j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmatprotec

Elastic stress analysis of bi-layered isotropic coatings and substrate subjected to line scratch indentation
M. Shakeri, A. Sadough, S. Rash Ahmadi
Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e
Article history:

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
In this study, a model is developed to predict the stresses in thin coatings induced by a line scratch indenter. In this case, the plane problem of surface loading of double elastic layers perfectly bonded to an elastic dissimilar half-plane is considered. Fundamental solutions are obtained for forces acting perpendicular and parallel to the layer surface. The stress and displacement elds are calculated for the coatings and the substrate due to these forces. These results are compared with the results of nite element method (FEM) by using ANSYS

Received 4 September 2006 Received in revised form 4 May 2007 Accepted 18 May 2007

Keywords: Coating Scratch Stress analysis FEM Multilayer Adhesion

software, as well as with the results of single isotropic-coated system and an uncoated elastic half-plane. These equations are useful for ranking the coatingsubstrate adhesion of different coated systems, or for estimating the critical mean stress for interfacial failure. 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1.

Introduction

Coating is widely used in optical, microelectrical, biomedical and decorative applications. The coating is designed to prepare favorable mechanical (i.e. low friction, abrasion resistance), chemical (i.e. barrier for gasses), optical, magnetic and electrical properties to various substrates. In general, the functional behavior of coated systems depends on the substrate and coatings properties (Blees and Wenkelman, 2000). Evidently, the durability and function of coating critically depends on adhesion between the coating and substrate (Blees and Wenkelman, 2000). Many situations in engineering require the transmission of loads through contact between different components and parts of assemblies. Often the contacting surface must be allowed to undergo relative sliding with respect to each other, for example, in ball bearing and journal bearing assemblies or between the fan and blades and root disks in aero-engines. Coatings are used in order to

achieve superior mechanical properties that are distinctly different from those of the substrate, e.g. increased hardness and stiffness, or lower stiffness and lower coefcient of friction (Ma and Korsunsky, 2004). Contact between coated bodies increases the complexity of stress states in the coating layers and substrate, affected by the elastic properties of the coatings, substrate, the friction coefcient, etc. (Ma and Korsunsky, 2004). Two main approaches for this type of problem have been used. The rst is the analytical method, widely investigated and used for these types of problems (Wu and Chiu, 1967; Bentall and Johnson, 1986; Elsharkawy, 1999; Porter and Hills, 2002). The other method is the nite element method (FEM) employed by many researchers (Ihara et al., 1996; Anderson and Colllins, 1995; Aslantas and Tasgetrian, 2002). FEM can be effectively used for arbitrary complex geometry and complex material constitutive laws, but it requires some signicant effort in pre- and post-processing of data. The ana-

Corresponding author. E-mail address: samrandahmadi@yahoo.com (S.R. Ahmadi). 0924-0136/$ see front matter 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.038

214

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

lytical method is more convenient and straightforward than FEM when is used for simplied contact congurations and linear material response. For material selection and preliminary design, analytical method may be much more efcient than FEM. However, a complete framework is still lacking for calculating contact tractions and stress elds for contact between an indenter and surface in coated systems. The aim of the present study is the development of a general framework for calculating stress and displacement elds between a solid indenter and a system with bi-layered isotropic coatings. The solution procedure is constructed in the following steps. Fundamental solutions are determined for concentrated normal and tangential forces acting at the surface of a coated half-plane. Solutions for the Airy stress functions are obtained for both cases and are used to derive the expressions for the elastic stress and displacement elds in coatings and substrate. These problems are also modeled by ANSYS software and the results of nite element method are obtained. The results of analytical solution are compared with the FEM results. The analytical results are also compared with the result of uncoated half-plane and single-coated system.

Since q1 and q2 are conjugate functions, they satisfy q2 q1 = , x y q1 q2 = y x q2 = x

1 4 Q1 .

and so

(5)

The stressstrain relations for the plane strain condition may be written as (Timoshenko and Goodier, 1982): 1+ [ xx ( E 1+ = [ yy ( E 1+ = xy E

xx = yy xy

xx xx

+ +

yy )] yy )]

(6)

which can be expressed in term of , q1 and q2 . So: 1+ u = x E v 1+ = E y q1 2 2 x x q2 2 2 y y

4(1 ) 4(1 )

(7)

Therefore, we have:

2.

