2

Fracture Toughness Determinations by

Means of Indentation Fracture
Enrique Rocha-Rangel

Universidad Politcnica de Victoria
Mxico
1. Introduction
The assessment of fracture toughness (K
IC
) on fragile materials such as ceramics or
composites through conventional methods can be arduous. Recently, an alternative route
referred to as the Indentation Fracture technique has been widely accepted with this
purpose and extensively reported in literature (Weisbrod & Rittel, 2000; Plaza, 2003; Evans
& Charles, 1976; Niihara et al., 1982). Different authors have derived math equations series
as to fine tune and match with K
IC
determination; those equations are based in the lineal
mechanical fracture theory (Wang, 1996). The indentation fracture method and its
application procedure are described in this chapter, whereas typical problems involved in
the test are shown. Al
2
O
3
-based composites with different reinforced metals fabricated by
both; liquid and solid pressureless sintering of an intensive mechanical mixture of powders
were used as studied materials.
Ceramic materials have properties of great interest for various structural applications,
specifically those that take advantage of their high hardness, chemical and thermal stability
in addition to their high stiffness. However, their great fragility has severely limited their
applications, although they have developed ceramic with reinforcement materials precisely
to increase the toughness of the same (Miranda et al., 2006; Konopka & Szafran, 2006; Marci
& Katarzyna, 2007; Travirskya et al., 2003; Sglavo, 1997). One of the macroscopic properties
that characterize the fragility of a ceramic is the fracture toughness (K
IC
). The fracture
toughness describes the ease with which propagates a crack or defect in a material. This
property can be assessed through various methods such as: Analytical solution, solution by
numerical methods (finite element, boundary integral, etc.). Experimental methods such as:
complianza, fotoelasticity, strain gauge, etc. and indirect methods such as: propagation of
fatigue cracks, indentation, fractography, etc. The choice of method for determining the
fracture toughness depends on the availability of time, resources and level of precision
required for the application. In practice, measurements of K
IC
require certain microstructural
conditions on the material to allow propagation of cracks through it in a consistent manner.
The strength of materials is governed by the known theory of Griffith, which relates the
strength (S) with the size of the defect or crack (c) by S = YK
IC
/c
1/2
. This expression suggests
the need to reduce the grain size and processing defects in the final microstructure to
optimize the mechanical performance. Moreover, with increasing K
IC
, resistance becomes
less dependent on the size of the defect, thereby producing a more tolerant material to
cracking. Due to high elastic modulus and low values of K
IC
in brittle materials, achieving in
them a stable crack growth is complicated and sometimes it is necessary sophisticated
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

22
measurement equipments and complex sample geometries (Wessel, 2004). The problem
with applying these methods to evaluate K
IC
is that required laborious procedures and only
get one result by sample, being necessary multiple measurements to obtain reliable
statistical results. In this sense many simple methods have been proposed to avoid these
difficulties. One particularly attractive procedure due to its simplicity for routine
evaluations of engineering materials is the indentation fracture (IF) method.
Although the IF method can only measure approaches of the values of K
IC
, is a convenient
technique for evaluation of many brittle engineering materials. This technique is based on
normalized standards hardness tests (ASTM E1820 - 09e1 Standard Test Method for
Measurement of Fracture Toughness, 2008 and ASTM C 1327-99, Standard Test Method for
Fracture Toughness at Room Temperature of Advanced Ceramics, 1999. Assuming the
presence of a preexisting, sharp, fatigue crack, the material fracture toughness values
identified by this test method characterize its resistance to: (1) fracture of a stationary crack,
(2) fracture after some stable tearing, (3) stable tearing onset, and (4) sustained stable
tearing. This test method is particularly useful when the material response cannot be
anticipated before the test, making reliable they obtained result.
These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for structural flaw tolerance
assessment. Awareness of differences that may exist between laboratory test and field
conditions is required to make proper flaw tolerance assessment.
The test is relatively simple to implement and requires only a standard micro hardness
tester. A small piece of material with a stress free surface and cracks is enough as test
sample. The method, however, is not suitable for materials with values of K
IC
, below 1
MPam
1/2
, significant ductility, large grain size and heterogeneous microstructures.
2. Antecedents
By the mid-60 began to apply empirically the concept of fracture mechanics to ceramic. The
development of science has run parallel to the indentation techniques which helped to
determine the resistance to penetration of the indenter in ceramics systematically. However,
the most important development was the discovery of the transformation of the zirconia
and the consequent increase in fracture toughness. From there they spent the previous
design of the material and systematic study on the basis of the manufacture,
characterization, testing and modeling. Another, important advance was the discovery that
the addition of second phase substances such as fibers and spheroids particles improved
mechanical properties such as fracture toughness (Konopka & Szafran, 2006; Travirskya et
al., 2003; Bosch, 1990; Lieberthal & Kaplan; 2001). Finally, it started working with cermets, it
means ceramic composites with second phase dispersed particles produced by particles
processing or made directly by oxidation of metal.
However, progress in understanding the mechanisms of increasing fracture toughness has
been slow for various reasons as the difference between the methods of measuring it, which
raises questions about its usefulness. On the other hand, the most reliable methods of
measurement tests require large numbers of samples which is not easy and possible in all
ceramics.
2.1 Fracture definition
The fracture is the separation of a material under stress action. The fracture occurs by crack
initiation and propagation (Figure 1). In this case the fault occurs with a small plastic
deformation. The most important atomic mechanism is the breaking of atomic bonds due to
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

