2006•The Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaRequires access

Comparison of atomic force acoustic microscopy and dynamic nanoindentation methods for compliant polymer systems

Matthew Stagemeyer, Joseph A. Turner, Mark R. VanLandingham

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Nanomechanical characterization of soft materials such as polymers and polymer composites represents a unique and challenging research topic of current interest. In this presentation, two characterization methods are compared directly using a set of model PDMS polymer systems. Experiments were conducted using both nanoindentation and atomic force acoustic microscopy (AFAM) to determine the dynamic mechanical properties. The experiments were conducted to determine reduced elastic modulus E* via AFAM measurement and storage modulus E via nanoindentation. The AFAM analysis was done using both a Hertzian contact model and a flat punch model. While the two methods showed marginal agreement, the resulting AFAM moduli were dependent on the model used in the analysis. Further investigation is needed to improve the accuracy of these measurements. In addition, further modeling is needed to improve the understanding of the tip-sample interaction in such systems. The results are anticipated to lead to the development of improved characterization methods for compliant materials. [Work supported by ARL.]

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Nanomechanical characterization of soft materials such as polymers and polymer composites represents a unique and challenging research topic of current interest. In this presentation, two characterization methods are compared directly using a set of model PDMS polymer systems. Experiments were conducted using both nanoindentation and atomic force acoustic microscopy (AFAM) to determine the dynamic mechanical properties. The experiments were conducted to determine reduced elastic modulus E* via AFAM measurement and storage modulus E via nanoindentation. The AFAM analysis was done using both a Hertzian contact model and a flat punch model. While the two methods showed marginal agreement, the resulting AFAM moduli were dependent on the model used in the analysis. Further investigation is needed to improve the accuracy of these measurements. In addition, further modeling is needed to improve the understanding of the tip-sample interaction in such systems. The results are anticipated to lead to the development of improved characterization methods for compliant materials. [Work supported by ARL.]

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Nanomechanical characterization of soft materials such as polymers and polymer composites represents a unique and challenging research topic of current interest. In this presentation, two characterization methods are compared directly using a set of model PDMS polymer systems. Experiments were conducted using both nanoindentation and atomic force acoustic microscopy (AFAM) to determine the dynamic mechanical properties. The experiments were conducted to determine reduced elastic modulus E* via AFAM measurement and storage modulus E via nanoindentation. The AFAM analysis was done using both a Hertzian contact model and a flat punch model. While the two methods showed marginal agreement, the resulting AFAM moduli were dependent on the model used in the analysis. Further investigation is needed to improve the accuracy of these measurements. In addition, further modeling is needed to improve the understanding of the tip-sample interaction in such systems. The results are anticipated to lead to the development of improved characterization methods for compliant materials. [Work supported by ARL.]

Key concepts: Nanoindentation, Materials science, Characterization (materials science), Atomic force acoustic microscopy, Elastic modulus, Composite material, Modulus, Polymer

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of atomic force acoustic microscopy and dynamic nanoindentation methods for compliant polymer systems — Research Paper | ScholarLens