ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

ME 3701
LAB REPORT
HARDNESS TEST

PREPARED BY :
ALBERTUS DIANTORO G.S
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

1. Present the data obtained and clearly indicate the sample,

indenter, and scale used for each set of measurements.
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

Photos of side A and B :

Side A :

Side B :
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

2. Use the Chauvenet's Criterion in order to identify any values

that may be considered for rejection.

a. HRD Surface B
Sample calculation :
Mean/Average:
35.1+36.9 .36 .3+36.6+36.2+36.2+36.3+36.7+36.1+36.1+36.1+
Mean=
12

Standart Deviation:
2
xix

SD = n1

So, the standard deviation is 0.4614

ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

b. HRD Surface A

c. HRC Surface B
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

d. HRC Surface A
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

3. Clearly state any reason(s) for any values that you think
should be excluded.
Chauvenets criterion is the method to use define an acceptable
scatter, by eliminating the bad data value, by statistical sense. The
method is states all data point should be retained that fall within a
band around the mean that corresponds of 1-1/(2N). in other word,
data for rejection obtaining their deviation from the mean is less than
1/(2N). hence, N is number data inserted.

a. HRD Surface B

Rejected -> because the value Chauvenets Criterion of the total 12

data is 2.037, hence the data of 1 row data HRD Surface B is 2.549. As
I state before, the data obtaining is must be less than the Chauvenets
criterion ( data<<chauvenets), then the data of 1st row data HRD
Surface B should be rejected.

b. HRD Surface A -> no rejected data , same as initial

c. HRC Surface B
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

Rejected -> because the value Chauvenets Criterion of the total 12

data is 2.037, hence the data of 2 row data HRC Surface B is 3.028.
As I state before, the data obtaining is must be less than the
Chauvenets criterion (data<<chauvenets), then the data of 2nd
row data HRC Surface B should be rejected.

d. HRC Surface A -> no rejected data , same as initial

ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

4. Determine the mean and standard deviation for the set of

values you retained.

a. HRD Surface B

Mean : 36.382
Standard deviation : 0.28919

b. HRD Surface A(look number 2b table):

Mean : 31.05
Standard deviation : 10.72

c. HRC Surface B
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

Mean : 14.66
Standard deviation : 0.35006

d. HRC Surface A(look number 2d table):

Mean : -0.105
Standard deviation : 16.32
ME 3701 Hardness Test Saputro Albertus

5. State any improvements (sample, equipment, procedure, etc.)

that will allow for the collection of more reproducible and/or
accurate hardness values.
From all of data, the most random data is from of HRC-Surface A
data, the data is randomly presented from negative value become
positive value, then after that, it reach stable and closer data readings.
Form my analysis, I think this problem is related to the machine. why?
First assumption, the machine brand new, then it is actually at the first
use, then I am not sure whether it has calibrated or not. At that time,
the test of HRC-Surface A is the first test in the machine of HR-3,the
beginning we got negative value, then after several test we got the
positive answer closer to another group, my analysis is after a long
testing again and again, the machine got better result, so I conclude
the machine is doing some calibrating in the several test.
Second assumption, there is a chance where the machine has a
machine deflection caused by dirt, grease, burrs, and other sources is
also a significant contributor to machine errors. Most Rockwell-scale
testers are unable to compensate for deflection (or movement) under
load.
Third assumption, We should consider human error in placing the
indenter to the machine. The placement of indenter is important
because it will effect the way it touch the surface, therefore, place the
indenter not so tight or even loose
Fourth assumption, vibration can be a contributor to loading
accuracy. Even if the part is not impacted during loading, the
oscillation of the indenter or the test specimen can cause the indenter
to work its way deeper into the part, creating a softer result. the should
always be placed on a dedicated, level, sturdy, table that is free
standing. Often, machines are placed on appropriate tables, but which
are inappropriately located, such as against a wall or an adjoining table
or counter. This scenario can lead to inaccurate results caused by when
other friend oppresses the table while they are writing the result, that
sends movement down the table, or by someone working on the
adjoining table creating movement that is translated through the table.
So, suggestion to do the experiment, the machine should be not
so close to each other or in separated table in each machine, so the
vibration may be reduced, then this error cause can be neglected.
Next, improving the surface sample preparation, by polish or grinding
in the grinding machine, to make it not rough and it will also remove
the dust or dirt that may cause deflection then make less accuracy.
Then about the human error, must be placing the indenter very tight,
not loose, double check is always needed to do before start the
operation.