Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T01:25:58.325Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nanohardness Measurements on Thin Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

K. R. Upadhyaya,
S. Saimoto and
R. S. Timsit
K. R. Upadhyaya
Affiliation:
Department of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6,
S. Saimoto
Affiliation:
Department of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6,
R. S. Timsit
Affiliation:
AMP of Canada Ltd., 20 Esna Park Drive, Markham, Ontario, L3R 1E1.
Get access

Abstract

Nanohardness measurements have been carried out on barrier-type anodic aluminum oxide films grown on super-purity aluminum and on a 600 nm thick Al-1wt%Cu blanket film deposited on a silicon wafer. This work was performed using a custom-built displacement-controlled apparatus. The anodic oxide films range in thickness from 20 to 100 nm. The material systems investigated correspond respectively to hard-film/soft-substrate and soft-film/hard-substrate combinations. The experimental evidence suggests that indentation of anodic films begins when the penetration-depth is approximately 1/5th the film thickness. There is also evidence that the measured hardness for Al-1wt%Cu film stems largely from the thin film material when the probing depth does not exceed approximately 1/5th the film thickness. Beyond this depth the substrate influences the film deformation behaviour and the measured hardness gradually reaches the hardness of the substrate material. The oxide films on aluminum show unexpected deformation properties.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Pethica, J.B., Hutchings, R., and Oliver, W.C., Phil. Mag. 48A, 593 (1983).Google Scholar
2. Gasilin, V.V., Kashirin, V.B., Kunchenko, V.V., Romanov, A.A., and Skubko, V.A., Zavodskaya Laboratoriya, 44, 364 (1978).Google Scholar
3. Nishibori, M. and Kinosita, K., Thin Solid Films, 48, 325 (1978).Google Scholar
4. Newey, D., Wilkins, M.A., and Pollock, H.M., J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum., 15, 119 (1982).Google Scholar
5. Wierenga, P.E. and Franken, A.J.J., J. Appl. Phys., 55, 4244 (1984).Google Scholar
6. Hannula, S.P., Stone, D., and Li, C-Y., in Electronic Packaging Materials Science, edited by Giess, E.A., Tu, K.N., and Uhlmann, D.R. (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 40, Pittsburgh, PA, 1985) pp. 217 224.Google Scholar
7. Field, J.S., Surface and Coatings Technology, 36, 817 (1988).Google Scholar
8. Hill, R., Lee, E.H., and Tupper, S.J., Proc. Roy. Soci. London, 188A, 273 (1947).Google Scholar
9. Shaw, M.C. and DeSalvo, G.J., Trasn. Of ASME: J. of Eng. for Industry, 92, 480 (1970).Google Scholar
10. Mulhearn, T.O., J. of Mech. Phys. Solids, 7, 85 (1959).Google Scholar
11. Upadhyaya, K.R., PhD Thesis, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontraio, Canada, Sep. 1994.Google Scholar
12. Wernick, S., Pinner, R., and Sheasby, P.G., The Surface Treatment and Finishing of Aluminum and its Alloys, 5th ed. ( ASM International and Finishing Publications Ltd., Teddington, Middlesex, England, 1990) Vol. 1. p. 303.Google Scholar
13. Bhattacharya, A.K. and Nix, W.D., Int. J. Solids Structures, 24, 1287 (1988).Google Scholar
14. Venkataraman, S.K., Kohlstedt, D.L, and Gerberich, W.W., J. Mater. Res. 8, 685 (1993).Google Scholar