Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:16:32.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bending Response of a 100nm Thick Free Standing Aluminum Cantilever Beam

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

M. Taher ,
A. Saif  and
Aman Haque
M. Taher
Affiliation:
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois1206 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801, [email protected]
A. Saif
Affiliation:
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois1206 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801, [email protected]
Aman Haque
Affiliation:
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois1206 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

A micro instrument is developed to apply force on free standing cantilever samples with suborm thickness. The objective is to study the effect of small thickness on the strength of materials when subjected to bending. The instrument consists of a MEMS actuator, 2mm × 3mm in size, and 20μm deep. It is employed to study an annealed Al cantilever sample, 110nm thick, 2μm wide and 15μm long, fabricated by evaporation. The sample yields at 841M Pa during the first cycle of loading. It is then unloaded and reloaded, when yielding occurs at 1200M Pa. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported experiment on free standing submicron metal film subjected to bending.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 594: Symposium V – Thin Films - Stresses & Mechanical Properties VIII , 1999 , 207
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2000

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] Artz, E.. Size effects in materials due to microstructural and dimensional constraints. Acta mater., 46(16):5611–5626, 1998.Google Scholar
[2] Wyrzykowsky, J. W. and Grabski, M. W.. The hall-petch relation in aluminum and its dependence on the grain boundary structure. Philosophical Magazine A, 53(4):505–520, 1986.Google Scholar
[3] Nix, W. D.. Mechanical properties of thin films. Met. Trans. A, 20(A):2217–2245, 1989.Google Scholar
[4] Fleck, N. A., Muller, G. M., Ashby, M. F., and Hutchinson, J. W.. Acta metall. mater, 40, No. 2:475–487, 1994.Google Scholar
[5] Hall, E. O.. Proc. phys. Soc., Lond., B(64):747, 1951.Google Scholar
[6] Petch, N. J.. J. Iron Steel Inst., 174:25, 1953.Google Scholar
[7] Aifantis, E. C.. On the role of gradients in the localization of deformation and fracture. Int. J. Engng. Sci., 30(10):1279–1299, 1992.Google Scholar
[8] Gao, H., Huang, Y., Nix, W. D., and Hutchinson, J. W.. Mechanism-based strain gradient plasticity. i. theory. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 47(6):1239–63, 1999.Google Scholar
[9] Stolken, J. S. and Evans, A. G.. A microbend test method for measuring the plasticity length scale. Acta Materialia, 46(14):5109–15, 1998.Google Scholar
[10] Nix, W. D. and Gao, H.. Indentation size effects in crystalline materials: a law for strain gradient plasticity. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 46:411–425, 1998.Google Scholar
[11] Tang, W. C., Nguyen, T. H., and Howe, R. T.. Laterally driven polysilicon resonant microstructures. Sensors and Actuators, A, 20:25–32, 1989.Google Scholar
[12] Shaw, K. A., Zhang, Z. L., and MacDonald, N. C.. Scream-i: A single mask, single crystal silicon, reactive etching process for microelectromechanical structures. Sensors and Actuators, A, 40:63–70, 1994.Google Scholar
[13] Saif, M. T. A. and MacDonald, N. C.. Measurement of forces and spring constants of micro instruments. Review of Scientific Instruments, 69 (3):1410–1422, 1998.Google Scholar