Application Case
Tel：0086-769-23184144
Fax：0086-769-22854144
web：www.sinowon.com
Email：sinowon@188.com
Test Report
Aluminum Specimen hardness test report
1. Specimens:
There are three aluminum specimens provided by customers, respectively labeled W14,W38,T11; as shown in the following illustrations. The testing position is the black words marked surface area. The thickness of the three specimens (W14, W38, T11): 11.84mm, 14.6mm, 13.54mm; and the weight: 37g, 34g, 44g.
2.Testing instruments and environment:
Sinowon hardness testers: Micro Vickers hardness tester MHV-1000Z and Ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100 (5kgf probe). The MHV-1000Z tests the three samples via HV scale, set the dwell time 10s. Before the test, it has been calibrated by 456 HV0.2 hardness block, measuring 5 times, and the average value is 460 HV0.2 which indicates that MHV-1000Z accuracy meets the ISO standard.
Testing Lab: DongGuan Sinowon instrument TianAn laboratory; Testing environment: 22℃, humidity 70%.
3.Testing data:
1）Apply MHV-1000Z 200gf test force and SU-100’s 5kgf test force to test the W14, W38 and T11 samples’ labeled surface area; the testing data is been shown in the following table.
2）The three specimen testing indentation screen shots from MHV-1000Z are shown below:
3）The three specimen testing results from SU-100 are shown below:
4.Data analysis:
From the above test results we can get:
1) Two instruments’ testing average value contrast as below:
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample W14 test average values were: (83.6HV; 84HV (UCI))
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample W38 test average values were: (84.0HV; 84HV (UCI))
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample T11 test average values were: (83.2HV; 82HV (UCI))
2) Two instruments’ testing deviation contrast as below:
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample W14 values were: (4.9HV; 5HV (UCI))
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample W38 values were: (4.5HV; 6HV (UCI))
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample T11 values were: (6.3HV; 5HV (UCI))
5.Testing conclusion:
1) The two groups of testing data comparison:
By the analysis of the above data, the ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100’s average value is almost the same with micro hardness MHV-1000Z’s; and the deviations from the two instruments are close, both deviations value are very small and stable. In summary, the SU-100 testing precision, and testing data stability is equal to the MHV-1000Z when testing on customer’s specimens, both are perfect.
2) Testing range comparison of the two instruments:
When the specimens are in the condition of without processing, Micro hardness tester MHV-1000Z can’t test them until the sample’s lower surface is parallel to the upper surface. For some irregular objects, MHV-1000Z test is more troublesome, the object will be required to have some metallographic processing (cutting, polishing or embedding) ; but the ultrasonic hardness teter SU-100 can avoid this trouble, for example ,it can directly test the side surfaces of your company’s specimens.
In a word, both of the two instruments can test your samples, except for the above comparisons, the SU-100 is more cost-effective; we advise customer to consider ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100 (5kgf probe) based on following reasons: it won’t damage your specimen , be able to test more other parts of the specimen, improve the testing efficient (the SU-100’s testing time is only 2S every time, but other desktop hardness testers will be at least 50S) and so on.
There are three aluminum specimens provided by customers, respectively labeled W14,W38,T11; as shown in the following illustrations. The testing position is the black words marked surface area. The thickness of the three specimens (W14, W38, T11): 11.84mm, 14.6mm, 13.54mm; and the weight: 37g, 34g, 44g.
2.Testing instruments and environment:
Sinowon hardness testers: Micro Vickers hardness tester MHV-1000Z and Ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100 (5kgf probe). The MHV-1000Z tests the three samples via HV scale, set the dwell time 10s. Before the test, it has been calibrated by 456 HV0.2 hardness block, measuring 5 times, and the average value is 460 HV0.2 which indicates that MHV-1000Z accuracy meets the ISO standard.
Testing Lab: DongGuan Sinowon instrument TianAn laboratory; Testing environment: 22℃, humidity 70%.
 |
 |
|
Micro Vickers hardness tester MHV-1000Z (#823-113) |
Ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100(#882-121) |
1）Apply MHV-1000Z 200gf test force and SU-100’s 5kgf test force to test the W14, W38 and T11 samples’ labeled surface area; the testing data is been shown in the following table.
| Instrument | Sample | Test force | Test 1 | Test 2 | Test 3 | Average value | Deviation |
| MHV-1000Z | W14 | 200gf | 86.1HV | 83.7HV | 81.2HV | 83.6HV | 4.9HV |
| W38 | 85.0HV | 81.2HV | 85.7HV | 84.0HV | 4.5HV | ||
| T11 | 80.2HV | 82.8HV | 86.5HV | 83.2HV | 6.3HV | ||
| SU-100 | W14 |
5kgf
|
82HV | 83HV | 87HV | 84HV | 5HV |
| W38 | 86HV | 80HV | 86HV | 84HV | 6HV | ||
| T11 | 82HV | 85HV | 80HV |
82HV
|
5HV
|
2）The three specimen testing indentation screen shots from MHV-1000Z are shown below:
 |
 |
 |
| W14’s testing indentation | W38’s testing indentation | T11’s testing indentation |
 |
 |
 |
| W14’s testing result | W38’s testing result | T11’s testing result |
4.Data analysis:
From the above test results we can get:
1) Two instruments’ testing average value contrast as below:
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample W14 test average values were: (83.6HV; 84HV (UCI))
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample W38 test average values were: (84.0HV; 84HV (UCI))
MHV-1000Z and SU-100 of sample T11 test average values were: (83.2HV; 82HV (UCI))
2) Two instruments’ testing deviation contrast as below:
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample W14 values were: (4.9HV; 5HV (UCI))
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample W38 values were: (4.5HV; 6HV (UCI))
The deviation of MHV-1000Z and SU-100 on the test sample T11 values were: (6.3HV; 5HV (UCI))
5.Testing conclusion:
1) The two groups of testing data comparison:
By the analysis of the above data, the ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100’s average value is almost the same with micro hardness MHV-1000Z’s; and the deviations from the two instruments are close, both deviations value are very small and stable. In summary, the SU-100 testing precision, and testing data stability is equal to the MHV-1000Z when testing on customer’s specimens, both are perfect.
2) Testing range comparison of the two instruments:
When the specimens are in the condition of without processing, Micro hardness tester MHV-1000Z can’t test them until the sample’s lower surface is parallel to the upper surface. For some irregular objects, MHV-1000Z test is more troublesome, the object will be required to have some metallographic processing (cutting, polishing or embedding) ; but the ultrasonic hardness teter SU-100 can avoid this trouble, for example ,it can directly test the side surfaces of your company’s specimens.
In a word, both of the two instruments can test your samples, except for the above comparisons, the SU-100 is more cost-effective; we advise customer to consider ultrasonic hardness tester SU-100 (5kgf probe) based on following reasons: it won’t damage your specimen , be able to test more other parts of the specimen, improve the testing efficient (the SU-100’s testing time is only 2S every time, but other desktop hardness testers will be at least 50S) and so on.
Previous Page：Test Report on Hardness of Metal Samples
