
13a
14a
average
St. dev.

3.18E+09
3.88E+09
3.94E+09
3.67E+09
4.3E+08
3.10E+09
2.67E-I-09
2.65E+09
2.81 E+09
2.5E+08
5.85E+09
2.57E+09
2.64E+09
3.68E+09
1.9E+09

m
2.136
2.171
2.176
2.161
0.021
2.135
2.106
2.100
2.114
0.019
2.252
2.099
2.101
2.151
0.088

(MPa)
842
913
912

0.136
0.171
0.176

889

0.161

41
826
786
797

0.021
0.135
0.106
0.100

803

0.114

21
1040
773
790

0.019
0.252
0.099
0.101

868

0.151

149

0.088

The power-law parameters thus obtained are closer to the values obtained by the tensile
test than the values obtained from the ends.

45

Results

The equations derived from power-law behaviour of the material were evaluated using
the power-law parameters as obtained by the tensile test, the hardness measurements and
from Meyer's law. The results are shown in table 15.
Table 15. Results from equations 25, 28, 30.
Tensile
k
n

(MPa)

(MPa)
(MPa)
CTuTs (MPa)
Oy

ao.2

860
0.157
309
357
550

Hardness Meyer
G
1
1057
889
0.261
0.161
163
311
233
361
573
564

K
803
0.114
394
429
560

868
0.151
327
374
561

According to equation (6) the power-law parameter n should be equal to the true
ultimate tensile strain. This equivalence is observed in the experiments.
The equation estimating the yield strength, (28), is not very accurate. Equation (30)
gives a good estimate of the 0.2% yield strength when the power-law parameters are
used as obtained with the tensile test. Using the power-law parameters obtained by the
hardness measurements produces a low value. Using the parameters as obtained from
Meyer's law a good estimate of the 0.2% yield strength is found. An even better estimate
of the ultimate tensile strength is obtained from Meyer's law.

46

6. DISCUSSION
6.1 Tensile test
It can be seen from the engineering and the true stress-strain curve that specimen tens3 starts
yielding at a much higher stress then the other specimens. This specimen also did not show
yield elongation. It seems that if the specimen was loaded to approximately 410 MPa before
the test was started. No explanation for this loading could be found.

6.2 Indentation test

6.2.1 Microscope depth measurement
Although the depth measurement using a microscope has the disadvantage of the depth
of field, it can provide accurate results for variations in height of at least 0.4 mm.
6.2.2 Tabor's findings
Tabor found that the diameter and depth of the indentation did not increase if the
specimen was reloaded. In this study both the diameter and the depth of the indentation
do increase if the specimen is reloaded. The increase in the indentation diameter may be
due to reversed plastic flow. It could also be due to the difference in equipment control.
In this study when maximum was reached the position of the cross-head was kept
constant, while Tabor probably used a fixed weight. The specimen in Tabor's case
would be under load for approximately 10 seconds. In this study the time at maximum
load was only very short, due to load relaxation. Moreover, the forces used were much
higher in this study.
6.2.3 Line patterns
The orientation of the line patterns observed could be due to texture in the material. In
figure 41 the microstructure of the steel [11] and its direction is displayed.

Perlite band direction

Figure 41. The microstructure ofthe steel [11] and its orientation. Magnification lOOx,
etched in 2% Nital.
It is unlikely that the line pattern appeared due to restrictions in size of the specimen, as
it was visible after loads as small as 1.5 kN. At these loads the indentation is
approximately 1.2 mm in diameter, which is 1/25 of the width of the specimen.
Two specimens did not exhibit these line patterns. The reason why the pattern did not
appear on these two specimens may be linked to the absence of yield elongation in the
tensile test specimen tens3.

