
Abstract
The paper presents the basic ideas of the guidelines for the
determination of the uncertainty which are presently being introduced
into the ISO standards on the conventional hardness measuring methods
Rockwell, Vickers, Brinell and Knoop. They are based on general
guidelines for the evaluation of the uncertainty of measurements
published by ISO (Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement
- GUM) and EA.
In
the past ten years, the efforts of industry to enhance the quality of
products have been increasingly supported on the one hand by the
development of high-precision measuring methods and measuring devices
and, on the other hand, by the international standardization of the
basis for quality assurance. In the field of hardness testing, this
tendency can be seen for example by the development of the instrumented
indentation test and the automatic image processing for the Vickers and
Brinell measuring methods. During the standardization of the basis for
quality assurance, apart from ISO 9001 [1], which describes a model for
the quality assurance in the manufacturing process, several basic
standards have been developed, which have sustainably influenced
industrial measurements.
Among these are in particular the ISO "Guide to the Expression of
Uncertainty in Measurement", which is abbreviated to "GUM", and the ISO
17025 standard on general requirements for the competence of testing
and calibration laboratories [3]. The GUM was the first document to lay
down a general, uniform guideline on how the uncertainty of measurement
isto be determined. Basically, the GUM prescribes the following steps
:
The internationally harmonized ISO 17025 standard formulates
clearly
the requirements in particular for the traceability of measurements to
national standards and with regard to the necessity of measurement
uncertainty considerations when indicating the measurement results. In
Germany we already have more than 20 DKD laboratories (DKD = German
Calibration Service) in the field of the measurement quantity hardness
which are accredited for the calibration of hardness reference blocks,
indenters, hardness testing machines and rubber hardness testers. As
for an accreditation, evidence of the measurement uncertainty is
required, these laboratories performed important work in determining
the uncertainty in the calibration of the hardness measuring means
represented by them according to GUM and to the EA guideline for the
estimation of the measurement uncertainty EA/4-02 derived from it [4].
Regardless of this remarkable progress one has to admit that
the concept of measurement uncertainty is relatively new in industry
because one used to operate here above all with the observance of
tolerances.
After the publication of the GUM (which is kept quite
general) it soon became clear that for the determination of the
measurement uncertainty it will be necessary to elaborate guidelines
specifically with regard to the measurement quantity. The requirement
that for each measurement result its measurement uncertainty must be
stated, can thus be realized best. Furthermore, it is necessary to
apply uniform methods for the determination of the measurement
uncertainty so that the values of the measurement uncertainty can be
compared with each other.
An important step in this direction was achieved through the
elaboration of the EA 10-16 guideline on the estimation of the
uncertainty of hardness measurements which was adopted within the
framework of the EA (European Cooperation for Accreditation)
organization [5].
On this basis, and by using the results of EU project "UNCERT" [6], it
was decided during the periodic and just due revision of the ISO
standards in the field of the hardness measuring methods Brinell,
Vickers, Rockwell and Knoop (namely ISO 6506, ISO 6507, ISO 6508, ISO
4545) to supplement these standards by guidelines for the determination
of the measurement uncertainty.
As these four ISO hardness standards lay down the
requirements for the test method, the testing machines and the
calibration of hardness reference blocks in three parts each, a total
of twelve guidelines for the determination of the measurement
uncertainty had to be elaborated. These guidelines are based as far as
possible on uniform principles and take, at the same time, the specific
features of the individual hardness measuring methods into account.
In the following, the basic principles of these guidelines
for the determination of the measurement uncertainty will be presented.
The determination of the uncertainty of the hardness measuring methods relates to Part 1 of the ISO 6506, ISO 6507, ISO 6508 and ISO 4545 standards. To get a better understanding of how the uncertainty of measured hardness values comes about, the metrological chain for the definition and transmission of the hardness scales is shown in Fig. 1.

