Standard hardness blocks

As with all tests, frequent caUbration of the test equipment using standard hardness blocks is a prerequisite for rehable hardness testing (see ASTM E18). Standard hardness blocks are available through commercial sources in the United States but do not have traceabiUty to internationally accepted standards as in Europe. 

The standard briefly covers the significance of hardness in terms of its relation with modulus, and the practical use of hardness tests. The hardness tests for rubber that are standardized by ISO are introduced and the distinction between dead load and durometer type instruments is explained to help with selection of a test method for particular circumstances. The effect of test piece, use of standard hardness blocks and comparison of hardness scales is also outlined. 

Going further in these attempts and analysing the results of Vickers hardness measurements (Hv) obtained for particular standard hardness blocks of the Mohs scale, Khrushchev (1950) tried to find a mathematical relationship between these values. To this end, he had to eliminate the existing discontinuities between particular degrees of Mohs hardness (Fig. 4.2.1, old scale). He attained this by augmenting the scale with five extra... 

Fig. 4.4.11. Abrasiveness of standard hardness blocks of traditional Mohs scale and modified by Povarennykh.

As equivalent to the Mackensen air blower, ultrasonic devices can be used, specifically those manufactured by Rio Grande and Branson (Fig. 4.4.18). With a suitably chosen nozzle delivering the abrasive material and with the device scaled on Mohs standard hardness blocks, small surfaces can be tested by the point abrasion method using ultrasonic impact abrasion technique. The possibility of employing a fine-grained abrasive for this purpose allows substantial miniaturization of measurement, as compared with Mackensen s method. 

The standard hardness blocks are too thick to reach equilibrium in the normal test period, so the hardness readings are taken on a stack of 2-mm-thick pieces. 

The Scleroscope scale ranges from 0 to 140 the cahbration point of 100 is the hardness of fully quenched but untempered steel. Standard test blocks embodying this condition are used for cahbration. 

Again there are examples from physical measurements that demonstrate how traceability can be achieved. There is no SI unit for hardness but there is a well-established traceability system for the results of hardness measurements. Hardness scales, e.g. Brunei or Rockwell, are defined in terms of the properties of the machines used to measure the hardness. The properties defined include the shape of the indenter, the applied load and the rate of application of the load together with the tolerances on the properties. Thus utilising a machine that meets these defined properties provides the traceability for the results obtained using it. However it is a difficult task to keep monitoring the properties of the machines and reference materials are used in the form of hardness blocks whose hardness has been measured at a standards laboratory on a machine with very well defined and monitored properties. 

The standard molecular structural parameters that one would like to control in block copolymer structures, especially in the context of polymeric nanostructures, are the relative size and nature of the blocks. The relative size implies the length of the block (or degree of polymerization, i.e., the number of monomer units contained within the block), while the nature of the block requires a slightly more elaborate description that includes its solubility characteristics, glass transition temperature (Tg), relative chain stiffness, etc. Using standard living polymerization methods, the size of the blocks is readily controlled by the ratio of the monomer concentration to that of the initiator. The relative sizes of the blocks can thus be easily fine-tuned very precisely to date the best control of these parameters in block copolymers is achieved using anionic polymerization. The nature of each block, on the other hand, is controlled by the selection of the monomer for instance, styrene would provide a relatively stiff (hard) block while isoprene would provide a soft one. This is a consequence of the very low Tg of polyisoprene compared to that of polystyrene, which in simplistic terms reflects the relative conformational stiffness of the polymer chain. 

Biased data from measurements might result from uncalibrated instruments. For example, a biased Rockwell hardness tester with a misalignment might constantly produce lower hardness values. It is usually required to check the tester with a standard test block to ensure that the hardness test machine is functioning properly before collecting any test data. Figure 6.6 shows the ASTM hardness test standards for Rockwell hardness testers manufactured by Instron Corporation. 

