JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE LETTERS
The elastic/plastic indentation of ceramics
M. T. L A U G I E R
Materials Testing Laboratories, 9 Nova Croft, Coventry CV5 7FJ, War., UK
Indentation fracture mechanics has undergone
considerable development following the work of
Evans and Charles [1] who found a "universal"
relation linking the length of surface traces of
cracks in brittle materials resulting from
"sharp" indentation to conventional fracture
toughness. However, it was found necessary to
introduce the empirical correction factor
( E / H ) 2/5, where E is Young's modulus and H is
hardness, to calibrate their universal plot. The
significance of the correction factor was clearly
brought out in the detailed elastic/plastic inden-
tation analysis of Lawn et al. [2] where it was
shown to be related to the "plastic" driving force
for crack growth, from consideration of the Hill
expanding cavity model [3].
The important plastic or residual crack driv-
ing force Pr was shown by means of a careful
physical argument to be of the form
P~ ~ P ( a / b ) ( E / H ) cot ~k
where P is the indenter load, a is the indentation
half-diagonal, b is the radius of the plastic zone
and ~ is the indenter semi-angle. In the limit of
well-developed cracks c >> b, where c is the
crack length, the residual force Pr may be
regarded as being concentrated at a point.
Assuming half-penny crack geometry, the stress
intensity factor K~ may be written [2]
Pr P
Kr ~ f(4~) ~ = f(4~)(a/b)(E/H) cot ¢ - ~
where f(~b) is an angular function introduced to
take account of the free surface and, by analogy
with the uniformly loaded case [4], is considered
to be slowly varying with value near unity [2] (q~
is measured from the downward normal to the
surface). The ratio a/b may be closely linked to
the relative plastic zone [3 = b/r of the Hill
expanding plastic/elastic cavity in which [3 is
linked to E/H, where r is the cavity radius, when
it is assumed that the plastic zone volume is
determined by the indentation volume. The
0261 8028/85 $03.00 + .12 © 1985 Chapman and Hall Ltd.
4 (1985) 1539-1541
expression of Hill [3] is
E 9[(1 - v)[33 - 2(1 - 2v)]
H 2(1 + In [33)
where v is Poisson's ratio. Equating the inden-
tation volume with the cavity volume gives for a
pyramidal indentation
[3 = b/r = (b/a)(21/2rc/cot ~)1/3
Chiang et al. [5], in an extensive indentation
analysis, have compared the predictions of the
Hill formula above, those of the Johnson [6]
analysis and those of their own analysis with
available experimental results on a wide range of
materials (see Fig. 1). The experimental results
are closely described by the extension of the Hill
analysis by Chiang et al. [5] which allows for
surface effects. The slope of their line is 0.38,
which may be compared with the value of 0.41
for the slope of the Hill line and 0.33 for the
slope of the simple analytical approximation,
[3 = (E/H) ~/3, to the Hill result (see Fig. 1). Lawn
et al. [2] chose to represent the experimental
data by the form [3 ~ ( E / H ) ~/2 also shown in
Fig. 1; this is neither an analytical approxi-
mation nor is it the best empirical description of
the experimental data. It may be mentioned that
the original Evans and Charles relation which
contains ( E / H ) 2/5 would correspond to the form
[3 ~ ( E / H ) 3/5 and so would differ even more
sensibly than the form of Lawn et al. [2] from
observation (see Fig. 1).
The form [3 ,-~ ( E / H ) l/2 used by Lawn et al. [2]
leads to b/a ,,~ (E/H)l/2(cot ~9)1/3, enabling the
residual crack driving force to be written
Pr ~ P(E/H)I/2( c°t ~)2/3
so that the expression for toughness is
Kr ~ f(q~)(cot ~)2/3(E/H)'/Zp/c3/Z
Using the analytical approximation to the Hill
result and applying the same reasoning as above
gives
1 539
 1°,, , , , I i l/..j~, , ~b.. ~ i _

o t /
7_ _ / / . - t / / _ I"

> - ~ - /

./
/
/
~ ~ Ill I I I I I I I II I
5 I0 I00 500

Figure 1 Relative plastic zone size fl as a function of E / H following Chiang et al. [5]: 1. fl = (E/H) 3/5 (Evans and Charles
[I]); 2. fl = (E/H) 1/2 (Lawn et al. [2]); 3. from Hill's analysis [3]; 4. Chiang et al. [5]; 5. fl = (E/H)I/3; 6. Johnson [6]. O,
soda-lime glass, ZX, A1203 + 42vol % ZrO2; I~, KCt (single crystal); ~ , ZnS; v , cold-rolled steel; O., hot-rolled brass.