23
the application of static loads. Although, theoretically the fracture can be caused by shearing
forces, the majority of cases correspond to the application of normal, tension or bending
stress.


Fig. 1. Open crack and deformation of a body that is under tensile forces.
The normal stress is the most effective in breaking atomic bonds. The fracture can be ductile
or brittle and involves a small or large consumption of energy, respectively (Figure 2). The
comparison between both types of fracture shows always a sudden collapse in brittle
fracture due to low energy absorption, originating from external stresses.


Fig. 2. Brittle vs. Ductile fracture (a) Very ductile, soft metals (e.g. Pb, Au) at room
temperature, other metals, polymers, glasses at high temperature. (b) Moderately ductile
fracture, typical metals (c) Brittle fracture, cold metals and ceramics.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

24
2.2 Fracture and energy balance
It is generally conventionally considered that Griffith (1920) with his work: The
phenomena of rupture and flow in solids was the first who introduced a scientific
approach on the fracture in solids. The theory of linear elastic fracture mechanics began to
be developed at that time. The Griffith fracture mechanics allowed to obtain a powerful
criterion to predict crack propagation demonstrating to be generalizable to many types of
materials and still remain valid.
Consider an infinite plate of unit thickness with a crack of length 2c is subjected to a tensile
stress as shown in Figure 3.


Fig. 3. Infinite plate of unit thickness with a crack of length 2c under tensile stress.
Griffith observed experimentally that small imperfections had a destructive influence on the
materials much more than large and involved that in an energy balance not only care about
the potential energy of external forces (W) and the stored elastic energy (UO), but another
had not previously considered: the surface energy (US).
The surface energy (US) is needed to create new surfaces, incorporating work. For example,
the blow and grow the surface of a soap bubble is required to make a job.
Correlated energies displayed are:
U - Total system energy
UO - Energy elastic plate with no cracks with applied forces (constant)
EU - elastic energy introduced to take place the opening of the crack
W - Work of external forces on the body
US - Energy associated with the "resistance" that opposes the material to the creation of new
surfaces
Where:

0 E s
U U U W U = + + (1)
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

25
The parameters W and EU are associated with each other because they both promote the
formation and propagation of the crack, while US represents the "resistance" that the
material opposes to the creation of new surfaces, such as those generated by cracks.
Inglis proposed a solution that Griffith retums by the assumption that there is an atomic
break caused by the crack, which is expected in brittle materials, such as ceramic. In a
harmonic oscillator model (a
o
is the atomic separation), once the springs have collapsed due
to high normal stress the crack propagates in a perpendicular plane as shown in Figure 4.


Fig. 4. Atomic break caused by the crack. a
o
is the atomic separation, once the springs have
collapsed due to high normal stress the crack propagates in a perpendicular plane.
Griffith's equation states:

2 2
e
c
U W
E
to
= (2)
If it is consider this "elastic capacity" of material per unit area (dA) of the cracks generated, it
can be defined a magnitude G.

