journal article·2018-03-12

Alternate approach for calculating hardness based on residual indentation depth: Comparison with experiments

G. Ananthakrishna, Srikanth K

Physical Review B· Volume 97· Issue 10
Publisher page

Abstract

It is well known that plastic deformation is a highly nonlinear dissipative irreversible phenomenon of considerable complexity. As a consequence, little progress has been made in modeling some well-known size-dependent properties of plastic deformation, for instance, calculating hardness as a function of indentation depth independently. Here, we devise a method of calculating hardness by calculating the residual indentation depth and then calculate the hardness as the ratio of the load to the residual imprint area. Recognizing the fact that dislocations are the basic defects controlling the plastic component of the indentation depth, we set up a system of coupled nonlinear time evolution equations for the mobile, forest, and geometrically necessary dislocation densities. Within our approach, we consider the geometrically necessary dislocations to be immobile since they contribute to additional hardness. The model includes dislocation multiplication, storage, and recovery mechanisms. The growth of the geometrically necessary dislocation density is controlled by the number of loops that can be activated under the contact area and the mean strain gradient. The equations are then coupled to the load rate equation. Our approach has the ability to adopt experimental parameters such as the indentation rates, the geometrical parameters defining the Berkovich indenter, including the nominal tip radius. The residual indentation depth is obtained by integrating the Orowan expression for the plastic strain rate, which is then used to calculate the hardness. Consistent with the experimental observations, the increasing hardness with decreasing indentation depth in our model arises from limited dislocation sources at small indentation depths and therefore avoids divergence in the limit of small depths reported in the Nix-Gao model. We demonstrate that for a range of parameter values that physically represent different materials, the model predicts the three characteristic features of hardness, namely, increase in the hardness with decreasing indentation depth, and the linear relation between the square of the hardness and the inverse of the indentation depth, for all but 150 nm, deviating for smaller depths. In addition, we also show that it is straightforward to obtain optimized parameter values that give good fit to the hardness data for polycrystalline cold worked copper and single crystals of silver.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Metal and Thin Film Mechanics · Force Microscopy Techniques and Applications · Microstructure and mechanical properties

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (55)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1103/PhysRevA.13.228710.1103/PhysRevA.13.2287 ↗
2. 10.1021/nl063039w10.1021/nl063039w ↗
3. 10.1103/PhysRevB.69.16541010.1103/PhysRevB.69.165410 ↗
4. 10.1063/1.271163410.1063/1.2711634 ↗
5. 10.1126/science.122330410.1126/science.1223304 ↗
6. 10.1146/annurev-matsci-082908-14542210.1146/annurev-matsci-082908-145422 ↗
7. 10.1557/JMR.1995.085310.1557/JMR.1995.0853 ↗
8. 10.1016/1359-6462(95)00524-210.1016/1359-6462(95)00524-2 ↗
9. 10.1557/JMR.1998.018510.1557/JMR.1998.0185 ↗
10. 10.1016/0022-5096(93)90072-N10.1016/0022-5096(93)90072-N ↗
11. 10.1016/0956-7151(94)90502-910.1016/0956-7151(94)90502-9 ↗
12. N. A. Fleck · 1997
13. 10.1016/S0022-5096(97)00086-010.1016/S0022-5096(97)00086-0 ↗
14. 10.1016/S0022-5096(01)00103-X10.1016/S0022-5096(01)00103-X ↗
15. 10.1080/0141861990821203710.1080/01418619908212037 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2004.05.03410.1016/j.scriptamat.2004.05.034 ↗
17. 10.1557/jmr.2004.19.3.76810.1557/jmr.2004.19.3.768 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.jmps.2006.02.00210.1016/j.jmps.2006.02.002 ↗
19. 10.1146/annurev-matsci-070909-10445610.1146/annurev-matsci-070909-104456 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.actamat.2006.03.03410.1016/j.actamat.2006.03.034 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.actamat.2010.03.00410.1016/j.actamat.2010.03.004 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.02.00910.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.02.009 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.06.00310.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.06.003 ↗
24. 10.1557/jmr.2009.013110.1557/jmr.2009.0131 ↗
25. 10.1016/S1359-6454(01)00405-010.1016/S1359-6454(01)00405-0 ↗
26. J. A. El-Awady · 2016
27. 10.1038/ncomms692610.1038/ncomms6926 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.02110.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.021 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.jmps.2006.07.00410.1016/j.jmps.2006.07.004 ↗
30. 10.1557/jmr.2007.009010.1557/jmr.2007.0090 ↗
31. 10.1007/s11837-014-1153-210.1007/s11837-014-1153-2 ↗
32. 10.1088/0965-0393/24/4/04500710.1088/0965-0393/24/4/045007 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.jmps.2014.04.00610.1016/j.jmps.2014.04.006 ↗
34. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.02550210.1103/PhysRevLett.100.025502 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.actamat.2006.07.01810.1016/j.actamat.2006.07.018 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.crhy.2010.07.00710.1016/j.crhy.2010.07.007 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.jmps.2005.07.00310.1016/j.jmps.2005.07.003 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.actamat.2007.09.00110.1016/j.actamat.2007.09.001 ↗
39. L. P. Kubin · 2012
40. 10.1016/j.physrep.2006.10.00310.1016/j.physrep.2006.10.003 ↗
41. 10.1088/0022-3727/15/12/00310.1088/0022-3727/15/12/003 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.actamat.2015.03.02710.1016/j.actamat.2015.03.027 ↗
43. 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.14410910.1103/PhysRevB.92.144109 ↗
44. 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.09410410.1103/PhysRevB.90.094104 ↗
45. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.01410710.1103/PhysRevB.95.014107 ↗
46. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.04550110.1103/PhysRevLett.95.045501 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.10.03210.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.10.032 ↗
48. 10.1016/S0079-6425(02)00003-810.1016/S0079-6425(02)00003-8 ↗
49. 10.1080/14786435.2010.50214110.1080/14786435.2010.502141 ↗
50. S. H. Strogatz · 2001
51. 10.1016/0956-7151(90)90021-810.1016/0956-7151(90)90021-8 ↗
52. H. Neuhäusser · 1983
53. 10.1063/1.172290010.1063/1.1722900 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.actamat.2008.09.03910.1016/j.actamat.2008.09.039 ↗
55. 10.1038/nmat208510.1038/nmat2085 ↗