Fundamental solution
u= 1+ E 4(1 )q1 , x v= 1+ E 4(1 )q2 , y (8)

The problem of elastic coatings of uniform thickness perfectly bonded to a dissimilar elastic underlying half-plane is investigated on the basis of two-dimensional theory of elasticity. Under the conditions of plane strain, the stress components xx , yy , xy can be expressed as (Timoshenko and Goodier, 1982): 2 = 2, y 2 = 2, x 2 = , xy

Finally, the plane strain general solution is written as u= 1+ E = 2 , y2 4(1 )q1 2 , x2 , x

xy

xx

yy

xy

(1)

v= =

1+ E

4(1 )q2

, y (9)

xx

yy

where is the Airy stress function. It must be biharmonic 4 = 0. Solution of the equation 4 = 0 can be chosen in the form (Timoshenko and Goodier, 1982):

2 . xy

=
0

[(A1 + A2 y)ewy + (A3 + A4 y) ewy ] (2)

3. Fundamental solution for a concentrated load normal to the surface

In view of the symmetry of the normal load and the requirement that the substrate must be stress-free at large distance from loading point, Airy stress functions for coatings and substrate can be written as (Xie and Hawthorne, 2002; Sull, 2002):
I

(c1 cos wx + c2 sin wx)dw,

where A1 , A2 , . . ., c1 , c2 are parameters which are only related to parameter w. Writing Q1 for 2 which represent x + y we observe that Q1 is the harmonic function, and will have a conjugate harmonic function Q2 . Consequently, Q1 + iQ2 is an analytic function of z = x + iy, and we may write: Q1 = 2 =
x

=
0

[(A1 + A2 y) ewy + (A3 + A4 y) ewy ] cos wx dw [(A5 + A6 y) ewy + (A7 + A8 y) ewy ] cos wx dw , [(A9 + A10 y) ewy ] cos wx dw (10)

II

=
0

y.

(3)

III

=
0

The integral of this function with respect to z is another analytic function, denoted as 4 (z). Then writing q1 and q2 for the real and imaginary pats of (z), we have: q1 = x
1 4 Q1 .

(4)

where Ai are generally functions of Fourier transform variable w, subscripts I, II, III refer to coating No. 1, coating No. 2 and substrate, respectively (Fig. 1). Using the procedure described in the previous section, the expressions for auxiliary functions q1 , q2 are obtained as follows:

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

215

Fig. 1 Coatingsubstrate system. For coating No. 1:

Fig. 2 Coatingsubstrate system.

qI = 1 qI = 2

1 2 0 1 2 0

(A4 ewy A2 ewy ) sin wx dw (11)

(A4 ewy + A2 ewy ) cos wx dw

For coating No. 2:

qII = 1 qII = 2

1 2 0 1 2 0

(A8 ewy A4 ewy ) sin wx dw (12)

Fig. 3 Uncoated half-space under concentrated load.

(A8 ewy + A4 ewy ) cos wx dw

And for substrate:

qIII = 1 1 2
0

A10 ewy sin wx dw (13)

qIII = 1

1 2 0

A10 ewy cos wx dw

The stress and displacement elds for the coatings and substrate can now be given in the following form: For coating No. 1, we have:
xx

Fig. 4 The mesh used to model a system with two coatings under concentrated normal load.

=
0

[(w2 A1 + A2 (w2 y 2w)] ewy + (w2 A3 + A4 (wy + 2w) ewy ] cos wx dw

yy

=
0

w2 [(A1 + A2 y) ewy + (A3 + A4 y) ewy ] cos wx dw (14)

xy

=
0 1

w[(wA1 + A2 wA2 y) ewy + (A3 w + A4 + A4 wy) ewy ] sin wx dw

u=

1+ E1 1+ v= E1

[2(1
0

1 )(A4 1 )(A4

ewy A2 ewy ) + w(A1 + A2 y) ewy + (A3 + A4 y) ewy ] sin wx dw ewy + A2 ewy ) (wA1 A2 wy + A2 ) ewy + (A3 w + A4 + wA4 y) ewy ] cos wx dw

[2(1
0

Table 1 Material properties used in analytic solution (Harry et al., 1999) Section/material Coating No. 1/hard tungstencarbon (WC)
E (GPa) 600 0.25

Coating No. 2/ductile tungsten (W)

400 0.28

Substrate/ stainless steel

210 0.3

h1 = 0.02 mm = 20 m; h2 = 0.02 mm = 20 m; L = 200 N/mm.