( ) ( )
2
E E
d U W d U W
G
dA dc

= = (3)
Where it is suppose a unitary depth of the crack and a length dc. The number 2 is because
there are two surfaces created by crack.
The term "G" means the energy supplied per unit area as the elastic capacity of the body to
create new surfaces (those of the cracks). It requires a continuous supply of stored elastic
energy in the body to continue the propagation of a crack once initiated. From body parts
with smaller loads comes the energy supply, although the main contribution is from the
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

26
stress concentration areas that cause local increase of the stress. Until several years ago, G
was the parameter used to measure the "toughness" and then was replaced by K, the
"intensity of stress". G may be considered (dimensionally) as a force (supplied by the body)
per unit length of the crack, or force of crack propagation. Applying the equations (2) and
(3) we have:

2
c
G
E
to
= (4)
Where:
o - Tensile or bending stress of the material.
c - Semiaxis of the crack (assumed elliptical) in the direction perpendicular to the stress
E Elasticity modulus
Inglis assumed that the difference between the elastic energy stored in the body and
dissipated by the crack plus the external work exerted on the body by the applied normal
stress is proportional to the elastic energy contained in a circle of radius c (2a) as can be seen
in Figure 5.


Fig. 5. Applied normal stress is proportional to the elastic energy contained in a circle of
radius c (2a).
2.3 Cracking modes and the concept of fracture toughness (K
IC
)
The stress-intensity Factor (K) is a quantitative parameter of fracture toughness determining
a maximum value of stress which may be applied to a specimen containing a crack of a
certain length.
Depending on the direction of the specimen loading and the specimen thickness, three types
of stress-intensity factors are used: K
IC
K
IIC
K
IIIC
.
All the stress fields near cracks can be deduced from the three load shapes that cause the
formation of three types of cracks, called "ways of cracking". As shown in Figure 6, the
mode I is the crack opening by traction. The II is sliding on a plane and the third involves a
lateral movement or "tearing" of the material.
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

27

Fig. 6. Fracture modes.
The fracture toughness (K
IC
) is a "threshold property so that (theoretically) above or below
face value there is or not crack propagation, respectively. Thus, from the standpoint of
stress, this is the "stimulus" and the crack is the response to stimulation. The fracture
toughness (or, ductility) enables an adequate redistribution of effort, as it is expected that
local efforts have higher than average, and if local plastic flow would be possible for another
part of the structure without stress bear so great, absorb the load. Hence, the importance in
materials technology for finds procedures to increase K
IC
. The fracture toughness depends
on the elastic energy dissipated (Wang, 1996). Therefore, if the material has a high ability to
dissipate elastic energy during crack propagation, without a catastrophic failure, we can say
that the material has high fracture toughness.
Since the critical value of K is K
IC
in the crack propagation mode I, one can expect a
parabolic proportionality of K in relation to E, so that K increases with E, giving the
equation 5. In fact in ceramics there is an erratic behavior and in some cases there was no
simultaneous increase in K
IC
and E. This may be due to the presence of other mechanisms
such as microplasticity and the second phase substances (Wessel, 2004).
2
IC s
K E = (5)
The crack propagation occurs when G (ec.4) reaches a critical value Gc, which is equal to
dUS/dA that contains the term dissipation of energy by the formation of new surfaces in a
material and is the "resistance" or opposition to it. Also known as R. Therefore, the crack
propagation occurs when G becomes R, is to mean when is achieved and exceed a critical
value. Obtaining a metastable equilibrium.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

28

c
G R = (6)
Assuming that o
c
and C
c
are the stress and the half of crack length at the critical point
respectively, we obtain:

2 2
c c
c
R
E
to
= (7)
In this case the crack propagates, but the increase in length is unstable and the total energy
U [equation (1)] decreases. In contrast, if a stress is applied o 1 <o cr then

2
1 cr
c
G
E
to
= (8)
The crack does not propagate because
0
dU
dc
< (9)
2.4 Use of hardness to characterize toughness and fragility (Correlations)
A systematic exposition of the expose above, allows to realize a conceptual connection with
the measurement of another properties from hardness (H). It is possible to correlate the
measurement of the hardness of the ceramic samples with different microstructural
characteristics and properties such as fracture toughness, the extent of the crack and the
elastic modulus. A possible sequence
1. The stress field is formed from:
a. The applied load
b. The stress field in the volume of the sample around the indented area that responds
to conditions of elasticity (dependent of Young's modulus, E) or plastic flow of
material (microplasticity) around the indented area. Since there are stresses when
the load is removed, they are called residuals.
2. The maximum stress due to the application of the load in the volume under the area of
indentation occurs at the interface between the elastic and plastic zone, which in turn
creates microcracks that depend on the population of imperfections surface and
nucleation mechanisms of the sliding planes of the material.
3. On the surface the indenter causes compression and not tension and acts not opposing
to residual stresses.
4. When is retired the indenter the compression on the surface decreases to zero.
5. Residual stresses (which have no opposition and are of the order Hv/20) acting against
the surface and cause radial cracks on the surface, visible under the microscope on slick
surfaces. These are radial cracks.
6. The radial and meridional cracks combine to form semi-elliptical crack surface and their
diameter is about twice the depth of the crack.
7. Radial cracks fully developed are in mechanical equilibrium and their dimensions are
determined from the K
IC
. Thus this let to measure the K
IC
.
Lawn and other researchers (Marshall & Lawn, 1986) formulated the view that residual
stresses do not contribute to a specific factor to the fracture toughness but instead affect the
length 2c of the cracks (see Figure 7). The basic equations that determine this parameter and
hardness are:
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