47

Discussion

For the two specimens a higher hardness was found, which indicates that some sort of
deformation could have occurred prior to the testing. Again there is no explanation for
this possible deformation.
6.2.4 Underwood's method
From the figures of the derivative of the load-displacement record it can be seen that the
derivative has a maximum between 5 k N and 20 kN. After the maximum it falls back to
approximately 80% of the maximum. I f Underwood's method is used to calculate the
stress-strain curve it would show a maximum stress. This fall is possible in an
engineering stress-strain curve, but the strain at maximum stress is too low if compared
with the ultimate tensile strain. The fall in stress is impossible in a true stress-strain
curve.
Therefore Underwood's method should only be used in order to evaluate the ultimate
tensile strain and not the complete stress-strain curve.
6.2.5 Power-law parameters
According to H i l l et al. [7] the power-law parameter n must be smaller than 0.22 if pileup is observed. In the experiments pile-up is clearly present so that n should be smaller
than 0.22. The value of n calculated from Tabor's equations is 0.26,
Comparing the power-law parameters as found by tensile test with the values obtained
by the indentation testing shows that the indentation value overestimates the power-law
parameters.
6.2.6 Stress-strain curve evaluation
Tabor's equations (14) and (15) provide good results at low loads/strains; at high
loads/strains the results overestimate the points of the true stress-strain curve.
Although the power-law parameters obtained using Tabor's equations are not accurate,
the power law function describes the first part of true stress-strain curve well. At
approximately 14% true strain, the power law deviates from the true stress-strain curve
obtained with the tensile test.
This means that Tabor's equations can be used for the first part of the true stress-strain
curve but at higher loads/strains there may some deviations.
6.2.7 Effects influencing indentation tests
The time at maximum displacement does not seem to influence the stress-strain points
obtained with the indentation test as all the results are within the spread of the
duplicates.
This may be due to load and displacement relaxation; the load quickly drops.
The loading method did not seem to influence the stress-strain points obtained with the
indentation test. A n effect of the loading method was not expected because the first part
should be identical, and the time at maximum displacement did not influence the test
either.
The number of steps used to load a specimen did not appear to influence the stress-strain
points obtained with the indentation diameter. The slope of the elastic part of the loading
was found to increase with the number of steps taken. An effect of the loading method
can also be seen in figure 25. The single-step specimens start at higher stress levels,
while the multiple-step specimens closely follow the points from Tabor's equation.
There seems to be an influence of the surface condition on the stress-strain points
obtained with the indentation test. The sanded specimens showed a larger indentation
diameter which causes a smaller hardness. This effect appears to be small. An effect of
the surface condition can also be found in the power-law parameters obtained though
Meyer's law.
6.2.8 Depth-to-diameter conversion
The depth-to-diameter conversion using the extended theoretical equation, (33), appears
to provide a good description of the relationship between the depth while loaded and the
diameter of the indentation after unloading.

48

Discussion

As this is a conversion between the loaded indentation depth and the unloaded diameter,
it is probable that the parameters of the equation depend on Young's modulus for the
material and possibly on the maximum load applied. These dependencies could explain
the difference between the theoretical and the fitted parameters.
Using the conversion with single-step specimens overestimates the first part of the points
obtained with Tabor's equations. This means that the load-displacement record of a
single-step indentation cannot be accurately converted to a stress-strain curve. The
multi-step loadings fall over the points from Tabor's equations.
The conversion can also be used successfully to convert the load-displacement record to
a load-diameter record for use with Meyer's law.
6.2.9 Equations previously proposed
Ultimate tensile strength
Equation 17 is found to provide the engineering ultimate tensile strength quite
accurately. From the measurements it could also be concluded that the Brinell hardness
(and this equation) is almost independent of the load used. A small load dependence is
found at loads below approximately 7 kN.
If Meyer's hardness is used instead of the Brinell hardness, a dependence on the load
becomes visible. For this equation the Brinell hardness is more suitable in that it is
independent.
Hertz' equation
The error found for Hertz' equation is probably partly due to the calculation of the radius
of curvature from the depth and the diameter of the indentation. Unfortunately there was
no equipment available for accurate measurement of the radius of curvature of the
indentations.
Meyer's law
Meyer's law was found to describe the force-diameter record accurately. The power-law
parameters which were calculated using Meyer's parameters are closer to the tensile test
parameters. The specimens with a sanded surface seemed to provide a more accurate
estimate of the parameters.
It is plausible that using Meyer's law the power-law parameters could be estimated quite
accurately.
Equations derived from the power law
Equations (6), (25), (28), (30) provide accurate results i f the power-law parameters
obtained by the tensile test are used. Using these equations with the parameters as
obtained by the hardness measurements does not provide good results, since the powerlaw parameters are not accurately estimated. The parameters obtained through Meyer's
law are more accurate and thus provide good results. The group of specimens with a
sanded surface provide the best of the three estimates.

49

Discussion

50

7. CONCLUSION
The load-displacement record is not linear.
Underwood's method cannot be used to evaluate the stress-strain curve.
The relationship between the depth during indentation and the diameter after indentation can
be described by extending the theoretical relationship.
The power-law parameters can be obtained from Meyer's law.
No influence of the time at maximum displacement could be found.
The surface condition only slightly affects the stress-strain points obtained with Tabor's
equations.
It appears that the surface condition influences the power-law parameters as obtained using
Meyer's law.
Tabor's equations fit the stress-strain curve for the first 14% strain. After that there is an
overestimation of the stresses.
Equations for the yield strength and the ultimate tensile strength derived from the power law
can be accurately used if the power-law parameters are accurately estimated.
Figure 42 shows where the equations can be used.

