Correction: Jindal, P.C. A New Method for Evaluating the Indentation Toughness of Hardmetals. Crystals 2018, 8, 197

The authors wish to make the following correction to the paper [1]. In page 5, we need to modify

Table 1. Data from Exner et al. [10] on Co Vol %; Vickers hardness and toughness.

SP# (Co Vol %)	Vickers Hardness	Km
5.1	1705	27.2
10.1	1603	30.8
14.8	1390	38.1

and

Table 2. Data from Seikh et al. [9] on Co Vol %; Vickers hardness and toughness.

SP# (Co Vol %)	Vickers Hardness	Km
4.2	1782	30.5
7.5	1748	29.8
10	1591	39.0
15.6	1483	39.9

into the following:

(Reason) The Km and Wm values as given in Table 1 and Table 2 were incorrect because the method proposed in the paper cannot be used for carbide materials vacuum annealed from coating temperatures typical of MTCVD/CVD coating temperatures when there is no change of room temperature Vickers Hardness after cooling from coating temperatures. Therefore, Indentation toughness of as sintered carbide materials (Reference 9) cannot be compared with indentation toughness of vacuum annealed carbide materials (Reference 10).

Shetty and colleagues (Reference 5) proposed another method as given in Equation (3) of the paper [1]. Indentation Toughness (Km) were calculated for both the as sintered carbide materials and vacuum annealed carbide materials as given in the corrected Table 1 and Table 2. It is to be noted that indentation toughness is inversely proportional to its Vickers Hardness for both sets of carbide materials. It is also very clear that as sintered carbide materials (Reference 9) have higher indentation toughness than the vacuum annealed carbide carbide materials (Reference 10) at a given level of Vickers Hardness.

These changes have no material impact on the discussion and conclusions of the paper. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused to the readers by these changes.