ASTM E 140 : 2012 : REV B

1.1Conversion Table 1 presents data in the Rockwell C hardness range on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, Rockwell superficial hardness, Knoop hardness, and Scleroscope hardness of non-austenitic steels including carbon, alloy, and tool steels in the as-forged, annealed, normalized, and quenched and tempered conditions provided that they are homogeneous.

1.2Conversion Table 2 presents data in the Rockwell B hardness range on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, Rockwell superficial hardness, Knoop hardness, and Scleroscope hardness of non-austenitic steels including carbon, alloy, and tool steels in the as-forged, annealed, normalized, and quenched and tempered conditions provided that they are homogeneous.

1.3Conversion Table 3 presents data on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, Rockwell superficial hardness, and Knoop hardness of nickel and high-nickel alloys (nickel content over 50 %). These hardness conversion relationships are intended to apply particularly to the following: nickel-aluminum-silicon specimens finished to commercial mill standards for hardness testing, covering the entire range of these alloys from their annealed to their heavily cold-worked or age-hardened conditions, including their intermediate conditions.

1.4Conversion Table 4 presents data on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, and Rockwell superficial hardness of cartridge brass.

1.5Conversion Table 5 presents data on the relationship between Brinell hardness and Rockwell B hardness of austenitic stainless steel plate in the annealed condition.

1.6Conversion Table 6 presents data on the relationship between Rockwell hardness and Rockwell superficial hardness of austenitic stainless steel sheet.

1.7Conversion Table 7 presents data on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, Rockwell superficial hardness, and Knoop hardness of copper.

1.8Conversion Table 8 presents data on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Rockwell hardness, and Vickers hardness of alloyed white iron.

1.9Conversion Table 9 presents data on the relationship among Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, Rockwell hardness, and Rockwell superficial hardness of wrought aluminum products.

1.10Conversion Table 10 presents data in the Rockwell C hardness range on the relationship among Leeb (Type D) hardness, Brinell hardness, Vickers hardness, and Rockwell hardness of non-austenitic steels including carbon, alloy, and tool steels in the as-forged, annealed, normalized, and quenched and tempered conditions provided that they are homogeneous.

1.11Many of the conversion values presented herein were obtained from computer-generated curves of actual test data. Most Rockwell hardness numbers are presented to the nearest 0.1 or 0.5 hardness number to permit accurate reproduction of these curves.

1.12Annex A1-Annex A10 contain equations to convert from one hardness scale to another. The equations given in Annex A1-Annex A9 were developed from the data in Tables 1 to 9, respectively. The equations given in Annex A10 were developed at the time the Leeb hardness test was invented (see Appendix X2). The data in Table 10 was calculated from the Annex A10 equations.

1.13Conversion of hardness values should be used only when it is impossible to test the material under the conditions specified, and when conversion is made it should be done with discretion and under controlled conditions. Each type of hardness test is subject to certain errors, but if precautions are carefully observed, the reliability of hardness readings made on instruments of the indentation type will be found comparable. Differences in sensitivity within the range of a given hardness scale (for example, Rockwell B) may be greater than between two different scales or types of instruments. The conversion values, whether from the tables or calculated from the equations, are only approximate and may be inaccurate for specific application.