Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T11:48:46.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The deformation behavior of ceramic crystals subjected to very low load (nano)indentations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Trevor F. Page*
Materials Division, Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, England
Warren C. Oliver
Metals and Ceramics Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37381
Carl J. McHargue
Metals and Ceramics Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37381
a)Address correspondence to this author.
Get access


The ultra-low load indentation response of ceramic single crystal surfaces (Al2O3, SiC, Si) has been studied with a software-controlled hardness tester (Nanoindenter) operating in the load range 2–60 mN. In all cases, scanning and transmission electron microscopy have been used to characterize the deformation structures associated with these very small-scale hardness impressions. Emphasis has been placed on correlating the deformation behavior observed for particular indentations with irregularities in recorded load-displacement curves. For carefully annealed sapphire, a threshold load (for a given indenter) was observed below which the only surface response was elastic flexure and beyond which dislocation loop nucleation occurred at, or near, the theoretical shear strength to create the indentation. This onset of plasticity was seen as a sudden displacement discontinuity in the load-displacement response. At higher loads, indentations appeared to be accommodated predominantly by dislocation activity, though microcracks were observed to form ät contact loads of only tens of milliNewtons. Possibly such cracks are the incipient slip-induced nuclei for the much larger, indentation-induced cracks usually apparent only on the surface at much higher loads and often used for estimating indentation toughness. By contrast, silicon did not show this behavior but exhibited unusually large amounts of depth recovery within indentations, resulting in a characteristic reverse thrust on the indenter during unloading. TEM studies of indentations in silicon revealed less evidence of obvious dislocation activity than in sapphire (particularly at the lowest loads used) but did show residual highly imperfect–and often amorphous–structures within the indentations, consistent with a densification transformation occurring at the very high hydrostatic stresses produced under the indenter. The reverse thrust is caused by the relaxation of densified material during unloading. Thus, it appears that the low-load hardness response of silicon is controlled by a pressure-sensitive phase transformation. Though SiC has been predicted to undergo a densification transformation similar to silicon, its load-displacement behavior was found to be similar to Al2O3 suggesting that, for these contact experiments at least, the critical resolved shear stress for dislocation nucleation is exceeded before the critical hydrostatic pressure for densification is reached. In all cases, residual, plastically formed indentations were measured to be smaller than the fully loaded indentation depths would suggest, confirming that a significant portion of the deformation is elastic surface flexure. However, there is some doubt as to whether silicon displays elastic-only deformation even at very small penetration depths. The use of microstructural studies to complement nanoindentation experiments is shown to be a key route not only to interpreting the recorded load-displacement responses, but also to examining the deformation mechanisms controlling the mechanical behavior of ceramics to surface contacts at these small spatial scales.

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.)


1.Pethica, J., Hutchings, R., and Oliver, W. C., Philos. Mag. A48, 593 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Newey, D., Wilkins, M. A., and Pollock, H. M., J. Phys. E 15, 119 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. See, for example, Bückle, H., in The Science of Hardness Testing and its Research Applications, edited by Westbrook, J. H. and Conrad, H. (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1973), pp. 453494.Google Scholar
4.Sargent, P. M. and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. 20, 2388 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Samuels, L. E. and Mulhearn, T. O., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 5, 125 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Burnett, P. J. and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. 19, 845 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Doerner, M. F. and Nix, W. D., J. Mater. Res. 1, 601 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Oliver, W. C., McHargue, C. J., Farlow, G. C., and White, C. W., in Defect Properties and Processing of High-Technology Nonmetallic Materials, edited by Crawford, J. H. Jr, Chen, Y., and Sibley, W. A. (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 24, Pittsburgh, PA, 1984), pp. 515523.Google Scholar
9.Oliver, W. C. and Pharr, G. M., in preparation (1991).Google Scholar
10. See, for example, Burnett, P. J. and Rickerby, D., Surf. Eng. 3, 69 (1987) and J. C. Knight, T. F. Page, and I. M. Hutchings, Surf. Eng. 5, 213 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Page, T. F. and Knight, J. C., Surf. Coat. Technol. 39/40, 339 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Knight, J. C., Whitehead, A. J., and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. (1992, in press).Google Scholar
13.Marshall, D., Noma, T., and Evans, A. G., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 65, C175 (1982).Google Scholar
14.Naylor, M. G. S. and Page, T. F., J. Microscopy 130, 345 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Ness, J. N. and Page, T. F., in Tailoring Multiphase and Composite Ceramics, edited by Tressler, R. E. (Mater. Sci. Res. 20) (Plenum Press, New York, 1986), p. 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Yeomans, J. A. and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. 25, 2312 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Supplied by Professor Krishna, P., Banaras Hindu University, Incia.Google Scholar
18. Supplied by Pennycook, Dr. S., ORNL, Solid State Division.Google Scholar
19.Page, T. F., McHargue, C. J., and White, C. W., J. Microscopy 163, 245 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Courtesy ORNL Solid State (JEOL 840) and Electron Microscopy (EM 430) Divisions.Google Scholar
21.Fisher, A. and Angelini, P., in Proc. 43rd Annual Meeting of Electron Microscopy Society of America, 1985, p. 182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. See, for example, Kelly, A., Strong Solids (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 1966), p. 66.Google Scholar
23. See, for example, Gane, N. and Cox, J. M., Philos. Mag. 22, 881 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. S..Bull, I., Page, T. F., and Yoffe, E. H., Philos. Mag. Lett. 59, 281 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Brown, L. M., unpublished work (1991).Google Scholar
26. See, for example, Lehoczky, S. L., J. Appl. Phys. 49, 5479 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Set, for example, Cottrell, A. H., Dislocations and Plastic Flow in Crystals (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 1953), pp. 5354; and J. P. Hirth and J. Lothe, Theory of Dislocations (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968), pp. 688–689 and the references cited therein.Google Scholar
28. See, for example, Hockey, B. J. and Lawn, B. R., J. Mater. Sci. 10, 1275 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Lawn, B. R. and Evans, A. G., J. Mater. Sci. 12, 2195 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Whitehead, A. J., private communication (Newcastle Nanoindenter).Google Scholar
31.Hill, N. J. and Rowcliffe, D. J., J. Mater. Sci. 9, 1569 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Clarke, D. R., Kroll, M. C., Kirchner, P. D., Cook, R. F., and Hockey, B. J., Phys. Res. Lett. 60, 2156 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. See, for example, Gridneva, I. V., Yu Milman, V., and Trefilov, V. I., Phys. Status Solidi (a) 14, 177 (1972); and V. F. Eremenko and V. I. Nikitenko, Phys. Status Solidi (a) 44, 317 (1971), together with the references cited in (32) and (34).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Sawyer, G. R., Sargent, P. M., and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. 15, 1001 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Whitehead, A. J. and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. (1992, to be submitted).Google Scholar
36.Brack, K., J. Appl. Phys. 36, 3560 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. O, Adewoye, O. and Page, T. F., J. Mater. Sci. 11, 981 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38.Onitsch, E. M., Microskopie 2, 345 (1947).Google Scholar
39.Sargent, P. M. and Page, T. F., Proc. British Ceramic Society 26, 209 (1978).Google Scholar
40. See, for example, Timosbenko, S. P. and Goodier, J. N., Theory of Elasticity (McGraw-Hill/Kogakusha, 1970), p. 413.Google Scholar