Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T18:00:22.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhanced Mechanical Hardness in Compositionally Modulated Fe/Pt and Fe/Cr Epitaxial Thin Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

B. J. Daniels ,
W. D. Nix  and
B. M. Clemens
B. J. Daniels
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 943052205
W. D. Nix
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 943052205
B. M. Clemens
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 943052205
Get access

Abstract

The hardnesses and elastic moduli of sputter-deposited Fe/Pt and Fe/Cr multilayers grown on MgO(001) are evaluated as a function of composition wavelength, Λ. Structural determination by x-ray diffraction showed these films to be oriented in the plane as well as out of the plane. The mechanical behavior of these films was evaluated by nanoindentation. The combination of nanoindentation and x-ray diffraction is an attempt to determine the structural underpinnings of the mechanical behavior of these metal multilayer systems. For both systems there is no observed enhancement in the elastic modulus (the so-called supermodulus effect) across a wide range of bilayer spacings. Nanoindentation results show that for Fe/Pt multilayers, the hardness is enhanced over that expected from a simple rule of mixtures by a factor of approximately 2.5, with a maximum enhancement of 2.8 times this value at a wavelength of 25 Å. This enhancement in hardness occurs for bilayer spacings from 20 Å to 100 Å and is not a strong function of Λ over this range. Results for Fe/Cr multilayers show a hardness enhancement over a similar wavelength range of approximately two times the rule of mixtures value, with a maximum enhancement of 2.2 times this value at a wavelength of 40 Å. The larger hardness enhancement in the Fe/Pt system may be due to the structural barrier (FCC/BCC) to dislocation motion between the two materials. The dominant mechanism responsible for the hardness enhancement in Fe/Pt and Fe/Cr multilayers is not yet known, however three models for dislocation interactions which could account for the hardness enhancement in these multilayers are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 343: Symposium H – Polycrystalline Thin Films - Structure, Texture, Properties and Applications , 1994 , 549
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Yang, W.M.C., Tsakalakos, T., and Hilliard, J.E.. J. Appl. Phys., 48:876, 1977.Google Scholar
2. Henein, G.E. and Hilliard, J.E.. J. Appl. Phys., 54:728, 1983.Google Scholar
3. Tsakalakos, T. and Hilliard, J.E.. J. Appl. Phys., 54:734, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Small, M.K., Daniels, B.J., Clemens, B.M., and Nix, W.D.. J. Mater. Res., 9:25, 1994.Google Scholar
5. Baker, S.P., Small, M.K., Vlassak, J.J., Daniels, B.J., and Nix, W.D.. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute: “Mechanical Properties and Deformation Behavior of Materials Having Ultra-Fine Microstructures. ” Praia do Porto Novo, Portugal, June 29 – July 10, 1992.Google Scholar
6. Jankowski, A.F.. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 126:185, 1993.Google Scholar
7. Foecke, T. and Lashmore, D.S.. Script. Met. et Mat, 27:651, 1992.Google Scholar
8. Nutt, S.R., Green, K.A., Baker, S.P., Nix, W.D., and Jankowski, A.F. in Thin Films: Stresses and Mechanical Properties Symposium. Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 130, Pittsburgh, PA, 1989.Google Scholar
9. Doerner, M.F.. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University, 1987.Google Scholar
10. Etienne, P., Massies, J., Lequien, S., Cabanel, R., and Petroff, F.. J. Crystal Growth, 111:1003, 1991.Google Scholar
11. Lairson, B.M., Visokay, M.R., Sinclair, R., and Clemens, B.M.. Appl. Phys. Lett., 61:1390, 1992.Google Scholar
12. Doerner, M.F. and Nix, W.D.. J. Mater. Res., 1:601, 1986.Google Scholar
13. Baker, S.P.. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University, 1993.Google Scholar
14. Visokay, M.R., Lairson, B.M., Clemens, B.M., and Sinclair, R.. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 126:136, 1993.Google Scholar
15. Lairson, B.M., Visokay, M.R., Sinclair, R., and Clemens, B.M.. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 126:577, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Koehler, J.S.. Phys. Rev. B, 2:547, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Pacheco, E.S. and Mura, T.. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 17:163, 1969.Google Scholar