29

2 V
P
H
a
=
o
(10)

2 c E
P
K
c
=
|
(11)
Where:
, - constants
a - half length of the indentation diagonal
c - half length of the crack generated by indentation
E elasticity modulus
P - applied load in the sample for hardness testing
K
C
- Fracture Toughness



Fig. 7. Cracking around hardness indentation.
depends on the geometry of the indenter and in the case of those are Vickers type its value
is 2. On the other hand is a constant but with more complex geometry that considers the
effects of interaction between the free surface of the specimen and the cracks generated
configurations. Its value is obtained experimentally.
When c >> a, the cracks centers can be considered at the point of the footprint of the apex of
the indenter and the K
r
contribution of residual stress to K
C
is expressed as:

,2
T
Z
P
K
C

|
= (12)

In this equation r is a constant proportional to
V
E
H
. Since the ceramic with weak bonds
such as: ionic or ionic-covalent, have lower values of E compared to those with covalent
bonds, present also less hardness and less residual stresses too. The fracture toughness is
also lower, as seen in all equations use "general" to be presented below.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

30
When mechanical equilibrium is reached and no further propagation of cracks during the
loading or after it was removed then:

1 1
T
C r E E
P E P
K K a
C H C

|
= = = (13)
Applying equation (10):

2
2
1 1
0.032
C r E E
H aa
E E H a
K a
H C H C

= =

(14)
Where
r
= 0.016 0.004 y = 2 as was specified earlier.
All formulas are referring to this result, although some minor changes were made in the
coefficient or in the exponent to adjust the results to the experimental values. The original
formula is of Lawn.

1
1,5
2
0, 028 ( )
C
V
E c
K HVa
H a

= (Lawn)(15)
Another well-known formula is the (Evans and Charles, 1976).
K
IC
= 0.16 (c/a)
-1.5
(Ha
1/2
) (Evans y Charles)(16)
(Niihara, 1982) established that:

0,4
1,5
0,5
0, 067
C V
V
E c
K H
H a

| |
| |
= o
|
|
\
\
(Niiihara) (17)
(Antis et al., 1981) did not replace the value of P as a function of HV and found this equation
that is virtually the same of Lawn:

0,5
1,5
0, 016
c
V
E P
K
H c
| |
=
|
\
(Antis)(18)
A final equation is that of Bhat, 2006)

0,36
5 0,4 0,6 0,7
1, 59 10
IC
c
K x E P a
a

| |
=
|
\
(Bhat)(19)
In the equation of Bhat elasticity modulus E is expressed in Pa, the load P in grams and both
a and c in microns. The result is given in MPam
0.5
and it is assumed c/a > 3.
3. The indentation fracture (IF) method
As has be mentioned earlier the indentation fracture method, is derived from the
experimental procedure commonly followed in hardness tests, it consists in relate the
lengths of the cracks shown in Figure 8, growing in the corners of the Vickers indentation
when a load (P) is applied, with the toughness of the material.
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

31


Fig. 8. Vickers indentation mark.
To calculate K
IC
by this method they have developed a number of equations, some of which
require the values of Young and Poisson modulus for their use in addition to the hardness
test results. The equations are divided into two groups: empirical and experimental. One of
the most used among the empirical group is the equation (16) proposed by Evans. While
equation (17) proposed by Niihara is one of the most experimental frequently used
K
IC
= 0.16 (c/a)
-1.5
(Ha
1/2
) (Evans y Charles) (16)

