Analysis of interacting cracks due to sequential indentations on sapphire
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Crack interaction behavior due to two sequential static Vickers indentations on a-plane sapphire was investigated. Secondary indentations were performed at various radial separations and angular positions around a primary indentation. The results indicate that interaction sensitivity for sapphire is highly dependent on the spatial relationship of the indentation patterns relative to the crystal orientation. Heightened crack interaction sensitivity was observed when sequential indentations were aligned along the m-axis while the lowest interaction sensitivity occurred when indentations were aligned along the c-axis. Cracks propagating parallel to the rhombohedral planes (R1 and R2) interacted first for most of the indentation orientations tested, while the basal plane (B) cracks interacted first only when indentations were performed along the c-axis. A new bulk material separation mode was identified when two sequential indentations were aligned along the m-axis. Two new terms are defined to characterize the sensitivity of the material to crack interactions due to sequential indentations: (i) the “interaction limit” (IL), which refers to the maximum distance between indentations that results in an extension of initial crack systems for a given orientation; and (ii) the “unification limit” (UL), which refers to the maximum distance between two indentations that results in complete unification or joining of crack systems originating from each indentation. The implications of these results for design of impact-resistant transparent windows and for establishing guidelines for the multi-hit resistance of sapphire are discussed.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Corrosion Behavior and Inhibition · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (45)
Show source-provided references
1. Patel · AMPTIAC Quart · 2000 · 4 · 1
2. Normandia · AMPTIAC Quart · 2004 · 8 · 21
3. Franks LP, Holm D, Kleinberg R. Transparent materials for armor—a cost study. US Army RDECOM-TARDEC Report; January 2010.
4. Jones · Am Ceram Soc Bull · 2006 · 85 · 24
5. LaSalvia · Ceram Eng Sci Proc · 2002 · 23 · 21310.1002/9780470294741.ch24 ↗
6. LaSalvia · JOM J Min Met Mater Soc · 2010 · 62 · 1610.1007/s11837-010-0004-z ↗
7. Krell A, Straßburger E. In: Advances in ceramic armor III: ceramic engineering and science proceedings, vol. 28(5); 2008. p. 45–5.10.1002/9780470339695.ch4 ↗
8. Chen · J Am Ceram Soc · 2007 · 90 · 100510.1111/j.1551-2916.2007.01515.x ↗
9. Karandikar · Ceram Eng Sci Proc · 2009 · 29
10. Murugesh · J Mater Eng · 1991 · 13 · 5510.1007/BF02834124 ↗
11. STANAG 4569. Protection levels for light armoured and logistic vehicles levels. NATO.
12. Purchase Specification Transparent Armor. ATPD-2352. US Army TACOM.
13. MIL-STD-810E. Department of defense test method standard for environmental engineering considerations and laboratory tests. Washington (DC): US Department of Defense.
14. Jones CD, Rioux JB, Locker JW, Pluen V, Mandelartz M. In: Advances in ceramic armor III: ceramic engineering and science proceedings, vol. 28(5); 2008. p. 113–24.10.1002/9780470339695.ch9 ↗
15. Dolan AM. Ballistic transparent armor testing using a multi-hit rifle pattern. Kettering University thesis; 2007.
16. Westmark · Wear · 1995 · 186–187 · 38410.1016/0043-1648(95)07139-3 ↗
17. Seward CR, Pickles CSJ, Field JE. In: Proc SPIE, vol. 1326; 1990. pp. 280–90.10.1117/12.22507 ↗
18. Walley · Wear · 2005 · 552–566 · 258
19. McKinley E. A rock strike testing of transparent armor. US Army Solicitation Number W56HZV09RA006; 2009.
20. Hansen DN, Wagner A. Rock strike testing of transparent armor. US Army TARDEC Report No. 21029; 2010.
21. Hockey · J Am Ceram Soc · 1971 · 54 · 22310.1111/j.1151-2916.1971.tb12277.x ↗
22. Kollenberg · J Mater Sci · 1988 · 23 · 332110.1007/BF00551312 ↗
23. Chan · J Am Ceram Soc · 1988 · 71 · 2910.1111/j.1151-2916.1988.tb05756.x ↗
24. Farber · Phys Status Solidi A · 1993 · 137 · 48510.1002/pssa.2211370219 ↗
25. Nowak · Acta Metall Mater · 1994 · 42 · 287910.1016/0956-7151(94)90229-1 ↗
26. Nowak · Philos Mag A · 1996 · 74 · 17110.1080/01418619608239696 ↗
27. Nowak · Appl Phys Lett · 1996 · 68 · 106310.1063/1.115713 ↗
28. Nowak · Acta Mater · 1999 · 47 · 432910.1016/S1359-6454(99)00316-X ↗
29. Kobayashi · J Soc Mater Sci Jpn · 2002 · 51 · 78010.2472/jsms.51.780 ↗
30. Kim · J Mater Res · 2005 · 20 · 138910.1557/JMR.2005.0201 ↗
31. Tymiak · Philos Mag · 2007 · 87 · 514310.1080/14786430701618464 ↗
32. Kanel GI, Nellis WJ, Savinykh AS, Raorenov SV, Rajendran AM. In: AIP conf proc, vol. 1195; 2009. p. 851–54.10.1063/1.3295276 ↗
33. Kanel · J Appl Phys · 2009 · 10610.1063/1.3204940 ↗
34. Reinhart · J Imp Eng · 2006 · 33 · 65510.1016/j.ijimpeng.2006.09.083 ↗
35. Tymiak · Acta Mater · 2004 · 52 · 55310.1016/j.actamat.2003.09.039 ↗
36. Haney E, Subhash G. J Eur Ceram Soc, accepted for publication.
37. Monoharan M, Muralidharan G. In: Mater res soc sym proc; 1998.
38. Choi · J Mater Sci · 1993 · 2810.1007/BF00357830 ↗
39. Twigg · Philos Mag A · 1996 · 7410.1080/01418619608239724 ↗
40. Zhang · J Mater Sci · 2003 · 38 · 118510.1023/A:1022893203086 ↗
41. Zhang · Acta Mater · 2001 · 49 · 296110.1016/S1359-6454(01)00198-7 ↗
42. Cook · J Am Ceram Soc · 1990 · 73 · 78710.1111/j.1151-2916.1990.tb05119.x ↗
43. Lawn · J Am Ceram Soc · 1980 · 63 · 57410.1111/j.1151-2916.1980.tb10768.x ↗
44. Lawn · J Mater Sci · 1975 · 10 · 104910.1007/BF00823224 ↗
45. Khan · J Phys D Appl Phys · 1992 · 25 · A25710.1088/0022-3727/25/1A/039 ↗