International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijadhadh

Theoretical study on shaft-loaded blister test technique: Synchronous

characterization of surface and interfacial mechanical properties
Junyi Sun a,b,n, Yongsheng Lian a, Zhengliang Li a,b, Xiaoting He a,b, Zhoulian Zheng a,b
a
College of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, PR China
b
Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area (Chongqing University), Ministry of Education, Chongqing 400030, PR China

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, the existing shaft-loaded blister test technique was improved and a theoretical study on
Accepted 8 March 2014 synchronous characterization of mechanical properties of coating thin-film and film/substrate interface
Available online 18 March 2014 was presented. Problems considered include the exact analytical solution to the problem of axisym-
Keywords: metric deformation of a blistering film and the theoretical derivation of expressions to determine
Coating Poisson's ratios, Young's modulus, the work done by the applied external load, the elastic energy stored
Delamination in a blistering film, and energy release rate. Some relative issues such as how to control the blistering
Constitutive behavior film as free as possible from plastic yielding and the influence of changing the loading-shaft radius on
Energy release rate the membrane stress distribution were discussed. Moreover, an experiment was conducted to verify the
Shaft-loaded blister test
presented theoretical work.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction assumed as a prior knowledge. Young's modulus or Poisson's ratio

Coating technology has found increasing application in many
advanced fields. Exact characterization of surface and interfacial
mechanical properties of a film–substrate system is often found to
be necessary [1–5]. Polymer thin films bonded to a solid substrate as
a protective coating, for example, is an indispensable component in
micro-electronic industries. The reliability of an electronic compo-
nent depends thus on the interfacial adhesive strength of the
polymer thin film to solid substrate [6,7]. Many mechanical testing
methodologies have been designed to measure adhesion [8–18].
Usually, a mechanical stress is imposed on the film–substrate couple
until debonding at the film/substrate interface is observed in order to
quantify the adhesive strength. But generally, for those very thin and
flexible films bonded to solid substrates, it is difficult to measure
their adhesion because of their fragility and tendency to rupture.
The determination of interfacial adhesive toughness (energy
release rate G) usually requires advanced knowledge of Young's
modulus (E) and Poisson's ratio (v) of coating films. So, in all the
existing literature, the interface characterization is separated from
the surface characterization. In fact, it is available in a few cases to
simultaneously determine Young's modulus (E) and Poisson's ratio
(v) of coating films [19–21], but usually either E or v is assumed as
a prior knowledge for determining other one. In all known
indentation analyses, for example, Poisson's ratio (v) is always
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 86 0 23 65120898; fax: þ86 0 23 65123511.
E-mail address: sunjunyi@cqu.edu.cn (J. Sun).
of coating films, however, may have difference due to variations in
processing conditions such as temperature, humidity, method of
etching, or the sequence of fabrication procedures. So, to increase
the reliability, Poisson's ratio (v), Young's modulus (E) and energy
release rate (G) should be determined simultaneously by the experi-
mental data from a one-off test. This is the so-called synchronous
characterization of mechanical properties of thin film and film/
substrate interface.
The basic principle of a shaft-loaded blister test is shown in
Fig. 1. A hole of radius d is bored (or chemically etched) through
the rigid substrate of a film–substrate system specimen until it
reaches the film/substrate interface. An external transverse load
F is applied to the thin film via a loading-shaft until it reaches the
maximum load Fm and a stable (no change in size) circular blister
with radius a and height wm is observed. Usually, by measuring a
series of blister height wi and their corresponding external load Fi,
the work UF (done by the external force F to the film/substrate
delamination system) may be determined. Obviously, if the blis-
tering film is always kept in elastic deformation during loading,
the work UF minus the elastic energy Uef (stored in the blistering
film) is exactly the interfacial energy of adhesion released as the
crack along the film/substrate interface extends a distance (a–d),
and the energy release rate G can thus be determined. Here, the
elastic energy Uef needs to be determined by an exact analytical
solution to the constitutive behavior of the blistering film.
Compared with other test techniques such as peel, indentation
and scratch, the blister test technique does not involve the
substrate effect. The conventional peel test has the disadvantages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.03.004
0143-7496/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139 129

Nomenclature Sr dimensionless form of sr

Srm maximum value of Sr
E Young's modulus of elasticity St dimensionless form of st
ν Poisson's ratio Z substituting variable of Sr
π circumference ratio w transversal displacement
a radius of a circular membrane or a blister u radial displacement
b radius of a loading-shaft wm maximum value of w
d radius of the hole through the substrate of a specimen wða þ bÞ=2 transversal displacement w at r ¼ ða þ bÞ=2
h thickness of films W dimensionless form of w
r radial coordinate Wm dimensionless form of wm
x dimensionless form of r θ slope angle (see Fig. 4)
F external transverse load α ratio (α ¼ b=a)
Fm maximum value of F B; B; k; R undetermined integration constants (B ¼  B)
P dimensionless form of F c; φ intermediate variables
q axisymmetrical uniformly-distributed load ðq ¼ F=2π bÞ φα variable φ at r ¼ b
er radial strain φ1 variable φ at r ¼ a
et circumferential strain φða þ bÞ=2 variable φ at r ¼ ða þ bÞ=2
sr radial stress UF work done by F to film/substrate delamination system
st circumferential stress Uef elastic energy stored in a blistering film
sy yield stress of films G energy release rate

Fig. 2. Sketch of a shaft-loaded blister test using a stainless-steel ball to load [25].

Fig. 1. Sketch of a shaft-loaded blister test [22].

of high bending angle at the crack front and too much energy
expended on plastic deformation, while the blister test has the
advantages of lesser bending angle and axisymmetric blister
geometry (easy to be analytically dealt with). Compared with
pressurized blister test technique (or bulge test technique) [23],
the shaft-loaded blister test technique has the advantage of
loading and controlling convenience. But plastic yielding and
piercing of the blistering film is still inevitable if a very slender
loading-shaft is adopted. So, it is important how to control the
blistering film as free as possible from plastic yielding during
shaft-loaded blister test.
Jin and Wang presented a theoretical study of a film/substrate
delamination using shaft-loaded blister test [24], as shown in
Fig. 1, in which the static problem of equilibrium of the blistering
film was simplified into the axisymmetric deformation problem of
circular membrane under the action of a central point load.
However, this means that a very slender loading-shaft has to be
adopted in order that the practical relationship between the applied
load F and the blister deflection wm can follow the simplified
theoretical solution [24]. But as a consequence of the infinitesimal
central point load, plastic yielding and piercing of the blistering film
is inevitable. So, the work of Jin and Wang has, in fact, no actual
significance for designing and interpreting a film/substrate delami-
nation experiment.
At an earlier stage, Wan and Liao suggested applying the
external load F via a stainless-steel ball of finite radius to overcome
plastic yielding and piercing of the blistering film [25], as shown in
Fig. 2. But they failed to present the exact analytical solution of the
corresponding circular membrane problem.
Fig. 3. Sketch of a shaft-loaded blister test using a cylinder with a frictionless flat
end to load.
At this stage, the existing shaft-loaded blister test technique is,
in fact, unsatisfactory due to the lack of either a loading method
able to overcome plastic yielding and piercing of the blistering film
or an exact analytical solution. In earlier papers [26,27], we
presented a theoretical study of a film/substrate delamination
using clamped punch-loaded blister test. It is, however, very
difficult to axisymmetrically clamp the thin film (at the center)
during experiment preparation. So, in this paper we suggest
applying the external load F via a cylinder with a frictionless flat
end of finite radius b (as a loading-shaft), as shown in Fig. 3. The
form of the loading-shaft used in Fig. 3 is, in fact, the same as that
in [12]. However, the approximative solution presented in [12]
cannot be used to achieve the idea of synchronous characteriza-
tion (E, v, and G).
Obviously, increasing the loading-shaft radius (b) is helpful for
controlling the blistering film free from plastic yielding. In the
130 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

central portion (i.e., in the film/shaft contact portion, see Fig. 3), Substituting Eq. (2) into (1), it is found
the blistering film will always continue to be radially stretched in dw
the plane parallel to the frictionless flat end of the cylinder during 2πrhsr ¼ F ð3Þ
dr
loading. Consequently, the applied external transverse load F may,
in fact, be regarded as an axisymmetric uniformly-distributed load in the plane of the membrane, there are the actions of the radial
q (distributing along a perimeter of the radius b) acting on the membrane force sr h and the circumferential membrane force st h,
blistering film. So, the static problem of equilibrium of the the in-plane equilibrium equation is
blistering film may be simplified into the axisymmetric deformation d
problem of circular membrane of radius a fixed at its perimeter ðrhsr Þ  hst ¼ 0 ð4Þ
dr
under the action of axisymmetric uniformly-distributed load q. The
main task here is the exact analytical solution to this circular The relations of the strain and displacement of the large deflection
membrane problem, and the theoretical determination of Poisson's problem are
ratio (v), Young's modulus (E) and energy release rate (G) based on
2
the obtained analytical solution. du 1 dw u
er ¼ þ ; et ¼ ð5Þ
In the next section, the closed-form solution of the considered dr 2 dr r
circular membrane problem was derived in detailed. In Section 3, The relations of the stress and strain are
the method how to calculate the numerical values of all the
) )
undetermined parameters was illustrated, and for ease of applica- er ¼ 1Eðsr  νst Þ sr ¼ 1 E ν2 ðer þ νet Þ
or ð6Þ
tion, some typical parametric plots were also presented based on et ¼ 1Eðst  νsr Þ st ¼ 1 E ν2 ðet þνer Þ
large numbers of calculations of numerical values. In Section 4, a
novel loading method (using a spring to load) was put forward to
overcome the disadvantage of the existing loading method. All the substituting Eq. (5) into (6), it may be seen that
expressions to determine Poisson's ratio v, Young's modulus E, h   i9
Eh du 1 dw 2
work UF, elastic strain energy Uef and energy release rate G were hsr ¼ 1  ν2 dr
þ 2 dr þ νur > =
h   i ð7Þ
also presented. In Section 5, how to control the blistering film free hst ¼ 1 
Eh u
þ νdu þ 2ν dw
2 >
;
ν2 r dr dr
from plastic yielding during shaft-loaded blister test will be
discussed, as well as the influence of changing the loading-shaft
radius b on the membrane stress distribution, based on the study by means of Eqs. (4) and (7)
on the limiting case of the obtained solution.  
u 1 1 d
¼ ðhst  νhsr Þ ¼ ðrhsr Þ  νhsr ð8Þ
r Eh Eh dr
2. Membrane equation and its closed-form solution if we substitute u of Eq. (8) into the first expression of Eq. (7),
then
The whole circular membrane may be divided into two parts:  
2
(1) the annular portion ða Z r Z bÞ, which may be dealt with as an d 1d 2 Eh dw
r ðr hsr Þ þ ¼0 ð9Þ
annular membrane problem and (2) the central portion (the film/ dr r dr 2 dr
shaft contact portion, b Z r Z 0), which will always continue to be Eqs. (3) and (9) are two equations for the solutions of sr and
radially stretched (it is, in fact, only a plane problem). All the dw=dr. The detailed derivation from Eqs. (4)–(9) may be obtained
integration constants may be determined by the application of the from any general theory of plates and shells.
continuous conditions at r ¼ b and the boundary conditions at r ¼ a. In the region of b Z r Z 0, it is obvious that dwðrÞ=dr ¼ 0. Hence,
In the region of a Zr Z b, suppose a piece of the annular from Eq. (5) it can be seen that
membrane of radius r is taken, just as it is shown in Fig. 4, with
a view of studying the static problem of equilibrium of this du u
er ¼ ; et ¼ ð10Þ
membrane under the joint action of the load F and the membrane dr r
force sr h acted on the boundary. Right here there are two vertical
forces, i.e. the force F and the total vertical force 2π rhsr sin θ, Substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (6)
which is produced by the membrane force sr h, in which θ is the

E du u
slope angle (see Fig. 4). The out-of-plane equilibrium condition is sr ¼ þν
1  ν2 dr r
2π r sr h sin θ ¼ F ð1Þ

E u du
st ¼ þν ð11Þ
in which 1ν r2 dr
dw From Eqs. (4) and (11)
sin θ ffi  ð2Þ
dr 2
d u du
r2 þ r u ¼ 0 ð12Þ
dr 2 dr
The boundary conditions, under which Eq. (12) may be solved, are
u ¼ 0 at r ¼ 0 and u ¼ cb at r ¼ b ð13a; bÞ
where c is an intermediate variable. So, the solution of Eq. (12)
may be written as

uðrÞ ¼ cr ð14Þ

Substituting Eq. (14) into Eq. (11), it may be obtained

Ec
sr ¼ st ¼ ð15Þ
Fig. 4. The equilibrium diagram of the circular membrane of radius r with br r ra. 1ν
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139 131

Now, let us introduce the following dimensionless variables: then

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2
a F w r 2
a sr 2
a st 2
dZ pffiffiffi 1  ZB
P¼ ; W¼ ; x ¼ 2 ; Sr ¼ ; St ¼ ð16Þ ¼ 2 ð27Þ
4π h E
4 h a 2 2 dx Z
Eh Eh
and transform Eqs. (9), (3) and (4) into Eq. (27) may be solved under the presuppositions of B ¼ 0,

2 B 4 0 and B o 0. The considered static problem of equilibrium is
2
d 1 dW therefore solved. The detailed solving process and the closed-form
ðxS r Þ þ ¼0 ð17Þ
dx2 2 dx solution of the considered problem may be found in Appendix A.

dW
x Sr ¼  P ð18Þ
dx 3. Calculation of numerical values
and
For problem where the values of ν and α are known in advance,
dSr all the expressions to determine the undetermined parameters
St ¼ Sr þ2x ð19Þ
dx were already presented in Appendix A. However, the numerical
Considering the continuity of the stress and strain at the inter- values of B, k, R, φα , and φ1 , Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 , and W m =ð2PÞ1=3 can still
connecting circle (at r ¼ b i.e., x ¼ α2 ) and using Eqs. (14) and (15), not be calculated, unless it can, in advance, be known that the
the boundary conditions, under which Eqs. (17)–(19) may be considered concrete problem belongs to which cases (i.e., B ¼ 0 or
solved, may be written as B 4 0 or B o 0). Based on large numbers of calculations of numer-
u
u
ical values (under the conditions of B ¼ 0, B 4 0 and B o 0), an
a2 c investigation into the variation of B with v and α was carried out.
ðSr ÞB ¼ ðSr ÞA ¼ and ¼ ¼ c at x ¼ α2 ð20a; bÞ
ð1  νÞh
2 r B r A Although Poisson's ratios of the majority of engineering materials
range from 0 to 0.5, in order to study the theoretical development
and
trend of some variables, Poisson's ratio here is considered as
u 0 o ν o 1. If the obtained numerical value of ν is in the region of
W ¼ 0 and ¼ 0 at x ¼ 1 ð20c; dÞ
r 0 o ν o 1, the other numerical values obtained in the same
in which, the subscript A and B denote the values of various calculation may be regarded to be valid (here ν is regarded as a
variables on two sides of the inter-connecting circle, the side of controlling parameter).
region (A) is under the action of the shaft, and the side of region Figs. 5–10 show the theoretical variation of Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 ,
(B) is not under any action of the external load. (The boundary W m =ð2PÞ1=3 , B, k, φα and φ1 with ν when α takes 0.1, 0.2, 0.3,
conditions (20b,d) may also be expressed in Sr . So long as et is 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9. Hence, from Fig. 7 and Eq. (A13) the
eliminated from Eqs. (5) and (6), it may be obtained u=r ¼ variation of B with v and α may be concluded as follows:
ðst  vsr Þ=E. After nondimensionalizing, Eqs. (20b,d) may be 8
< B ¼ 0 when ð1 þ νÞð3  α Þ ¼ 4
2
>
transformed into St  vSr ¼ c and St  vSr ¼ 0, in which St may be
B 4 0 when ð1 þ νÞð3  α2 Þ o 4 ð28Þ
expressed in Sr via Eq. (19)). Then, eliminating dW=dx from >
:
Eqs. (17) and (18), an equation which contains only Sr may be B o 0 when ð1 þ νÞð3  α2 Þ 4 4
obtained
Let us take α ¼ 0.1 and ν ¼ 0.4, as an example, to detail the
d
2
1 P2 calculation process for the numerical values of B, k, R, φα , φ1 ,
2
ðxSr Þ ¼  ð21Þ Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 and W m =ð2PÞ1=3 . From Eq. (28) it may be known that
dx 2 x2 S2r
the problem of α ¼ 0.1 and ν ¼ 0.4 should be solved under the
Substituting Z for xSr , i.e., let condition of B o 0 (due to ð1 þ νÞð3  α2 Þ 4 4). Let us roughly take

1=3 φ1 ¼ 1.1 (see Fig. 10). Hence, with φ1 ¼ 1.1 and α ¼ 0.1, from
xSr ¼
1 2
P ZðxÞ ð22Þ Eq. (A52) it may be obtained φα ¼ 1.477276. With φ1 ¼ 1.1, φα ¼
2 1.477276 and α ¼ 0.1, from Eq. (A54) it may be obtained
Substituting Eq. (22) into Eq. (21), it may be obtained
ν  0.398321. From Fig. 10 it may be seen that ν will increase

2
d Z 14
Z2 ¼ 1 ð23Þ
dx2
12
From Eqs. (18) and (22), it may be seen that
10
dW ð2PÞ1=3
¼ ð24Þ
dx ZðxÞ
S rm 8
Multiplying the two sides of Eq. (23) with dZ=dx P 2 1/ 3

2
 ( ) α = 0.1
1 d dZ 1 dZ d 1 2 6
¼ 2 ¼ ð25Þ
2 dx dx Z dx dx Z
4
After integrating

2 2
1 dZ 1
¼ B ð26Þ
2 dx Z α = 0.9
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
where B is an undetermined integration constant. Let us take the
ν
positive value in the square-root value (no solution can be
obtained to satisfy physical meaning if the negative value is taken), Fig. 5. The variation of Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 with ν.
132 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

1.6 1.6
α = 0.1 α = 0.9
1.4 1.4
α = 0.1
1.2
1.2

1 α = 0.9
1
Wm
0.8
(2 P )1 / 3
ϕα 0.8
0.6

0.6
0.4

0.4
0.2
α = 0.9
0 0.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
α = 0.1
ν 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fig. 6. The variation of W m =ð2PÞ1=3 with ν.
ν
Fig. 9. The variation of φα with ν.

1
1.6
α = 0.1 α = 0.9
0.5 1.4
α = 0.9
α = 0.9
1.2
0
B
α = 0.1 1

-0.5 ϕ1 0.8 α = 0.1

0.6
-1

0.4

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0.2
ν
Fig. 7. The variation of B with ν. 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
ν
0.05
Fig. 10. The variation of φ1 with ν.
α = 0.1
0

-0.05
B ¼  0.154552 and R ¼ 0.515801. Moreover, from Eqs. (A55) and
-0.1 (A56) it may be obtained Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 ¼ 5.865654 and W m =ð2PÞ1=3
-0.15 ¼ 1.443577. So, the problem of α ¼ 0.1 and ν ¼ 0.4 is thus solved
and all the calculations can easily be finished with the help of a
-0.2
k Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
-0.25

-0.3
4. Synchronous characterization of surface and interfacial
-0.35 mechanical properties
α = 0.9
-0.4
The external transverse load F is applied to the thin film via a
-0.45
cylinder with a frictionless flat end of radius b, as shown in Fig. 3,
-0.5 until it reaches Fm and a stable (no change in size) blister with
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
radius a and height wm is observed. The loading-shaft radius (b)
ν
and the small hole radius (d) are regarded as known parameters,
Fig. 8. The variation of k with ν. while the external transverse load (Fm), the blister radius (a), and
the deflections (wm and w(a þ b)/2) are the measured parameters,
where wm denotes the deflection w at r ¼ b (i.e., at x ¼ α2 ) and
along with the decrease of φ1 . So, let us gradually decrease the w(a þ b)/2 denotes w at r ¼ ða þ bÞ=2 (i.e., at x ¼ ð1 þ αÞ2 =4). After
taken value of φ1 until φ1 ¼ 1.093643. Finally, with φ1 ¼ 1.093643 unloading, the thickness (h) of the blistering film also needs to be
and α ¼ 0.1, from Eq. (A52) it may be obtained φα ¼ 1.475870, and measured. Suppose that the blistering film is always kept in elastic
with φ1 ¼ 1.093643, φα ¼ 1.475870 and α ¼ 0.1, from Eqs. (A54), deformation during loading. The so-called synchronous character-
(A53), (A51) and (A50) it may be obtained ν ¼ 0.4, k ¼  0.003321, ization is detailed as follows.
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139 133