0,4
1,5
0,5
0, 067
C V
V
E c
K H
H a

| |
| |
= o
|
|
\
\
(Niihara) (17)
Also:
H = 1.8P/a
2
(20)
Where:
K
IC
= Fracture toughness (MPam
1/2
)
H = Vickers hardness (MPa)
E = Young modulus (MPa)
P = Test load in Vickers hardener (MPa)
c = Average length of the cracks obtained in the tips of the Vickers marks (microns)
a = Half average length of the diagonal of the Vickers marks (microns)
3.1 Applications of the IF method
With the idea to observe the application of the IF method investigations about the
production of Al
2
O
3
-based composites with different reinforcement metals and
intermetallics have been carried out. The synthesis of composites materials has been made
by means of both; liquid and solid pressureless sintering of an intensive mechanical mixture
of powders.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

32
3.2 Experimental procedure
The starting raw material were powders of Al
2
O
3
, FeO, NiO, TiO
2
and ZrO
2
(99.9 %, 1 m,
Sigma, USA) and powders of aluminum, cobalt, copper, iron, molybdenum, nickel, titanium
and zirconium (99.9 % purity, 1-2 m, Aldrich, USA). For the composites reinforced with
pure metals the amount of powders used was one that allowed obtaining Al
2
O
3
-based

composites with 10 vol. % of the respective metal. For the composites reinforced with
intermetallics, they were used as oxides of the respective metal for the in situ synthesis of
the corresponding intermetallic phase.

The sum of the starting materials; was fitted to the
necessary amounts to form the products indicated in reaction (21) with 10 vol. % of each
intermetallic phase.
Me
x
O
y
+ Al Me
x
Al
y
+ Al
2
O
3
(21)
Where: Me can be any of the next metals; Fe, Ni, Ti or Zr.
The processing and characterization of the composites were as follows: The weighted
powders were put under a process of dry mix-milling at a speed of rotation of 300 rpm for
12 h, with the help of a horizontal mill (Cole Parmer, Labmill) using as milling elements
balls of stabilized ZrO
2
(YSZ), the weight ratio of balls/powders was of 25:1. The powder
mixtures were then fabricated into ten cylindrical samples of each composition with
dimensions of 20 mm in diameter and 3 mm in thickness; this was done by uniaxial pressing
of up to 200 MPa. The pressed samples were sintered in an electrical furnace (Carbolite,
1700) without the application of pressure at 1500 C for 1 h in an inert atmosphere. The
speeds of heating and cooling remained constant and were 10 Kminute
-1
. The
characterization of sintered products was carried out in the following way; the density was
evaluated by the Archimedes method, the hardness was measured with the help of Vickers
indenter, the fracture toughness was determined by the method of fracture by indentation
using the equation of Evans. Reported values are the average of ten measurements. The
microstructures of the composites were observed with the help of a scanning electron
microscope (SEM). The SEM was equipped with energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer
(EDX) with which the phases present in the microstructure could be identified.
3.3 Results and discussion
3.3.1 Microstructure
Figure 9. Shows typical microstructures obtained by SEM of some of the composites
investigated. Here, it can be seen fine and homogeneous microstructures, with the presence
of two phases, on the basis of (EDX) analysis, it is deduced that the gray phase corresponds
to the alumina matrix and the small white and brighter phase corresponds to the metallic
reinforcement added to the ceramic matrix. The metallic phase is localized principally at
intergranular positions. The main metallic particle size is on average 1 m. In general all
microstructures are fine, however the use of Ni, Ti and the corresponding intermetrallics
help to obtain the finest microstructures in the composites. Judging from the trend disclosed
by the Al
2
O
3
/intermetallic composites, it can be noticed that the microstructures have no
cracks or pores, thus suggesting that the in situ formation of the intermetallics did not just
occur, but in addition helped in the diffusion process in order to obtain well consolidated
bodies. Image analysis performed on all the samples studied showed that the average
volume fraction of the metallic phase in the composites was approximately 9.5%.
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

33

(Al2O3) (Al2O3/Al)

(Al2O3/Co) (Al2O3/Cu)

(Al2O3/Ni) (Al2O3/Ti)

(Al2O3/Ni3Al) (Al2O3/Ti3Al)
Fig. 9. Typical microstructures obtained by scanning electron microscopy of some of the
composites investigated here.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

34
The values of density, hardness and fracture toughness evaluated in the composite materials
fabricated here are reported in Table 1. In this table also are reported the corresponding
values for monolithic Al
2
O
3
also processed here.