Figure 1:Metrological chain for the definition and transmission of the hardness scales
The chain starts on the international level with the definitions of different hardness scales in the ISO standards on the basis of which international comparisons of different hardness scales are carried out. With a series of hardness standardizing machines on the national level, primary hardness reference blocks are calibrated for the calibration in the world national metrology institutes exist which have set up hardness standardizing machines. In Germany, such hardness standards are operated at PTB. The accuracy of the hardness standardizing machines is achieved by direct calibrations on the highest level and verified by international comparisons. The largest part of hardness reference blocks is calibrated by the calibration laboratories of DKD. For this, hardness reference standard machines are used in the DKD laboratories which are traced back to the national standards by direct and indirect calibrations. The hardness reference blocks calibrated by them serve to monitor the hardness testing machines at the premises of the users, above all in industry. Besides this indirect calibration with hardness reference blocks, also direct calibrations of the essential influence quantities in hardness testing machines like test force, length measurement, indenter geometry and test cycle are carried out. When laying down the method for estimating the uncertainty we started from the assumption that data as easily available as possible will be used for this purpose. Also, the calculation should not be unnecessarily complicated. Therefore, the uncertainty of the hardness values measured with hardness testing machines is obtained from the measurement with hardness reference blocks and a test specimen. The influences are considered in detail in Table 1.
| Influence of the uncertainty | Source of their determination |
|
|
Table 1: Influences and sources of their dertermination taken into account in the uncertainty of the hardness measuring method
At this point, the method divides into two branches:As uE
is a general maximum value which has to be taken from the ISO standard,
the determination of the measurement uncertainty is simplified, but in
general the measurement uncertainty according to Method 1 is larger
than that according to Method 2.
The calculation formulas for
Methods 1 (eq.1) and 2 (eq. 2) are as follows:
| (1) | ![]() |
| (2) | ![]() |
The root represents according to GUM the combined uncertainty
which follows from the sum of the variances of the above discussed
influence quantities. The expanded uncertainty
U is then the combined uncertainty multiplied by
the expansion factor 2. By this it is achieved that the hardness
measuring value generally lies with a probability of approximately 95%
in the interval given by the expanded uncertainty.
Method 2 can be recommended not only when the smallest
possible measurement uncertainty has to be proven but also when a
quality control card, e.g. with the statistical quantities mean value
X and the range R, is
conducted. The calculation of the measurement uncertainty is
demonstrated by the example as given in Table 2:

Table 2: Calculation (in excerpts) of the uncertainty of the Rockwell hardness measurement
The calibration of hardness testing machines
encompasses both
the direct calibration of test force,
length measurement, indenter geometry and test cycle and the indirect
calibration of the overall function with hardness reference blocks.
The uncertainties for the four mentioned measurement
quantities calculated on the basis of
direct calibration are compared with the corresponding tolerances in
ISO 6508-2 and ISO 4545-2. The uncertainty of the indirect calibration
is compared with the permissible limit deviation of the hardness
testing machine
Uncertainty of the Direct Calibration of
Hardness
Testing Machines
The uncertainty of the direct calibration will be
demonstrated here by means of an example, i.e. the calibration of the
test force.
The combined relative standard uncertainty of the test force
calibration is calculated according to the following equation:
(3)
where:
uFRS
- relative measurement uncertainty of the force transducer (from the
calibration certificate)
uFHTM - relative standard uncertainty
of the test force generated by the hardness testing machine
The
results of the test force calibration:
(4), (5)
where:
t
= 1.32 for n = 3 and a = 68.3%
The calculation of the uncertainty of the test force is given
in Table 4.

Table 3: Results of the force calibration

Table 4: Calculation of the measurment uncertainty of the test force
Finally, the maximum relative deviation of the test force ΔFmax including the measurement uncertainty of the used standard is calculated.
ΔFmax= ΔFrel + UF (6)
The
result of the example means that the deviation of the test force
including the measurement uncertainty of the used standard observes the
tolerance in paragraph 4.2 of DIN EN ISO
6508-2.

Table 5: Calculation of the maximum relative deviation of the test force including the measurment uncertainty
Uncertainty of the Indirect Calibration of the Hardness Testing Machine
The measurement uncertainty of the indirect
calibration of the
hardness testing machine is calculated as follows:
(7)
where:
uH
-
Standard uncertainty of the hardness testing machine when measuring a
hardness reference block
uCRM
- Calibration uncertainty of the hardness reference block
uCRM-D
-
Hardness change of the hardness reference block since the last
calibration due to drift (negligible when using the hardness reference
block according to the standar)
ums
-
Uncertainty due to the resolution of the measurement system of the
hardness testing machine
According to the calibration certificate for k = 1, the
following example is considered :
Hardness reference block HCRM
= 45.4 HRC
Uncertainty of the hardness reference block uCRM
= ±0.5 HRC
Resolution of the measurement system of the testing hardness testing
machine ms = 0.1 µm (= 0.05 HRC).
Using the hardness reference block on the hardness testing machine, the measuring results were obtained and are given in Table 6:

