Tribology International Vol. 29, No. 8, pp. 675-694.

1996
Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0301-679X/96/$15.00 i-O.00

SCIENCII i
SO301-679X(96)00014-X

Analytical models of scratch

rdness
J. A. Williams

The ability of one material to abrade or scratch another has a long

history as the basis of a scale of hardness and is clearly related to
the now more common measure of hardness as the resistance of
a material to indentation. However, there is no simple relation
between the values of hardness from these two tests. Producing
an abraded groove in the surface of a specimen involves large
plasi.:ic strains, and a number of analytical models have been
proposed for this process based on such techniques as slip line
field theory and the theorems of plastic load bounding. While
there is reasonable agreement between the predicted and
measured values of the loads, these methods are much less
satisfactory in providing estimates of the patterns of deformation
or strain around the groove and these limitations may be
asso,ciated with some of the idealizations relatively simple models
make about material behaviour - such as isotropy and a neglect
of eiastic effects. The scratch testing of brittle solids can also
invo!ve plastic behaviour facilitated by the high local hydrostatic
compressive stresses generated close to the tip of a sharp
indenter. Scratch hardness is also finding applications as a test for
the ntegrity of coated substrates, although the modes of failure
here may be more complex than those observed in homogeneous
materials. Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

Keywords: scratch hardness, abrasion, hardness

Introduction element, through both macro- and micro-scopic tests

using Vickers diamond indenters, to the development
Harcness is defined qualitatively as the characteristic of nano-hardness techniques which usually use a
ability of a material to resist penetration or abrasion trigonal or Berkovitch indenter, the apical angle of
by o,.her bodies’. However, any quantitative measure which is often chosen so that the resulting nominal
of this feature of material behaviour depends on the area versus depth relation is the same as that for a
technique used for its measurement; it is an extrinsic Vickers indenter.
property of a material rather than a fundamental
or intrinsic property such as density or thermal The use of the ability of one material to scratch or
condilctivity. Over recent decades it has become the abrade another as the basis of a scale of hardness
norm to concentrate on the design and interpretation perhaps preceded the use of indentation, and certainly
of penetration or indentation hardness tests for which ran in parallel with it for many years - although it
several standard procedures have been developed. has to be said that scratch tests have not been
Thesl: range from the long-established Brine11 test, formalized to anything like the same extent as those
which uses a hard steel or carbide ball as the indenting depending on indentation. One of the earliest estab-
lished of such scales of hardness was that developed
Camhridgr Univer.sity Engineerin g Department, Trumpington Street, by Mohs (1824)2: this is based on an array of ten
Camhbdge, CB2 IPZ, UK minerals ranging from number 1 (talc) to number 10
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 675
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

equivalent to an increase in indentation hardness by

Notation a factor of close to 1.6, with the exception of that
from corundum (a form of alumina) to diamond. The
HV Vickers hardness evenness of this scale is a testimony to the careful
HB Brine11 hardness experimental work of Mohs, who was himself well
HS scratch hardness aware of the much larger step between the values of
HC static indentation hardness minerals 9 and 10. It is generally accepted that for
HP ploughing hardness one material to scratch another, the indenter or
Pm indentation pressure scratching particle must be at least 20% harder than
A LB load bearing area the damaged surface: actually this factor depends
AP projected area rather of the shape of the scratching particle, varying
E elastic modulus between only just over unity for a close to spherical
h depth of indenter penetration particle to about 1.6 for a much more angular indenter.
t thickness of surface layer or coating
W length of diagonal of indentation or Any form of scratch hardness test is a form of
width of scratch controlled abrasive wear and thus it seems reasonable
Poisson’s ratio to use the test as a means of ranking materials for
;;k contact modulus = { ( 1-v,‘)/E1 + their likely resistance to abrasion in service. This must
be done with some caution, however, as the geometry
(l-~~*)lE~}-~ where subscripts 1
and 2 refer to the two solids in of the scratch hardness indenter is likely to be very
different (usually very much more severe) from those
contact
indenter half angle of the asperities that make up the topography of even
a
indenter attack angle = 771%- CI comparatively rough engineering surfaces: conse-
P quently the response of the wearing material may be
very different in these two situations. Neither is it
easy to relate the measured scratch hardness to other,
(diamond) see Fig 1; each member of the scale is perhaps more fundamental, material properties such
capable of scratching all those numerically below it. as elastic modulus or yield stress because there is not,
There is, not unnaturally, a strong correlation between at least at the present time, a complete deterministic
the Mohs hardness of a material and that measured model of the scratching process. In practice, scratch
by indentation. The gradient of the logarithmic plot testing is most often used as a quality control technique
of Fig 1 indicates that each step in the Mohs scale is enabling the performance of one surface to be qualitat-
ively and, to some extent, quantitatively compared to
another which is known to be satisfactory in use. This
form of test is especially popular when dealing with
10000 surfaces which have been engineered by thermal,
chemical or coating treatments in order to give them
enhanced hardness or wear resistance.
Around the turn of this century, the Swedish metallur-
n-
‘s 2000 gist Brine11 was responsible for developing the tech-
nique of pressing a hard sphere into the test surface
to assess a material’s strength or resistance to defor-
2 mation and the test is still widely used. The standard
uz 500
load P is of magnitude 3000 kgf and, if the ball has
;?j diameter D (conventionally 10 mm) and the measured
2r 1000 : diameter of the resulting permanent depression is d,
c
.P the Brine11 hardness HB is simply defined as the load
E per unit curved area of the indent or:
8
5 100 / If 2P
HB = nD2{ 1 - (1 - (d/D)*)l”}
(1)
50 32 I
Tij 200 1
A significant disadvantage of this test is its lack of
LI I I( I! I I I I geometric similarity, i.e. the fact that the hardness
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 depends on the ratio of d/D; this means that changing
either the diameter of the test ball or the load P can
lead to different numerical values of the hardness for
a given surface. For this reason it is recommended
that P and D are chosen so that 0.3 < dlD < 0.4.
This particular problem is overcome in the Rockwell
Mohs number hardness test (which uses a spherically tipped conical
indenter with an included angle of 120”) and both the
Fig 1 Mohs scale of hardness: when plotted against a Vickers test and the allied Knoop test, both of
scale of Vickers indentation hardness the slope of the which use pyramidal indenters. The Vickers indenter,
line indicates a hardness factor of 1.6 between adjacent introduced in the late 1920’s has an angle of 136
minerals on the scales7 between opposing faces, see Fig 2(a) - this was chosen
676 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

(a>

cubic indenter

Fig 2 (a) The Vickers hardness test uses a square based pyramidal indenter with an angle of 136” between opposite
faces. The Vickers hardness is defined as the load per unit sloping area, while the indentation pressure is the load
per ul?it projected area; (b) the Knoop indenter and type of indentation produced which is in the form of an
elongrted diamond shape with its length dimension seven times its width; (c) the Birnbaum scratch hardness test
used a cubic indenter orientated as indicated; (d) in a scratch hardness test the scratch hardness is defined in the
same :vay as the indentation hardness, i.e. as load P over load bearing area ALR, while the ploughing hardness is
the ra!-io of the ploughing or friction ,force F to the projected area AP seera by the indenter in the vertical plane
normLil to the sliding direction

to be ‘equivalent’ to the Brine11 test in which the ratio is seven times the smaller. The Knoop test is particularly
d/D was equal to 0.375. The Knoop indenter is such useful for studying the indentation resistance of rela-
that i: forms an elongated rhombic indentation as tively brittle or friable materials and investigating the
illustr,ited in Fig 2(b) in which the longer dimension effect of crystal structure on hardness.
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 677
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Cd)
Scratch hardness, HS = &