216

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

And for substrate, we obtain:

xx

=
0

[(w2 A9 + 2wA10 w2 A10 )] ewy cos wx dw

yy

=
0

w2 [(A9 + A10 y) ewy ] cos wx dw w[(wA9 + A10 wA10 y) ewy ] sin wx dw

0 3 0 3 0

xy

= 1+ E1 1+ E3

(16)

u=

[2(1 [2(1

3 )(A10

ewy ) + w[(A9 + A10 y) ewy ] sin wx dw

Fig. 5 The mesh used to model a system with two coatings under concentrated tangential load.

v=

3 )A10

ewy A10 ewy + A10 ) ewy cos wx dw

The unknown functions Ai (w) are now determined from the boundary conditions at the surface (Fig. 2): For coating No. 2, we have: y=0
xx yy xy

= (x) =0

(17)

=
0

[(w2 A5 + A6 (w2 y 2w)] ewy + (w2 A7 + A8 (wy + 2w) ewy ] cos wx dw

yy

=
0

w2 [(A5 + A6 y) ewy + (A7 + A8 y) ewy ] cos wx dw (15)

xy

=
0 2

w[(wA5 + A6 wA6 y) ewy + (A7 w + A8 + A8 wy) ewy ] sin wx dw

u=

1+ E1 1+ v= E2

[2(1
0

2 )(A8 2 )(A8

ewy A6 ewy ) + w(A5 + A6 y) ewy + (A7 + A8 y) ewy ] sin wx dw ewy + A6 ewy ) (wA5 A6 wy + A6 ) ewy + (A7 w + A8 + wA8 y)] cos wx dw

[2(1
0

Fig. 6 Normal load. (a) Distribution of stress in y direction under L = 200 N/mm. (b) Displacement in y direction (v) under L = 200 N/mm.

Fig. 7 Tangential load. (a) Distribution of stress in y direction under L = 200 N/mm. (b) Displacement in x direction (u) under L = 200 N/mm.

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

217

These conditions are applied in Eq. (17), where (x) is Dirac delta function. The continuity conditions of stress and displacements along the interfaces are (Fig. 2):

at

y = h1

yy(coat. No. 1) xy(coat. No. 1)

u(coat. No. 1)
v(coat. No. 1)

= yy(coat. No. 2) = xy(coat. No. 2) = u(coat. No. 2) = v(coat. No. 2) = yy(substrate) = xy(substrate) = u(substrate) = v(substrate)

Using the procedure described in the previous section, the stress and displacement eld for the coatings and substrate can be found. In this case, the boundary conditions at the surface are as follows
yy xy

and y=0

=0 = (x)

(20)

yy(coat. No. 2) xy(coat. No. 2)

at

y = h2

u(coat. No. 2)
v(coat. No. 2)

(18)

These conditions are applied in Eq. (14), where (x) is Dirac delta function. The continuity conditions of stress and displacements along the interfaces are;

In order to show the format of the unknown functions, they are determined from the boundary and continuity conditions for material properties represented in Table 1. Hard sputterdeposited WC layer has been combined with pure tungsten layers in bi-layer and multilayer structures. Bi-layered coatings of this type up to 60 m thick, produced by magnetron sputtering and composed of hard WC and ductile W layers, were found to be very promising erosion-resistant coatings for compressor blades in gas turbine engines (Harry et al., 1999; Quesnel et al., 1993).

at

y = h1

yy(coat. No. 1) xy(coat. No. 1)

u(coat. No. 1)
v(coat. No. 1)

= yy(coat. No. 2) = xy(coat. No. 2) = u(coat. No. 2) = v(coat. No. 2) = yy(substrate) = xy(substrate) = u(substrate) = v(substrate)

yy(coat. No. 2) xy(coat. No. 2)

at

y = h2

u(coat. No. 2)
v(coat. No. 2)

(21)

4. Fundamental solution for a concentrated load tangential to the surface

Similar to the argument of the previous section, according of the anti-symmetry of the tangential load and far-eld stressfree condition of substrate, Airy stress functions for coatings and substrate can be written in the form (Xie and Hawthorne, 2002; Sull, 2002):

The unknown functions Ai (w) are now determined from the boundary and continuity conditions.

