2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsg.2018.09.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Loop energy: A useful indicator of the hardness of minerals from depth-sensing indentation tests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The similarity of values between the two investigations observed in Figure 3 could be discussed in their crystallographic orientations. However, Masuda et al [21] were unable to describe the crystallographic orientation of 7 tested minerals. Based on this fact, the similarity of values can be considered surprisingly high, except for pairs 2 and 4.…”
Section: Scratchability Of Materials: Looking For An Indicator Of Hardness Differentialmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The similarity of values between the two investigations observed in Figure 3 could be discussed in their crystallographic orientations. However, Masuda et al [21] were unable to describe the crystallographic orientation of 7 tested minerals. Based on this fact, the similarity of values can be considered surprisingly high, except for pairs 2 and 4.…”
Section: Scratchability Of Materials: Looking For An Indicator Of Hardness Differentialmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Masuda et al [21] determined the Meyer hardness for nine minerals of the Mohs scale. The hardness ratio for each pair of minerals up to corundum (mineral number 9) can be calculated, besides data presented elsewhere [14], which was s determined by Broz et al [22].…”
Section: Scratchability Of Materials: Looking For An Indicator Of Hardness Differentialmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…We, instead, used the model of Yu and Blanchard (1996), which applies to an elastic‐perfectly plastic solid indented by a rigid conical indenter. Here, σ y is expressed through an inverse hyperbolic function: σy=E0.25emtan0.25emθ2)(1ν2Cθtan0.25emh1][21ν2HEtanθ ${\sigma }_{y}=\frac{E\,\tan \,\theta }{2\left(1-{\nu }^{2}\right){C}_{\theta }}{\tan \,h}^{-1}\left[\frac{2\left(1-{\nu }^{2}\right)H}{E\,\tan \,\theta }\right]$ where, C θ is an empirically derived function of θ , the angle between the face of the indenter and the surface of the specimen, and ν is Poisson's ratio, which we consider an average of 0.27 along [010] for gypsum (Fu, 2017; Masuda et al., 2018). For Vickers indenter, θ = 22° (Evans & Goetze, 1979), resulting C θ = 2.6817.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%