Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A note on a common mistake in the analysis of nanoindentation data

  • M. Munawar Chaudhri (a1)

Abstract

It is shown that to analyze the load versus displacement data obtained from a nanoindentation experiment on a flat surface, it is incorrect to use the so called “reduced modulus,” which includes the elastic properties of both the indenter and the test solid. It is suggested that, until correct analytical solutions become available, the indenter should always be of a much stiffer material than the test solid and it should be approximated to a rigid indenter in the analysis. Furthermore, when the indenter and the test surface are of comparable elastic moduli, the measured indenter displacement is the distance of mutual approach of the two contacting bodies rather than the penetration of the indenter below the original surface of the test solid.

Copyright

References

Hide All
1.Alekhin, V.P., Berlin, G.S., Isaev, A.V., Kalei, G.N., Merkulov, V.A., Skvortsov, V.N., Temovskii, A.P., Krushchov, M.M., Shnyrev, G.D., and Shorshorov, M.Kh., Ind. Lab. 38, 619 (1972).
2.Bulychev, S.I., Alekhin, V.P., Shorshorov, M.Kh., Ternovskii, A.P., and Shnyrev, G.D., Ind. Lab. 41, 1409 (1975).
3.Galanov, B.A., Grigor’ev, O.N., Mil’man, Yu. V., and Ragozin, I.P., Ind. Lab. 11, 93 (1983).
4.Loubet, J.L., Georges, J.M., Marchesini, O., and Meille, G., J. Tribology 106, 43 (1984).
5.Loubet, J.L., Georges, J.M., and Meille, G., in Microindentation Techniques in Materials Science and Engineering, edited by Blau, P.J. and Lawn, B.R., ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 889 (ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1986), p. 72.
6.Doemer, M.F. and Nix, N.D., J. Mater. Res. 1, 601 (1986).
7.Doerner, M.F., Gardner, D.S., and Nix, W.D.. J. Mater. Res. 1, 845 (1986).
8.Ross, J.D., Pollock, H.M., Pivin, J.C., and Takadonm, J., Thin Solid Films 148, 171 (1987).
9.Wu, T.W., Moshref, M., and Alexopoulos, P.S., Thin Solid Films 187, 295 (1990).
10.Swain, M.V. and Mencik, J., Thin Solid Films 253, 204 (1994).
11.Tsui, T.Y., Vlassak, J., and Nix, W.D., J. Mater. Res. 14, 2196 (1999).
12.Gerberich, W.W., Strojny, A., Yoder, K., and Cheng, L-S., J. Mater. Res. 14, 2210 (1999).
13.Lim, Y.Y., Chaudhri, M.M., and Enomoto, Y., J. Mater. Res. 14, 2314 (1999).
14.Lim, Y.Y. and Chaudhri, M.M., Philos. Mag. A 79, 2979 (1999).
15.Oliver, W.C. and Pharr, G.M., J. Mater. Res. 7, 1564 (1992).
16.Sneddon, L.N., Int. J. Engng Sci. 3, 47 (1965).
17.Yoffe, E.H., Philos. Mag. A 50, 813 (1984).
18.Timoshenko, S.P. and Goodier, J.N., in Theory of Elasticity, 3rd ed. (McGray-Hill, New York, 1970) p. 412.
19.Williams, J.S., Chen, Y., Wong-Leung, J., Kerr, A., and Swain, M.V., J. Mater. Res. 14, 2338 (1999).
20.Page, T.F., Oliver, W.C., and McHargue, C., J. Mater. Res. 7, 450 (1992).

A note on a common mistake in the analysis of nanoindentation data

  • M. Munawar Chaudhri (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed