Sharp and Blunt Contact

A loading contact of hard surfaces, for example, by static or dynamic impingement of bodies, can lead to cracking if the stresses exceed critical values. Such damage typically occurs in one of two modes (i) local area loading or blunt contact and point loading or sharp contact. ... 

The systems approach seeks to identify situations or factors likely to contribute to human error. James Reason s analysis of industrial accidents revealed that catastrophic safety failures almost never result from isolated errors conunitted by individuals. Most incidents result from smaller and multiple errors in components and environments with underlying system flaws. Reason s Swiss Cheese Model describes this phenomenon. Errors made by individuals can result in disastrous consequences due to flawed systans that are represented by the holes in the cheese. Reason believed human error would happen in complex systems. Striving for perfection or punishing individuals who make errors does not appreciably improve safety. A systems approach stresses efforts to catch or anticipate human errors before they occur. Reason used the terms active errors and latent errors to distinguish individual errors from system errors. Active errors almost always involve frontline personnel. They occur at the point of contact between a human and some element of a larger system. Latent errors occur due to failures of the organization or designs that allow inevitable active errors to cause harm. The terms sharp end and blunt end correspond to active error and latent error. The systems approach provides a framework for analysis of errors and efforts to improve safety. 

Experimental tools have been developed using a spherical indenter to produce blunt contact while sharp contact is produced by conical or pyramidal tips as reviewed below. Also, scratch testing allows production of a lateral movement during the contact and hence a frictional force. These testing modes allow to approach real contact conditions. 

Lawn et al. (1975, 1978), and Lawn and Marshall (1978) distinguish two types of indenter whose action on the tested surface differs significantly (1) a blunt indenter (e.g., a hard ball) distinguished by an ideal elastic contact, so that the crack initiation is controlled by previously present defects (usually on the sample surface), and (2) a sharp indenter (e.g., a cone or pyramid) distinguished by partially plastic contact, so that the original defects start to grow as the result of the indentation process itself. In practice, the contact situations can therefore be seen as intermediate between the two cases. Within this area all typical indenters used for hardness measurement are contained. 

Note, that the surface and deformation forces are of the same order of magnitude. Therefore, surface forces should be as small as possible to minimise damaging and indentation of soft polymer samples. For example, sharp probes have a lower capillary attraction and adhesion forces, and therefore enable more gentle probing of a soft polymer than a blunt tip. A sharp tip can also be moved in and out of the contamination layer more readily than a blunt tip. This is particularly important for non-contact intermittent contact imaging described in Sect. 2.2.1. 

Figure 12.5 Contact damage (cracks) in the surface of ceramics, (a, b) Cracks caused by a blunt and (c, d) cracks caused by a sharp indenter. (a) Hertzian ring crack in silicon carbide (b) Crack caused in operation by the...

The solution for an elastic contact was given by Hertz (1881) and Sneddon (1965) (Chapter 8) for a blunt and sharp indenter respectively. The solutions can be written in the general form (Chapter 8 we suppose the indenter is much more rigid than the specimen)... 

---