F
and Ploughing hardness, HP
q 6

Fig 2 Continued

At about the time when scratch hardness tests were where, in Equation (4), C is a constant whose value
still competing with indentation tests for commercial is about 3, depending to some extent on the shape of
acceptance, a number of possible geometries were the indenter. This relation can still be used with
suggested - for example, in the Birnbaum test’ the materials that stain harden, and which consequently
corner of a cube is dragged across the test surface have no definite flow stress, by taking Y equal to the
with the leading edge diagnonal inclined at an angle yield stress in a simple compression test at some
of 35” to the direction of sliding as illustrated in Fig 2(c). representative value of strain E, whose value depends
However, for general engineering use indentation on the indenter shape (for a Vickers indenter Tabor
hardness triumphed over scratch hardness, the scientific has shown that E, = 0.08). In establishing both these
community tending to work mainly with Vickers (or measures of hardness the elastic response of the
sometimes Knoop) figures while commercial and material is neglected during both the loading and
industrial materials are often quoted in Brine11 or unloading stages of the tests, in other words the
Rockwell values. indented material is modelled as being rigid-plastic:
the consequences of this idealization are discussed
The Vickers hardness Hv of a surface is defined as
later.
the applied load P divided by the area of the sloping
sides of the pyramidal indentation. Since it is usually Now consider what happens if a static Vickers hardness
the length w of the diagonals of the impression that test is turned into a scratch test by maintaining the
are measured, it follows from the geometry of the normal load at P but moving the indenter, say along
indenter that: a direction of one of the diagonals of the indentation,
as shown in Fig 2(d). At first the indenter will sink
Hv= loadP x 2sin68” = 1.854 x 5 further into the surface as a result of the loss of the
diagonal2 load carrying capacity of the rear two faces, but, as
The static indentation hardness H,, or indentation movement proceeds, the indenter will tend to ‘climb
pressure pm, can be defined, in any indentation test, up’ the front or leading edge, pushing a wedge or
as the normal load P divided by the projected area prow of deforming material ahead of it. A steady state
which carries it; in the case of a Vickers test this is will be reached in which both the normal force P, the
equal to the square of the length of the diagonal e-2: tangential force F and the extent of the plastic
it thus follows that the values of Hv and Hc are deformation (which is usually measured by the width
simply related by the equation of the resulting groove left in the surface) become
constant. The scratch hardness H, is defined, by
Hv = 0.927 x Hc (3) analogy with the static indentation hardness, as:
Hardness tests provide very simple and non-destructive load P
means of measuring the resistance of a material to Hs = (5)
projected load bearing area = z
plastic deformation; most usefully, for ductile metals,
At first sight, we might expect that, if resistance of
there is a straightforward relation between the inden-
material to penetration remains the same:
tation pressure pm (or H,-) and the yield stress in
simple compression Y or shear yield stress k. For an 1
Hs = Hc and both = m7 Hv
idealized rigid perfectly-plastic material which obeys
the von Mises yield criterion, this relation is of the
form: i.e. H, = Hc = 1.08 Hv (6)
Area ALB is generally deduced from measurements of
pm= C.Y= j3C.k (4) the track width w so that, in principle, it actually
678 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

IO displace equal volumes, tanu = $"I3

Fig 3 Pn a scratch test, the load bearing area is calculated

from d*he width of the groove formed. In principle it
makes no difference whether the Vickers indenter is
moved edge or face first, although it is usual to slide
parallel to one of the indenter diagonals. If a cone (or
0.0' . ' ' ' ' . ' 1 . 1
Rockwell indenter) is used in a scratch test an equivalent 60 100 120 140 160 160 200
pyramid angle can be calculated on the basis of equal
volumetric displacements Indenter included angle 2,a

makes no differences whether the indenter is traversed Fig 4 Ratio of scratch hardness Hs to the static inden-
edge forward or face forward, see Fig 3(a) and (b) - tation hardness Hc as a function of the indenter included
although the edge forward configuration is the more angle. Data from: +, copper and X, steeP; half
usual. Comparison between hardness values made with triangles - aluminium”“; q copper and 0 steeP:
pyramidal indenters and those from tests made with triangles - copperT7; solid curve from quasi-upper
a conical or Rockwell indenter can be made if an bound model, see text
equivalent pyramid angle is chosen which would have
generated the same displaced volume of material as
is indicated in Fig 3(c). In practice, experiment shows values close to 180” so the ratio of HSIHc shows an
that R;ls is rarely equal to H, but depends on the increase from about 0.6 to approximately 1.4. To
nature of the material being indented: Table 1, using understand the reason underlying these variations we
result:, from the literature, shows some data for a need to estabish a model of the scraching process
selection of metals. Some of these for work-hardened which will relate the value of HS to both the imposed
materials together with other data taken from Tsukizoe process parameters (the shape and geometry of the
and Sakamotoh are plotted in Fig 4, which illustrates indenter, the effects of friction at the interfaces
that the ratio of these two measures of hardness H, between it and the deforming material) and more
and Ar depends also on the included angle of the fundamental strength properties of the metal being
inden,; employed - as this changed from 90” to tested (such as its flow stress and its ability to work
harden).
Table 1 Comparison of indentation hardness Hc When carrying out a scratch hardness test the tangential
and scratch hardness Hs for a range of materials: or ‘friction’ force F is often also monitored. This
from 3uttery and Archard and Brookes et a/.55 means that a third value of hardness, or ratio of load
to unit load-carrying area, can also be defined by
Material WHc looking at the area supporting this tangential force. This
hardness, sometimes called the ‘ploughing hardness’ HP
is defined by the relation:
0.9% carbon steel 2800 3300 1.16 tangential force F
3340 4200 1.26 HP = (7)
4330 5650 1.31 projected area = A,
7530 8800 1.17 where area AP is the projected area seen in a direction
9420 10700 1.14 normal to that of the relative motion of the indenter
Aluminium -
annealed 216 196 0.91 - as indicated in Fig 2(d); it should be noted that to
-
worked 422 245 0.58 evaluate its magnitude accurately we need to know
Copper -
annealed 530 903 1.70 not only the height of the ridges left in the wake of
-
worked 1079 853 0.79 the indenter but also the height of the prow at the
0.2% carbon steel leading edge. The quantity HP can also be thought of
- annealed 1265 1295 1.02 as the energy expended to displace a unit volume of
- worked 2354 2247 0.95 material. One other point is worth noting: when a
hard indenter or asperity moves across a softer surface
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 679
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

and produces a groove, some of the displaced material

may be physically detached from the surface rather ALB = h’tan’a h* fana
than merely displaced. For micro-machining of this FTG% = cota
sort to be a preferred mode of deformation the
experimental work of Sedriks and Mulhearn’, as well
as many later studies, showed that the attack angle of PI--F
the indenter, that is the angle between its leading
edge or face and the direction of sliding, must exceed
some critical value. In general, especially for ductile
metals, this critical value of attack angle is greater
than that which is generated when a conventional AP = h’tana
hardness indenter is used in a scratch hardness test.
The attack angle for a Vickers indenter, moving edge Fig 5 Relation between scratch hardness and ploughing
first, is 16” and the corresponding value for a Rockwell hardness. P is the normal load and F the force that
indenter, ignoring the effect of spherical tip, is 30” causes the indenter to move horizontally. The indenter,
(although at small depths or penetrations, when contact of semi-angle CY,has penetrated the material to a depth
is actually made on the spherical surface of the h. The normal load is carried by the projected area
Rockwell indenter which has a radius of 200 microns, &B and the horizontal or ploughing load by the area
the effective attack angle can be very much smaller 4
than this value and this particular geometric effect has
been explored by Sin et ~l.~. In the great majority of
This simple analysis and those, though more complex,
scratch tests on metals ahe predominant mode of
of a similar nature”-” are based on equilibrium and
deformation is ploughing rather than micro-machining.
can have nothing to say about the magnitude of
ploughing force F viewed independently of the normal
Models of scratch hardness testing force P or indeed of the shape or geometry of the
deformed material. However, the very simple final
The most elementary model of the scratching or result is a useful limiting case against which to check
ploughing process makes two principal assumptions; numerical solutions for conditions of good lubrication
firstly, that the resistance to penetration offered by or those with no significant adhesion effects.
the material can be taken to be a material constant
independent of whether we consider the ‘vertical’ or The assumption that H,; the ploughing hardness or
‘horizontal’ penetrating directions i.e. the value of HP specific ploughing force, is a constant can of course
is taken to be equal to the scratch hardness Hs; and be examined experimentally. Again results from several
secondly, that the effects of adhesive friction can sources are plotted as the data points in Fig 6
be treated as being independent of those involving where the measured hardness values have been non-
deformation. This implies that we can write that the dimensionalized by the material flow stress k (which has
total tangential or ‘friction’ force is equal to the sum been deduced from conventional static or indentation
of the adhesion and ploughing terms, i.e.: hardness tests). It seems that while H, is reasonably
F=F,+F,
or
F=F,+H,xA, A copper / 1
Thus, the overall coefficient of friction,
F ff,A,

