Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

EXPERIMENT 2
Hardness Test

1.0 OBJECTIVE
1.1 To measure hardness of Ultra High Molecule Weight Polyetalline (UHMWPE)
samples using Shore (durometer) hardness test.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Hardness is the property of a material that enables it to resist plastic deformation, usually by
penetration. However, the term hardness may also refer to resistance of bending, scratching,
abrasion or cutting. The hardness testing of plastics is most commonly measured by the Shore
(Durometer) test or Rockwell hardness test. Both methods measure the resistance of the plastic
toward indentation. Both scales provide an empirical hardness value that doesn't correlate to
other properties or fundamental characteristics.
In this experiment, we use the Shore (durometer) test to measure the hardness of the samples.
Durometer, like many other hardness tests, measures the depth of an indentation in the material
created by a given force on a standardized presser foot. This depth is dependent on the hardness
of the material, its viscoelastic properties, the shape of the presser foot, and the duration of the
test. ASTM D2240 durometers allows for a measurement of the initial hardness, or the
indentation hardness after a given period of time. The basic test requires applying the force in a
consistent manner, without shock, and measuring the hardness (depth of the indentation). If a
timed hardness is desired, force is applied for the required time and then read. The material under
test should be a minimum of 6.4 mm. [1]

1 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

Figure 1: Diagram for durometer application

Figure 2: Type of durometer shore

The results obtained from this test are a useful measure of relative resistance to indentation of
various grades of polymers. However, the Shore (durometer) hardness test does not serve well as
a predictor of other properties such as strength or resistance to scratches, abrasion, or wear, and
should not be used alone for product design specifications.

2 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

3.0 COMPONENTS AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 Shore (durometer) hardness test

Figure 3: Durometer

3.2 Ultra High Molecule Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) samples

Figure 4: The Sample of UHMWPE with 0% ZnO (pure)

3 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

Figure 5: The Sample of UHMWPE with 12% ZnO

Figure 6: The Sample of UHMWPE with 25% ZnO

Figure 7: The Sample of UHMWPE with 1% Chitosan and 12% ZnO

4 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

Figure 8: The Sample of UHMWPE with 2% Chitosan and 12% ZnO

Figure 9: The Sample of UHMWPE with 3% Chitosan and 12% ZnO

5 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

4.0 PROCEDURES
4.1 The samples were prepared in round shape.

Figure 10: The samples were prepared in round shape

4.2 The measurements were taken at least 12mm from the edge of the material and the
required pressure must be applied for 5 seconds. (The material must be at least 5mm
thick. If the material is thinner than this, additional layers of the same material can
used to achieve this minimum thickness).

Figure 11: The reading was taken

6 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

4.3 The hardness reading was read from the scale.

4.4 ASTM D 2240 was referred for more details.
5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1: The hardness reading of different ratio of zinc oxide and chitosan of UHWMPE samples and
their average hardness.

Samples

Ratio ZnO :

Reading 1, N

Reading 2, N

Reading 3, N

Average

Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Sample 5
Sample 6

C6H11NO4, %
0:0
12:0
24:0
12:1
12:2
12:1

60.5
61.0
53.0
63.0
64.0
57.0

59.5
61.5
54.0
65.5
62.0
54.5

62.0
61.5
56.0
64.0
63.5
56.0

Hardness (HA), N
60.6666667
61.333333
54.333333
64.166667
63.166667
55.833333

Table 2: The conversion of average hardness, HD of different ratio of zinc oxide and chitosan of
UHWMPE samples to the force.

Samples

Ratio ZnO :

Average Hardness (HA), N

Force, F = 445HD , N

Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Sample 5
Sample 6

C6H11NO4, %
0:0
12:0
24:0
12:1
12:2
12:1

60.6666667
61.333333
54.333333
64.166667
63.166667
55.833333

26998.15
27291.85
24176.85
28555.65
28110.65
24844.35

7 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

5.1 Plot graph hardness vs. load for all the samples tested. Discuss.

The Graph of Average Hardness vs Ratio of Sample (%)

66
64
62
60
58
Average Hardness (N) 56
54
52
50
48

Ratio of sample (%)

Figure 12: The graph of average hardness (N) vs ratio of sample (%)

Based on the graph at Figure 12, it shows that the trend for the graph of average
hardness vs. ratio of sample UHWMPE is fluctuated. The highest value of average
hardness belongs to sample 4 which is contained 1% of chitosan and 12% of zinc oxide
with 64.167N and the lowest value of average hardness belongs to sample 3 that have
25% of zinc oxide with 54.33N.

8 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

The Graph of Force (N) vs Ratio of Sample (%)

29000
28000
27000
26000
Force (N)

25000
24000
23000
22000
21000
1

Ratio of sample (%)

Figure 13: The graph of force (N) vs ratio of sample (%)

Based on the graph at Figure 13, it also shows that the trend for the graph of force vs.
ratio of sample UHWMPE is fluctuated. The value of force for every samples is obtained
by using a formula for shore D, F=445HD. This graph also shows the two same samples
that have highest and lowest value of parameters state, force. The highest value of force
belongs to sample 4 which is contained 1% of chitosan and 12% of zinc oxide with
28555.65N and the lowest value of average hardness belongs to sample 3 that have 25%
of zinc oxide with 24176.85N.