4;

3.

GUTS

1. Meyer's law
2. Tabor's equations
3. Gy(28) (30)
4. G U T S (17) (25)

Figure 42. The possible application ofthe equations.

51

Conclusion

52

8. RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the power-law parameters obtained with the Meyer's law are very encouraging.
These tests should be continued in order to find the influencing factors and should also be
extended to include other materials.
One of the remaining problems is the representation of the yield elongation. For the type of
steel used in this study the yield elongation is a very important part of the material behaviour.
The yield elongation could perhaps be extracted for the differences in the power-law
parameters as obtained with Tabor's equations and through Meyer's law.
The parameters obtained with Meyer's law are closer to the values obtained by the tensile
test. The tensile test values were obtained by excluding the yield elongation from the power
law fit. Meyer's power-law parameters thus describe a true stress-strain curve without yield
elongation.
Using Tabor's equations, points are found on the true stress-strain curve. When a power law
is fitted to these data points, it takes the extra yield due to yield elongation into account.
The difference in the power-law parameters obtained with the two methods could provide a
means of describing the yield elongation.

53

Recommendations

54

9. R E F E R E N C E S
1. D. Tabor, "A Simple Theory of Static and Dynamic Hardness", Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London 192 [A] (1948), 247.
2. D. Tabor, "The Hardness and Strength of Metals", Joumal of the Institute of Metals 79
(1951), 1.
3. D. Tabor, "The Hardness of Metals", 1951.
4. G.E. Dieter, "Mechanical Metallurgy", 1988, 329.
5. K.L. Johnson, "Reversed Plastic Flow during the Unloading of a Spherical Indenter",
Nature 199 (1963), 1282.
6. J.H. Underwood, G.P. O'Hara, J.J. Zalinka, "Analysis of Elastic-Plastic Ball Indentation
to Measure Strength of high strength steels". Experimental Mechanics 26 (1986), 379.
7. R. Hill, B. Storaker, A.B. Zdunek, "A theoretical study of the Brinell hardness test".
Proceedings ofthe Royal Society of London, 423 [A] (1989), 301.
8. J.R. Gaboon, W.H. Broughton, A.R. Kutzak, "An Improved Equation Relating Hardness
to Ultimate Strength", Metallurgical Transactions 3 (1972), 3040.
9. S.C. Chang, M.T. Jahn, C M . Wan, J.Y.M. Lee, T.K. Hsu, "The Determination of
Tensile Properties from Hardness Measurements for Al-Zn-Mg alloys", Joumal of
Materials Science 11 (1976), 623.
10. R. Bholanath, "Bepaling van de scheurweerstandskromme van Fe-510Nb bij
verschillende temperaturen", graduate report. Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Chemical Technology and Material Science, 1992.
11. C. ten Hom, "Fracture toughness evaluation using circumferentially cracked cylindrical
specimens", report. Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Chemical Technology
and Materials Science, 1997.

55

References

56

L I S T OF SYMBOLS
fit parameter
fit parameter
constant
constant
constant
Ce
depth of indentation
8
diameter of indentation
d
diameter of the indenter
D
strain
8
representative
strain
Ee
true strain
Tl
HUTS true strain at the ultimate tensile strength
Young's modulus for the indenter
Ei
Young's modulus for the material
Em
F
force
H
hardness
Brinell hardness
HB
Meyer hardness
HM
constant
K
strain coefficient
k'
strength coefficient
k
Meyer constant
km
Meyer exponent
m
n
power-law exponent
maximum pressure
Po
average contact pressure
Pm
radius
of curvature of the indenter
Ti
radius
of curvature of the indentation
Tm
stress
a
0.1
% yield strength
Go.i
0.2 % yield strength
0.2
representative stress
Oe
compressive stress parallel to the plane
Or
C^UTS ultimate tensile strength
true tensile strength
Gw
Oy
yield stress
compressive stress vertical to the plane
strain exponent
x'
necking
a
b
c
C

List of symbols

58

APPENDIX 1: MEASURED DATA

1a
2a
2b
2c
2d
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
3h
4a
5a
6a
7a
7b
7c
7d
7e
7f
7g
7h
7i
8a
8b
8c
8d
8e
8f
8g
8h
8i
9a
9b
9c
9d
9G