2.8

2.7
α = 0.01

2.6

wm 2.5

w (a+ b ) α = 0.1
2 2.4
α = 0.2

2.3

Fig. 12. Sketch of a shaft-loaded blister test using a spring to load (via a cylinder
2.2 with flat end).
α = 0.6
for definite integral
2.1
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 Z wm m
ν UF ¼ FðwÞdw ¼ ∑ F i ðwi  wi  1 Þ ð32Þ
0 i¼1
Fig. 11. The variation of wm =wða þ bÞ=2 with v when α takes different values.
In doing so, however, plenty of measured data are needed if a
calculation without too much loss of accuracy is expected by
4.1. Determination of Poisson's ratios and Young's modulus Eq. (32). Here, a novel loading method was put forward to
overcome this disadvantage. A spring of high quality is employed
According to our earlier experience [21], the value of Poisson's to collect the work UF, as shown in Fig. 12.
ratios (v) of the blistering film may be determined by wm and Under the forward push of the screw rod (at a cross-head speed
w(a þ b)/2. From Eqs. (A15), (A24), (A30), (A44) and (A50), the of about 1.0 mm/min), the circular blistering film with radius a and
expressions of wm/w(a þ b)/2 may be written as height wm may be observed, while the compressed length of the
spring is exactly L  wm, where L denotes the distance that the
wm 2ð3  α2 Þ1=3  2ð2α2 Þ1=3 screw rod moves away from its original location. L is also a
¼ when B ¼ 0 ð29Þ
wða þ bÞ=2 2ð3  α2 Þ1=3  ð6 þ 12α  2α2 Þ1=3 measured parameter and it will substitute for the measured
parameter Fm (due to Fm ¼kx(L  wm), where kx is the coefficient
wm φα  φ1 of the spring). So, UF may be written as
¼ when B 4 0 ð30Þ Z L  wm  
wða þ bÞ=2 φða þ bÞ=2  φ1 1 2 L  wm 1
UF ¼ FðlÞdl ¼ kx l ¼ kx ðL  wm Þ2 ð33Þ
0 2 0 2
wm ln j tan ðφα =2Þj  ln j tan ðφ1 =2Þj Comparing Eqs. (32) and (33) it may be seen that, after using a
¼ when B o 0 ð31Þ
wða þ bÞ=2 ln j tan ðφða þ bÞ=2 =2Þj  ln j tan ðφ1 =2Þj spring to load, only two data (wm and L) need to be measured to
UF.
in which, φða þ bÞ=2 denotes φ at r ¼ ða þbÞ=2 and it may be
determined by Eq. (A20) when B 4 0 or by Eq. (A40) when B o0.
4.3. Determination of the elastic energy Uef
Fig. 11 presents the variation of wm/w(a þ b)/2 with v when α
takes 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.04, 0.05, 0.06, 0.07, 0.08, 0.09, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3,
As for the elastic energy (Uef) stored in the blistering film, from
0.4, 0.5 and 0.6 (of course, α may also take more values if
Eqs. (16), (A17), (A36) and (A56), the expressions of Uef may easily
necessary), which indicates that wm/w(a þ b)/2 and v are in one- Rw
be written as (by U ef ¼ 0 m FðwÞdw)
one correspondence. So, with the observed values of wm and
w(a þ b)/2, the value of Poisson's ratio (v) can be easily determined. π hE
U ef ¼ w4m when B ¼ 0 ð34Þ
On the other hand, from Fig. 6 it may be seen that W m =ð2PÞ1=3 22 a2 ½ð3  α2 Þ1=3  ð2α2 Þ1=3 3
and v are also in one–one correspondence. So, with the observed
values of wm and its corresponding load Fm, the value of Young's π hE½ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ 4
U ef ¼ wm when B 4 0
modulus (E) of the blistering film can simultaneously be deter- 24 a2 ð1  α2 Þðφ1  φα Þ3
mined, in which wm and Fm may be changed into the form of ð35Þ
W m =ð2PÞ1=3 by Eq. (16).
and

π hE½ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ  ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ 4
U ef ¼ wm when B o 0 ð36Þ
23 a2 ð1  α2 Þðln j tan ðφα =2Þj  ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ3

4.2. Determination of the work UF 4.4. Determination of the energy release rate G

Usually, the work UF done by the applied external transverse Obviously, if the blistering film is always kept in elastic
load F to the film/substrate delamination system may be deter- deformation during loading, UF minus Uef is exactly the interfacial
mined by measuring a series of blister height wi and their energy of adhesion released as the crack along the film/substrate
corresponding external load Fi, i.e., by the approximate calculation interface extends a distance (a  d). Thus, the expression of the
134 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

energy release rate may be written as G ¼ ðU F  U ef Þ=ðπ a2  π d Þ

2
blister (suppose its radius is 20 mm). From the example in
(it should be pointed out that G here is in fact the average value for Section 3 it may be known that Srm =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 ¼ 5.865654 due to
an annular extension from r ¼ d to r ¼ a). So, the energy release α ¼ b=a ¼ 2=20 ¼ 0.1. Taking sr ¼ sy ¼ 20 MPa, from Eq. (16) it may
rate (G) can finally be determined along with the determination of be obtained F m ¼ 4.048369 N. So, this value of Fm should be
Poisson's ratio (v) and Young's modulus (E) of the blistering film, regarded as a critical value of the applied external transverse load
and if a spring is used to load, the relative measured parameters (F) during the farther loading (for obtaining a larger blister of
will be a, wm, w(a þ b)/2, h and L. radius 6 mm o a r 20 mm). As long as the applied external trans-
verse load F is under Fm, the blistering film can be controlled free
from plastic yielding. After obtaining the observed values of the
5. Discussions larger blister, all the parameters (v, E, and G) may more accurately
be determined.
It should be pointed out that the closed-form solution pre-
sented here is only applicable to the case that the blistering thin
film exhibits a large deflection but small strain. So, the thickness of 5.2. Limiting case of α ¼ b/α-0
the blistering thin film, h, may be regarded as constant during
loading. But the presented solution is not applicable to membrane The limiting case of the problem dealt with here is exactly the
problems involving hyperelastic materials where h may have a axisymmetric deformation problem of circular membrane fixed at
large variation during loading. its perimeter under the action of a central point load [24,26]. Its
The work of this paper is only a theoretical study on shaft- solution may also be derived from the solution obtained here (by
loaded blister test technique, and it gave emphasis to the idea how letting α ¼ b=a ¼ 0). The following work is intended to show why
to achieve the synchronous characterization of surface and inter- this solution (for point load) cannot be used for designing and
facial mechanical properties. As for experimental study, there are interpreting the film/substrate delamination experiment using
still many problems that need to be considered in detail, for shaft-loaded blister test.
example, specimen geometry and preparation, loading arrange-
ment, measurement of displacements, data acquisition and reduc- (1) When B ¼ 0, Eq. (A12) and α ¼ 0 give k ¼ 0, Eq. (A13) and
tion, and so on, all await further study if the idea could be put into α ¼ 0 give
application. There were two early and valuable relative works by ν ¼ 1=3 ð37Þ
Liechti and Hanson [14,15], they are helpful for dealing with those
problems above. Theoretically speaking, the radius of the loading- and Eq. (A15) and α ¼ 0 give
shaft, b, should be as close as possible to the radius of the small W ¼ ð2PÞ1=3 61=3 ð1  x1=3 Þ ð38Þ
hole through substrate, d, under the condition of b rd, in order to
let the shaft and the blister be concentric during loading. In view So, the maximum deflection (at x ¼ 0) is
of that circular debonds are not always produced and that W m ¼ ð2PÞ1=3 61=3 ð39Þ
irregular shapes, once formed, became even more so under
increased load, it is necessary to reversely apply a press onto the
thin film surface by a rigid thin plate with a hole of radius a, and Moreover, Eq. (A14) and α ¼ 0 give
let the hole and the loading-shaft be concentric, in order to able to
 pffiffiffi!2=3
1 2 1=3 3 2
finally obtain a circular blister of radius a. The corner effects may Sr ¼ P x  1=3 ð40Þ
2 2
be attenuated slightly by blunting the corner of the flat end of the
loading-shaft, which should not bring forth too much error. So, the maximum stress (at x ¼ 0) is Srm -1.
Moreover, it is worthwhile to discuss next two aspects in detail. (2) When B 4 0, Eqs. (A32) and (A33) and α ¼ 0 give φα ¼ 0 and
k ¼ 0, and Eqs. (A31) and (A34) and α ¼ 0 give
5.1. Control over the plastic deformation of the blistering film
ð2BÞ3=2 ¼ 2φ1  sin 2φ1 ð41Þ