So that, if we take HP = H,, it follows that:

(8)

Now, the ratio A,IA,, depends on the shape of the

indenter; for example, in the particular case of a
pyramid (and making the assumption that the prow 0 J
has the same height as ridges), Fig 5 illustrates that MO 100 120 140 160 180

AIJALB is equal to cotcu, so that: Indenter included angle 2a

p = pA + cota (91
Fig 6 Ploughing hardness Q, non-dimensionalized by
In the case of an edge-first Vickers indenter, the
the shear flow stress k, as a furlction of the indenter
effective value of the angle CYis 74” (since the angle
angle 2~. Experimental points from Xie57. Upper solid
between opposing edges is 148”). If adhesion effects
curve from Williams and XieZ2 with friction factor
are small, i.e. the test is well lubricated, then I*.* f = 1, lower solid curve f = 0: chained line18 f = 1:
tends to zero, and Equation (9) reduces to
long dashed line-59 f = 1, short dashes f = 0: dotted
line21 f = 0
680 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

constant at indenter included angles of 120” or less, ploughing component of the force (i.e. the ploughing
as this angle is made larger so the apparent hardness hardness HP), is found by minimizing the rate at which
defined in this way increases by perhaps as much as energy is expended at the sliding which takes place at
a factor of 3 or 4. Once again this indicates the need the inter-block boundaries. This method of analysis is
for a elasticity model of the scratching or ploughing based on the upper limit load theorem which states
process which might provide both more sophisticated that, provided certain conditions are met, the true
estimates of the force components P and F and some velocity field minimizes the overall rate of plastic
guidar ce as to the likely geometry of the deformation. working. However, strictly speaking, the applications
Unforunately, such an analysis is not as straightforward of this theorem requires that the surface configuration
as it might first seem not only because of the three- of the plastic zone be known ab initio. In the case of
dimensional nature of the contact (and therefore of scratch testing this is not the case, as it is bounded by
the deformation geometry and strain field) but also a stress free surface whose shape is not controlled by
because of the existence of the free surface. This the tooling i.e. the indenter. This means that solutions
featum invalidates some of the assumptions conven- arrived at on the basis of energy minimization are not
tionall:y made in the analyses of superficially similarly necessarily those that will in fact be favoured; in the
metal ,working situations such as drawing or extrusion. terminology of Avitzur and TalbertZ3 this is a ‘casual’
application of the limit theorem and the predictions
To overcome this aspect of the problem, one technique
are not so much upper bounds as ‘physically reasonable’
that It,as been utilized is to identify complete and
solutions. This difficulty has been addressed for
acceptable solutions in analogous two-dimensional
this particular geometry recently by Azarkhin and
situations and then argue how these can be extended
into the third dimension - such a procedure had been Richmond”: their results, using what is claimed to be
followed by, amongst others, Scrutton and Yousef”, a more rigorous form of analysis, show that, while
Challen and Oxley 13, Konvopoulos et a[.r4, Petrykls these ‘quasi-upper-bound’ solutions can be significantly
and Torrance”‘. The major problem here is that any in error as far as geometric predictions are concerned,
steady-state two-dimensional solution demands either the values of ploughing forces and the associated
that the indenter climbs upwards to exactly the level expenditure of energy are likely to be in error by only
of the free surface (albeit pushing ahead of it an a few percent.
‘Oxley wave’ of deforming material) or else, if the tip
of the indenter remains below the free surface level, Figure 8(a) shows the simplest set of subsurface
material must actually be removed from the surface planar discontinuities in tangential velocity which is
by some form of micro-machining or prow removal. compatible with both steady motion of a pyramidal
Analytical solutions have been developed for both these indenter and incompresibihty of the material: the
‘no-wear’ and ‘wear’ situations (these are illustrated in geometry of this set is in fact described by one variable,
Fig 7 (a-c)) and, as required, for the situation of no for example the height of ridge h and has been used
adhes.on between indenter and adjacent material they by several authors’S.‘5.26 to model both scratch testing
collapse to the curve t.~ = cotcu. Figure 7(d), taken and a more general form of abrasive wear. However,
from 3lack et n1.r’ demonstrates this; it shows a map when compared to actual observations is clearly
of the overall coefficient of friction versus the indenter deficient in two important respects. Firstly, there is
included angle. Note, however, that conditions of any no prow of material extending ahead of the leading
scratch hardness test, in which the included angle 20! edge of the indenter - the point C lies at the level of
is in Excess of 120”, and so attack angles are less than the undeformed material and no surface deformation
30”, will plot very much in the bottom left-hand corner extends beyond the line BC; experimentally, there is
of this figure. almost always clear evidence of plastic deformation
The other traditional way of investigating this problem extending ahead of the asperity. Secondly, the model
is to represent the indenter by a simple three- assumes that plastic deformation does not penetrate
dimer sional geometric shape and use the Upper Bound into material lying beneath the level of the apex of
method to estimate the rate of plastic working and so the indenter, i.e. below point D. However, if a
the associated force terms’g-22. At the macroscopic metallographic section is made through a ploughed
level :his idealized indenter shape would be, for the groove there is always evidence of considerable plastic
Rockl,qell scratch test, a cone or, for the Vickers, a disturbance beneath this level. (Figure 9 shows such
pyranid. At a smaller scale, i.e. one at which the a section in a brass specimens which has been
depth of penetration is comparable with (rather than subsequently heat treated to illustrate, from the extent
much greater than) the radius at the tip of the indenter, of the recrystallized zone, the material which had
a more appropriate shape might be a sphere. The undergone extensive plastic deformation during the
upper bound method assumes that the material, ploughing process.) Recently, Williams and Xiex2 have
which is characterized as being rigid-perfectly plastic, developed a more complex ‘upper-bound’ model which
accommodates the movement of the indenter by overcomes the two deficiencies of the simpler case:
movir,g around as a series of rigid blocks, so creating this requires six geometric descriptors - the dimensions
discor;tinuities in the tangential components of velocit- indicated in Fig 8(b) - but is capable of a greater
ies at the interfaces between them. The number and degree of quantitative agreement with observation as
general form of these blocks is specified in the model is shown by Fig 10, which compares estimates of the
chose:r: this must be compatible with incompressibility specific ploughing force, or ploughing hardness, HP,
of the material and the imposed boundary conditions, against the included angle of the indenter for the two
but the exact position of the interfaces, as well as the cases h3 = 0 and h3 > 0 for a copper specimen.
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 681
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Fig 7 Two-dimensional deformation models of scratching by a hard wedge. In (a), wave formation, in order to
generate a steady state solution the point D, the tip of the wedge, must climb to the level of the original specimen
surface. In (b), wave removal, the combination of geometry and interfacial friction leads to the periodic removal
from the surface of the wave or prow of material. In (c) the wedge has an effective attack angle greater than the
critical value required to initiate micro-machining. (d) Plots of the overall coefficient of friction u as a function of
the indenter included angle 2a (or the indenter attack angle /3 equal to (90”-a) for the illustrated modes of two-
dimensional material response and interfacial friction factors. If the included angle is more than about 120” wave
formation is favoured. For zero friction between the indenter and the deforming material TV= cotcr. (from Black
et a1.17)