9 | Page

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

The Graph of Force (N) vs Average Hardness (N)

Force (N)

29000
28000
27000
26000
25000
24000
23000
22000
21000

Average Hardness (N)

Figure 14: The graph of force (N) vs average hardness (N)

Figure 14 shows the graph of force (N) vs average hardness (N) . Having the same trend
with previously two graphs, it shows fluctuated trend with the same samples that have
highest and lowest values of parameters stated. In this graph, the highest value force is
28555.65N with respect to its average hardness, 64.167N. Meanwhile the value of the
lowest is 24176.85N with average hardness of 54.333N. As values of modulus of
elasticity and hardness arise, the values of force also arise because force is directly
proportional with average hardness.

10 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

5.2 How to maximize the performance of durometer.

There are few aspects that we can consider for maximizing the performance of
durometer:
5.2.1

Alignment
Carefully position handheld units so that the presser foot is in even
contact and the indenter are perpendicular with the sample surface. It is
critical that the presser foot is flat against the surface of the sample during
test. When the presser foot is not parallel with the sample supporting
surface and the unit is mounted at a slight angle, low readings frequently
obtained. Use the alignment tool provided with the stand for best results.

5.2.2

Constant Force
The force used to press the durometer against the test surface
should be constant. Too little force may not allow the presser foot to be in
firm contact with the surface of the part. Too much force may cause the
material to flow into the indenter opening resulting in an excessive
compressive stress that will affect the Shore readings. This is particularly
true for softer materials. When comparing results always make sure the
force is the same.

5.2.3

Sample Thickness
ASTM D 2240 defines the minimum thickness of parts to be
tested. Testing thinner samples may result in bad results. Parts can
frequently be stacked or plied to get to the required thickness. If stacking
is not possible, some testing may be required to make sure the thickness is
not causing bad results. Typically parts that are too thin will give results
that are too-hard.

11 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

5.2.4

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

Test Times
When comparing results it is important to use the same test times.
Some materials exhibit a large degree of flow after the full test load is
applied. A one or two second difference in taking the reading can cause
significant variations.

5.2.5

Round Part Testing

Small round parts, like o-rings, are particularly difficult to test.
Care must be taken to align the centerline of the sample with the centerline
of the indenter. Any offset will cause low readings. The M scale was
designed for testing o-rings and must be used for any that are too small for
the A scale.

5.2.6

Define Test Parameters

No matter what test methods you are always document them on the
test report so that they can be reproduced.

5.2.7

Regular Calibration
All instruments are subject to drift over time. Frequent testing with
test blocks will help you monitor the performance of testers on a day-today basics. Rubber test blocks, however, are subject to hardness changes
as they age. Therefore, annual direct calibrations are important to maintain
a stable testing program.

12 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

5.3 How to relate the durometer results with stiffness of tested material
Durometer is an indirect measure of the stiffness, or more correctly the modulus
of an elastomeric material. Modulus is a property of elastomers, analogous to the
same property of metals, which is the ratio of stress to strain in the elastomer at some
loading condition. Unlike metals which is typically have a linear stress-strain curve
below their yield point, the stress-strain relationship of elastomers is non-linear over a
range of loading condition and can be significantly influenced by ambient
temperature. As a result, the modulus of an elastomer is highly dependent on the
conditions under which it is measured. This fact makes the understanding of
elastomers and their properties important in the understanding of the performance of
elastomeric vibration and shock isolators.
In a relative sense, low durometer or hardness correlates to a low modulus or
stiffness. Similarly, as durometer increases so does modulus and vice-versa. However,
the correlation between durometer and modulus is not directly proportional, doubling
in durometer value does not equate to a doubling in modulus.
Isolator stiffness is a direct function of elastomer modulus and part geometry. So,
as with the relationship between durometer and elastomer modulus, part stiffness
cannot be estimated for a known durometer. However, part stiffness will increase in
durometer, part stiffness will decrease with a decrease of durometer too.
6.0 CONCLUSION
From the experiment, we can conclude that the Shore (Durometer) Hardness which is
used durometer with type of shore D is used to determine the relative hardness of soft
materials, usually plastic or rubber. The hardness test measures the penetration of a specified
indentor into the samples under specified conditions of force and time. Besides, we also can
conclude that sample of Ultra High Molecule Weight Polyethylene with the presence of filler
zinc oxide content increase when it has 12% zinc oxide but decrease when it have 25% zinc
oxide. Meanwhile when chitosan content is added into the samples, it indicated rising in
graph but fell when the content is increased.
7.0 REFERENCES
[1]

http://www.ptc1.com/what_is_durometer.htm

13 | P a g e

Polymer Properties (EBT 326)

Exp. 2: Hardness Test

[2]

www.inteszt.hu/PDF/01/Shore_general_catalogue.pdf

[3]

http://www.usplastic.com/knowledgebase/article.aspx?contentkey=608

[4]

Callister, W. D. and Rethwisch D. G. (2011).Materials Science and Engineering.

[5]

ASTM D2240-05(2010), Standard Test Method for Rubber PropertyDurometer

Hardness, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010

14 | P a g e