Reinforced
Metal
relative
(%)
HV
(GPa)
K
IC

(MPam
-1/2
)
Al
2
O
3
94.95 +/- 1.2 20.97 +/- 1.7 3.2 +/- 0.2
Al 89.01 +/- 0.88 18.62 +/- 1.3 4.1 +/- 0.1
Co 96.64 +/- 0.79 18.61 +/- 1.4 4.3 +/- 0.1
Cu 93.32 +/- 0.91 18.90 +/- 1.2 4.4 +/- 0.1
Fe 92.82 +/- 1.10 18.51 +/- 1.5 4.0 +/- 0.1
Mo 89.17 +/- 0.93 19.03 +/- 1.3 4.1 +/- 0.1
Ni 96.35 +/- 0.80 18.11 +/- 1.4 4.7 +/- 0.1
Ti 98.25 +/- 0.83 18.17 +/- 1.5 4.8 +/- 0.1
Zr 92.59 +/- 0.88 19.10 +/- 1.6 4.2 +/- 0.1
Fe
3
Al 95.40 +/- 0.94 18.78 +/- 1.2 5.2 +/- 0.2
Ni
3
Al 98.30 +/- 0.97 16.43 +/- 1.4 6.9 +/- 0.2
Ti
3
Al 98.52 +/- 1.10 16.10 +/- 1.6 7.3 +/- 0.2
Zr
3
Al 98.76 +/- 0.89 18.12 +/- 1.5 7.0 +/- 0.2
Table 1. Values of relative density, hardness and fracture toughness of the different Al
2
O
3
-
based composites fabricated here.
3.3.2 Density
From this table it can be observed that the composite materials reinforced with Al, Cu, Fe,
Mo and Zr display a lower relative density than monolithic Al
2
O
3
, whereas the composite
materials reinforced with the other metals (Co, Ni and Ti) including all the intermetallics
used, show better densification than monolithic Al
2
O
3
. The worst densifications were
obtained in composites with Al and Mo, this may be due to the big differences in densities
and melting points between these two metals in comparison with the corresponding values
of monolithic Al
2
O
3
. This difference provokes poor diffusion during the sintering stage,
leading to heterogeneous microstructures and in consequence bad densification of the
products. For the cases were good densifications were obtained, as well as for the cases
where in situ intermetallics were formed, in addition the reactions allowed some diffusion
mechanisms to be activated during the process helping the densification of the products.
The densification of the reinforced sample with titanium was very good, and it was
equivalent to the densification obtained with the intermetallics. This was due probably to
the close relation between the densities of titanium, the intermetallics and Al
2
O
3
, a situation
than helps atomic movement during the sintering.
3.3.3 Hardness
With respect to the hardness results, from table 1 it can be seen that for all the systems
monolithic Al
2
O
3
is the hardest material. All the composite materials present hardness
values between 18 and 19 GPa that are less than the almost 21 GPa reported for monolithic
Al
2
O
3
. This is logical because a ceramic material has to be harder than the same ceramic
material with the incorporation of ductile phases in its bulk volume.
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

35
3.3.4 Fracture toughness
From Table 1 and Figure 10 it can be observed that in all the composite cases the fracture
toughness of monolithic Al
2
O
3
was improved considerably, principally in composites
reinforced with Ni and Ti and in all composites reinforced with intermetallic phases. The
incorporation of ductile metal particles in the ceramic matrix enhances the fracture
toughness due to plastic deformation of the metallic phase, which forms crack-bridging
ligaments when a crack grows in the material under a tensile stress action. In other words,
the energy absorbed for plastic deformation is unavailable for crack extension. Additionally,
the deformed particles could bridge the faces of the crack wake, thereby exerting closure
stresses, reducing the effect of the stress intensity at the crack tip (Ji & Yeomans, 2002;
Lalande, 2003).
For the case of Al
2
O
3
/Ni system: nickel provides a liquid phase during the sintering stage
that promotes diffusion and therefore densification of the composite On the other hand, Ni
helps to refine the alumina microstructure by pinning its grain boundaries and thereby
restraining the grain growth of alumina.
For the case of the Al
2
O
3
/Ti system: because the densities of titanium and alumina are very
similar, Ti is well dispersed in the alumina matrix, forming a good homogeneous composite
microstructure that promotes diffusion and densification, and as a consequence good
toughening of the final material.
For the case of Al
2
O
3
/intermetallics systems: the use of intermetallics as reinforcement in
Al
2
O
3
gives an appreciable enhancement in the fracture toughness, this is due to the good
ductility, low density and chemical compatibility of intermetallics with alumina. These
factors help to obtain homogeneous microstructures with the formation of interfaces that
allow the activation of different diffusion mechanisms thus improving the final density and
then the mechanisms that improve the fracture toughness of the composites.