The various solid and dashed curves on Fig 6 are those
predicted from some of the various models of the
scratching or abrasive wear process available in the
literature and so enable experiment to be compared
with theory. Friction between the indenter and the
deforming material is incorporated by the usual ‘friction
factor’ f, which is defined as the ratio of the local
682 Tribology International Volume 29 Number
interfacial shear strength to the value of the yield
shear strength of the adjacent deforming material.
The lower three curves of the figure were calculated
with f taken to be zero, the upper are for ‘sticking’
friction conditions i.e. f equal to unity. For indenters
with included angles of less than about 120” the curves
are close to being flat, but all the models generate an
8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Cd) Indenter included angle 2a / degrees

160 140 120 100 80

0.9 0.6 04 o-2 +-- f ---D 0-o 0.2 0-L 0.6

20 LO 60 80 100

Attack angle I degrees

Fig 7 Continued

increase in the ploughing hardness as the
angle of the indenter gets larger. Friction
the irdenter and the deforming material
increasingly important role as the extent of the
grows
The anaterial shear strains yP involved in any scratch
or ploughing deformation are large, certainly greater
than unity, and can be estimated from the pattern of
veloci,.y discontinuities established by energy minimiz-
ation. At these levels of deformation we should expect
a real as opposed to an idealized, material to exhibit
some strain hardening. This phenomenon can, to some
extent: be incorporated by usin a representative
average value of flow stress k in the deformation
model, where this quantity is defined by the relation:
YP
and the variation of shear flow stress k with imposed
shear strain y is obtained experimentally; in many
cases this follows a power law form. Equation (11)
illustrates the fact that k is not an invariable material
constz nt but depends on the severity of the deformation
process under investigation, i.e. the value of the
imposed shear strain yP.
Once steady state conditions are achieved, the normal
force P applied to the indenter does no work and so
does not appear explicitly in the ‘upper bound’
calculation. However, as Oxley has pointed out in
relation to plane strain drawingz7, this does not mean
included that we cannot estimate its value and thus the numerical
between values of the indentation and scratch hardnesses.
plays an Consider, for example, the two-dimensional situation
interface illustrated in Fig 11: the force F is estimated from the
work calculation, but P is unknown. If there were to
be no friction at the interface between the indenter
and the deforming material then the resultant of F
and P must be normal to the interface, as shown in
Fig 11(b): since two sides of the force triangle are
now known, the ratio of F:P, that is F for the junction,
can be evaluated. In the case of no friction it follows
simply that l.~ is equal to cotcu. Even when f is not
equal to zero, we can examine the influence of the
or
local interfacial coefficient of friction on the overall
value in much the same way. In effect, it is thereby
possible to predict the relation between the values of
scratch and indentation values of hardness: the solid
curve on Fig 4 was produced in this way with an
(11) interfacial friction coefficient set equal to a value of
0.5.
Lost material and elastic deformation
If a surface profilometer is used to obtain a trace
across the groove formed in a scratch hardness test
and then a comparison made between the cross-section
of the ridges and that of the groove it is invariably
found that the area of the ridges is smaller than that
of the groove; in other words a measurable amount
of material appears to have been ‘lost’. The same
observation can be made in a hardness test when the
volume of the indentation is larger than that of the
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 683
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Fig 8 (a) A simple rigid-block deformation model of scratch hardness. Material enters the deformation zone across
plane BCD with velocity uO: block ABCD moves with uniform velocity u. On crossing plane ABC the material
velocity reverts to ug. The deformation is entirely described by one geometric parameter, for example the height h.
(b) A more complex mechanism, described by six geometric parameters, which allows both the formation of a
prow preceding the indenter and the plastic zone to extend to the point F which lies at the depth h3 below D the
apex of the indenter (from Williams and Xie2’)

‘pile-up’ surrounding the indentation site. A qualitiative While the greater part of the material displaced by
explanation is not difficult. As the load on the indenter the passage of the indenter moves into the ridges left
is increased so material close to it is deformed in its wake a small part, the ‘lost’ material, is effectively
plastically and thus at constant volume - this material accommodated by the elastic strain field in the relatively
is forced downwards and outwards into the surrounding far distance. In a material with a high elastic modulus
hinterland which expands elastically. When the load but a low flow stress (for example a soft or annealed
is removed (in a scratch test as the indenter moves metal) the contribution of these elastic phenomena
forward) whether initially deformed plastically or may be comparatively unimportant: on the other hand,
elastically, the material recovers in an elastic fashion. with a much more elastically susceptible material, i.e.
684 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Fig 9 Taper section through a scratch hardness track in a brass specimen. Heat treatment has been used to cause
the pb&caIly deformed material to recrystallize preferentially. The deformation extends significantly below the
depth of the indenter tip

Attack angle f3 / degrees

surface the contact stresses are not Hertzian (as they
would be for the contact of either a circular cylinder
or sphere on a plane) but involve a stress singularity,
i.e. an infinite stress, at the apex of the indenter. For
a wedge the contact pressure p(x) has the form’?
Ecotol
p(x) = -cash-‘X (12)
The corresponding mean contact pressure pm is given
by:
Ecotcw
Pm = 2 (13)
Although when x = 0 the pressure becomes infinite.
160 140 120 100 80 as indicated in Fig 12(a), the maximum shear stress
developed within the material, which is equal to Ecotal
Indenter included angle 20: I degrees X, is still finite. There is thus some limiting value of
the angle OLfor which the material can respond to the
Fig 10 Specific ploughing force or ploughing hardness imposition of the indenter purely elastically. The limit
versus indenter included angle for deformation model of this behaviour will occur when the value of this
illustrated in Fig 8(b) for h, = 0 and h3 > 0. Data peak shear stress becomes equal to k, i.e. when:
points are for copper and taken from Xies7
Ecota
~ = yield stress in shear
Tt
one with a lower ratio of elastic modulus E to yield
strengl:h Y, they can be much more significant. k=$ for a von Mises material (14)
Although no complete elastic-plastic solution to the
ploughing problem has been developed it is reasonable in other words, elastic behaviour is maintained until
to argue that the effects will follow the same trends
as those established for elastic-plastic indentation by pq = & = 0.91 (15)
similarly shaped rigid indenters. When a hard two-
dimensional wedge (of semi-angle CC) or a three- At higher loads the central plastic region now formed
dimensional cone or pyramid is pressed into an elastic at the tip of the indenter gradually expands, always
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 685
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

(a) 1
P

a
P ’

49,
if no friction then p I1 11
-x
normal to interface
\P

7
i
R is total reaction on indenter I ’

I- a a
_I

& P

p=; for zero friction p = cots

\
\
\
. ,
In the more general case, -a_- -
elastic hinterland -\
elastic-plastic boundary
if F and a are known then the
Fig 12 The indentation of the surface by a rigid wedge
value of P can be estimated
of cone. (a) In the elastic case, the intensity of the
Fig 11 In the two-dimensional ploughing process illus- strain at any point in the solid depends on the angle
trated the force F can be estimated from an approximate /3 = (~12) - CY. (b) Within the elastic-plastic range,
‘upper bound’ analysis; however, as the normal force a semi-cylindrical ‘core’ is attached to the indenter
P does no work its value cannot be estblished in the surrounded by an elastic-plastic region in which the
same way. If? however, there is no friction at the deformation is radially symmetric
interface the resultant force R must be perpendicular
to the interface, so establishing the value of P. In a
more general case, there will be an interfacial shear
Pm
y=& 1 +lngYcota
stress 7, but if the ratio r/p can still be estimated, and (16)
the geometry of the force polygon still gives an estimate [ 1
of the normal load P We know that full plasticity will be achieved when
pmlY = 3 and so Equation (16) shows that this
situation corresponds to the group EcotalY having a
value well over 100. We can note that in both the
purely elastic and the elastic-plastic treatments the
surrounded of course by an elastic hinterland. Analysis
of this elastic-plastic situation is based on the obser- indentation pressure depends on the group EcotctlY.
The ratio E/Y can be interpreted as the strain of the
vation that material in this plastic ‘core’ is displaced
more or less radially as the indenter descends; this, material at yield while the value of cotcu (which is also
equal to tar@ where p is the effective attack angle or
in turn, suggests that it can be treated as being under
inclination of the wedge face to the surface) is a
an essentially hydrostatic compressive stress. For the
measure of the intensity of the strain associated with
purposes of analysis, it is assumed that the stresses
the deformation. The group EcotcriY can thus be
and displacements have radial symmetry and are the
same as in an infinite elastic half-space containing an thought of as the ratio of the strain imposed by the
indenter to the maximum strain that can be sustained
expanding cylindrical cavity, Fig 12(b). At the interface
by the material before yielding.
between the elastic and plastic regions two conditions
are imposed, viz that hydrostatic core stress is equal It is therefore possible to display the full range of
to the radial elastic stress, and that the radial displace- material response, from elastic through elastic-plastic
ment of the elastic plastic boundary is just sufficient to to fully plastic, on a plot of indentation pressure,
accommodate the material displaced by the downward conveniently non-dimensionalized by the yield stress
incremental movement of the rigid indenter (the plastic Y, versus the parameter EcotcuiY. Such a plot is shown
material is incompressible). On this basis Johnson29 in Fig 13( a)29. This figure shows data points taken from
showed that for a wedge indenter: Hirst and Howse wedge indentation experiments30. The
686 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

