Nanoscratch testing, as an important technique for the assessment of the mechanical failure behaviour and adhesion strength of ceramic coatings and a simulation tool of single asperity contact in tribological experiments, is increasingly becoming an established nanomechanical characterisation method. This paper reviews recent work in nanoscratch testing in different engineering applications including thin ceramic films, automotive organic coatings, chemical–mechanical polishing and biomaterials. In the main part of the paper, nanoscratch results from experiments performed using NanoTest systems fitted with tangential force sensors and spherical indenters as scratch probes are presented and discussed. The types of nanoscratch tests described include constant load nanoscratches, ramped load nanoscratch tests and multipass repetitive unidirectional constant load nanoscratch tests (nanowear). The results are discussed in terms of critical load sensitivity to intrinsic and extrinsic factors, impact of scan speed and loading rate, influence of probe radius and geometry, estimation of tip contact pressure, influence of surface roughness and film stress and thickness, and finally role of ploughing on friction evolution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LarssonM, OlssonM, HedenqvistP, HogmarkS: ‘Mechanisms of coating failure as demonstrated by scratch and indentation testing of TiN coated HSS – on the influence of coating thickness, substrate hardness and surface topography’, Surf. Eng., 2000, 16, 436–444.
2.
IchimuraH, IshiiY: ‘Effects of indenter radius on the critical load in scratch testing’, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2003, 165, 1–7.
3.
HolmbergK, RonkainenH, LaukkanenA, WallinK: ‘Friction and wear of coated surfaces—scales, modelling and tribomechanisms’, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2007, 202, 1034–1049.
4.
HolmbergK, RonkainenH, LaukkanenA, WallinK, ErdemirA, EryilmazO: ‘Tribological analysis of TiN and DLC coated contacts by 3D FEM modelling and stress simulation’, Wear, 2008, 264, 877–884.
5.
SteinmannPA, TardyY, HintermannHE: ‘Adhesion testing by the scratch test method: influence of intrinsic and extrinsic parameters on the critical load’, Thin Solid Films, 1987, 154, 333–349.
6.
OllendorfH, SchneiderD: ‘A comparative study of adhesion test methods for hard coatings’, Surf. Coat. Technol., 1999, 113, 86–102.
7.
BullSJ, RickerbyDS: ‘New developments in the modelling of the hardness and scratch adhesion of thin films’ Surf. Coat. Technol., 1990, 42, 149–164.
8.
BurnettPJ, RickerbyDS: ‘The relationship between hardness and scratch adhesion’, Thin Solid Films, 1987, 154, 403–416.
BeakeBD, VishnyakovVM, ValizadehR, ColligonJS: ‘Influence of mechanical properties on the nanoscratch behaviour of hard nanocomposite TiN/Si3N4 coatings on Si’, J. Phys. D, 2006, 39D, 1392–1397.
11.
BeakeBD, VishnyakovVM, HarrisAJ: ‘Relationship between mechanical properties of thin nitride-based films and their behaviour in nano-scratch tests’, Tribol. Int., 2011, 44, 468.
12.
RoyS, Darque-CerettiE, FelderE, RaynalF, BispoI: ‘Experimental analysis and finite element modelling of nano-scratch test applied on 40–120 nm SiCN thin films deposited on Cu/Si substrate’, Thin Solid Films, 2010, 518, 3859–3865.
13.
TangW, WengX, DengL, XuK, LuJ: ‘Nano-scratch experiments of Au/NiCr multi-layered films for microwave integrated circuits’, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2007, 201, 5664–5666.
14.
BeakeBD, LauSP: ‘Nanotribological and nanomechanical properties of 5-80 nm tetrahedral amorphous carbon films on silicon’, Diamond Relat. Mater., 2005, 14, 1535–1542.
15.
BeakeBD, OgwuAA, WagnerT: ‘Influence of experimental factors and film thickness on the measured critical load in the nanoscratch test’, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2006, A423, 70–73.
16.
ShiB, SullivanJL, BeakeBD: ‘An investigation into which factors control the nanotribological behaviour of thin sputtered carbon films’, J. Phys. D, 2008, 41D, 045303.
17.
BeakeBD, GoodesSR, ShiB: ‘Nanomechanical and nanotribological testing of ultra-thin carbon-based and MoST films for increased MEMS durability’, J. Phys. D, 2009, 42D, 065301.
18.
BeakeBD, ShiB, SullivanJL, L J: ‘Nanoscratch and nanowear testing of TiN coatings on M42 steel’, Tribology, 2011, 5, 141–147.
