A critical examination of the Berkovich vs. conical indentation based on 3D finite element calculation

Abstract

ABSTRACTMuch of our understanding of the elastic-plastic contact mechanics needed to interpret nanoindentation data comes from two-dimensional, axisymmetric finite element simulations of conical indentation. In many instances, conical results adequately describe real experimental results obtained with the Berkovich triangular pyramidal indenter, particularly if the angle of the cone is chosen to give the same area-to-depth ratio as the pyramid. For example, conical finite element simulations with a cone angle of 70.3° have been found to accurately simulate experimental load-displacement curves obtained with the Berkovich indenter. There are instances, however, where conical simulations fail to capture important behavior. Here, 3D finite element simulations of Berkovich indentation of fused silica are compared to similar simulations with a 70.3° cone. It is shown that a potentially significant difference between the two indenters exists for the contact areas and contact stiffnesses. Implications for the interpretation of nanoindentation data are discussed.