We are confident that any user of this combined evaluation technique, as well as the development of future test standards for manual ultrasonic testing will benefit from this result, because it allows a greater flexibility in the applicable method without loosing reliability. Often an expensive production of a reference block can be avoided and therefore testing costs are reduced. Since all calculations are performed by a PC, the operator can fully concentrate on his most important duty scanning the workpiece and observing the A-scan. Additional time will be saved for the test documentation, since all testing results are stored in the instrument s memory (the PC s hard drive) with full link to the Software World (Microsoft Word, Excel, etc.). 

In the context of the EHCF construct described in the previous Section, the problem of semiempirical modelling of TMCs electronic structure is seen in a perspective somewhat different from that of the standard HFR MO LCAO-based setting. The EHCF provides a framework which implicitly contains the crucial element of the theory the block of the two-electron density matrix cumulant related to the d-shell. Instead of hardly systematic attempts to extend a parameterization to the transition metals it is now... 

Fig. 4.1.1. Comparison of Mohs hardness degrees with Vickers hardness logarithms for standard blocks of the Mohs scale. (After Bowden and Tabor, 1964)...

To substantiate the need for indicating the crystallographic direction along with hardness test results, we calculate the hardness of one of the fundamental standard blocks of the Mohs scale, i.e., fluorite (H = 4), in three directions... 

Fig. 4.2.2. Comparison of standard blocks of the Mohs scale with hardness classes. (After Khrushchev)...

With the Vicat test a steel needle, at the end flattened to an area of 1 mm2 is pressed into a block of the material with a standard force (1 kgf for Vicat-A, 5 kgf for Vicat-B). The temperature is increased at a standard rate of 50 °C / hour until the needle has penetrated 1 mm into the sample then the Vicat softening point has been reached. As well as we have seen with the Shore hardness ( 7.5.1), this process of penetration is, in fact, also governed by the E-modulus of the material, though in a much more complicated way. Globally, also to the Vicat test a characteristic E-modulus can be ascribed, which is lower than with the ISO bending test, namely about 200 MPa for Vicat-B and 40 MPa for Vicat-A. 

Pharmacopeias require that hard capsules be tested in the same apparatus as tablets even though they have very different physical properties. Filled capsules contain entrapped air, and most formulations will float on water. Devices are required to ensure that they sink, and these can influence the results obtained. Gelatin and hypromellose are adhesive materials and tend to block wire meshes that form part of the standard equipment. The way in which capsules disintegrate and dissolve is dependent upon several factors such... 

Each card must have a unique hardware address. If two cards have the same hardware addresses, neither one of them will be able to communicate. For this reason, the IEEE committee has established a standard for hardware addresses, and assigns blocks of these addresses to NIC manufacturers, who then hard-wire the addresses into the cards. 

Polyurethane adhesives were prepared by mixing polyol, diisocyanate (MDI, TDI or HDI), solvent (DMF, benzene or ethylace-tate), and catalyst (T-9) in the following fashion The diisocyanate dissolved in half of the total solvent volume was mixed with two-thirds of the polyol in one-fourth of the solvent in the presence of a trace of the catalyst. The mixture was heated to 50°C until an exothermic reaction starts then, heat was temporarily removed and reapplied for 10 min to maintain a temperature of 80°C. The rest of the polyol, catalyst, and solvent were then added and mixed completely. The resin was ready for application when the consistency of the mixture had reached a suitable level. The adhesive was spread on 11 3/4" x 4 1/2" x 3/4" wood (hard maple or southern pine) strips. The moist adhesive-coated surfaces were exposed to ambient air (vented hood) for 20-30 seconds if DMF was used as solvent, or for 3-5 minutes if either benzene or ethylacetate was used. After pressing (100 psi), the strips were cut into small shear blocks and tested according to ASTM Standard D905-49. Polyurethane coatings were prepared by mixing the polyol (80 parts) in ethylacetate (60 parts) and toluene (40 parts), with a solution of TDI (53 parts) in 80 parts ethylacetate and 30 parts toluene, and T-9 catalyst... 

---