Comparison between single loading–unloading indentation and continuous stiffness indentation. Issue 57 (17th July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jia, Yun-Fei; Cui, Yuan-Yuan; Xuan, Fu-Zhen; Yang, Fuqian
• Is Part Of: RSC advances. Volume 7:Issue 57(2017)
• Page Start: 35655
• Page End: 35665
• Publication Date: 2017-07-17
• Subjects: Chemistry -- Periodicals; 540.5
• DOI: 10.1039/c7ra06491h
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2046-2069

Abstract

Abstract : SEM images of indents and variation of a "constant" value of indentation hardness of fused silica with the indentation strain rate. Abstract : Experiments are performed on fused silica, Si, and duplex stainless steel to examine whether the CSM (continuous stiffness indentation) method will provide approximately the "same" results of contact modulus and indentation hardness as those measured from the quasi-static single loading–unloading indentation. The experimental results show that the elastic modulus measured by the CSM method is compatible with that by the quasi-static loading–unloading method for hard materials, while there exists a percentage difference of ∼21.3% between the smallest value and the largest vale of the measured indentation hardnesses from the CSM method for fused silica and a percentage difference of ∼15.3% between the hardnesses measured by the CSM method and the single indentation for duplex stainless steel. The large percentage difference suggests that the indentation hardness measured by the CSM method may not be compatible with that measured by the quasi-static loading–unloading method for hard materials. The finite element results reveal the percentage difference between the indentation hardness at the wave peak and that at the wave valley for the CSM method increases with the increase of the ratio of elastic modulus to yield stress.