1、 , Yy 1,2, 11,3,2,1(1. 天津大学机械工程学院,天津300072; 2. 天津商业大学机械工程学院,天津300134;3. 解放军交通运输学院基础部,天津300161)K 1: 通过比较45钢拉伸试验与纳米压痕试验得到的弹性模量,分析了影响纳米压痕测试精度的因素及其对测试结果的影响b结果表明:纳米压痕法得到的弹性模量大于拉伸试验法得到的弹性模量;压头形状与尺寸a试样表面粗糙度a定位零点等是影响测量精度的主要因素,尤其是压头尖端的不规则形状使得压头在压入材料的初始阶段与材料之间的相互作用变得复杂b1oM: 纳米压痕; 精度; 弹性模量; 硬度ms |: TB302. 3 DS
2、 M : A cI|: 1000-3738(2008) 08-0004-04InfluencingFactorsof Nano-indentationTestPrecisionLIUMe-i hua1,2, LI Hong-qi1, WANGJing3, WANGJiang-hong2, TONGJing-wei1(1. Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China; 2. Tianjin University of Commerce,Tianjin 300134, China; 3. Military Traffic Institute, Tianjin
3、 300161, China)Abstract: The elastic modulus of 45 steel obtained by the traditional tensile test is compared with thatobtained by nano-indentation test. The results indicate that the latter is larger than the former. The main factorsresulting in the experimental difference are shape of the indenter
4、 tip, surface roughness of the sample anduncertainty of zero position. Especially, random-shape of theindenter tip makes the problem is morecomplex at thebeginning of pressing tested sample.Keywords: nano-indentation; precision; elastic modulus; hardness0 T ?1 , .d % kEb 7 “ ,/ ?Z,ZEX a , ) kb “ - (
5、1963- ), o, a , q,p V 3b =: 1 q“ , -M wL M1“b.d k !M1, , NKl “ k y Yb k -, n5 !S, 1 p 1 ,/ k5 !1, , , N k !a kZE# y %b !1 ka , ) a, q ?, P l , Y| vb , , E kYyT1, “ -M1i3- 7byN,TYV1 45 % k , E k ,s Y , k1y b1 kTs1.1 kT1.1.1 拉伸试验$ 4 M“v 345,#4#32 8 2008 M8机 械 工 程 材 料Materials for Mechanical Engineerin
6、gVol. 32 No. 8Aug. 2008) , SGB/ T 228- 2002! %k“bCSS-441000 % k %k, k20 e , k |5Q kT (, F ,: , Yy A U - Ph2c + 2PhcR ( 3)( hc h1 H, V|h) w , h( VVr / T7 :A = 24. 56 hc + 1- sinAsinA R2( 4), 9 Vr T1H = PmaxA ( 5) Vr T(5)9 ,M( f /, IcR( T9 H Xh TA = 24. 56h2c39H 01nm2bm2 / k X k1 1“Fig.2 Relativeinden
7、tationhardnessversus depthcurveswithdifferentradiuses of thetipm2 Vn, Ri kY 1 v, 0 f /Y Ab hc ,: , Yy (a) hh (b) khhm3 ( M q 1“Fig.3 Relativecontactareaversus impress depth(a) comparisonof theideal Berkovichindenterwithnonidealindentergeometry (b) comparisonofthetestingindenterwithnonidealindenterge
8、ometry(F 4), 20 g # L- 1 ( 4) , 2 mg# L- 1K(4), 50 mg # L- 1 E=,C,.F4 qYJ. , 2004, 20(3): 327- 330.6 , .4 A ?# 0 K ?YJ. 8, 2004, 20(5): 57- 59.7 f, ? , 2,r.:, 1992.3 f ./ , k/ # M.:, 2005.4 f .Y , kTy J. L , 2004,19(4): 437- 443.5 . L E#M15 D.:S S , 2003.6 ( , O,. MSJ. _- s, 1998, 34(5): 23- 25.7 , ,k,. , N(g SZEJ. , 2005(9): 645- 652.8 ,-. E , / J.S, 2005, 16(22): 2052- 2055.9 UY.YA k+15 J. ,1997(6): 39- 41.10 珣, 2.AGiC# J. ZYv, 1998, 32(2): 27- 31.11 ( +,1 , . I nh w qM0sJ. , 2004, 36(6): 680- 687.#73#Cm,:F4 - ?Y
