Leeb rebound hardness test
method of testing metal hardness
The Leeb Rebound Hardness Test (LRHT) invented by Swiss company Proceq SA is one of the four most used methods for testing metal hardness. This portable method is mainly used for testing sufficiently large workpieces (mainly above 1 kg).
It measures the coefficient of restitution. It is a form of nondestructive testing.
History
The Equotip (later on also called simultaneously as Leeb method) rebound hardness test method was developed in the year 1975 by Leeb and Brandestini at Proceq SA to provide a portable hardness test for metals. It was developed as an alternative to the unwieldy and sometimes intricate traditional hardness measuring equipment. The first Leeb rebound product on the market was named “Equotip”, a phrase that still is used synonymously with “Leeb rebound” due to the wide circulation of the “Equotip” product.
Traditional hardness measurements, e.g., those of Rockwell, Vickers, and Brinell, are stationary, requiring fixed workstations in segregated testing areas or laboratories. Most of the time, these methods are selective, involving destructive tests on samples. From individual results, these tests draw statistical conclusions for entire batches.
“Leeb rebound hardness test” enters the record as method of testing metal hardness. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Leeb, rebound and hardness can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Leeb rebound hardness test” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Leeb, rebound and hardness provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 23, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q1313158. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1975.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Leeb rebound hardness test”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Leeb rebound hardness test primary sources, Leeb rebound hardness test archive and Leeb research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Leeb rebound hardness test”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Leeb rebound hardness test” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.