It should be pointed out that, once the plastic deformation of and

the blistering film happens during loading, the determination of
energy release rate (G) must take into account the energy
expended on the plastic deformation (which will make the
considered problem more difficult to deal with). For this reason,
the blistering film is usually expected to be free from plastic
yielding during loading. In general, if the yield stress value ðsy Þ
may roughly be estimated, the blistering film can be controlled as
free as possible from plastic yielding by decreasing the applied
external transverse maximum load (Fm) or increasing the loading-
shaft radius (b). For instance, the yield stress of a 60-μm thick
polymer coating is estimated about sy ¼ 20 MPa. Suppose that a
smaller blister (an earlier blister after loading, for example with a
radius about 6 mm) may be obtained by using a loading-shaft of
radius b ¼ 2 mm, as shown in Fig. 3, and the blistering film of this
smaller blister can fully regain its original shape after being
unloaded. With the observed values of this smaller blister, the
values of Poisson's ratios (v) and Young's modulus (E) of the
polymer film may roughly be calculated (see Section 4.1, suppose
they are ν ¼ 0.4 and E ¼ 1100 MPa). Hence, with ν ¼ 0.4 and
ν ¼ ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ= sin 2 φ1 = tan φ1  1 ð42Þ
Hence, from Eqs. (A24), (A30) and (41) it may be obtained
W ¼  ð2PÞ1=3 2ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  1=3 ðφ  φ1 Þ ð43Þ
So, the maximum deflection (at x ¼ 0, i.e., at φ ¼ φα ¼ 0) is
W m ¼ ð2PÞ1=3 2φ1 ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  1=3 ð44Þ
Moreover, from Eq. (A25), k ¼ 0 and Eq. (41) gives


1 2 1=3 2ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ1=3 sin 2 φ
Sr ¼ P ð45Þ
2 2φ  sin 2φ
So, the maximum stress (at x ¼ 0, i.e., at φ ¼ φα ¼ 0) is
Srm -1. Here, φ1 may be determined by ν via Eq. (42), and
the relation between x and φ is shown in Eq. (A20).
(3) When B o0, Eqs. (A52) and (A53) and α ¼ 0 give φα ¼ π =2
and k ¼ 0, and Eqs. (A51) and (A54) and α ¼ 0 give
!
cos φ1  φ1 
3=2 
E ¼ 1100 MPa, the value of the applied external transverse max- B ¼ 2  1=2 þ ln  tan  ð46Þ
sin φ1
2 2
imum load (Fm) may be estimated for the expected maximum
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139 135

and ∞
!
cos φ1  φ1  8

ν¼2 þ ln  tan  = cos φ1 =cot2 φ1 1 ð47Þ α =0
sin 2 φ1 2 7

6
Hence, from Eqs. (A44), (A50) and (46) it may be obtained
!  1=3 Sr 5
cos φ1  φ1  P 2 1/ 3
1=3 2=3  ( ) α = 0.1
W ¼ ð2PÞ 2 þ ln tan  4
sin φ1
2 2 2
 φ  φ 

  3
 ln tan  ln tan 1  ð48Þ
2 2
2
So, the maximum deflection (at x ¼ 0, i.e., at φ ¼ φα ¼ π =2)
is 1
!  1=3
 φ1  cos φ1  φ1 
1=3 2=3   0
W m ¼ ð2PÞ 2 ln tan  þ ln tan  0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
2 sin 2 φ1 2
r/a
ð49Þ
Fig. 15. The variation of Sr =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 with r=a when α ¼ 0; 0:1 and ν ¼ 0:4.
Moreover, from Eq. (A45), k ¼ 0 and Eq. (46) gives

 !1=3
1 2 1=3 1=3 cos φ1  φ1 

Sr ¼ P 2 þ ln  tan 
sin φ1
2 2 2
!
cos φ  φ

cot2 φ= þ ln tan  ð50Þ
sin φ
2 2

1.6

1.4

1.2 Fig. 16. A photograph of the simulating experiment.

1 So, the maximum stress (at x ¼ 0, i.e., at φ ¼ φα ¼ π =2) is

Srm -1. Here, φ1 may be determined by ν via Eq. (47), and
ϕ1 0.8
the relation between x and φ is shown in Eq. (A40).

0.6
Fig. 13 shows the variation of φ1 with ν when α ¼ 0 (which is
plotted by Eqs. (37), (42) and (47)). Fig. 14 shows the variation of
0.4
W m =ð2PÞ1=3 with ν when α ¼ 0 (which is plotted by Eqs. (39), (44)
and (49)). Fig. 15 shows the variation of Sr =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 with r=a
0.2
when ν ¼ 0:4 and α ¼ 0, in which, the case of ν ¼ 0:4 and α ¼ 0:1 is
ν = 1/3 also presented as a contrast. From Fig. 15 it may be seen that the
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 radial stress Sr in the central portion (film/shaft contact portion)
ν is obviously greater than that in the other portion of the mem-
Fig. 13. The variation of φ1 with ν when α ¼ 0.
brane, especially at r=a-0, Sr =ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 -1 when α ¼ 0 (but Sr =
ðP 2 =2Þ1=3 o 6 when α ¼ 0:1).
From Figs. 5 and 15 it can be seen that, the loading-shaft radius
(b) should take a value as large as possible, otherwise, the
2 blistering film (at central portion) will easily enter plastic yielding
1.8 if b-0. So, from this point of view, it is incorrect that Jin and Wang
suggested using this solution (point load) to design and interpret
1.6
the film/substrate delamination experiment using shaft-loaded
1.4 blister test [24].
1.2
Wm
1 6. Experiment and results
(2 P )1 / 3
0.8
It is obvious that the validity of the new technique presented
0.6 here depends mainly on the exact solution to the axisymmetric
0.4 deformation problem of circular membrane fixed at its perimeter
under the action of axisymmetric linearly-distributed loads.
0.2
An experiment was conducted to verify the validity of the
0 closed-form solution (presented in Section 2) and the method to
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 simultaneously determine Poisson's ratio and elastic modulus of
ν
the polymer film (presented in Section 4.1). A polymer film of
Fig. 14. The variation of W m =ð2PÞ1=3 with ν when α ¼ 0. thickness 0.02 μm was adhered onto the flat end of a hollow PVC
136 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

Table 1 test a reliable method for mechanical characterization of film–

Numerical values of relative parameters. substrate systems.
The work presented here can be extended to the experimental
φ1 φα φða þ bÞ=2 W m =ð2PÞ1=3 wm =wða þ bÞ=2 ν
study of film/substrate delamination. It is applicable to the thin
1.440000 1.508334 1.469923 0.933708 2.279354 0.409917 flexible films with small residual stresses. Large residual stresses
1.438856 1.507784 1.469038 0.933673 2.279383 0.410000 may have a large influence on the mechanical behavior of the
1.435000 1.505929 1.466053 0.933551 2.279470 0.410283 blistering film. Indeed, the residual stresses may still be present
1.430000 1.503523 1.462182 0.933389 2.279592 0.410664
even in the very thin films. We will study the relative issues such
1.425000 1.501114 1.458309 0.933220 2.279716 0.411058
1.420000 1.498703 1.454435 0.933046 2.279849 0.411466 as with residual stress (or pre-tension) and bending effect of
thicker film in the further work.