9f
9g
9h
10a
10b
10c
lOd
lOe
lOf
10g
lOh
lOi

d
dz pile
Max
Max displ. dF/d8
8 (mic)
S (clock) dz pile
E
o
CTl
OUTS
OUTS
(mic)
(clocl<)
load
(HB)
(HM)
48022 0.001533 25.6E+6 441E+6 0.005721 0.00157
0.00017
0.1802 623E+6 469E+6 654E+6
0
12010 0.000355 35.0E+6 603E+6 0.003049 0.000316
0.0960 548E+6 541E+6 576E+6
0.00006
24013 0.000691 35.1 E+6 604E+6 0.004165 0.000664
0.1312 588E+6 541E+6 617E+6
0.000102
36021 0.001057 32.4E+6 557E+6 0.004982 0.001066
0.1569 616E+6 524E+6 647E+6
0.0002
48022 0.00149 27.6E+6 476E+6 0.005645 0.00153
0.1778 640E+6 490E+6 672E+6
0
6019 0.000175 34.0E+6 586E+6 0.00221 0.000184
0.0696 523E+6 532E+6 549E+6
0.003002
0.000346
0
645E+6
0.0945 566E+6 559E+6 594E+6
12011 0.000333 37.5E+6
0.003596
0.000524
0
0.1133 591E+6 566E+6 621E+6
18006 0.000486 37.7E+6 649E+6
0.000104
0.1289 608E+6 563E+6 639E+6
24015 0.000645 36.6E+6 631E+6 0.004094 0.000666
0.000108
0.1424 623E+6 557E+6 654E+6
30013 0.000812 35.1 E+6 605E+6 0.004521 0.000832
0.000166
0.1543 637E+6 548E+6 669E+6
36015 0.000988 33.2E+6 572E+6 0.004898 0.000988
0.00018
0.1652 648E+6 532E+6 681E+6
42020 0,001179 30.8E+6 530E+6 0.005245 0.00121
0.000192
0.1752 658E+6 512E+6 691E+6
48021 0.001403 28.1 E+6 484E+6 0.005564 0.001456
0.00016
0.1736 671E+6 527E+6 704E+6
48017 0.001389 30.1 E+6 518E+6 0.005512 0.001438
0.00019 0.1741 667E+6 522E+6 700E+6
48022 0.001416 29.4E+6 506E+6 0.005529 0.001444 0.00143 0.000202
48008 0.001395 35.2E+6 606E+6 0.005475 0.001388 0.0014 0.000178 0.00018 0.1724 680E+6 538E+6 714E+6
0
0 0.0681 545E+6 555E+6 573E+6
6003 0.000194 30.6E+6 528E+6 0.002162 0.000188 0.00017
0 0.00003 0.0930 585E+6 579E+6 614E+6
12006 0.000356 36.7E+6 632E+6 0.002953 0.000364 0.00033
0 0.00004 0.1115 609E+6 585E+6 640E+6
18004 0.000511 37.9E+6 653E+6 0.003542 0.000488 0.00048
0.000578
0.00056
0.000044
0.00006 0.1197 618E+6 584E+6 648E+6
0.0038
21006 0.000587 38.9E+6 671 E+6
0 0.00006 0.1270 627E+6 583E+6 658E+6
24010 0.000662 40.2E+6 692E+6 0.004032 0.000634 0.00064
0.000086
0.1397 647E+6 583E+6 679E+6
30006 0.000821 37.2E+6 640E+6 0.004437 0.00081
0.001 0.000134
0.0001 0.1517 659E+6 571E+6 692E+6
36012 0.000993 34.8E+6 600E+6 0.004816 0.000956
0.0001 0.1621 673E+6 560E+6 707E+6
42010 0.001173 32.6E+6 562E+6 0.005148 0.00115 0.00119 0.000132
0.00014 0.1721 682E+6 541E+6 717E+6
48014 0.001373 29.8E+6 513E+6 0.005465 0.001382 0.0014 0.000226
0 0.00002 0.0695 523E+6 533E+6 550E+6
6002 0.000187 32.2E+6 554E+6 0.002206 0.00016 0.00016
