Finite Element Method for Predicting the Cohesive Strength of DLC Film on 316L Stainless Steel by Four Point Bend Test and Validation with Experimental Results

Muhammad M. Morshed; Stephen M. Daniels; M.S.J. Hashmi

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.264-265.1823

Paper Titles

Polishing Force Modification near the Boundary of a Part Surface
p.1788

A Heuristic Solution of Multi-Item Single Level Capacitated Dynamic Lot-Sizing Problem with Setup Time
p.1794

Statistical Wear Model for Adhesively Bonded Tools
p.1802

Study on Machining Characteristic of Aeronautical Material under Orthogonal Dry Cutting
p.1812

Finite Element Method for Predicting the Cohesive Strength of DLC Film on 316L Stainless Steel by Four Point Bend Test and Validation with Experimental Results
p.1823

Effect of Nano Silica on the Sinterability of Hydroxyapatite Dense Bodies
p.1832

Effects of Bismuth Oxide on the Properties of Calcium Phosphate Bioceramics
p.1839

Synthesis of High Fracture Toughness of Hydroxyapatite Bioceramics
p.1849

Sintering of Hydroxyapatite Ceramic Produced by Wet Chemical Method
p.1856

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 264-265Finite Element Method for Predicting the Cohesive...

Finite Element Method for Predicting the Cohesive Strength of DLC Film on 316L Stainless Steel by Four Point Bend Test and Validation with Experimental Results

Abstract:

The mechanical performance of DLC coatings on 316L stainless steel deposited by a saddle field fast atom beam source has been evaluated using the four point bend (FPB) test. Two different deposition parameters, pressure and current were varied when depositing the films. Load-displacement measurements were carried out during the bend test to determine the load corresponding to crack initiation. This load designated as the cohesive strength of the coating which is also called the cracking resistance of coating and provides a measure of the strength of the coating. The cohesive strength of the coating was calculated based on elementary beam theory. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) was used to determine the location of the crack. Finite element analysis was used to predict the stress distribution across the coating thickness. The experimental work on FPB tests has been used to support the numerical (finite element) model for the determination and prediction of film cohesive strength. It was observed that at lower deposition current, the cohesive strength increases with increased deposition pressure whereas, for higher deposition current, these values do not increase with increasing deposition pressure. The model takes into account the film’s Young’s modulus, thickness and deposition pressure and current, and has shown that it is capable of predicting film cohesive strength when combined with a theoretical formulation for brittle fracture. It has been observed that the maximum stress develops at the outer surface of the film and propagates through the film-substrate interface. This result has only been validated for films with higher Young’s modulus compared to that of the substrate material.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advances in Materials and Processing Technologies II

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 264-265)

Pages:

1823-1831

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.264-265.1823

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

June 2011

Authors:

Muhammad M. Morshed, Stephen M. Daniels, M.S.J. Hashmi

Keywords:

Cohesive Strength, DLC Film, Saddle Field Source

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

References

[1] K. Miyoshi, R.L.C. Wu and A. Garscadden: Surf. Coat. Technol. Vol. 54-55 (1992), p.428.

Google Scholar

[2] L. A. Thomson, F. C. Law, N. Rushton and J. Franks: Biomaterials Vol. 12 (1991), p.37.

Google Scholar

[3] K.E. Spear and J.P. Dismukes: Synthetic Diamond: Emerging CVD science and technology, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY (1994), p.123.

Google Scholar

[4] Z. Sun, C.H. Lin, Y.L. Lee, J.R. Shi, B.K. Tay and X. Shi: Thin Solid films Vol. 377-378 (2000), p.198.

Google Scholar

[5] T. Zhai, Y. G. Xu, J. W. Martin, A. J. Wilkinson and G. A. D. Briggs: Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 21 (1999), p.889.

Google Scholar

[6] R.M. Souza, G.G.W. Mustoe and J. J. Moore: Thin Solid Films Vol. 355-356 (1999), p.303.

Google Scholar

[7] W. F. Riely and L. Zachary: Introduction to Mechanics of Materials, John Wiley, NY (1989), p.274.

Google Scholar

[8] O. Unal and D. J. Sordelet: Scripta Mater Vol 42 (2000), p.631.

Google Scholar

[9] M. M. Morshed, D. C. Cameron, B. P. McNamara, and M. S. J. Hashmi: Surf. Coat. Technol. Vol. 169-170 (2003), p.254.

Google Scholar

[10] M. M. Morshed, B. P. McNamara, D. C. Cameron and M. S. J. Hashmi: J. Mater. Proc. Technol. Vol. 143-144 (2003), p.922.

Google Scholar

[11] U. Wiklund, M. Bromark, M. Larsson, P. Hedenqvist and S. Hogmark: Surf. Coat. Technol. Vol. 91 (1997), p.57.

Google Scholar

[12] J. A. Berríos-Ortíz, J. G. La Barbera-Sosa, D. G. Teer and E. S. Puchi-Cabrera: Surf. Coat. Technol. Vol. 179 (2004), p.145.

Google Scholar

[13] Y. Wang and D. Hu: Int. J. Machine Tools and Manufac. Vol. 45 (2005) p.43.

Google Scholar

[14] S. J. Bull and A. K. Korsunsky: Tribol. Int. Vol. 31 (1998), p.547.

Google Scholar