5.

Total stress and displacement elds

FI = FII = FIII =
0

[(A1 + A2 y) ewy +(A3 + A4 y) ewy ] sin wx dw [(A5 + A6 y) ewy +(A7 + A8 y) ewy ] sin wx dw , [(A9 + A10 y) ewy ] sin wx dw (19)

With these solutions for the cases of normal and tangential loads one can obtain displacements and stresses for any inclined force at an arbitrary angle to the boundary. In this way, the total stress and displacement elds are obtained from superposing the results of normal and tangential forces, so we have (Quesnel et al., 1993):
xx

n t xx P + T xx ,

yy

n t yy P + T yy ,

xy

n t xy P + T xy ,

u = un P + Tut ,

v = vn P + Tvt

(22)

Table 2 Comparison of results for normal and tangential load Stress (MPa)/displacement (mm)
(a) Normal load
xx yy xy

Analytical solution
31.2 31.19 31.83 0.000748 0.00223 31.2 31.83 31.2 0.000216 0.00325

FEM solution
32.1 30.5 32.3 0.000755 0.00226 32.1 30.5 32.3 0.000213 0.00327

Timoshenko solution
31.83 31.83 31.83 0.000748 0.00224 31.83 31.83 31.83 0.000216 0.00325

u v (b) Tangential load

xx yy xy

u v x = 1 mm; y = 1 mm; load = 200 N/mm.

218

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

Table 3 Comparison of results for normal and tangential load Stress (MPa)/displacement (mm)
(a) Normal load
xx yy xy

Analytical solution
15.29 15.28 15.91 0.0000762 0.001849 15.90 15.91 15.29 0.000225 0.00265

FEM solution
16.1 15.7 16 0.0000760 0.001855 16.08 15.50 15.80 0.000222 0.00269

Timoshenko solution
15.91 15.91 15.91 0.0000762 0.001849 15.91 15.91 15.91 0.000225 0.00265

u v (b) Tangential load

xx yy xy

u v x = 2 mm; y = 2 mm; load = 200 N/mm.

where P is the normal load, T the tangential load and n and t refer to the solution of normal and tangential load, respectively.

Tangential load: = = 2Tx2 y (x2

2 + y2 )

xx

yy

2Ty3 (x2 + y2 )
2

6.

Stress elds in uncoated half-plane

xy

2Txy2 (x2 + y2 )
2

(24)

Stress and displacement elds in uncoated half-plane are as follows (Fig. 3) (Sokolnikoff, 1976; Muskhelishvili and Radok, 1975): Normal load: = = 2Px3 (x2
2 + y2 )

where r =

x2 + y2 and = arctan(y/x).

7.
, = 2Pxy2 (x2
2 + y2 )

Finite element method

xx

yy

xy

2Px2 y (x2 + y2 )
2

(23)

In this section, a system of half-space with bi-layered coating is modeled (Figs. 4 and 5) and the stress eld was calculated by nite element method using ANSYS software. This problem is solved for both normal and tangential loads. A plane strain nite element method has been developed for calculat-

Table 4 Comparison of results for normal load Position Stress (MPa)

(a)
xx yy xy

x = 1 mm, y = 1 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

28.45 33.43 31.60 0.0000814 0.00222

x = 2 mm, y = 2 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

14.57 15.93 15.88 0.0000799 0.001846

FEM solution
28.5 33.2 31.4 0.000080 0.00223

FEM solution
14.8 15.9 15.65 0.0000785 0.00185

u v

Position Stress (MPa)

(b)
xx yy xy

x = 1 mm, y = 0.01 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

15.73 0.628 29.51 0.0005426 0.001344

x = 1 mm, y = 0.03 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

25.96 0.587 1.18 0.0002 0.0022

FEM solution
15.8 0.65 30.1 0.00053 0.00136

FEM solution
25.7 0.600 1.25 0.000215 0.0023

u v

Numerical results for bi-layered coating system: h1 = 0.02 mm = 20 m; h2 = 0.02 mm = 20 m.