tube with inner radius 97 mm and wall thickness 3 mm, as shown

in Fig. 16. The elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio of the polymer Acknowledgment
film were measured to be E ¼ 4212 MPa and ν ¼ 0.41. A 2.3-kg
weight cylinder of radius 38 mm, as a loading-shaft, was trans- This work was funded by the National Natural Science Founda-
versely and axisymmetrically applied onto the thin film surface. tion of China (Grant no. 51178485) and also by the Natural Science
Fine powder of chalk was sprinkled onto the flat end of the Foundation of Chongqing (Grant No. cstc2013jcyjA30012).
cylinder to reduce friction at the contact with the film surface.
(May be, the concentric circles of colored powders are the best
choice to see if there are sticking regions during loading.) The
Appendix A
deflections of the film were measured to be wm ¼ 6.880 mm (at
r r b ¼ 38 mm) and wða þ bÞ=2 ¼ 3.018 mm (at r ¼ ða þ bÞ=2 ¼
ð97 þ 38Þ=2 ¼ 67.5 mm). A1. The case of B ¼ 0
The partial result of numerical value calculations for this
circular membrane problem of α ¼ b=a ¼ 38/97 is shown in From Eq. (27), B ¼ 0 gives
pffiffiffi
Table 1. So, from Table 1 it may be seen that W m =ð2PÞ1=3 dZ 2
¼ 0.933673 while α ¼ 38/97 and ν ¼ 0.41. Then, from Eq. (16) it ¼ pffiffiffi ðA1Þ
dx Z
may be obtained that wm ¼ 0:933673hða2 F=2π h EÞ1=3  6.883 mm,
4

where a ¼ 97 mm, h ¼ 0.02 μm, E ¼ 4212 MPa and F ¼ 2:3 After integrating
9:8 ¼ 22.54 N. So, our theoretical calculating value (wm ¼ pffiffiffi !2=3
3 2 3
6.883 mm) is very close to its measured value (wm ¼ 6.880 mm), ZðxÞ ¼ xþ k ðA2Þ
which indicates that the closed-form solution presented in Section 2 2
2 is valid.
where k is an undetermined integration constant. Substituting Eq.
Now, let us use the measured values of wm ¼ 6.880 mm and
(16) into Eq. (8), eliminating xSr with the help of Eq. (22) and
wða þ bÞ=2 ¼ 3.018 mm to simultaneously determine Poisson's ratio
considering Eq. (A1)
and elastic modulus of the polymer film. From Table 1 it may be

 " pffiffiffi #
seen that wm =wða þ bÞ=2 ¼ 6:88=3:018 ¼ 2.279655 corresponds to 2 
 2
u 1 2 1=3 h dZ Z 1 2 1=3 h 2 2 Z
ν  0.411 and W m =ð2PÞ1=3  0.933220. Then, from Eq. (16) it may ¼ P 2  ð1 þ νÞ ¼ P pffiffiffi  ð1 þ νÞ
r 2 a2 dx x 2 a2 Z x
be obtained that E ¼ 0:933223 ða2 F=2π hw3m Þ  4211.86 MPa, where
ðA3Þ
wm ¼ 6.880 mm and F ¼ 22.54 N. So, the theoretical calculating
value (ν ¼ 0.411 and E ¼ 4211.86 MPa) is very close to its known Substituting Eq. (A2) into Eq. (A3)
values (ν ¼ 0.41 and E ¼ 4212 MPa), which indicates that the 2 pffiffiffi !  1=3 pffiffiffi !2=3 3

 2
method presented in Section 4.1 is valid. u 1 2 1=3 h 4 3=2 3 2 3 3 2 3  15
¼ P 2 xþ k  ð1 þ νÞ xþ k x
r 2 a2 2 2 2 2

ðA4Þ

7. Concluding remarks From Eqs. (24) and (A2)

pffiffiffi !  2=3
The work presented here makes three significant and new dW ð2PÞ1=3 3 2 3
¼ ¼  ð2PÞ1=3 xþ k ðA5Þ
contributions to thin-film mechanics, shaft-loaded blister test dx ZðxÞ 2 2
technique and mechanical characterization of film/substrate sur-
face and interface. These contributions should greatly facilitate the Integration of Eq. (A5) gives
design and interpretation of film/substrate delamination experi- pffiffiffi !1=3
1=3
pffiffiffi 3 2 3
ment using shaft-loaded blister test. First, the closed-form solution W ¼  ð2PÞ 2 xþ k þR ðA6Þ
of axisymmetric deformation of circular membrane fixed at its 2 2
perimeter under the action of axisymmetric linearly-distributed
where R is another undetermined integration constant. From Eqs.
loads is presented. It is a new solution of circular membrane
(22) and (A2)
problems after the well-known Hencky solution [28–30]. This

 pffiffiffi !2=3
solution includes the limiting case of a central point load, so it
1 2 1=3 3 2 3
may be called as “concentrated load solution” for short. Second, Sr ¼ P xþ k x1 ðA7Þ
2 2 2
the new loading-shaft form and loading method overcome the
disadvantage of existing shaft-loaded blister test technique. Third, Eqs. (A7) and (20a) give
the method for synchronously characterizing the mechanical
properties of film/substrate surface and interface is presented.
 pffiffiffi !2=3
1 2 1=3 3 2 2 3 a2 c
All in all, the comprehensive developments in both theoretical P α þ k α2 ¼ ðA8Þ
ð1  νÞh
2 2 2 2
analysis and experiment techniques make the shaft-loaded blister
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139 137

Eqs. (A4) and (20b) give Eqs. (24), (A18) and (A19) give

1=3
2 pffiffiffi !  1=3 pffiffiffi !2=3 3 rffiffiffi
1 2
2
h 4 3=2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 ð2PÞ1=3 B 2
P 2 α þ k  ð1 þ νÞ α þ k α  25 ¼ c dW ¼  dx ¼  ð2PÞ 1=3
dφ ðA23Þ
sin φ
2 a2 2 2 2 2 2 B

ðA9Þ After integrating

rffiffiffi
Eqs. (A4) and (20d) give 2
pffiffiffi ! W ¼ ð2PÞ1=3 ðφ þ RÞ ðA24Þ
pffiffiffi 3 2 3 B
2 2 ¼ ð1 þ νÞ þ k ðA10Þ
2 2 where R is another undetermined integration constant. From Eqs.
(22), (A18) and (A20)
Eq. (A6) and (20c) give


pffiffiffi !1=3 1 2 1=3 ZðxÞ 1 2 1=3 1 sin 2 φ
pffiffiffi 3 2 3 Sr ¼ P ¼ P ð2BÞ3=2
1=3 2 x 2 B 2φ  sin 2φ  kð2BÞ3=2
R ¼ ð2PÞ 2 þ k ðA11Þ
2 2 ðA25Þ
From Eqs. (A8) and (A9), it may be obtained if we call φ at x ¼ 1 as φ1 and φ at x ¼ α2 as φα , then from Eq.
pffiffiffi (A20) we have
2 2
k¼  α ðA12Þ
1 þ k ¼ ð2BÞ  3=2 ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ ðA26aÞ
3
From Eqs. (A10) and (A12), it may be seen that and
4 ¼ ð1 þ νÞð3  α2 Þ ðA13Þ α2 þ k ¼ ð2BÞ  3=2 ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ ðA26bÞ
Eq. (A13) indicates that the case of B ¼ 0 should be in the region Eqs. (A26a) and (A26b) are the conditions for the determination of
of 1=3 r ν r1 (corresponding to 0 r α r1). Hence, from Eqs. (A7) φ1 and φα with the known values of k and B. Eqs. (A25) and (20a)
and (A12) give

 pffiffiffi pffiffiffi !2=3

1 2 1=3 3 2 2 2 1 2 1=3 1 sin 2 φα a2 c
Sr ¼ P x α x1 ðA14Þ P ð2BÞ3=2 ¼ ðA27Þ
2 2 2 2 B 2φα  sin 2φα  kð2BÞ 3=2
ð1  νÞh
2

