Influence of implantation of heavy metallic ions on the mechanical properties of two polymers, polystyrene and polyethylene terephthalate
Source abstract
Abstract
Ion implantation of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polystyrene (PS) with various high energy metallic ions at 70 kV and a dose of 3 × 1016 ions/cm2 has been made. Measurements of the mechanical properties of the polymers before and after implantation have been made with an ultra microindentation system using both pointed and a small (2 μm) radius spherical-tipped indenter. The surface regions were also investigated by atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Rutherford backscattering (RBS). Significant differences have been observed between the Ti–B dual-implanted surfaces and those of the Au and W implanted surfaces. For both the PET and PS, the resistance to indenter penetration at very low loads was much greater for the Ti–B dual-implanted surfaces. The estimated maximum hardness and modulus of the implanted materials were 0.3 and 8 GPa for the PET material and 1.4 and 16 GPa for the PS material. The results obtained with the spherical indenter show a gradual decline in effective modulus of the surface with penetration depth, whereas the hardness or contact pressure goes through a maximum before declining asymptotically to the bulk values. The values of hardness estimated for the spherical-tipped indenter are somewhat more conservative than the optimistic estimates with the Berkovich indenter. The improved increase in hardness for the Ti–B dual-implanted PET material scales with the RBS measured increased depth of implantation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal and Thin Film Mechanics · Diamond and Carbon-based Materials Research · Polymer Nanocomposite Synthesis and Irradiation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (24)
Show source-provided references
1. 23. Bushby A. J. , Bell T. J. , and Swain M. V. , unpublished.
2. 10.1016/0020-7225(65)90019-410.1016/0020-7225(65)90019-4 ↗
3. 10.1016/0168-583X(86)90291-010.1016/0168-583X(86)90291-0 ↗
4. 10.1016/0040-6090(95)06561-X10.1016/0040-6090(95)06561-X ↗
5. 10.1016/0168-583X(94)95342-210.1016/0168-583X(94)95342-2 ↗
6. 10.1016/S0257-8972(09)90008-110.1016/S0257-8972(09)90008-1 ↗
7. 10.1557/JMR.1995.019010.1557/JMR.1995.0190 ↗
8. 10.1557/JMR.1993.092710.1557/JMR.1993.0927 ↗
9. 24. McCulloch D. , Yap E. , Swain M. V. , and Perry A. J. , unpublished.
10. 10.1016/0257-8972(92)90250-E10.1016/0257-8972(92)90250-E ↗
11. 10.1016/0257-8972(92)90296-M10.1016/0257-8972(92)90296-M ↗
12. Ziegler · 198
13. 10.1016/0020-7683(87)90116-810.1016/0020-7683(87)90116-8 ↗
14. 10.1557/JMR.1992.156410.1557/JMR.1992.1564 ↗
15. Ueno · Nucl. Instrum. Methods, Phys. Res. · 1991 · 59 · 1263 and 1276
16. Mencik · Materials Forum · 1994 · 18 · 277
17. 10.1016/0257-8972(92)90293-J10.1016/0257-8972(92)90293-J ↗
18. 10.1557/JMR.1986.060110.1557/JMR.1986.0601 ↗
19. 10.1016/0042-207X(89)90188-710.1016/0042-207X(89)90188-7 ↗
20. 3. Xu X. L. , Yu Y. , Chen L. , Fang F. , Zhou Z. , and Zou S. , unpublished work.
21. Nishiyama · Nucl. Instrum. Methods, Phys. Res. · 1991 · 59 · 1276
22. 10.1557/JMR.1993.029710.1557/JMR.1993.0297 ↗
23. Gao · Int. J. Sol. Struct. · 1992 · 29 · 247110.1016/0020-7683(92)90004-D ↗
24. 6. Rao G. R. , Lee E. H. , and Treglio J. R. , Surf. Coatings Technol. (in press).