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

219

Table 5 Comparison of results for tangential load Position Stress (MPa)

(a)
xx yy xy

x = 1 mm, y = 1 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

27.07 28.72 27.69 0.0002132 0.003228

x = 2 mm, y = 2 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

14.59 15.08 14.29 0.0002163 0.002621

FEM solution
28.5 30.45 28.2 0.000215 0.00345

FEM solution
14.65 15.60 14.45 0.000218 0.00265

u v

Position Stress (MPa)

(b)
xx yy xy

x = 1 mm, y = 0.01 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

236.2 0.0198 2.96 0.00228 0.00021

x = 1 mm, y = 0.03 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

338.5 0.187 8.15 0.002211 0.0002375

FEM solution
235.3 0.021 2.6 0.00219 0.000221

FEM solution
338.5 .20 8.25 0.00223 0.00024

u v

Numerical results for bi-layered coating system: h1 = 0.02 mm = 20 m; h2 = 0.02 mm = 20 m.

Fig. 8 Comparison of results from analytical solution and nite element method (normal load). (a) Comparison of results for normal load, yy for y = 2 mm. (b) Comparison of results for normal load, xy for y = 2 mm.

ing stresses and displacements in coatings and substrate. A suitable mesh density around the contact area was found to be roughly half the coating thickness (Figs. 4 and 5). Structural solid Quad 4node 42 elements were used in ANSYS nite element software. The coatings and substrate behavior was characterized as elastic and isotropic. The sliding tip was modeled as completely rigid. The kinetic formulation was determined applying plane strain behavior and loads are applied at nodes. In order to nd the numerical results the material properties represented in Table 1 are used (Harry et al., 1999).

The system is modeled by ANSYS nite element software for uncoated, single and double-coated substrate and the stresses and displacement are obtained. Typical results of distributions and displacement are shown in Figs. 6a and b and 7a and b. The gures are topographical stress eld and displacement eld maps where each color corresponds to a certain stress and displacement level range in coatings and substrate. For normal load and double-coated system the stress yy and displacement in y direction, v, are as follows and for tangential load and double-coated system the stress yy and displacement in x direction, u, are as follows.

Fig. 9 Comparison of results from analytical solution and nite element method (normal load). (a) Comparison of results for normal load, v for y = 0.01 mm. (b) Comparison of results for normal load, zz for y = 0.01 mm.

220

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

Fig. 10 Comparison of results from analytical solution and nite element method (normal load). (a) Comparison of results for normal load, xx for y = 0.03 mm. (b) Comparison of results for normal load v for y = 0.03 mm.

Fig. 11 Comparison of results from analytical solution and nite element method (tangential load). (a) Comparison of results for tangential load, xx for y = 2 mm. (b) Comparison of results for tangential load, xx for y = 0.01 mm.

Fig. 12 Comparison of results from analytical solution and nite element method (tangential load). (a) Comparison of results for tangential load, u for y = 0.01 mm. (b) Comparison of results for tangential load, xx for y = 0.03 mm.

8.

Results and comparison

A mathematical model was developed to calculate the distribution of stresses and displacement in thin coatings and

substrate by an indenter under normal and tangential loading. These equations include the effect of material properties of coatings and substrate, the indenter geometry and normal or tangential load. In order to check these equations, we calculated the results again using the ANSYS nite element

Table 6 Comparison of results between single-coated system and bi-layered-coated system putting h2 = 0 for normal load Position Stress (MPa)
(a)
xx yy xy

x = 1 mm, y = 1 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

29.45 32.76 31.74 0.0000791 0.002226

x = 1 mm, y = 0.01 mm; load = 200 N/mm Analytical solution

12.86 0.635 30.38 0.000552 0.001345

FEM solution
30.1 33.04 31.23 0.000078 0.0023

FEM solution
12.65 0.73 29.8 0.00054 0.0014

u v (b)
xx yy xy

u v

29.61 30.67 29.59 0.0002229 0.00327

31.1 30.01 30.5 0.00223 0.00033

245.1 0.0236 1.9 0.00229 0.0002171

246.3 0.03 1.4 0.0022 0.000229

Numerical results for single-coated system: h1 = 0.02 mm = 20 m; h2 = 0.

j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 1 9 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 213221

