Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T15:39:38.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Determining the Limit of Hardness in Ternary Carbide thin Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

James E. Krzanowski
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Jose L. Endrino
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Sirma H. Koutzaki
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Get access

Abstract

In this study we examine the structure and mechanical properties of ternary carbide films, with the objective of understanding the role that residual stress, density, grain size, texture and crystallinity play in determining film hardness. The main variables we used to alter film structure are the nominal film compositions and substrate bias voltage. The systems examined here are Ti-Hf-C and Hf-Si-C, and are compared to previous work on Ti-Si-C. The Hf-Si-C films show hardness levels above that of HfC alone. Residual stress measurements show a compressive stress to be present, with the exception of the -25V sample where the stress was tensile. However, compositional analysis of the biased samples by XPS reveals that Si content in the films is reduced by the application of substrate bias. Consistent with this, the films with higher bias have larger grain sizes and better crystallinity. For the Ti-Hf-C films, the results for hardness vs. bias are consistent with known stress and densification effects of the bias, and values are consistent with rule-of-mixtures expectations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

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

1. Veprek, S., Niederhofer, A., Moto, K., Bolom, T., Mannling, H.D., Nesladek, P., Dollinger, G., and Bergmaier, A., Surf. Coat. Tech., v. 133–134, pp. 152159 (2000).Google Scholar
2. Voevodin, A.A. and Zabinski, J.S., J. Mater. Sci., v. 33, pp. 319327 (1998).Google Scholar
3. Veprek, S., Reiprich, S., and Shizhi, Li, Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 66, no. 20, pp. 26402642 (1995).Google Scholar
4. Veprek, S., Reiprich, S., Thin Solid Films, 268, pp. 6471 (1995).Google Scholar
5. Veprek, S., Haussmann, M, and Reiprich, S., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. A, v. 14, pp. 4651 (1996).Google Scholar
6. Bull, S.J. and Rickerby, D.S., Mechanics of Coatings, Dowson, D., Taylor, C.M. and Godet, M., Eds., Proceedings of the 16th Leed-Lyon Symposium on Tribology, held at the Institut National des Sciences Appliques, Lyon, France, 5-8 Sept., 1989, pp. 337349.Google Scholar
7. Messier, R., Giri, A.P., and Roy, R.A., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. A, 2, pp. 500503 (1984).Google Scholar
8. Krzanowski, J.E. and Koutzaki, S.H., J. Amer. Cer. Soc. 84 pp. 672–74 (2001)Google Scholar
9. Koutzaki, S.H., Krzanowski, J.E., and Nainaparampil, J., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. A., 19, pp. 19121918 (2001).Google Scholar
10. Phani, A.R., Krzanowski, J.E., and Nainaparampil, J. J., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. A., 19, pp. 22522258 (2001).Google Scholar
11. Cullity, B.D., “Elements of X-ray Diffraction, 2nd Ed.,” ch. 16, Addison-Wesley Co., Reading, MA (1987).Google Scholar