(4 Rigid
xp’as”c
(pzO.1)
o
B,oO

f3 = 200
$2 Jot
_
_ -
q

polythene
PMMA glass copper
steels
I
180

160

140

120

100

80

SO

40

E IY

Fig 13 (a) Mean indentation pressure, normalized by the yieM stress Y, as a function of the parameter EcotculY;
curves from Equations (5) and (6). Experimental data from Hirst and HowseX 0 p = 5”, x p = 15”, 0 p = 30
rom Johnsor?‘). (b) Map of material response plotted as values of the included indenter angle 2a versus the
Katevial parameter E/Y

elastic Equation (15) has been plotted at the ‘elastic’
or left-hand end of the axes and the values of pm/Y
given by rigid-plastic theory for the appropriate values
of p at the ‘fully-plastic’ or right-hand end. In the
transition region between these two extremes there is
good agreement between the experimental values and
the elastic-plastic expanding cavity model.
Essentially the same divisions of material response
could also be displayed on a map with one axis the
material property group E/Y and the other the indenter
shape 2~. Equations (15) and (16) then generate the
two boundaries indicated in Fig 13(b). Extrapolating
from two to three dimensions, this plot suggests that
a Vickers indent (with 2a = 136”) can be treated as
being essentially fully plastic in metals with values of
E/Y greater than about 200 (i.e metals such as copper
or mild steel and those any softer) but if E/Y is less
than this then elasticity should be taken into account:
this would, for example, indicate that elastic effects
might be significant when testing hardened or heat
treated steels. When E/Y is small, say less than 10,
the response is entirely elastic - this represents the
case for many polymeric or elastomeric materials. We
might note that we are here, as in the fully plastic
analysis, assuming that the indenter is undeformable;
its elastic properties can be taken into account by
replacing E in the equations above by the contact
modulus E* defined as ((1 - u,‘)/EI + (1 - I+‘)/
E,}-l where subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the materials
of the substrate and the indenter.

Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 687

Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

Scratch hardness tests on brittle materials per unit volume). A quantitative analysis, which
corroborates this qualitative argument for indentation
At first sight it might seem that the damage introduced has been put forward by Lawn and Fulle$* and leads
by scratching relatively brittle materials, such as to the expectation that the normal load for fracture
ceramics and minerals, must be dominated by fracture Pfr is given by:
processes. However, the classic work of Bridgman3’
and subsequently that of other workers, has shown P, = K1c(rra)3”tancu (17)
that under sufficiently high hydrostatic pressures brittle where K,, is the mode I fracture toughness of the
materials may be prevented from fracturing so that material being tested. Since the load for plastic
any permanent deformation can be essentially plastic. deformation P,, is given by:
As we have seen, the stresses under a hardness indenter
involve a localized high hydrostatic compression and P,, = a’Hc (18)
in many materials this can be sufficiently high to the transition from one mode to the other will be at
inhibit brittle fracture, so enabling satisfactory plastic an indentation size a given by:
indentation or scratch hardness tracks to be generated.
The very existence of the Mohs hardness scale, and
n3 tar& (19)
the fact that it is possible to obtain good permanent
static hardness indents (at least using Rockwell or
Vickers indenters) with which to compare the Mohs If we consider, for a moment, scratching by a sharp
values is evidence of this. Nevertheless, in practical indenter, say with (Y I- 45”, then Equation (19) suggests
cases with brittle materials, as well as a degree of that even a conventionally very brittle material such
plastic flow, both indentation and scratch hardness as glass, which has a fracture toughness of the order
tests are associated with the formation of surface or of 1 MPa 6 but an indentation hardness that can
near surface crack systems. be up to 5 GPa, might be able to sustain plastic flow
up to the scale of a test which produces a track of the
Crack formation is explicable when using spherical order of a micron or so in width; such observations
indenters by reference to the Hertzian solution of the have indeed been reported33.34. The same equation
stress field - in this case, fracture is produced by the predicts that tougher engineering ceramics and poly-
maximum tensile stress on the free surface which mers, such as polycarbonate, could withstand tests
occurs just at the edge of the contact area. This producing wear tracks an order of magnitude or so
generates a crack which can propagate into the bulk greater in width. Tests in ductile metals, even high
of the material in a characteristic conical fashion. As strength steels, would have to be on the scale of tens
the indenter moves across the surface so it may leave of millimetres to favour fracture over plastic flow.
a series of semi-circular surface cracks in its wake. At
higher loads, a family of sub-surface Hertzian cone
cracks may be generated from these initial surface Scratch hardness tests on the micro-scale
flaws; the formation of these cracks is illustrated in It is well known that the mechanical strength of a
Fig 14(a). material when measured in the bulk is very much less
than the theoretical strength of a single, unblemished
In the case of either indentation or scratching by a
crystal. This is due to the presence of defects within
conical or pyramidal indenter, localized plasticity in the crystalline structure - dislocations, voids and
the material immediately adjacent to the indenter tip micro-cracks - and their formation and interaction
leads to a relief in the value of the tensile stress: the forms the basis of our understanding of the mechanical
concentration in tensile stress moves into the subsurface properties of matter on the usual engineering scale.
material immediately below the indenter tip and it is
Recent years have seen the growth of interest in the
here that a median crack nucleates - Fig 14(b). This
mechanical properties of material at much smaller
does not necessarily break through to the surface while micro- or nano-scales and there is considerable evidence
fully loaded, but, either (in an indentation hardness
that as the size of the experiment is reduced so there
test) as the indenter is unloaded or as it moves forward are changes in the measured strength properties.
(in a scratch test), additional families of cracks may
be formed. This is generally attributed to a mismatch Gane35 carried out micro-indentation experiments on
between the strains in the plastically deformed zone gold and found that when the scale of the indentation
and those in the elastic hinterland which produces a was reduced to a dimension of the order of 100 nm
system of residual tensile stresses. In order for an the effective shear stress had risen from the bulk value
incipient crack to propagate an energy balance must of 45 MPa to about 900 MPa: in other words from
be satisfied, that is the released elastic strain energy about 0.25% of the shear modulus to about 5% of its
must be sufficient to provide the surface energy value. If the indentation is made with a spherical
involved in the production of the crack surfaces. This indenter into a material capable of work hardening
is the classic approach of linear elastic fracture then as the diameter d of the indentation increases so
mechanics and one of its consequences is a scaling does the effective strain in the material. This means
effect. The released elastic energy must depend on that the measured indentation hardness Hc also grows
volume, i.e. on the cube of a characteristic length, with the size of the indentation, so that:
whereas the area of the crack will be dependent on Hc = Cldnp2
length squared. Consequently, the smaller the scale (20)
of the indentation the larger the stress required to where n 2 2. The form of Equation (20) was first
produce cracking (this determines the strain energy suggested by Meyer36.37 and the constant n is known
688 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

(4 I load P

(b) ! load P

.77B$sLT
.,,. c.,: ; .

