E04.09 - Inclusions

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.  
4.2 Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 11.1.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.  
4.3 The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.  
4.4 The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting proce...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.  
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.  
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.  
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory...

ABSTRACT
This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous non-metallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. This practice enables the experimenter to estimate the extreme value distribution of inclusions in steels. The procedures in determining non-metallic inclusions in steel are presented and discussed in details.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics.  
5.2 It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E45, Practice E1122, or Practice E1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis.  
5.3 This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions.  
1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared.  
1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability.  
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.4.1 For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers.  
1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.  
4.2 Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 11.1.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.  
4.3 The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.  
4.4 The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting proce...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.  
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.  
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.  
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This internationa...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.  
4.2 Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.  
4.3 The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.  
4.4 The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting proce...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.  
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.  
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.  
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This internationa...

ABSTRACT
This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous non-metallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. This practice enables the experimenter to estimate the extreme value distribution of inclusions in steels. The procedures in determining non-metallic inclusions in steel are presented and discussed in details.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics.  
5.2 It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E45, Practice E1122, or Practice E1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis.  
5.3 This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions.  
1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared.  
1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability.  
1.4 The measured values are stated in SI units. For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers.  
1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.  
4.2 Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.  
4.3 The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.  
4.4 The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting proce...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.  
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.  
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.  
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production ma...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production ma...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. ^REFERENCE:
ASTM Standards:
E3 Guide for Prep...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production ma...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 These test methods cover procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production ma...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ABSTRACT
This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous non-metallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. This practice enables the experimenter to estimate the extreme value distribution of inclusions in steels. The procedures in determining non-metallic inclusions in steel are presented and discussed in details.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics.
It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E 45, Practice E 1122, or Practice E 1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis.
This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions.
1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared.
1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability.
1.4 The measured values are stated in SI units. For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers.
1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics.
It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E 45, Practice E 1122, or Practice E 1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis.
This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions.
1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared.
1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability.
1.4 The measured values are stated in SI units. For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers.
1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories).
Because the inclusion population within a given lot of steel varies with position, the lot must be statistically sampled in order to assess its inclusion content. The degree of sampling must be adequate for the lot size and its specific characteristics. Materials with very low inclusion contents may be more accurately rated by automatic image analysis, which permits more precise microscopic ratings.
Results of macroscopic and microscopic test methods may be used to qualify material fo...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results.
Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected.
The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type.
The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories).
Because the inclusion population within a given lot of steel varies with position, the lot must be statistically sampled in order to assess its inclusion content. The degree of sampling must be adequate for the lot size and its specific characteristics. Materials with very low inclusion contents may be more accurately rated by automatic image analysis, which permits more precise microscopic ratings.
Results of macroscopic and microscopic test methods may be used to qualify material fo...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized procedures for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopic methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopic methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopic methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopic methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopic methods A and D.
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopic or a microscopic method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics.
It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E 45, Practice E 1122, or Practice E 1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis.
This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions.
1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared.
1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability.
1.4 The measured values are stated in SI units. For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers.
1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized methods for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopical methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopical methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopical methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopical methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.  
1.2 These test methods are suitable for manual rating of inclusion content. Other ASTM standards cover automatic methods for obtaining JK ratings (Practice E 1122) and inclusion content using image analysis (Practice E 1245).  
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopical or a microscopical method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.  
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover a number of recognized methods for determining the nonmetallic inclusion content of wrought steel. Macroscopical methods include macroetch, fracture, step-down, and magnetic particle tests. Microscopical methods include five generally accepted systems of examination. In these microscopical methods, inclusions are assigned to a category based on similarities in morphology, and not necessarily on their chemical identity. Metallographic techniques that allow simple differentiation between morphologically similar inclusions are briefly discussed. While the methods are primarily intended for rating inclusions, constituents such as carbides, nitrides, carbonitrides, borides, and intermetallic phases may be rated using some of the microscopical methods. In some cases, alloys other than steels may be rated using one or more of these methods; the methods will be described in terms of their use on steels.
1.2 These test methods are suitable for manual rating of inclusion content. Other ASTM standards cover automatic methods for obtaining JK ratings (Practice E 1122) and inclusion content using image analysis (Practice E 1245).
1.3 Depending on the type of steel and the properties required, either a macroscopical or a microscopical method for determining the inclusion content, or combinations of the two methods, may be found most satisfactory.
1.4 These test methods deal only with recommended test methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures to perform JK-type inclusion ratings using automatic image analysis in accordance with microscopical methods A and D of Practice E45.  
1.2 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any grade of steel or other alloy where the method is appropriate.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses are conversions and are approximate.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.