0.00005 0.0946 565E+6 558E+6 593E+6
11999 0.000351 36.2E+6 623E+6 0.003003 0.000304 0.00032 0.000104
0.00007 0.1133 591E+6 566E+6 620E+6
18001 0.000514 36.5E+6 628E+6 0.003597 0.000476 0.00048 0.000104
21006 0.000594 37.4E+6 645E+6 0.003854 0.000556 0.00057 0.000098 0.00008 0.1214 600E+6 566E+6 630E+6
24010 0.000675 36.0E+6 619E+6 0.004088 0.000642 0.00066 0.000118 0.00009 0.1288 610E+6 565E+6 640E+6
30010 0.000842 35.2E+6 606E+6 0.004504 0.000788 0.00082 0.000116 0.00011 0.1419 628E+6 562E+6 659E+6
0.00014 0.1539 640E+6 550E+6 672E+6
36009 0.00102 33.3E+6 573E+6 0.004888 0.001008 0.00102 0.000126
0.00118
0.00122
0.00018 0.1647 652E+6 537E+6 685E+6
0.005229
0.000164
529E+6
30.7E+6
42012 0.001214
0.001402
0.00144
0.000234
0.00019 0.1740 667E+6 523E+6 701 E+6
0.005526
48015 0.001417 29.2E+6 503E+6
0.000188
0.00017
0
0 0.0699 517E+6 526E+6 543E+6
6006 0.000184 32.6E+6 562E+6 0.00222
0 0.00004 0.0949 561E+6 554E+6 589E+6
12010 0.000346 36.2E+6 624E+6 0.003014 0.000328 0,00032
0.00006 0.1136 587E+6 562E+6 617E+6
18012 0.000506 36.5E+6 629E+6 0.003608 0.000482 0.00048 0.000072
24013 0.000669 35.9E+6 619E+6 0.004099 0.000642 0.00065 0.000098 0.00009 0.1291 607E+6 562E+6 637E+6
0.00012 0.1424 623E+6 557E+6 654E+6
30018 0.000836 34.7E+6 598E+6 0.004522 0.000804 0.00084 0.000104
0.00014 0.1546 634E+6 544E+6 666E+6
36017 0.001015 33.0E+6 568E+6 0.004909 0.000998 0.00102 0.000172
0.00017 0.1649 650E+6 535E+6 683E+6
0.0012 31.6E+6 544E+6 0.005237 0.001182 0.00122 0.000186
42019
0.00019 0.1743 666E+6 521E+6 699E+6
48017 0.001404 28.7E+6 495E+6 0.005534 0.001434 0.00144 0.000214
0.0373 455E+6 474E+6 478E+6
1501 5.76E-05 26.0E+6 448E+6 0.001183 0.000048
0.0511 484E+6 500E+6 508E+6
3000 9.59E-05 35.4E+6 610E+6 0.001622 0.000092 0.0001
0.0617 499E+6 511E+6 524E+6
4504 0.000138 35.5E+6 611E+6 0.001958 0.00015 0.00013
0.0703 512E+6 520E+6 538E+6
0.000178
0.00017
0.002231
672E+6
39.0E+6
6005 0.00017
0.0834 545E+6 546E+6 572E+6
0.000222
0.00005
0.002649
638E+6
9007 0.000249 37.1 E+6
0.00032
0.000042
0.00005
0.0950 561E+6 553E+6 589E+6
0.000354
0.003015
12007 0.000322 39.0E+6 672E+6
0.000392
0.0004
0.00004
0.00006
0.1051 572E+6 556E+6 601 E+6
0.0004 38.4E+6 661 E+6 0.003336
15006
0.1139 584E+6 558E+6 613E+6
0.000488
0.00049
0.000112
0.00008
18001 0.000475 39.1 E+6 673E+6 0.003618
0.000092
0.00009 0.1294 603E+6 558E+6 633E+6
24005 0.000634 37.7E+6 649E+6 0.00411 0.00063 0.00065