4 2a I--

Fig I;’ Basic indentation fracture systems. (a) Cone crack system associated with ‘blunt’ or spherical indenters: the
crack nucleates from a pre-existing surface flaw (small dashes) forming surface rings finally becoming critical and
propa,oating as a developed cone. (b) Median crack system associated with a ‘sharp’ indenter such as a pyramid
or co?le: the crack nucleates from the plastic contact zone shown shaded3”. (c) A similar series of arc-shaped
fractures caused by .sliding a sphere over a brittle solid, in this case soda-lime glass, under a normal load. The
rungslen carbide sphere slid from left to rights6

as the Meyer index. In a fully work hardened material, Gane and COXES and Oliver et aZ.39) indicate that the
incap?bIe of further changes in flow stress, n = 2. data can be fitted by an equation of the form:
Experiments spanning the micro-hardness to nano-
hardness range, i.e. indentation depths from a few tic = Cld”m2 f C,d-’ (21)
nanornetres to perhaps ten microns (for example, in which C, and C, are constants; the two hardening
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 689
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams
effects are thus effectively additive. although at these
small scales the second term of Equation (21) dominates.
At this sort of size we are effectively indenting or
scratching single grains of the workpiece. When single
crystals of metal are studied on a macroscopic scale
the stress to initiate plastic deformation, even after
work hardening, is generally only of the order of 0.1
to 0.5% of the elastic modulus; however, at very small
scales, the heavily stressed regions of the material may
be sufficiently restricted to be effectively defect-free;
as the tool either indents or scratches the surface the
applied load must be great enough to generate or
punch dislocations into a perfect crystal lattice in order
to allow the motion of the indenter to continue. The
precise mechanism or mechanisms by which this occurs
is not clear but all of the continuum models of
dislocation generation or nucleation lead to predictions
of stresses of the order of modulus divided by factors
of between 10 and 50, i.e. of the order of those
observed experimentally.
An alternative analytical approach, which has only
really become feasible over the last decade or so, is
that of calculating the forces and energy requirements
in these small scale processes not by continuum
modelling, but rather by mathematically simulating
the actual interatomic force relations within an array
of atoms which is then forced to accommodate the
movement of the indenter: this is the technique of
molecular dynamics. When it is remembered than a
penetration of one micron will be sufficient to disrupt
many thousands of atomic layers, it is apparent
that such a model needs to contain several millions
individual atoms and that the computational effort
required in such simulations is truly prodigious. The
calculation must be repeated at time increments which
are small compared to the period of atomic vibration
(say lOPI2 s) so that many millions of iterations are
required to simulate even a fraction of a second of
real time. In parallel with these simulations, the
technology of the single point machining of non-
ferrous metalson a much smaller scale than previously
attempted has become established as a realistic pro-
duction process for engineering components with very
precise dimensional tolerances and exceptionally fine
surface finishes. As scale deminishes so the specific
energy per unit volume displaced, effectively the
ploughing hardness, increases: Fig 15 (from Stowers,
et al.“()) shows this effect from both a number of
experimental studies on cutting (principally on copper)
and the corresponding molecular simulations.
Since we are now dealing with the deformation of
effectively single crystals it is also reasonable to
suppose that the observed numerical values of scratch
hardness will be influenced by the relation between
the direction of the hardness track and the underlying
crystal geometry; this effect can also be explored in
molecular simulations. Figure 16(a) shows a computer
generated graphic illustrating the scratching of a (111)
copper surface by a blunted diamond pyramid indenter
moving face forward along a [loo] direction. Exper-
imentally, anisotropy in indentation hardness is most
conveniently studied using a Knoop hardness indenter,
see Fig 2(b), and large effects can sometimes be
found. Figure 16(b) shows results obtained by Brookes
690 Tribology International Volume 29 Number
et nl.” on the (100) plane of a single crystal of MgO;
hardness in the (110) directions is just about twice
that in the (100) directions. Other materials with a
similar crystallographic structure may show rather
smaller effects although there is in general good
agreement between the measured hard and soft direc-
tions and those calculated on the basis of the preferred
slip systems for both cubic and hexagonal crystals.
Scratch testing of coated surfaces
For some years, despite the lack of a fully satisfactory
analytical model of its mechanics, the scratch hardness
test has been used to provide a simple and rapid
means of assessing the adherence of thin, hard
and wear resistant coatings to metallic and ceramic
substrates. In this form of the test the diamond
indenter, often in the form of the 120” Rockwell cone,
is drawn across the coated sample at increasing values
of normal load P until the coating is observed to
become detached or fractured at some critical load.
Comparatively early investigations into the mechanics
of this form of tesP2.“’ used thin metal coatings on
glass, and made use of the results referred to above
for the fully plastic indentation to provide an expression
for the critical shearing force required for coating
removal. However, in these particular experiments the
coatings were very thin, generally of the order of a
few tens of nanometres, and so the geometry of the
indentation was dominated by the plastic properties
of the underlying substrate. Mechanically robust coat-
ings are likely to be much thicker than this - at least
of the order of microns, perhaps tens of microns -
and consequently the hardness, whether static or
scratch, of the bi-layer is influenced by the mechanical
properties of both of the constituents as well as by
the strength of the bonding between them. In the
‘volume-mixture’ model”“. the hardness of the com-
posite, Komp3 is supposed related to the hardnesses
of the film and substrate Hf and H,, by the relation:
f22)
where V, and V, are the plastically deforming volumes
of the film and the substrate respectively, as illustrated
in Fig 17(a). However, it is difficult to justify this model
on theoretical grounds, and various fitting parameters
have to be invoked to make theory and experiment
match. An alternative approach is to apply to the coated
material the expanding cavity or core model, previously
used by Johnson (q.v.) to investigate indentation hard-
ness in a homogeneous half-space4-5.“6.The equivalent
expanding cavity or core is illustrated in Fig 17(b). As
the cavity expands so a number of deformation regimes
can be encountered. It is possible for both materials to
have regions of elastic and plastic deformation, or for
the film to be completely plastic while the substrate
remains elastic. This theory predicts a critical indenter
penetration up to which the composite hardness is
reasonably unaffected by the substrate properties, but
beyond which the composite hardness changes rapidly.
It also appears to be more successfulin modelling hard
films on softer substrates- which are of course generally
of more technological interest.
8 1996
 Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

lE+06
q Moriwaki - exp

0 Lucca - exp

A Belak - simulation

0 Ikawa - exp

0 Ikawa - simulation

+ Drencher - exp

lE+O3
0.1 1 10 100 1000

depth of cut / nm

Fig 15 Specific etret.gy ,for crcttirq or scratching as a furxtiorz of cieptlr of the penetration of the tool or indetzter40