Fig. 10. Fracture toughness values measured for all the composites investigated.
Figures 11a and 11b show the fracture surface and the advance of a crack in an Al
2
O
3
/Ti
reinforced composite. The fracture mode in figure 11a corresponds to microvoid coalescence
as suggested by the dimple-like depressions that are typical of ceramic materials. From
figure 11b it can be observed that the sample exhibits a mixed fracture mode, because
metallic particles bridge the surface of the crack in the composite, but at the same time they
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

36
can cause deflection of the crack. So the toughening mechanism in Al
2
O
3
/metal reinforced
composites is due to crack bridging and crack deflection in this type of material. Steinbrech
has reported that the improvement achievable in reinforced composites is governed by the
mechanical properties of the ductile material, ligament diameter, volume fraction of the
components, interfacial properties and the reaction products of the constituents (Steinbrech,
1992). This can explain the differences obtained in the fracture toughness of the materials
investigated here.



(a) (b)
Fig. 11. (a) Fracture surface and (b) advanced of a crack in an Al
2
O
3
/Ti reinforced composite.
4. Conclusions
Al
2
O
3
-based composites reinforced with different metals have been fabricated by both;
liquid and solid pressureless sintering of an intensive mechanical mixture of powders. By
the use of ductile particles in a hard ceramic matrix, significant improvements in fracture
toughness due to plastic deformation of the metallic phase has been obtained. However,
there are metals that enhance the toughness of a ceramic better than others; these are those
metals that have similar densities to alumina, because they help to obtain fine and
homogeneous microstructures after sintering. From the fracture toughness measurements
and microstructural observations, finally it can be commented that the toughening
mechanism in Al
2
O
3
/metal reinforced composites is due to crack bridging and crack
deflection.
Through fabricated composite-materials it was possible to analysis the application of the
indentation fracture (IF) method for the determination in a simple and reliable way the
fracture toughness of those materials. From the obtained results and with the help of
bases given in the literature it can be commented that the main requirements to be met for
samples that will be applied the IF methods for their fracture toughness determination
are:
- Porosity fine and well distributed.
- Homogeneous microstructure.
- Good surface finish, free of residual stresses, pores and cracks.
- Parallel surfaces
www.intechopen.com

Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture

37
5. Acknowledgements
Author would thank to the mixed foundation of promotion to the scientific and
technological investigation from CONACyT-Tamaulipas Government, by the support
offered for the accomplishment of the research work and its diffusion.
6. References
Anstis G. R., Chantikul P., Lawn B. R., and Marshall D. B. (1981). A Critical Evaluation of
Indentation Techniques for Measuring Fracture Toughness: I, Direct Crack
Measurements, Journal of the American Ceramic Society, Vol. 64, No. 9, (September
1981) pp. 533538.
ASTM E1820 - 09e1 Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness. (2008)
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, (2008).
ASTM C 1327-99, Standard Test Method for Fractute Toughness at Room Temperature of
Advanced Ceramics (1999). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, (1999), pp. 14-02.
Bhat S. (2006). Fracture parameters estimation of alloy steel reinforced with maragin steel.
Fracture of Nano and engineering Materials and Structures, Proceedings of the 16
th