59

Appendix 1: Measured data

36007
48013
1503
3003
4502
6003
8999
12006
11g 15004
11h 18008
24005
lli
36006
11j
11k 48017
12a 48019
13a 48016
14a 48014
15a 48017
16a
1502
16b
3004
16c
4504
16d
6008
16e
9010
16t
12015
16g 15014
16ii 18019
161 24025
16) 36038
16k 48051
17a 48024
18a 48021
19a
6002
19b 12003
19c 18004
19d 24009
19e 30007
19f
36010
19g 42016
19li 48018
20a
6005
20b 12011
20c 18008
20d 24010
20e 30010
20f
36011
20g 42016
20tl 48015
22a
6005
22b 12007
22c 18006
22d 24008
22e 30010
22f
36012
22g 42014
22h 48018
23a
6004
23b 12006
23c 18005
10)
10k
11a
11b
11c
lid
11e
Ilf

60

0.000982 34.4E+6
0.001379 29,8E+6
5.81 E-05 25.4E+6
9.34E-05 36,0E+6
0.000129 37.4E+6
0.000166 37.8E+6
0.000241 38.7E+6
0.000315 38.0E+6
0.000392 38.0E+6
0.000466 39.2E+6
0.00062 38.5E+6
0.000957 35.2E+6
0.001346 30,6E+6
0.001419 34,0E+6
0.00143 33.8E+6
0.001392 34,7E+6
0.001383 35.1 E+6
5.64E-05 21.3E+6
9.92E-05 34.5E+6
0.000139 37.5E+6
0.000174 37,5E+6
0.000252 37.4E+6
0.000327 38.7E+6
0.000403 38.2E+6
0.000478 39,2E+6
0.000635 37,4E+6
0.000974 35,0E+6
0.001356 31,0E+6
0.001334 36.3E+6
0.001358 35,7E+6
0.000173 34.4E+6
0.000328 37.9E+6
0.000485 37.9E+6
0.000645 37.8E+6
0.000809 36.8E+6
0.000984 34.7E+6
0.00117 33.0E+6
0.001374 31,1 E+6
0.000185 32,4E+6
0.000343 37.4E+6
0.000502 37.6E+6
0.000662 37.2E+6
0.000824 37.0E+6
0.000995 34.9E+6
0.001175 33.7E+6
0.00137 31.1 E+6
0.000178 33,5E+6
0.000337 37,6E+6
0.000497 37,3E+6
0.000659 36.9E+6
0.000823 36.5E+6
0.000995 34,9E+6
0.001177 33,3E+6
0,001378 30,8E+6
0.000182 32,8E+6
0.000338 38.2E+6
0.00049 38,9E+6

593E+6
514E+6
438E+6
620E+6
644E+6
650E+6
667E+6
654E+6
655E+6
675E+6
663E+6
607E+6
526E+6
586E+6
583E+6
597E+6
604E+6
366E+6
594E+6
645E+6
647E+6
644E+6
667E+6
658E+6
675E+6
644E+6
602E+6
533E+6
624E+6
615E+6
593E+6
652E+6
653E+6
652E+6
633E+6
597E+6
568E+6
535E+6
558E+6
645E+6
647E+6
641E+6
636E+6
600E+6
581E+6
535E+6
577E+6
648E+6
643E+6
636E+6
629E+6
600E+6
574E+6
531E+6
566E+6
659E+6
670E+6

0.004898 0.001008
0.005521 0.001434
0.001183 0.00006
0.001612 0.000108
0.001938 0.000154
0.002204 0.000206
0.002637 0.00022
0.002993 0.000322
0.003311 0.000392
0.003595 0.000512
0.004077 0.000596
0.004849 0.00099
0.005477 0.001364
0.005575 0.001446
0.005591 0.001456
0.005541 0.001412
0.00554 0.00145
0.001181 0.000046
0.001616 0.000126
0.001938 0.000144
0.002209 0.00018
0.002655 0.000266
0.00301 0.000344
0.003325 0.000428
0.003607 0.000504
0.004094 0.000654
0.00486 0.001042
0.005473 0.00139
0,005412 0.001394
0.005479 0.001406
0.002186
0.002986
0,003575
0,004054
0,00446
0.004819
0.005143
0.005445
0.002201
0.002998
0.003585
0.004072
0.004476
0.004834
0.005153
0.005442
0.002182
0.002978
0.003567
0.004064
0.004464
0.00483
0.005151
0.005448
0.002175
0.002965
0.003553

0.00101
0,00144
0.00003
0,00008
0,00012
0,00016
0.00024
0,00033
0,0004
0,00049
0,00064
0,001
0.00141
0,00145
0,00146
0,00143
0.00143
0.00004
0.00009
0,00014
0,00017
0,00025
0,00033
0,00041
0,00049
0,00065
0,00101
0,00141
0,00137
0,0014
0,00016
0,00033
0,00048
0.00064
0.0008
0,00099
0,00118
0.00139
0.00017
0.00033
0.00049
0,00065
0,00082
0,001
0,00119
0,0014
0,00032
0,00048
0,00063
0.00081
0,00099
0,00118
0,00139
0,00016
0,00032
0,00047

0,00015
0,000184

0,000038
0,000048
0,000084
0.000088
0,000072
0,000118
0,000158
0,000247
0,000194
0,000192
0,000232