If the plastic zone is extensive then, once again by flow, as illustrated diagrammatically in Fig 18. This
analog,y with the homogeneous case, it may be more suggests that the adhesion behaviour could be modelled
apprnm-iate to treat both the material of the coating by comparing the strain energy released during the
and the substrate as rigid-perfectly plastic though of removal of the coating to the changes in surface energy
different flow stresses. Indentation of such a layered terms involved, in other words by again following a
solid my a long or two-dimensional wedge has been Griffith energy balance approach-‘“-“‘. However. in
investigated in this way by Lebouvier et al.“’ using a undertaking any analysis of this sort it is important also
rigid 51ock quasi-upper bound method which is still to take into account the fact that in the great majority
subject to the theoretical objections alluded to above. of cases the coating itself is unlikely to be initially stress
As thiz coating thickness is increased so the composite free, but is often left by its production process, with a
hardnsss changes from being dominated by that of the large residual tensile stress parallel with the surface
underying substrate to being closer to that of the coating which can make a large contribution to the stresses
itself. In the case of a Vickers indenter and a coating driving the delamination process.
of twi:e the hardness of the substrate, by the time that
the thickness of the coating has reached about 1.5 times Although a single value of the load corresponding to
the length of the hardness diagonal, the effect of the some particular failure criterion (such as delamination
coating on the composite hardness is dominant - ahead of the indenter or chipping at the edges of the
whatever the state of friction, i.e. the value off, at the track) is often quoted as the critical load at which
interface between the indenter and the deforming failure of a surface coating has occurred, this distinction
material. see Fig 17(c). No attempts have yet been is often somewhat artificial as a spectrum of failure
made to extend these models of the static hardness loads will invariably be observed if repeated tests are
of an!sotropic half-spaces to their scratch hardness made under nominally identical conditions. What is
equivalents. Indeed, this may not be appropriate as, important is the distribution of flaws both within the
when there is relative tangential motion between the coating and at the coating-substrate interface. This
indener and the coated specimen, the coating often statistical nature of failure can probably best be
fails ahead of the indenter where the coating responds represented in terms of the ‘weak-link’ theory
to the applied tangential compressive stress by buckling developed (originally for rolling element bearings) by
or spaling away from the substrate rather than by plastic Weibu115”. However, there are difficulties in determin-
Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 691
Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

(b)
Cl003 Cl103 c0103 CT103 CT003

600

II I I I I I I I I I
0 60 120 180
Orientation I deg

Fig 16 (a) Molecular dynamics simulation of scratching a (111) copper surface by a sharp diamond indenters”.
(b) K~oop hardness values obtained on the (001) f ace of a single crystal of MgO as a ,functiorz of the orieruation
of t$e long diagonal of the inderzter4’

ing with precision the number of countable failures;
both acoustic emission during the test and acoustic
and optical or electron microscopy on the subsequent
wear tracks have been used”,s2.
An additional contributory factor to the loss of a surface
coating is the interfacial frictional force generated by
adhesion between the indenter and the upper surface of
the coating. For example, Bull et a1.5” found that by
careful cleaning of the surface of a 7 micron thick TIN
coating on a Gainless steel substrate the critical load
reauired for its disruotion could be reduced from more
than 50 N to around 30 N. The fine film of organic
contamination left by handling with the fingers, or even
deposited from the plasticizers present in the plastic of
the material of storage bags used to keep the specimens
692 Tribology international Volume
prior to testing, could be quite enough to bring about
such changes. When using the scratch test to make
quantitative comparisonsbetween different coatings care
must be taken to minimize the effect of such variables.
The crescent shaped tensile cracks left in the wake of
the passage of the indenter and shown in plan in
Fig 14(c) and in section in Fig 18 are evidence of the
high friction that is often associatedwith clean surfaces.
Conclusions
When using conical or pyramidal indenters, the scratch
hardness of even ductile metals is rarely equal to their
indentation hardness. The optimum cone or pyramid
angle for consistent scratch hardness measurements
29 Number 8 1996
 :;:‘:.,.‘.-
:a.._ ..
. .
:_.
core

. ; ‘,. :
coatino

.’

1
.,
Analytical

of strain.
models of scratch

forces involved in the scratch hardness

hardness:

testing of
ductile materials but are less successful in predicting
the associated changes in geometry or the distributions

Elastic deformation of the hinterland of the specimen

can be significant in scratch tests which use indenters
of large included angles cy or in materials with relatively
low values of the ratio of elastic modulus E to yield
J. A. Williams

substrate stress Y. For the idealization of rigid-plastic behaviour

to be appropriate the ratio EiYcotcu should be in
excess of 200.
With brittle solids, the high hydrostatic pressures
developed around the deformed region may be suf-
ficient to inhibit brittle fracture and so mean that
under these conditions both indentation and scratch
hardness are measures of the plastic rather than the
brittle properties of the solid. When fracture does
occur it may often be driven by the stresses associated
with the mismatch between conditions in the plastically
deforming zone and the surrounding material within
which conditions are elastic. Cracks may often propa-
gate as material is unloaded, that is effectively behind
0.5 1 1.5 2 the indenter in a scratch test.
ratio of coating thickness I to indentation size w
Both experiment and computer simulation demonstrate
that in very small scale experiments, hardness. both
Fig I7 (a) Geometry used in the volume mixture law indentation and scratch, of crystalline materials can
of corllposite hardness. V, is the plastic volume in the be very much greater than that measured on a
film and V, in the substrate. (6) The equivalent cavity macroscopic scale. This effect can be associated with
or core beneath the hardness irldenter which expands the small size of the deformed zone which may have
under the influence qf a hydrostatic pressure. (c) Wedge a very low defect density. The shear yield stress may
or dir~lensional indentation of a bi-layer in which the grow in such small scale experiments to be as much
surface layer has double the flow stress of the substrate: as 5 to 10% of the elastic modulus of the material as
mean indentation pressure p,,, (normalized by the flow compared with less than 0.5% in larger scale exper-
stress of the substrate k) as a function of depth of the iments of essentially the same geometry. In addition,
ratio of the surface layer thickness t to the indentation there may be significant changes in hardness as the
width w. f is the ,friction factor ut the interfaceA orientation of the indent or track is varied with respect
cracking and detachment to the crystallographic axes of the specimen.
of the coating
P I due to compressive buckling Scratch testing is now routinely used for the evaluation
of coatings despite the fact that a full analytical
treatment has yet to be established: such an analysis
would necessarily involve the elastic and plastic proper-
ties of both the coating and the substrate as well as
the strength of the bond between them. Most practical
coating processes leave the surface with a high degree
of residual stress and this too must be accounted for.
Since failure of the coating is invariably initiated at
tensile cracks
behind the indenter incipient flaws or points of weakness, either within it
or at the bond with the underlying material, it is likely
Fig ~cI Diagrammatic representation of a section through that in arriving at a satisfactory analysis some form of
a scratch test OH a coated substrate. The coating may statistical treatment will be found most appropriate.
buckle or spa11 aK,ay from the substrate ahead of the
plastic zone associated with the generation of any ploughed References
groove. If there are significant adhesive forces betlz>een 1. ASM Handbook. Volume 18, Friction. Lubrication and Wear
the indenter and the upper surface of the coating, tensile Technology. ASM Ktlfernafiontrl, New York, 1441
stress’s generated to the rear of the indenter can lead to 2. Mohs, F. Grundriss dcr Mineralogie. 1824 (English translation
the fb7Gation of a series of half-moon or semicircular by Haidinger W.. Treatise on Mineralogy. Comtable, Edinburgh.
sucfac-e cracks, shown here in section 1825
3. Brine11 J.A. %tt att bestamma kroppers hBrdhet jamte n&a
till~mpningar af detsamma. Telirzisk lidskrifi 1900. 30, 69-87
lies iI! the range of 120” to 160”. Indenters with smaller 4. O’Neill H.O. The hardness of metals and alloys. Chnpman-
included angles, and so larger effective attack angles, Hall. Lorldon. 1967
are more likely to produce significant volumes of 5. Tahor. The Hardness of Metals. Claretulorz Press. O.uford. 1951
debris by micro-machining. Approximate upper bound 6. Tsukizoe T. and Sakamoto T. Friction in scratching without
methods of analysis can provide good estimates of the metal transfer. Bull. Jrrp. Sot. Mech. Eng. 1075, 18, 115, 65-72

Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996 693

Analytical models of scratch hardness: J. A. Williams

I. Sedriks A.J. and Mulhearn T.O. Mechanics of cutting and 33 Giovanola J.H. and Finnie 1. On the machining ot glass.
rubbing in simulated abrasive processes. Wear IY6.7, 6, 157-$66 J. h4nter. Sci. 1980, 15, 2508~3511
x. Sin H., Saka N. and Suh N.P. Abrasive wear mechanisms and 35. Gane N. The dii-ect measurement of the strength of metals on
the grit size efiect. Wear 1979. 55. 163-IYO a sub-micrometre scale. Proc. Roy. Sot. 1970. A371. 367-391
Y. Mulhearn T.O. and Samuels I.E. The abrasion of metals: a 36. Tahor D. The hardness of solids. Xri,. Ph?t. TK~VIO~. 1970. 1,
model of the process. Wear 1962. 5. 47&49S 145%17Y
10. Goddard J. and Wilman H. A theory of friction and wear 37. Tahor D. Indentation hardness and its measurements in micro-
during the abrasion of metal. Wear 1962. 5. 111-135 indentation techniques. In Materials Science and Engineering.
(Eds Blm. P.J. md Lmw. B.R.) ASTM, 1985. 129%15Y
11. Zum Gahr K.H. Modelling of body abrasive wear. Went- /Y#X.
124. x7-102 38. Gane N. and Cox J.M. The micro-hardness of metals at vrry
low loads. Phil. Msg. 1970, 22. X81-891
12. Scrutton R.F. and Yousef N. The action of the build-up when
scraping with rough conical tools. Wear 1970. 15. 411-421 39. Oliver W.C., Hutchings R. and Pethica J.B. Measurement of
hardness at indentation depths as low a5 ?(I nnnometres.
13. Challen J.M. and Oxley P.L.B. An explanation of the differenr
regimes of friction and wear using asperity defoi-mation models. In Micro-indentation techniques in Materials Science and
1979, Wear 53. .?29-243 Engineering. (Edr Blrru, P.J. und LNIUII. B.R.) ASTM STP
889, Philadelphia. 1986. YO-IOK
14. Konvopoulous K., Saka N. and Sun N.P. Plowing friction in
dry and lubricated metal sliding. J. Trihol. 19N6. 108, .?0&31 Stowers I.F., Belak J., Lucca D.A., Komanduri R., Rhorer
R.L., Moriwaki T., Okuda K., Ikawa N.. Shimada S., Tanaka
IS. Petrvk H. Proc IMechE International Conference on Friction. H.. Dow T.A. and Drescht J.D. Molecular dynamic simulation
Luhiication and Wear. London. MEP 1987. I?!-I.?3 of the chip forming process in single crystal copper and
16. Torrance A.A. A three dimensional cutting criterion for abrasion. comparison with experimental data. In Proc. 1991 Annual
Wenr 19X& 123, 87-96 Meeting of the American Society of Precision Engineers. Smtu
Fe, 1991, 100-103
17. Black A.J.. Koplainsky E.M. and Oxley P.L.B. An investigation
of the different regimes of deformation which can occur when 41. Brookes C.A., O’Neill .J.B. and Redfern B.A.W. Anisotropy in
a hard wedge slides over a soft surface: the influence of wedge the hardness of single crystals. Proc. Ro!. Sot. 1971, A322.
angle. lubrication and prior plastic working of the surface. Wem 73-32
IYHX. 123, 97-114 42. Benjamin C. and Weaver C. Measurement of adhesion of thin
18. Childs T.H.C. The sliding of rigid cones over metals in high films. Proc. Roy. Sot. 1960, A254 163-176
adhesion conditions. Inr. J. Me&. Sci. 1970, 12, 393-40.3 13 Weaver C. Adhesion of thin films. .I. Vm. Sci. Techrlol. 1975,
19. Gilormini P. and Felder E. Theoretical and experimental study 12. 1x-25
of the ploughing of a rigid-plastic semi-infinite body by a rigid 44 Burnett P.J. and Rickerhy D.S. The mechanical properties of
pyramidal indenter. Wear lY83. 88, 195-206 wear resistant coatings. Parts I and II. Thin Solid FiOns 1987.
20. Ahildgaard T. Prediction of force components acting on a 148, 41-50, S/-63
ploughing cone by means of three-dimensional upper-bound 45 Ford L.J. A cavity model of the indentational hardness of a
theory. In Proc. Conf. on Advanced Technology of Plasticity. coated substrate. Thirz Solid Films 199-I. 245, 122~1.?1
Tohyo, Vol I. 1984, 121-1176
Ford I.J. Elastic relaxation of indented coated substrates using
21. Ahehe M. and Appl F.C. Theoretical analysis of the basic a cavity model. Surf: Cocct. Technol. IY94. 67. 119-123
mechanics of abrasive processes. Part I: general model and Part
II: model of the ploughing process. Weur IYHK. 126. 251-366, 17. Lehouvier D., Gilormini P. and Felder E. A kinematic solution
26 7-283 for plane-atrain indentation of a bi-layer. J. Plz,v.\. Dr Appl.
PI2y.K I98S, 18, 19Y-210
2’. Williams. J.A. and Xie Y. The generation of wear surfaces by
the interaction of parallel grooves. Wear IYY.2, 15.5, 363-379 3x Laugier M..J. An energy approach to the adhesion of coatings
using the scratch test. Thin Solid Films 1984. 117. _743-248
23. Avitzur B. and Talhert S.H. in Plasticity and Modern metal
Forming (Ed. Blqvmki, T. ) EDevier. Armterdnm, IYKY 49 Laugier M.J. Adhesion of TiC and TIN coatings prepared by
chemical vapour deposition on WC-Co-based cemented carbides.
24. Azarkhin A. and Richmond 0. A model of ploughing by a J. Mntrr. Sri. 1986. 21, 2269-2272
pyramidal indenter - upper hound method for stress free
surfaces. Wear 1992. 15. 409-418 50 Weihull W. J. Appl. Mech. 1’151. IS, 3Y3
25. de Vathaire M., Delamare F. and Felder E. An upper-hound 51 Je J.E., Gyarmati E. and Naoumidis A. Scratch adhesion test
model of ploughing by a pyramidal indenter. Weicr IY#l, 66, on reactively sputtered TIN on a soft substrate. Thin Solid
55-64 Films 1968, 136. 57-67
26. Azarkhin A. and Richmond 0. A generalization of the upper- 52 Perry A.J. Scratch adhesion testing - a critique. Srfr/ Eng.
bound method with particular reference to the problem of a 1986. 2. 183Sl90
ploughing indenter. J. Appl. Me&. 1992. 56. /O-i4 53 Bull S.J., Rickerby D.S.. Matthews A. Leyland A., Pace A.R.
21. Oxley P.L.B. A note on allowing for the friction in estimating and Valli J. The use of scratch adhesion resting for the
upper hound loads. 1111. J. Mech. Sci. 1963, 5, IX-184 determination of interfacial adhesion: the importance of frictional
drag. Surf. Cwt. Techtzol. 1988. 36, 5O.?G.i/ 7
28. Sneddon I.N. Fourier Transforms. McGrmv Hill, New York,
1951 54 Buttery T.C. and Archard J.F. Grinding and abrasive wear.
Proc. Inst. Me&. Gzg. 1971. 185. 537-551
29. Johnson K.L. The correlation of indentation experiments.
J. Mrch. PIzys. Solids 1970, IS. 115~126 55 Brookes C.A., Green P., Harrison P.H. and Moxley B. Some
observations on scratch and indentation hardness measurements.
30. Hirst W. and Hawse M.G.J.W. The wedge indentation of J. Plyr. D: Appl. Phys. 1972, 5. lX4~129.?
materials. Proc. Roy. Sot. 1969, A311, 429-444
56 Hutchings I.M. Trihology: Friction and Wear of Engineering
31. Bridgman P.W. Studies in Large Plastic Flow and Fracture.
Materials. Longman. London. 1993
McGrawHill. New York. IY5.?
57 Xie Y. The generation of worn surfaces in sliding contact5 with
32. Lawn B.R. and Fuller E.R. Equilibrium penny-like cracks in
hard asperities. PhD dissertatiorl. Carnbrid,qe Urzrversiry. 1994
indentation fracture. J. Mater. Sci. 1975, 10. _70/6-7024
58 Belak J. Private communication. 1993
33 Sheldon G.L. and Finnie I. On the ductile behaviour of
nominally brittle materials during erosive cutting. Travis. ASME 59 Maan N. and van Groenou A.B. Low speed scratch experiments
J. Indust. 1966. 88, 357-392 on steel. Wear 1977. 42, 36S.790

694 Tribology International Volume 29 Number 8 1996