This video shows how to determine the ASTM grain size number for a metal specimen. Generally, the strength of metal increases as the grain size decreases.
@@segurasegurajorge8018 yes. But actually the magnification is known and that real length on surface of steel = 0.215 mm is calculated from Magnification. Real length = photo length / magnification. I don't know why the video presenter did the opposite of this.
Segurasegura Jorge 165 mm is the width of the sample itself. but 0.215 mm is the width of the area under the microscopic light. it is the area which is being seen by the eyepiece. but there is a simple direct way to find the magnification too. just multiply the eyepiece magnification value with the nose piece lens magnification value.(e:g; if the eyepiece is 10X and nosepiece is 5X then the magnification is 50X). hope it helped
When doing a grain number analysis, the photograph is not true size; therefore a scale factor must be determined. So 1 inch in the photo in this example is 0.254 mm on the 100 magnification; listen carefully to the narrator. The decimal is moved two places. it is true that 1 inch equals 25.4 mm. The 0.215 mm is measured on the sample that was photographed. You will need to conduct the analysis with a real sample and substitute your actual observation that you measure on your sample.
I would want to ask you a question. If i m not wrong if we have a scale bar. We can find length of this line we used for interception, and directly divide this length of line to the number of intercepts and obtain grain size diameter. is my assumption correct?
You need a video on how to deal with the metal yard when they deliver defective metal and defending your claim that it is defective. I had to etch a piece of stainless steel and show them that it had grains of iron carbide that causes corrosion before they would replace it.
@@mahesafernandaaldhopangest6272 it's probably too late but it is the print size dimension's height. 0:55. which is also the length of the two lines she used, hence 2x124. hope this helps.
165 *124 miles , the magnification of the eyepiece of the telescope can view a distance of 20460 sq miles .... this is rough idea of the area under the cross hairs ....... ...... pixels all wired ......
Best video and most easiest way of explanation for calculating grain size without using software. Thank you for uploading. Best Wishes...
how did the grain count was 140?
Could you explain better? For example, where did you suddenly get 0.215 mm from?
+bob yes where did it come from!!?
+Segurasegura i got it. 0.215 mm come from the actual width of the steel sample. which is the real steel. and the width of the photo is 165mm.
@@segurasegurajorge8018 yes. But actually the magnification is known and that real length on surface of steel = 0.215 mm is calculated from Magnification. Real length = photo length / magnification. I don't know why the video presenter did the opposite of this.
Thank for clear explanation. But i didn't understand the value of 2(124)!. Is this a true value or print value of length of lines?
same here
Me ajudou demais agradeço o esforço!
I thank there is some mistake in converte in to mm
she said one inch on a 100 magnification photo is 0.254mm @3:25
the explanation cant get any better. in most textbooks tney define just 3-4 methods in order to touch the topics. this is in depth
thanxx
+Sunil Sharma do you know here she got the 0.215mm?
+Segurasegura Jorge nvm
Segurasegura Jorge 165 mm is the width of the sample itself. but 0.215 mm is the width of the area under the microscopic light. it is the area which is being seen by the eyepiece. but there is a simple direct way to find the magnification too. just multiply the eyepiece magnification value with the nose piece lens magnification value.(e:g; if the eyepiece is 10X and nosepiece is 5X then the magnification is 50X). hope it helped
thanks i understood it right after i posted my question. right as i finished typing haha. but thanks. this will clear things up for other people.
Very good, thanks
شكرا لشرح
very helpful, thx
helpful!!! thank you.
is it ASTM E112 ?
so helpful!!
When doing a grain number analysis, the photograph is not true size; therefore a scale factor must be determined. So 1 inch in the photo in this example is 0.254 mm on the 100 magnification; listen carefully to the narrator. The decimal is moved two places. it is true that 1 inch equals 25.4 mm. The 0.215 mm is measured on the sample that was photographed. You will need to conduct the analysis with a real sample and substitute your actual observation that you measure on your sample.
I would want to ask you a question. If i m not wrong if we have a scale bar. We can find length of this line we used for interception, and directly divide this length of line to the number of intercepts and obtain grain size diameter. is my assumption correct?
You need a video on how to deal with the metal yard when they deliver defective metal and defending your claim that it is defective. I had to etch a piece of stainless steel and show them that it had grains of iron carbide that causes corrosion before they would replace it.
i didn't understand the value of 2(124) ? and this video refers to astm no ? anyone can answer
@@mahesafernandaaldhopangest6272 it's probably too late but it is the print size dimension's height. 0:55. which is also the length of the two lines she used, hence 2x124. hope this helps.
very helpful
great!
Thanks
it would have been nice if you could have put 200 um scale bar on the micrograph or 215 um scale bar ... whole explanation .. it is very dubious
i thought 1 in = 25.4mm........but thanks for the video
I had hard time understanding that , in 100 magnification 1 inch will be equal to 254 mm.
165 *124 miles , the magnification of the eyepiece of the telescope can view a distance of 20460 sq miles .... this is rough idea of the area under the cross hairs ....... ...... pixels all wired ......
❤
Do I see the beginnings of end grain corrosion?
Yes
1 in. =/= .254mm
she said one inch on a 100 magnification photo is 0.254mm @3:25
1in = 25.4 mm , its most be mistake !
she said one inch on a 100 magnification photo is 0.254mm @3:25
I thank there is some mistake in converte in to mm