0,00005
0,000038
0,00004
0,000038
0,000088
0,000114
0,000142
0,00014
0,000204

0,00015 0,1543 637E+6 547E+6 669E+6

0.0002 0,1739 669E+6 524E+6 702E+6
0.0373 456E+6 474E+6 479E+6
0,0508 490E+6 507E+6 515E+6
0,0610 509E+6 521E+6 534E+6
0,0694 525E+6 534E+6 551E+6
0.00004 0,0831 549E+6 551E+6 577E+6
0.00005 0,0943 569E+6 562E+6 597E+6
0.00006 0,1043 581E+6 565E+6 610E+6
0,00007 0,1132 592E+6 567E+6 621E+6
0,00009 0,1284 613E+6 569E+6 644E+6
0,00013 0,1527 650E+6 562E+6 682E+6
0,00018 0.1725 679E+6 537E+6 713E+6
0,00021 0,1756 656E+6 509E+6 689E+6
0,000215 0,1761 652E+6 505E+6 685E+6
0,000205 0,1745 664E+6 519E+6 697E+6
0.000205 0,1745 664E+6 519E+6 697E+6
0,0372 457E+6 476E+6 480E+6
0,0509 488E+6 504E+6 513E+6
0,0610 509E+6 522E+6 535E+6
0,0696 523E+6 532E+6 549E+6
0,00004 0.0836 543E+6 544E+6 570E+6
0.00004 0,0948 563E+6 556E+6 591 E+6
0.00006 0.1047 576E+6 560E+6 605E+6
0.00007 0,1136 588E+6 563E+6 617E+6
0,00009 0,1289 609E+6 564E+6 639E+6
0,00012 0,1531 648E+6 559E+6 680E+6
0,00016 0,1724 681 E+6 539E+6 715E+6
0,00016 0,1705 696E+6 556E+6 731E+6
0,0002 0,1726 679E+6 537E+6 713E+6
0,00004 0,0688 533E+6 543E+6 560E+6
0,00005 0,0940 572E+6 565E+6 600E+6
0.00007 0.1126 598E+6 573E+6 628E+6
0.00009 0.1277 620E+6 576E+6 651 E+6
0,00011 0.1405 640E+6 576E+6 672E+6
0,00014 0.1518 658E+6 571 E+6 691E+6
0,00016 0.1620 674E+6 562E+6 708E+6
0,00019 0.1715 688E+6 547E+6 722E+6
0,00002 0.0693 526E+6 536E+6 553E+6
0,00005 0.0944 567E+6 560E+6 596E+6
0,00007 0.1129 595E+6 570E+6 624E+6
0,00009 0.1282 615E+6 570E+6 645E+6
0,0001 0.1410 636E+6 571 E+6 668E+6
0.00012 0.1522 654E+6 566E+6 687E+6
0.00014 0.1623 672E+6 559E+6 705E+6
0,00016 0.1714 688E+6 547E+6 722E+6
0.0687 536E+6 545E+6 562E+6
0,00005 0.0938 575E+6 568E+6 604E+6
0,00007 0,1123 601 E+6 576E+6 631 E+6
0,00008 0,1280 617E+6 573E+6 648E+6
0,00012 0,1406 639E+6 574E+6 671 E+6
0,00014 0,1521 655E+6 567E+6 688E+6
0,00016 0,1622 672E+6 559E+6 706E+6
0,00018 0,1716 687E+6 546E+6 721E+6
0,00003 0,0685 539E+6 548E+6 566E+6
0,00005 0.0934 580E+6 574E+6 609E+6
0,00007 0,1119 605E+6 581E+6 636E+6

23d
23e
23f
23g
23h
24a
24b
24c
24d
24e
24f
24g
24h
25a
25b
25c
25d
25G

25f
25g
25h
26a
26b
26c
26d
26e
26f
26g
26h
27a
27b
27c
27d
27e
27f
27g
27h

24009
30009
36011
42015
48019
6004
12005
18003
24008
30010
36010
42015
48015
6005
12006
18007
24011
30012
36013
42014
48017
6003
12005
18007
24013
30010
36012
42013
48016
6005
12003
18009
24009
30009
36013
42016
47811

0.000646 37.9E+6
0.000809 36.5E+6
0.000976 35.3E+6
0.001154 33.7E+6
0.001351 31.0E+6
0.000183 32.7E+6
0.000341 37.7E+6
0.000498 37.8E+6
0.00066 36.5E+6
0.000827 35.5E+6
0.001 33.8E+6
0.001185 31.6E+6
0.001378 30.5E+6
0.000175 34.2E+6
0.000332 37.8E+6
0.000482 39.3E+6
0.000632 39.2E+6
0.000785 38.1 E+6
0.000946 36.3E+6
0.001115 34.9E+6
0.001297 32.6E+6
0.000183 32.7E+6
0.00034 37.6E+6
0.000497 37.8E+6
0.000656 36.8E+6
0.000821 36.2E+6
0.000991 34.8E+6
0.001172 32.7E+6
0.001364 30.9E+6
0.000182 32.9E+6
0.00034 37.7E+6
0.000491 39.3E+6
0.00065 37.4E+6
0.000809 36.5E+6
0.000973 35.6E+6
0.001148 33.4E+6
0.001336 31.4E+6