(8)The measurement uncertainty according to eq. (8) is calculated and is given in Table 7.
(9)| Measurement quantity Xi | Estimated value xi | Standard measurement uncertainty u(xi) | Distribution type | Sensitivity coefficient ci | Contribution to uncertainty ui(H) |
| uH | 45.4 HRC | 0.37 HRC | Normal | 1.0 | 0 HRC |
| uCRM | 45.4 HRC | 0.25 HRC | Normal | 1.0 | 0 HRC |
| ums | 0 HRC | 0.058 HRC | Rectangle | 1.0 | 0 HRC |
| uCRM-D | 0 HRC | 0 HRC | Triangle | 1.0 | 0 HRC |
| Combined uncertainty Combined uncertainty uHTM | 0 HRC | ||||
| Expanded measurement uncertainty UHTM (k = 2) | 0 HRC | ||||
| Hardness H, measured on the hardness testing machine | 45.1 HRC |
| Expanded measurement uncertainty UHTM,HRC | 0.9 |
Deviation of hardness
testing machine when calibrated with hardness refence block I I, HRC | 0.5 |
| Maximum deviation of hardness testing machine including measurement uncertainty Δ HHTMmax, HRC | 1.4 |
The result (Table 8) means that the permissible limit deviation of the hardness testing machine, which - according to paragraph 5 of ISO 6508-2 - amounts to ± 1.5 HRC, is observed.
During the indirect calibration with primary hardness reference blocks, the overall function of the hardness reference standard machine is checked. Thereby, the repeatability and the deviation of the hardness reference standard machine from the actual hardness measuring value are determined. The measurement uncertainty of the indirect calibration of the hardness reference standard machine is determined with the following equation.
(10)
where
:
uCRM-1 -
Calibration uncertainty of the primary hardness reference block
according to the calibration certificate for k = 1
uxCRM-1
- Standard uncertainty of the hardness reference standard
machine due to its repeatability
uCRM-D
-
Hardness change of the primary hardness reference block since its last
calibration due to drift
ums -
Uncertainty due to the resolution of the measurement system of the
hardness reference standard machine
Eq. (10)
corresponds in its structure to eq. (7) according to which the
measurement uncertainty is determined during the indirect calibration
of the hardness testing machine.The
measurement
uncertainty of the hardness reference block is then calculated as
follows:
(11)
where:
uCRM
- Calibration uncertainty of the hardness reference block
uxCRM-1 -
Standard uncertainty due to the inhomogeneity of the hardness
distribution on the hardness reference block
| Measuring quantity Xi | Estmated value xi | Standard uncertainty u(xi) | Distribution type | Sensitivity
coefficient ci | Contribution to uncertainty ui(H) |
| uCRM-1 | 45.5 HRC | 0.25 HRC | Normal | 1.0 | 0.25 HRC |
| uxCRM-1 | 0 HRC | 0.11 HRC | Normal | 1.0 | 0.11 HRC |
| ums | 0 HRC | 0.05 HRC | Rectangle | 1.0 | 0.029 HRC |
| uCRM-D | 0 HRC | 0 HRC | Trianggle | 1.0 | 0 HRC |
| Combined uncertainty uCM | 0.27 HRC | ||||
Table 9: calculation of the uncertainty of a Rockwell hardness reference standard machine
In the example given in Table 9, first the uncertainty of a Rockwell hardness reference standard machine uCM is calculated with eq. (10). After that, the measurement uncertainty of the hardness reference block is determined with eq. (11).

Table 10: Determination of the inhomogeneity of the hardness reference block
The standard deviation (Table 10) of the hardness reference block due to the inhomogeneity is obtained from:
(12)with t = 1.14 and n = 5 one obtains :
uxCRM_2 = 0.12 HRC
Finally, the expanded calibration uncertainty of the hardness reference block is calculated (Table 11).
| Hardness of the hardness reference block HCRM,HRC | 45.4 |
| Inhomogeneity of the hardness reference uxCRM-2,HRC | 0.12 |
| Measurement uncertainty of the hardness reference standard machine uCM, HRC | 0.27 |
| Expanded calibration uncertainty of the hardness reference UCRM,HRC | 0.59 |
According to the example given, an expanded uncertainty of the hardness reference block U = 0.6 HRC is thus obtained.
Within the framework of the revision of the standards ISO 6506, ISO 6507, ISO 6508 and ISO 4545 for the hardness measuring methods according to Brinell, Vickers, Rockwell and Knoop, guidelines for the determination of the measurement uncertainty for the hardness measuring method, the hardness testing machine and the hardness reference blocks were elaborated. These guidelines, which have been presented by means of calculation examples, show that the calculation of the measurement uncertainty can be carried out without difficulties. The introduction of the guidelines for the determination of the measurement uncertainty creates the preconditions for a further improvement of quality assurance in connection with products on which the hardness has to be measured. In particular, one requirement given in the basic standards of quality assurance can be fulfilled now: that in practical hardness measurement it must be possible to indicate for each hardness measuring value its uncertainty. If it is necessary to frequently carry out uncertainty calculations it is recommended to convert the guidelines into a software program. [8]
The guidelines for the determination of the measurement uncertainty here presented have been developed within the scope of a working group of DIN NMP 141 "Hardness testing of metals". Special thanks are owed to the members of this working group - Dr. Wehrstedt, Dr. Polzin, Mr. Patkovszky and Dr. Ullner - for their constructive contributions and discussions.
