. Transactions. aper, I have referred to the relation-ship between Brinell hardness and grain size indicated by Fig. 3. of thepaper by Messrs. Bassett and Davis. Using the equation: Brinell hardness =K ^, V diam. of average grain in mm. and placing the constant equal to 30 the following set of figures is ob-tained. These plot rather close to the curve shown in Fig. 3. Brinell Hardness Diameter of Average Grain, in Mm. 43 50 60 75 100 150 It is interesting to observe that beyond a hardness value of approxi-mately 75, at which point grain-size measuremen
. Transactions. aper, I have referred to the relation-ship between Brinell hardness and grain size indicated by Fig. 3. of thepaper by Messrs. Bassett and Davis. Using the equation: Brinell hardness =K ^, V diam. of average grain in mm. and placing the constant equal to 30 the following set of figures is ob-tained. These plot rather close to the curve shown in Fig. 3. Brinell Hardness Diameter of Average Grain, in Mm. 43 50 60 75 100 150 It is interesting to observe that beyond a hardness value of approxi-mately 75, at which point grain-size measurements became impracticable,the authors carry dotted extensions of the cm-ves up to the hmitinghardness value of the cold-rolled metal, 160. In other words, they repre-sent a continued decrease in grain size down to a minimum of zero sizeat the maximum hardness value. Any attempt to count in this range would show a reversal of grainsize mth hardness and the grain size corresponding to maximum hardness DISCUSSION 453. Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Fig. 1.—Sheet brass rolled 4 numbers and annealed J^ hr. 350° 2.—Sheet brass rolled 7 numbers and annealed J^ hr. 350° C.
Size: 2617px × 955px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bo, bookcentury1800, bookdecade1870, booksubjectmineralindustries