221

software. The numerical results for both uncoated and coated systems, from analytical solution and nite element method, are compared. The results are very close to each other. The numerical results for uncoated half-space, from analytical solution and nite element method, in arbitrary points, are obtained and compared. They are also compared with the results of Timoshenkos solution Eqs. (23) and (24). Some results are presented in Tables 2 and 3. The numerical results, also, for coated half-space, from analytical solution and nite element method, in arbitrary points, are obtained and compared. The instance results represented in Tables 4 and 5 show that the results are very close to each other. So these equations should be authentic. Comparison between some numerical results from analytical solution procedure and nite element simulation are presented in Figs. 812. In order to compare with the results of single-coated system we put h2 = 0 in bi-layered-coated system formulation. In this case, the Ai (w) variables obtained are completely equal to variables obtained from single-coated system, so the numerical results in two cases are equal (Table 6). These equations should be authentic and useful for ranking the coatingsubstrate adhesion of different coated systems. It also can be used for estimating the mean coating stress for interfacial failure from the critical load.

other type of loads, fundamental solutions can be re-derived using the general procedures given in this paper.

references

9.

Conclusions

Fundamental solutions for concentrated normal and tangential forces acting on the surface of a coated half-plane are determined. Solutions of the Airy stress functions for the two cases are obtained and are used to derive the expressions for the elastic elds in coatings and substrate. These problems are also modeled by ANSYS software and the results of nite element method are obtained. The results of analytical method are compared with FEM data. They are very close to each other. These equations are useful for ranking the coating substrate adhesion of different coated systems, as well as estimating the critical mean stress for interfacial failure. The conclusions obtained in this paper apply to contact of a system coated by tow layers and for concentrated normal and tangential load. For the contact of multi-coated system and

Anderson, I.A., Colllins, I.F., 1995. Plane strain stress distributions in discrete and blended coated solids under normal and sliding contact. Wear 185, 2333. Aslantas, A., Tasgetrian, S., 2002. Debonding between coating and substrate due to rollingsliding contact. J. Mater. Des. 23, 571576. Bentall, R.H., Johnson, K.L., 1986. An elastic strip in plane rolling contact. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 10, 637663. Blees, M.H., Wenkelman, G.B., 2000. The effect of friction on scratch adhesion testing. Thin Solid Films 359, 113. Elsharkawy, A.A., 1999. Effect of friction on subsurface stresses in sliding line contact of multilayered elastic solids. Int. J. Solid Struct. 36, 39033915. Harry, E., Rouzaud, A., Juliet, P., Pauleau, Y., 1999. Adhesion and failure mechanisms of tungsten-carbon containing multilayerd and graded coatings subjected to scratch tests. Thin Solid Films 342, 207213. Ihara, T., Shaw, M.C., Bhushan, B., 1996. A nite element analysis of contact stress and strain in elastic lm on a rigid substrate. Trans. ASME, J. Tribol. 108, 527539. Ma, L.F., Korsunsky, A.M., 2004. Fundamental formulation for frictional problem. J. Solid Struct. 41, 28372854. Muskhelishvili, N.I., Radok, J.R., 1975. Some Basic Problem of Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, fourth ed. Noordhoff International Publishing, Leyden. Porter, M.I., Hills, D.A., 2002. Note of complete contact between a at rigid punch and an elastic layer attached to a dissimilar substrate. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 44, 509520. Quesnel, E., Pauleau, Y., Monge-Cadet, P., Brun, M., 1993. Tungsten and tungsten-carbon PVD multilayered structures as erosion-resistant coatings. J. Surf. Coat. Technol. 62, 474481. Sokolnikoff, I.S., 1976. Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, second ed. Mc Graw Hill International Book Company, New York. Sull, K.R., 2002. Contact mechanics and adhesion of soft solids. J. Mater. Sci. Eng. R36, 145. Timoshenko, S.P., Goodier, J.N., 1982. Theory of Elasticity, third ed. Mc Graw Hill International Book Company, New York. Wu, T.S., Chiu, Y.P., 1967. On the contact problem of layered elastic bodies. Quart. Appl. Math. XXV, 233242. Xie, Y., Hawthorne, H.M., 2002. Effect of contact geometry on the failure modes of thin coatings friction on scratch adhesion testing. J. Surf. Coat. Technol. 155, 121129.