From Eqs. (A6), (A11) and (A12) Eqs. (A22) and (20b) give
" #
2

½ð3  α Þ  ð3x  α Þ h 1 2 1=3 3=2 1 cos φα sin 2 φα
1=3 1=3 2 1=3 2 1=3
W ¼ ð2PÞ 2  ðA15Þ
P ð2BÞ  ð1 þ νÞ ¼c
a2 2 B sin φα 2φα  sin 2φα  kð2BÞ3=2
So, the maximum stress and deflection at the central portion
ðx r α2 Þ are ðA28Þ

 Eqs. (A22) and (20d) give
1 2 1=3 1=3  2=3
Srm ¼ P 2 α ðA16Þ
2 cos φ1 sin φ1
2
ð1 þ νÞ ¼0 ðA29Þ
and sin φ1 2φ1  sin 2φ1  kð2BÞ3=2

W m ¼ ð2PÞ1=3 21=3 ½ð3  α2 Þ1=3  ð2α2 Þ1=3  ðA17Þ Eq. (A24) and (20c) give
R ¼  φ1 ðA30Þ
A2. The case of B 4 0 Eqs. (A26a and A26b) give
ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ
Let us introduce the new variable φ, such that ð2BÞ3=2 ¼ ðA31Þ
ð1  α2 Þ
1
Z ¼ sin φ
2
ðA18Þ Eliminating the intermediate variable c from Eqs. (A27) and
B
(A28), and considering Eqs. (A26b) and (A31), it may be obtained
From Eq. (26) it may be seen that the variable transformation is
sin φα α2 ½ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ
3
valid. Substituting Eqs. (A18) into (27)
¼ ðA32Þ
cos φα 2ð1  α2 Þ
dφ 1 1
¼ pffiffiffiB3=2 ðA19Þ
dx 2 sin 2 φ Eqs. (A26a) and (A31) give

After integrating ð1  α2 Þð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ

k¼ 1 ðA33Þ
ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ
x þ k ¼ ð2BÞ  3=2 ð2φ  sin 2φÞ ðA20Þ
From Eqs. (A26a), (A29) and (A31), it may be obtained
where k is undetermined integration constant. Substituting
Eq. (16) into Eq. (8) and eliminating xSr with the help of Eq. (22), ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ  ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ
ν¼ 1 ðA34Þ
ð1  α2 Þ sin φ1 tan φ1
2
it may be seen that

 2 
u 1 2 1=3 h dZ Z Hence, for problem where the values of ν and α are known in
¼ P 2  ð1 þ νÞ ðA21Þ
r 2 a 2 dx x advance, Eq. (A32) may be use for calculating the numerical value
of φα with the known value of α and a given value of φ1 . With this
Making use of Eqs. (27), (A18) and (A20), Eq. (A21) may be
obtained value of φα , the numerical values of B, k and v may be
simplified to
calculated via Eqs. (A31), (A33) and (A34), respectively. If the
" # numerical value of ν, obtained in this calculation, is not equal to its
2

3=2 1 cos φ sin φ
2
u h 1 2 1=3
¼ P ð2BÞ  ð1 þ νÞ known value, another given value of φ1 may be taken to continue
r a2 2 B sin φ 2φ  sin 2φ  kð2BÞ3=2 the calculation above until the obtained value of ν is just equal
ðA22Þ to its known value. Then, the obtained corresponding numerical
138 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139

values of B, k, φα and φ1 are exactly the solution of the problem of if we call φ at x ¼ 1 as φ1 and φ at x ¼ α2 as φα , then from Eq.
known ν and α. Eq. (A20) is the conditions for the determination (A40) we have
of x from φ with the known values of B and k. 
!
φ1 
 3=2
Moreover, from Eqs. (22), (A18) and (A31) the maximum stress B cos φ1 
1 þ k ¼ pffiffiffi þ ln  tan  ðA46aÞ
sin φ1
2 2
at the central portion (x r α2 ) may be written as 2


2ð1  α2 Þ2=3 sin φα and
2
1 2 1=3
Srm ¼ P ðA35Þ !
2 α2 ½ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ2=3 B
 3=2
cos φα 
 φα 
α2 þk ¼ pffiffiffi þ ln  tan  ðA46bÞ
sin φα
2 2
and from Eqs. (A24), (A30) and (A31) the maximum deflection at 2
the central portion ðx r α2 Þ may be written as
Eqs. (A46a) and (A46b) are the conditions for the determina-
1=3 2ð1  α2 Þ1=3 ðφ1  φα Þ tion of φ1 and φα with the known values of k and B. Eqs. (A45) and
W m ¼ ð2PÞ ðA36Þ
½ð2φ1  sin 2φ1 Þ ð2φα  sin 2φα Þ1=3 (20a) give


1 2 1=3 pffiffiffiffiffiffi cot2 φα a2 c
P 2B pffiffiffi 3=2 ¼ ðA47Þ
ð1  νÞh
2 2
A3. The case of B o 0 ð cos φα = sin φα Þþ ln j tan ðφα =2Þj 2kB
2

Eqs. (A42) and (20b) give

Let B ¼  B. From Eq. (27) it may be seen that
 " #
1 2 1=3 h pffiffiffiffiffiffi cot2 φα
2
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi P 2B
2
 ð1 þ νÞ pffiffiffi 3=2 ¼ c
2 cos φα
dZ pffiffiffi 1 þ ZB
2 a ð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2Þj  2kB
¼ 2 ðA37Þ
dx Z ðA48Þ

Let us introduce the new variable φ, such that Eqs. (A42) and (20d) give
1 2 cot2 φ1
Z ¼ cot2 φ ðA38Þ  ð1 þ νÞ pffiffiffi 3=2 ¼ 0
B cos φ1 ð cos φ1 = sin φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2Þj  2kB
2

Substituting Eqs. (A38) into (A37) ðA49Þ

3=2 Eqs. (A40) and (20c) give
dφ B sin 3 φ
¼  pffiffiffi ðA39Þ  φ 
dx 2 cos 2 φ 
R ¼  ln tan 1  ðA50Þ
2
After integrating
! Eqs. (A46a) and (A46b) give
 3=2
cos φ  φ
B 
x þ k ¼ pffiffiffi þ ln  tan  ðA40Þ
2 sin 2 φ 2

3=2 ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ  ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ
B ¼ pffiffiffi ðA51Þ
2ð1  α2 Þ

where k is undetermined integration constant. Substituting Eliminating the intermediate variable c from Eqs. (A47) and
Eq. (16) into Eq. (8) and eliminating xSr with the help of Eq. (22), (A48) and considering Eqs. (A46b) and (A51), it may be obtained
it may be obtained cos 3 φα

 2  sin 2 φα
u 1 2 1=3 h dZ Z
¼ P 2  ð1 þ νÞ ðA41Þ
r 2 a 2 dx x α2 ½ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ  ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ
¼
ð1  α2 Þ
Making use of Eqs. (A37), (A38) and (A40), Eq. (A41) may be ðA52Þ
simplified to

 " # Eqs. (A46a) and (A51) give
1 2 1=3 h pffiffiffiffiffiffi cot 2 φ
2
u 2
¼ P 2B  ð1 þ νÞ pffiffiffi 3=2
r 2 a2 cos φ ð cos φ= sin φÞþ ln j tan ðφ=2Þj 2kB
2 ð1 α2 Þðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þþ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ
k¼ 1
ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ  ð cos φα = sin 2 φα þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ
ðA42Þ
ðA53Þ
From Eqs. (24), (A38) and (A39), it may be obtained
sffiffiffi Eqs. (A46a), (A49) and (A51) give
dW 2 1
¼ ð2PÞ 1=3
ðA43Þ 2½ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ
dφ B sin φ ν¼ 1
ð1  α2 Þ cos φ1 cot2 φ1

