
© 1999 by CRC Press LLC
Higher hardness values obtained in low-load indentation may arise from the observed pressure-
induced phase transformation during the nanoindentation (Pharr, 1991; Callahan and Morris, 1992).
Additional increase in the hardness at an even lower indentation depth of 2.5 nm reported here may arise
from the contribution by complex chemical films (not from native oxide films) present on the silicon
surface. At small volumes, there is a high probability that indentation would be made into a region that
was initially dislocation free. Furthermore, at small volumes, it is believed that there is an increase in the
stress necessary to operate dislocation sources (Gane and Cox, 1970; Sargent, 1986). These are some of
the plausible explanations for the increase in hardness at smaller volumes.
Nanohardness values of virgin, coated, and treated silicon samples are presented in Table 14.5. Coatings
and treatments improved nanohardness of silicon. We note that dry-oxidized and PECVD oxide films
are harder than wet-oxidized films, as these films may be porous (Bhushan and Venkatesan, 1993c). High
hardness of oxidized films may be responsible for lower wear and scratch resistance (Table 14.5). Hardness
values of virgin and C
+
-implanted Si(111) at various indentation depths (normal loads) are presented
in Figure 14.51. We note that the surface layer of the implanted zone is much harder than that of the
subsurface, and may be brittle leading to higher wear on the surface. Subsurface of the implanted zone
is harder than the virgin silicon, resulting in high wear resistance (data presented earlier, Figure 14.46).
Bhushan et al. (1994c) measured nanohardness of polished thin-film disks at loads of 80, 100, and
140 µN loads, Figure 14.52. Hardness values were 21 GPa (10 nm), 21 GPa (15 nm), and 9 GPa (40 nm);
the depths of indentation are shown in the parenthesis. The hardness value at 80 and 100 µN is much
higher than at 140 µN. This is expected since the indentation depth is only about 15 nm at 100 µN, which
is smaller than the thickness of DLC coating (~20 to 30 nm). The hardness value at lower loads is primarily
the value of the carbon coating. The hardness value at higher loads is primarily the value of the magnetic
film, which is softer than the carbon coating. This result is consistent with the scratch and wear data
discussed previously.
For the case of hardness measurements made on thin-film rigid disk at low loads, the indentation
depth is on the same order as the variation in the surface roughness. For accurate measurements of
indentation size and depth, it is desirable to subtract the original (unindented) profile from the indented
profile. Bhushan et al. (1994b,c, 1995d), and Lu and Bogy (1995) developed an algorithm for this purpose.
Because of hysteresis, a translational shift in the sample plane occurs during the scanning period, resulting
in a shift between images captured before and after indentation. Therefore, the image needs to be shifted
for perfect overlap before subtraction can be performed. For this purpose, a small region on the original
image was selected and the corresponding region in the indented image was found by maximizing the
correlation between the two regions. (Profiles were plane-fitted before subtraction.) Once two regions
were identified, overlapped areas between the two images were determined and the original image was
shifted with the required translational shift and then subtracted from the indented image. An example
of profiles before and after subtraction is shown in Figure 14.53. The indent on the subtracted image can
be measured easily. At a normal load of 140 µN the hardness value of polished, unlubricated magnetic
thin-film rigid disk (σ roughness = 3.3 nm) is 9.0 GPa and the indentation depth is 40 nm.
Figure 14.54a shows the hardness as a function of residual depth for three types of 100-nm-thick
amorphous carbon coatings deposited on silicon by sputtering, ion beam, and cathodic arc processes
(Kulkarni and Bhushan, 1997). Data on uncoated silicon are also included for comparisons. The cathodic
arc carbon coating exhibits highest hardness of about 24.9 GPa, whereas the sputtered and ion beam
carbon coatings exhibit hardness values of 17.2 and 15.2 GPa, respectively. The hardness of Si(100) is
13.2 GPa. High hardness of the cathodic arc carbon coating explains its high wear resistance, reported
earlier. Figure 14.54b shows the elastic modulus as a function of residual depth for various samples. The
cathodic arc coating exhibits the highest elastic modulus. Its elastic modulus decreases with an increasing
residual depth, while the elastic moduli for the other carbon coatings remain almost constant. In general,
hardness and elastic modulus of coatings are strongly influenced by their crystalline structure, stoichi-
ometry, and growth characteristics which depend on the deposition parameters. Mechanical properties
of carbon coatings have been known to change over a wide range with sp
3
–sp
2
bonding ratio and amount