19.
BeakeBD, DaviesMI, LiskiewiczTW, VishnyakovVM, GoodesSR: ‘Nano-scratch, nanoindentation and fretting tests of 5–80 nm ta-C films on Si(100)’, Wear, 2013.
20.
NohSM, LeeJW, NamJH, ParkJM, JungHW: ‘Analysis of scratch characteristics of automotive clearcoats containing silane modified blocked isocyanates via carwash and nano-scratch tests’, Prog. Org. Coat., 2012, 74, 192–203.
21.
FuW.-E, ChenC.-CA, HuangK.-W, ChangY.-Q, LinT.-Y, ChangC.-S, ChenJ.-S: ‘Nano-scratch evaluations of copper chemical mechanical polishing’, Thin Solid Films, 2013, 529, 306–311.
22.
GaoS, CaiZ, HuangS, QianL, YuH: ‘Nano-scratch behavior of human root canal wall dentin lubricated with EDTA pastes’, Tribol. Int., 2013, 63, 169–176.
23.
KarimzadehA, AyatollahiMR: ‘Investigation of mechanical and tribological properties of bone cement by nano-indentation and nano-scratch experiments’, Polym. Test., 2012, 31, 828–833.
24.
BeakeBD, LiskiewiczTW, SmithJF: ’Deformation of Si(100) in spherical contacts – comparison of nano-fretting and nano-scratch tests with nano-indentation’,Surf. Coat. Technol., 2011, 206, 1921–1926.
25.
NANOINDENT: ‘Creating and disseminating novel nanomechanical characterisation techniques and Standards’, part funded by the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement NMP3-CA-2008-218659.FP7.
26.
NANOINDENT-PLUS project: ‘Standardising the nano-scratch test’, part funded from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement NMP-2012-CSA-6-319208.
BeakeBD, LiskiewiczTW: ‘Comparison of nano-fretting and nano-scratch tests on biomedical materials’, Tribol. Int., 2012, 63, 123–131.
30.
SparyID, BushbyAJ, JennettNM: ‘On the indentation size effect in spherical indentation’, Philos. Mag., 2006, 86, 5581–5593.
31.
HouXD, BushbyAJ, JennettNM: ‘Study of the interaction between indentation size effect and Hall–Petch effect with spherical indenters on annealed polycrystalline copper’, J. Phys. D, 2008, 41D, 074006.
32.
HouXD, JennettNM: ‘Application of a modified slip-distance theory to the indentation of single-crystal and polycrystalline copper to model the interactions between indentation size and structure size effects’, Acta Mater., 2012, 60, 4128–4135.
33.
RaimondiMT, VenaP, PietrabissaR: ‘Quantitative evaluation of the prosthetic head damage induced by microscopic third-body particles in total hip replacement’, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 2001, 58, 436–448.
34.
MirghanyM, JinZM: ‘Prediction of scratch resistance of cobalt chromium alloy bearing surface, articulating against ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, due to third body wear particles’, Proc. IMechE H, 2004, 218H, 41–50.
35.
GoldbergJR, GilbertJE: ‘Electrochemical response of CoCrMo to high-speed fracture of its metal oxide using an electrochemical scratch test method’, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 1997, 37, 421–431.
36.
SinghA, DaoM, LuL, SureshS: ‘Deformation, structural changes and damage evolution in nanotwinned copper under repeated frictional contact sliding’, Acta Mater., 2011, 59, 7311–7324.
37.
GeeMG, NimishakaviL: Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater., 2011, 29, 1–9.
AchantaS, LiskiewiczTW, DreesD, CelisJ.-P: ‘Friction mechanisms at the micro-scale’, Tribol. Int., 2009, 42, 1792–1799.
41.
WangCT, GaoN, GeeMG, WoodRJK, LangdonTG: ‘Effect of grain size on the micro-tribological behaviour of pure titanium processed by high-pressure torsion’, Wear, 2012, 280–281, 28–35.
42.
HanlonT, ChokshiAH, ManoharanS, SureshS: ‘Effects of grain refinement and strength on friction and damage evolution under repeated sliding contact in nanostructured metals’ Int. J. Fatigue, 2005, 27, 1159–1163.
43.
LeylandA, MatthewsA: ‘On the significance of the H/E ratio in wear control: a nanocomposite coating approach to optimised tribological behaviour’, Wear, 2000, 246, 1.