European Conference of Fracture, Alexandroupolis Grecce, Edited by Gdoutos E. G.
(July, 2006), pp.
Boch P., Chartier T. and Giry J. P. (1990). Zirconio Toughened Mullite / The Role of Circn
Dissociation, Ceram. Trans., Mullite and Mullite Matrix Composites, edited by Somiya
S., Davies R. F. and Pak J.A. Vol. 6, (1990), pp. 473-494.
Evans A. G. and Charles E. A. (1976). Fracture Toughness Determination by Indentation, J.
Am. Ceram. Soc., Vol. 59, (1976), pp. 371-372.
Griffith A. A. (1921). The Phenomena of Rupture and Flow in Solids, Phil. Trans. R. Soc.
Lond. (January, 1921) pp. 163-198.
Ji Y. and Yeomans J. (2002). Processing and mechanical properties of Al
2
O
3
-5 vol.% Cr
nanocompistes. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., Vol. 22, No. 12 (2002) pp. 1927-1930.
Konopka K. and Szafran M. (2006). Fabrication of Al
2
O
3
-Al composites by infiltration
method and their characteristics. J. Mater. Proc. Technol., Vol. 175, (2006), pp. 266-
270.
Lalande J., Scheppokat S., Jansen R. and Claussen N. (2002). Toughening of
alumina/zirconia ceramic composites with silver particles. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., Vol.
22, No. 13 (2002) pp. 2165-2168.
Lieberthal M. I. and Kaplan K. (2001). Processing and properties of Al
2
O
3
nanocomposites
reinforced with sub-micron Ni and NiAl
2
O
4.
Mater. Sci. Eng., Vol. A302, No. 1
(2001), pp. 83-91.
Marci C. and Katarzyna P. (2007). Processing, microstructure and mechanical properties of
Al
2
O
3
-Cr nanocomposite J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., Vol. 27. No. 2-3, (2007), pp. 1273-1277.
Marshall D. B. and Lawn B. R. (1986). Indentation of Brittle Materials, Microindentation
Techniques in Materials Science and Engineering, ASTM Vol. 889, (1986), pp. 26-46.
Miranda Hernndez J. G., Moreno Guerrero S., Soto Guzmn A. B. and Rocha Rangel E.
(2006). Production and Characterization of Al
2
O
3
-Cu Composite Materials. J. Ceram.
Proc. Res., Vol. 7, No. 4, (2006), pp. 311-315.
www.intechopen.com

Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry

38
Niihara K., Morena R. and Hasselman D. P. H. (1982). Evaluation of K
IC
of Brittle Solids by
The Indentation Method with Low Crack-To-Indentation Ratios, J. Mater. Sci. Lett.,
Vol. 1, (1982), 1, pp. 13-16.
Plaza L. M. (2003). Determination of Uncertaines in Plane Tougness (K
IC
) Testing, Seminario
Sobre la Evaluacin de la Incertidumbre en Ensayos Mecnicos, Universidad de la Rioja,
Espaa, (2003).
Steinbrech R. W. (1992). Toughening mechanisms for ceramics materials. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.
Vol. 10, No. 3 (1992) pp. 131-135.
Sglavo V. M., Marinob F., Zhang B. R. and Gialanella S. (1997). Ni
3
Al intermetallic
compound as second phase in Al
2
O
3
ceramic composites. Mater. Sci. Eng., Vol.
A239-240, (1997), pp. 665-669.
Travirskya N., Gotmanb I. and Claussen N. (2003). Alumina-Ti aluminide interpenetrating
composites: microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater. Lett., Vol. 57, No. 22-
23, (2003), pp. 3422-3424.
Wang C. H. (1996). Introduction to Fracture Mechanics, DSTO Aeronautical and Maritime
Research Laboratory, (July, 1996), pp. 199-207.
Weisbrod G. and Rittel D.

A. (2000). Method for Dynamic Fracture Toughness
Determination Using Short Beams, International Journal of Fracture, Vol. 104, (2000),
pp. 1-5.
Wessel J. K. (2004). The Handbook of Advanced Materials. John Wiley & Sons, USA (2004).
www.intechopen.com
Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in
Medicine and Industry
Edited by Dr. John Cuppoletti
ISBN 978-953-307-351-4
Hard cover, 360 pages
Publisher InTech
Published online 23, August, 2011
Published in print edition August, 2011
InTech Europe
University Campus STeP Ri
Slavka Krautzeka 83/A
51000 Rijeka, Croatia
Phone: +385 (51) 770 447
Fax: +385 (51) 686 166
www.intechopen.com
InTech China
Unit 405, Office Block, Hotel Equatorial Shanghai
No.65, Yan An Road (West), Shanghai, 200040, China
Phone: +86-21-62489820
Fax: +86-21-62489821
This book contains chapters on nanocomposites for engineering hard materials for high performance aircraft,
rocket and automobile use, using laser pulses to form metal coatings on glass and quartz, and also tungsten
carbide-cobalt nanoparticles using high voltage discharges. A major section of this book is largely devoted to
chapters outlining and applying analytic methods needed for studies of nanocomposites. As such, this book will
serve as good resource for such analytic methods.
How to reference
In order to correctly reference this scholarly work, feel free to copy and paste the following:
Enrique Rocha-Rangel (2011). Fracture Toughness Determinations by Means of Indentation Fracture,
Nanocomposites with Unique Properties and Applications in Medicine and Industry, Dr. John Cuppoletti (Ed.),
ISBN: 978-953-307-351-4, InTech, Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/nanocomposites-with-
unique-properties-and-applications-in-medicine-and-industry/fracture-toughness-determinations-by-means-of-
indentation-fracture