4.7 Article

Investigation of softening induced indentation size effect in Nanoglass and Metallic glasss

期刊

JOURNAL OF NON-CRYSTALLINE SOLIDS
卷 577, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2021.121316

关键词

Nanoindentation experiments; Finite element analysis; Nanoglass; Metallic glass; Indentation size effect

资金

  1. Science and Engineering Research Board (Government of India) [SRG/2019/000034]
  2. DFG [SPP 1594, HA1344/30-1, HA1344/38-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, binary Cu60Zr40 nanoglasses and melt spun ribbons were synthesized and investigated through bonded interface and nanoindentation experiments. The results showed differences in shear band morphology and density between the two materials, and both exhibited an indentation size effect.
In this work, binary Cu60Zr40 nanoglasses (NGs) and melt spun ribbons (MGs) are synthesized by using magnetron sputtering in an inert gas condensation (IGC) system and standard melt-spinning, respectively. The bonded interface experiments through micro-indentation, and nanoindentation experiments at different peak loads are conducted on both glasses. In addition, complementary finite element (FE) simulations are performed using finite strain viscoplastic constitutive theory for amorphous metals. The bonded interface experiments reveal smooth and almost semi-circular shaped shear bands in MG, while the formation of wavy shear bands is observed in NG. Further, the primary shear band densities in the MG is higher than that in NG, while the plastic zone size below the indenter is larger in the latter than the former. Furthermore, nanoindentation experiments show that the hardness in NGs as well as MGs decreases with increase in indentation depth signifying both alloys exhibiting the indentation size effect (ISE). However, the ISE is found to be more pronounced in MGs than NGs. The FE simulations show that the less pronounced ISE in NGs is due to the slower softening primarily because of higher friction coefficient, mu in them.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据