After integrating ðA54Þ

sffiffiffi
Hence, for problem where the values of ν and α are known in
1=3 2  φ

W ¼ ð2PÞ ln tan  þR ðA44Þ advance, Eq. (A52) may be used for calculating the numerical value
B 2
of φα with the known value of α and a given value of φ1 . With this
where R is another undetermined integration constant. From obtained value of φα , the numerical values of B, k and v may be
Eqs. (22), (A38) and (A40) calculated via Eqs. (A51), (A53) and (A54), respectively. If the


 numerical value of ν, obtained in this calculation, is not equal to its
1 2 1=3 ZðxÞ 1 2 1=3 pffiffiffiffiffiffi cot2 φ
Sr ¼ P ¼ P 2B pffiffiffi 3=2 known value, another given value of φ1 may be taken to continue
2 x 2 ð cos φ= sin 2 φÞ þ ln j tan ðφ=2Þj 2kB the calculation above until the obtained value of v is just equal to
ðA45Þ its known value. Then, the obtained corresponding numerical
 J. Sun et al. / International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 51 (2014) 128–139
values of B, k, φα and φ1 are exactly the solution of the problem of
known ν and α. Eq. (A40) is the conditions for the determination
of x from φ with the known values of B and k.
Moreover, from Eqs. (22), (A38) and (A51) the maximum stress
at the central portion ðx r α2 Þ may be written as


1 2 1=3
Srm ¼ P
2 [16] Jensen. HM. The blister test for interface toughness measurement. Eng Fract
21=3 ð1  α2 Þ2=3 cot2 φα
 [17] Wan KT, Mai YW. Fracture mechanics of a shaft-loaded blister of thin flexible
α2 ½ðð cos φ1 = sin 2 φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ2=3
ðA55Þ
and from Eqs. (A44), (A50) and (A51) the maximum deflection at
the central portion ðx r α2 Þ may be written as
22=3 ð1  α2 Þ1=3 ðln j tan ðφα =2Þj  ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ
W m ¼ ð2PÞ1=3
½ðð cos φ1 = sin φ1 Þ þ ln j tan ðφ1 =2ÞjÞ ðð cos φα = sin 2 φα Þ þ ln j tan ðφα =2ÞjÞ1=3
2
References
[1] Fernando M, Kinloch AJ. Use of the ‘inverted-blister’ test to study the adhesion
of photopolymers. Int J Adhes Adhes 1990;10:69–76.
[2] Wan KT. A novel blister test to investigate thin film delamination at elevated
temperature. Int J Adhes Adhes 2000;20:141–3.
[3] Arjun A, Wan KT. Derivation of the strain energy release rate G from first
principles for the pressurized blister test. Int J Adhes Adhes 2005;25:13–8.
[4] Plaut RH, White SA, Dillard DA. Effect of work of adhesion on contact of a
pressurized blister with a flat surface. Int J Adhes Adhes 2003;23:207–14.
[5] Sun JY, Qian SH, Li YM, He XT, Zheng ZL. Theoretical study of adhesion energy
measurement for film/substrate interface using pressurized blister test:
energy release rate. Measurement 2013;46:2278–87.
[6] Chu YZ, Durning CJ. Application of the blister test to the study of polymer–
polymer adhesion. J Appl Polym Sci 1992;45:1151–64.
[7] Jeong HS, White RC, Chu YZ, During CJ. Adhesion study of polyimide to
SI surfaces. Surf Interface Anal 1992;18:289–92.
[8] Dearnley PA. A brief review of test methodologies for surface-engineered
biomedical implant alloys. Surf Coat Technol 2005;198:483–90.
[9] Mittal KL. Adhesion measurement of thin films. Electrocompon Sci Technol
1976;3:21–42.
[10] Ollendorf H, Schneider. D. A comparative study of adhesion test methods for
hard coatings. Surf Coat Technol 1999;113:86–102.
[11] Wan KT. Adherence of an axisymmetric flat punch onto a clamped circular
plate: transition from a rigid plate to a flexible membrane. ASME J Appl Mech
2001;69:110–6.
[12] Wan KT, Guo S, Dillard. DA. A theoretical and numerical study of a thin
clamped circular film under an external load in the presence of a tensile
residual stress. Thin Solid Films 2003;425:150–62.
139
[13] Li G, Wan KT. Adhesion map for thin membranes. ASME J Appl Mech 2014;81:
021018 (1-7).
[14] Liechti KM, Hanson EC. Nonlinear effects in mixed-mode delaminations. Int J
Fract 1988;36:199–217.
[15] Liechti KM, Hanson. EC. An examination of mixed-mode debonding in the
blister test. Adhesively bonded joints: testing, analysis and design. In: Johnson
WS, editor. . Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials; 1988.
p. 13–27.
Mech 1991;40:475–86.
membrane on rigid substrate. Int J Fract 1995;74:181–97.
[18] Xiao LH, Su XP, Wang JH, Zhou. YC. A novel blister test to evaluate the interface
strength between nickel coating and low carbon steel substrate. Mater Sci Eng
2009;501:235–41.
[19] Liu SB, Wang QJ. Determination of Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio for
coatings. Surf Coat Technol 2007;201:6470–7.
ðA56Þ
[20] Chang JY, Yu GP, Huang JH. Determination of Young's modulus and Poisson's
ratio of thin films by combining sin 2ψ X-ray diffraction and laser curvature
methods. Thin Solid Films 2009;517:6759–66.
[21] Sun JY, Hu JL, Zheng ZL, He XT, Geng. HH. A practical method for simultaneous
determination of Poisson's ratio and Young's modulus of elasticity of thin
films. J Mech Sci Technol 2011;25:3165–71.
[22] Dannenberg H. Measurement of adhesion by a blister method. J Appl Polym
Sci 1961;5:125–34.
[23] Huang CK, Lou WM, Tsai CJ, Wu TC, Lin HY. Mechanical properties of polymer
thin film measured by the bulge test. Thin Solid Films 2007;515:7222–6.
[24] Jin CR, Wang. XD. A theoretical study of a thin-film delamination using shaft-
loaded blister test: constitutive relation without delamination. J Mech Phys
Solids 2008;56:2815–31.
[25] Wan KT, Liao K. Measuring mechanical properties of thin flexible films by a
shaft-loaded blister test. Thin Solid Films 1999;352:167–72.
[26] Sun JY, Hu JL, He XT, Zheng ZL, Geng. HH. A theoretical study of thin film
delamination using clamped punch-loaded blister test: energy release rate
and closed-form solution. J Adhes Sci Technol 2011;25:2063–80.
[27] Sun JY, Hu JL, He XT, Zheng. ZL. A theoretical study of a clamped punch-loaded
blister configuration: the quantitative relation of load and deflection. Int J
Mech Sci 2010;52:928–36.
[28] Hencky H. Über den spannungszustand in kreisrunden platten mit versch-
windender biegungssteifigkeit. Z Math Phys 1915;63:311–7.
[29] Alekseev SA. Elastic circular membranes under the uniformly distributed
loads. Eng Corpus 1953;14:196–8.
[30] Chien WZ, Wang ZZ, Xu YG, Chen. SL. The symmetrical deformation of circular
membrane under the action of uniformly distributed loads in its portion. Appl
Math Mech (Engl. Ed.) 1981;2:653–68.