b/a ~ (E/H)Z/3(cot ~O)2/3 kSe = Ave {Kc/[(E/H)2/3(p/c3/2)]}

and = 0.0098 _+ 0.0025

P~ ,.~ P(EIH)2/3(cot ~9)2/3 (0.0025 = 1 s.D.) with a coefficient o f variation

v = 25.5%. Table I shows the data used for the
so that the expression for toughness Kr becomes calibrations taken from [7] together with the
calculated indentation toughness. It is also o f
K r ~ f(q~)(cot O ) ~ / 3 ( E / H ) 2 / 3 p / c 3/2
interest to use this data to provide a calibration
which differs f r o m the expression o f L a w n et al. o f the original relation o f Evans and Charles [1].
[2] only in that the exponent o f E / H is 2/3 and The calibration constant is
not 1/2.
/?EC = Ave {Ko/[(E/H)2/5(p/c3/2)]}
Anstis et al. [7] carried out a critical evalu-
ation o f the indentation fracture technique = 0.021 ___ 0.006
based on the results o f L a w n et al. [2] and using
(0.006 = 1 S.D.) with a coefficient o f variation
a wide range o f brittle materials for which
v = 26%. This differs significantly f r o m the
toughness values were available. They f o u n d
original value o f 0.031 o f Evans and Charles [1]
that for well-behaved materials the convention-
obtained when the constraint factor is given the
ally determined toughness Ko correlated well
value 3.
with the result o f L a w n et al. [2] when crack
A l t h o u g h the Laugier modification has the
growth is dominated by the residual plastic
merit o f an analytical derivation o f the exponent
forces. A calibration constant
2/3 in the term (E/H), the formulae provide
k7A = Ave {Ko/[(E/H)'/2(p/c3/2)]} essentially equivalent descriptions o f the data
(v ~ 25 to 26%) when W C - C o is included.
= 0.016 + 0.004
W C - C o materials are a special case the point
(0.004 = 1 S.D.) with a coefficient o f variation loading requirement is not met (c/b ~ 1 to 2)
v = 25% was obtained by averaging over the - and must be treated separately. W h e n W C - C o
data in braces. is excluded, the Laugier modification provides
The data o f Anstis et al. [7] m a y be used to the best description o f the data (see Table I) with
calibrate the modified expression for Kr, leading /~L, = 0.010, v = 19%; this m a y be c o m p a r e d
to a new calibration constant with kSA' = 0.017, v = 21% and /~EC" = 0.022,
1 540
T A B L E I Indentation toughness data used for calibration taken from [7]

Material P/c 3/2 E/H kA kL k Ec KcA K~c K~c K~c+

(MPa m t/2) (MPa m I/2) (MPa m I/2)

WC Co 210 43.6 0.00865 0.00456 0.0126 22 26 20 12

Si3N4 (NC132) 60 16.2 0.0166 0.0103 0.0219 3.9 4.1" 3.8 3.9* 3.8 4.0* 4.0
SiC 50 18.2 0.0188 0.0114 0.0251 3.4 3.6* 3.4 3.5* 3.4 3.5* 4.0
A1203 (AD999) 36 20.2 0.0241 0.0145 0.0326 2.6 2.8* 2.6 2.7* 2.5 2.6* 3.9
A1203 (AD90) 31 29.8 0.0171 0.0096 0.0241 2.7 2.9* 3.0 3,0" 2.5 2.6* 2.9
Glass ceramic 43 12.8 0.0162 0.0105 0.0210 2.5 2.6* 2.3 2,4* 2.5 2.6* 2.5
Si3N4 (NC350) 33 17.7 0.0144 0.0088 0.0192 2.2 2.4* 2.2 2,3" 2.2 2.3* 2.0
Sapphire 22 19.5 0.0216 0.0130 0.0291 1.6 1.6" 1.6 1,6" 1.5 1.6" 2.1
Glass (AS) 19 13.5 0.0130 0.0084 0.0169 1.1 1.2" 1.1 1.I* 1.1 1.2" 0.91
Glass (SL1, II) 14 12.7, 13.0 0.0148 0.0096 0.0192 0.80 0.85* 0.76 0.77* 0.82 0.86* 0.74, 0.75
Glass LA 14 13.3 0.0133 0.0086 0.0172 0.82 0.87* 0.78 0.79* 0.83 0.87* 0.68
Si 13 15.8 0.0135 0.0085 0.0178 0.83 0.88* 0.81 0.83* 0.82 0.86* 0.7

F¢a = 0.016, S.D. = 0.004; v = 25%; /~A' = 0.017, S.D. = 0.004, V = 21%
EL = 0.0098, S.D. = 0.025, V = 25%; E L" = 0.010, S.D. = 0.002, V = 19%
~rEC = 0.021, S.D. = 0.006; V = 26%; EEC' = 0.022, S.D. = 0.005, V = 23%
*Predicted toughness when WC Co is excluded (' prime indicates WC Co has been excluded).
+Experimental results.

v = 23% for the corresponding forms of Anstis 2. B. R. LAWN, A . G . EVANS and D.B.
et al. [7] and Evans and Charles [1]. MARSHALL, ibM. 63 (1980) 574.
3. R. HILL, "The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity",
The modified formula applicable to ceramics
Ch. 5 (Oxford University Press, 1950).
and glasses is 4. F. W. SMITH, A. S. KOBAYASHI and A . F .
KLc = O.OlO(E/H)2/3p/c3/2; EMERY, J. AppL Mech. 34 (1967) 953.
5. S. S. C H I A N G , D. B. MARSHALL and A . G .
E L' = 0.010, v = 19% EVANS, J. Appl. Phys. 53 (1982) 298.
6. K. L. JOHNSON, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 18 (1970)
115.
Acknowledgement 7. G. R. ANSTIS, P. C H A N T I K U L , B. R. LAWN
The author thanks Sandvik Ltd for permission and D. B. MARSHALL, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 64
to publish this work. (1981) 533.

References
1. A. G. EVANS and E. A. CHARLES, J. Am. Ceram. Received 3 April
Soc. 59 (1976) 371. and accepted 28 May 1985

1 541