Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T21:24:50.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ultimate Strain Measurement of Micromachined Membranes Using a Potentiometric Technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

R. C. Goforth
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
R. K. Ulrich
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Y. K. Leong
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
G. Zhao
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access

Abstract

A potentiometric method for the measurement of ultimate strain of thin films is presented. In this method, an electric potential is applied between two electrodes located one on each side of the thin film under investigation. The electrodes are immersed in an electrolytic solution. The thin film acts as an electrical current barrier. To determine the ultimate strain, a controlled load is applied to the film. Cracking of the film causes a sharp rise in the current from an initial small leakage value. The applied load at the onset of cracking is used to calculate the ultimate strain.

we have previously demonstrated the feasibility of the method for thin silicon nitride films deposited on aluminum strips. The method is very sensitive and can detect cracks too small to be observed with a microscope. We discuss extension of the method to the measurement of the ultimate strain of micromachined membranes. The load is applied by pressurizing one side of the membrane. Micromachined structures are used to determine residual stresses.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Campbell, D.S., in Handbook of Thin Film Technology, edited by Maissel, L.I. and Glang, R. (McGraw Hill, New York, 1970), Ch. 12.Google Scholar
2. Jaccodine, R.J. and Schlegel, W.A.,J. Appl. Phys. 37, 2429 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Petersen, K.E. and Guarnieri, C.R., J. Appl. Phys. 50, 6761 (1979).Google Scholar
4. Allen, M.G., Mehregany, M., Howe, R.T., and Senturia, S.D., Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 241 (1987).Google Scholar
5. Zhao, G., Master's Thesis Proposal Presentation, University of Arkansas, Dept. of Chem. Engr., 1991 (unpublished).Google Scholar
6. Sinha, A. K., Levinstein, H.J., Smith, T.E., Quintana, G., Haszko, S.E., J. of the Electrochem. Soc. 125, 601 (1978).Google Scholar
7. Mehregany, M., Master's Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (1986).Google Scholar