2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11249-021-01466-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of Sample Tilt and Applied Load on Microscratch Behavior of Copper Under a Spherical Diamond Indenter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 128 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, based on a single-point measurement, the friction coefficient was defined by directly dividing the tangential force by the normal force. This method was widely used in the single-asperity contact, e.g., the nanoscratch simulations [ 34 ] and the microscratch test [ 35 ]. In this work, we studied the effect of scratch depth on the friction coefficient and thus used the second method to calculate the friction coefficient at each scratch depth based on the single-point measurement.…”
Section: Methodology and Model Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, based on a single-point measurement, the friction coefficient was defined by directly dividing the tangential force by the normal force. This method was widely used in the single-asperity contact, e.g., the nanoscratch simulations [ 34 ] and the microscratch test [ 35 ]. In this work, we studied the effect of scratch depth on the friction coefficient and thus used the second method to calculate the friction coefficient at each scratch depth based on the single-point measurement.…”
Section: Methodology and Model Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The scratch response of BST ceramics was investigated using Anton Paar microscratch tester MST 2 by either Berkovich (the sharp edge was along the scratch direction: edge-forward orientation) or spherical indenter with radius of 500 μm in the atmospheric environment [74][75][76] under progressively increasing normal load Fn (initial load is 5 mN) and scratching speed of 3 mm/min. Cracking was detected by acoustic emission (AE) signals acquired by the passive Vallen piezoelectric AE sensor (specifications: central frequency of 150 kHz, dynamic range of 65 dBAE, and maximum amplification of 179200X), which can capture acoustic spikes (i.e., micromovements of the sample due to waves generated by sudden events such as cracking) and convert their number to volts that are sent to the software.…”
Section: J U S T a C C E P T E Dmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For a higher sensitivity factor, the value of AE signal Va is C×Vi, where Vi is the input signal, and C is the sensitivity factor, and AE (%) value (= Va/Vmax×100%) corresponds to Va divided by the maximum range Vmax of 5 V. Since sample tile can affect scratch response [75,77], surface tilt angle was measured to be 0.15° by the pre-scan of the initial surface profile, resulting in negligible effect of sample tilt.…”
Section: J U S T a C C E P T E Dmentioning
confidence: 99%