652E+6 0.004035
629E+6 0.004447
608E+6 0.004803
581 E+6 0.005125
533E+6 0.005418
564E+6 0.002202
649E+6 0.002995
651 E+6 0.003599
629E+6 0.004099
611 E+6 0.00452
582E+6 0.004889
545E+6 0.005215
525E+6 0.005492
588E+6 0.002045
651 E+6 0.002819
677E+6 0.003403
675E+6 0.003879
656E+6 0.004294
625E+6 0.004656
601 E+6 0.004979
561 E+6 0.005285
563E+6 0.002204
647E+6 0.002995
650E+6 0.003581
633E+6 0.00406
623E+6 0.004473
599E+6 0.004837
562E+6 0.005164
533E+6 0.005451
567E+6 0.002179
649E+6 0.002965
676E+6 0.003554
645E+6 0.004034
629E+6 0.00444
0.0048
613E+6
575E+6 0.00512
540E+6 0.005404

0.00064
0.0008
0.00098
0.00117
0.00137
0.00017
0.00034
0.00049
0.00066
0.00083
0.00102
0.00122
0.00142
0.00015
0.00031
0.00046
0.00061
0.00077
0.00094
0.00112
0.00132
0.00017
0.00033
0.00048
0.00065
0.00082
0.001
0.0012
0.0014
0.00016
0.00032
0.00047
0.00063
0.0008
0.00098
0.00116
0.00136

0.00009 0,1271 626E+6 582E+6 657E+6

0.00012 0,1400 644E+6 580E+6 676E+6
0.00014 0,1513 663E+6 575E+6 696E+6
0.00016 0,1614 679E+6 567E+6 713E+6
0.00018 0,1706 694E+6 555E+6 729E+6
0.00002 0.0693 526E+6 535E+6 552E+6
0.00004 0,0943 568E+6 561E+6 597E+6
0,00007 0,1134 590E+6 565E+6 619E+6
0.00009 0,1291 606E+6 562E+6 637E+6
0,00012 0,1423 624E+6 557E+6 655E+6
0,00015 0,1540 640E+6 550E+6 672E+6
0,00018 0,1643 656E+6 541 E+6 688E+6
0.00021 0.1730 676E+6 533E+6 709E+6
0,00002 0,0644 610E+6 623E+6 640E+6
0.00003 0,0888 641E+6 638E+6 673E+6
0,00004 0.1072 660E+6 639E+6 693E+6
0,00006 0,1222 677E+6 637E+6 711E+6
0.00008 0.1352 691E+6 630E+6 725E+6
0,00009 0.1466 705E+6 622E+6 740E+6
0,00011 0.1568 719E+6 612E+6 755E+6
0,00014 0.1665 730E+6 595E+6 766E+6
0,00003 0,0694 525E+6 534E+6 551 E+6
0,00005 0,0943 568E+6 561 E+6 597E+6
0,00007 0.1128 596E+6 571E+6 626E+6
0,00008 0,1279 618E+6 574E+6 649E+6
0,00011 0.1409 637E+6 572E+6 669E+6
0,00013 0,1523 653E+6 565E+6 686E+6
0.00015 0,1626 669E+6 555E+6 702E+6
0.00018 0,1717 686E+6 545E+6 720E+6
0.00003 0,0686 537E+6 547E+6 564E+6
0,00006 0,0934 579E+6 573E+6 608E+6
0,00008 0.1119 605E+6 581 E+6 636E+6
0,00009 0.1271 626E+6 583E+6 657E+6
0,00011 0.1398 646E+6 582E+6 678E+6
0,00013 0.1512 664E+6 576E+6 697E+6
0,00015 0,1612 680E+6 569E+6 714E+6
0,00017 0,1702 695E+6 556E+6 730E+6

61

Appendix 1: Measured

data

APPENDIX 2: T H E IMPROVED ASTM SECANT

METHOD
The improved ASTM secant method approximates the derivative of data points by the
following procedure.
Take a data point with number i .
Take a second point with number A higher.
The derivative is calculated with equation ( A l ) .
dy ^ Y i + A - y j

(Al)

X:
dx
-i+A
where
and X J + A are the x and y coordinates of the point with number i+A; y-, and Xi are the
X and y coordinates of the point with number i .
This is the derivative associated with point:
Xi+A+Xi

'i+A
Ydy
tlx

+yi

i+A

Figure Al. Schematic view ofthe improved ASTM secant

method.

63