Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T03:14:03.960Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Continuous Microindentation and Microscratch Measurements of Metal-Ceramic Adhesive strengths

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

S. Venkataraman
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
D. L. Kohlstedt
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
W. W. Gerberich
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Get access

Abstract

To investigate the effect of heat-treatment on the adhesion of Pt thin films to NiO substrates, the strain energy release rate, interfacial fracture toughness and interfacial shear strength were determined from continuous microscratch and continuous microindentation experiments. Samples were prepared by sputtering Pt onto single crystals of NiO, followed by a heat-treatment at temperatures of 300, 500 and 800°C and an oxygen partial pressure of either 0.21 or 10-5 atm. Continuous microscratch tests were performed by driving a conical indenter with either a 1 or 5 μm tip radius simultaneously into and across the Pt film. From the magnitude of the critical load at the point of film delamination and the area of the delaminated piece of the thin film, the strain energy release rate (practical work of adhesion) and interfacial fracture toughness were calculated. The practical work of adhesion and interfacial fracture toughness increased from 0.2 J/m2 and 0.2 MPa√m, respectively, for as-sputtered samples to 4.6 J/m2 and 1 MPa√m for samples heat-treated at 500°C and 10-5 atm. Preliminary analysis of continuous microindentation results for Pt/NiO samples yielded interfacial shear strengths of 270 MPa for as-sputtered samples and 725 MPa for samples heat-treated at 500°C and 10-5 atm. While these values are in good agreement with those determined by other methods for metal-ceramic systems, there are sufficient differences in test method for a single system to require additional analysis of the proposed models.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
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.)

References

REFERENCES

1 Wu, T.W., J. Mater. Res., 6, 407 (1991).Google Scholar
2 Nix, W.D., Met. Trans. A, 20 A, 2217 (1989).Google Scholar
3 Shieu, F.-S., Raj, R. and Sass, S.L., Materials Science Center Report # 6905, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University.Google Scholar
4 Wu, T.W., Hwang, C., Lo, J. and Alexopoulos, P.S., Thin Solid Films, 166, 299 (1988).Google Scholar
5 Stone, D., LaFontaine, W.R., Alexopoulos, P., Wu, T.-W. and Li, C.Y., J. Mater. Res., 3, 141 (1988).Google Scholar
6 Venkataraman, S., Kohlstedt, D.L. and Gerberich, W.W., submitted for publication.Google Scholar
7 Doerner, M.F. and Nix, W.D., J. Mater. Res., 1, 601 (1986).Google Scholar
8 Benjamin, P. and Weaver, C., Proc. Roy. Soc., London A254, 163 (1960).Google Scholar
9 Weaver, C., J. Vac. Sci. Technol., 12, 18 (1975).Google Scholar
10 Johnson, K.L., Contact Mechanics (Cambridge University Press 1985), pp. 5051, 68–70, 171–179, 427–428.Google Scholar
11 Tazaki, M., Nishibori, M. and Kinosita, K., Thin Solid Films, 51 13 (1978).Google Scholar
12 Dalgleish, B.J., Lu, M.C. and Evans, A.G., Acta Metall., 36, 2021, 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Evans, A.J. and Ruhle, M., MRS Bulletin, 10, 46 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Agrawal, D.C. and Raj, R., Materials Science and Engineering, A126, 125 (1990).Google Scholar