1998
DOI: 10.1109/84.661392
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Specimen size effect on tensile strength of surface-micromachined polycrystalline silicon thin films

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
164
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 356 publications
(167 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
2
164
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A smaller specimen shows a higher fracture stress/strain. (9,10) This is due to the decrease in the probability of a fracture source existing in a highly stressed region on a specimen. This is why fracture stress measured by a tensile test is usually lower than that measured by a bending test.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A smaller specimen shows a higher fracture stress/strain. (9,10) This is due to the decrease in the probability of a fracture source existing in a highly stressed region on a specimen. This is why fracture stress measured by a tensile test is usually lower than that measured by a bending test.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The number of interior micro-cracks increases with the volume of the materials. The Weibull distribution probability function is usually used to represent the variation in the fracture strength of brittle materials [18][19][20][21][22][23]. A higher Weibull modulus corresponds to a less scattered fracture strength.…”
Section: Weibull Analysis Of Tensile Strength Of Specimenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Having the higher probability of the existence of a larger flaw, the larger specimen has lower strength (size effect) [18,19], as described by Eq. 4.…”
Section: Weibull Analysis Of Tensile Strength Of Specimenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All the beams tested showed linear elastic behaviour followed by abrupt failure, which is suggestive of brittle fracture. Previously reported numbers of strengths range from 1 to 6 GPa for silicon (Johansson et al 1988;Ericson & Schweitz 1990;Wilson & Beck 1996;Sharpe et al 1997;Sato et al 1998;Tsuchiya et al 1998;Greek et al 1999;Mazza & Dual 1999;Yi et al 2000) and approximately 1 GPa for SiO 2 (Tsuchiya et al 2000) microscale specimens. This clearly indicates that bending strength shows a specimen size dependence.…”
Section: Bending Tests Of Nanostructures Using An Afmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the following, we begin with the stress distribution in smooth nanobeams followed by the effect of surface (110), Bhushan & Venkatesan (1993). b Johansson et al (1988), Ericson & Schweitz (1990), Wilson & Beck (1996), , Sharpe et al (1997), Sato et al (1998), Tsuchiya et al (1998), Greek et al (1999) and Yi et al (2000). c Johansson et al (1989), Ballarini et al (1997), Kahn et al (1999) and Fitzgerald et al (2000).…”
Section: Finite-element Analysis Of Nanostructures With Roughness Andmentioning
confidence: 99%