Fig. 1. Research context diagram of subsurface damage testing

Fig. 1. [in Chinese]

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of indentation fracture mechanics model

Fig. 3. AFM morphology and corresponding two-dimensional profile of the scratched area of single crystal silicon before (a) and after (b) HF etching^[23]

Fig. 4. Corrosion rate curves of machined specimens and matrix specimens^[25]

Fig. 5. Differential corrosion acceleration curve^[25]

Fig. 6. K9 glass grinding subsurface microscopic image^[26]

Fig. 7. K9 glass polished subsurface micrograph^[26]

Fig. 8. Corrosion rate curve of damaged K9 glass^[27]

Fig. 9. Corrosion rate curve of non-damaged K9 glass^[27]

Fig. 10. Morphology of subsurface damage after etching and polishing of optical components^[29]. (a) 8.4 μm; (b) 10.9 μm; (c) 16.5 μm; (d) 19.6 μm

Fig. 11. Schematic diagram of cross-section microscopy measurement

Fig. 12. Micrographs of glass-ceramic subsurface damage measured by cross-sectional microscopy^[30]

Fig. 13. Micrographs of subsurface damage of SiC wafers measured by cross-sectional microscopy^[31]

Fig. 14. Subsurface damage obtained by cross-section polishing method (silicon wafer as co-chip)^[34]

Fig. 15. Subsurface damage obtained by cross-section polishing (polyester as co-chip)^[34]

Fig. 16. Subsurface damage obtained by interfacial bonding^[34]

Fig. 17. Measurement principle diagram of angle polishing method

Fig. 18. SEM micrograph of glass-ceramic angle polishing method^[30]

Fig. 19. Microscopic image of pits in ULE glass^[36]

Fig. 20. Schematic diagram of magnetorheological polishing bevel method

Fig. 21. Images of magnetorheological polishing bevel when the damage is large^[37]

Fig. 22. Images of magnetorheological polishing bevel when damage is small^[37]

Fig. 23. Cross-sectional profile of magnetorheological polishing class^[38]

Fig. 24. Micrograph of head of magnetorheological polishing class^[39]

Fig. 25. Micrograph of the tail end of the magnetorheological polishing class^[39]

Fig. 26. Overall morphology of subsurface damage of RB-SiC material^[40]

Fig. 27. Schematic diagram of residual stress determination by X-ray diffraction method

Fig. 28. Schematic diagram of laser confocal microscopy

Fig. 29. Longitudinal distribution of subsurface damage in different sections^[47]

Fig. 30. Schematic diagram of the contact between fluorescent particles and the surface of the sample

Fig. 31. Schematic diagram of laser modulation scattering technology

Fig. 32. Schematic diagram of laser scattering confocal microscopy

Fig. 33. Measurement principle of transmission total internal reflection microscopy

Fig. 34. Measurement principle of reflection total internal reflection microscopy

Fig. 35. Schematic diagram of optical coherence tomography

Fig. 36. Schematic diagram of the measurement of subsurface defects in optical components by high-frequency scanning acoustic microscopy

Fig. 37. Schematic diagram of two crack configurations

Fig. 38. Schematic diagram of the model of the spherical indenter

Fig. 39. Schematic diagram of the indentation model of the sharp indenter

Fig. 40. Relationship between subsurface crack depth and surface roughness

Fig. 41. Schematic diagram of the interaction mechanism between abrasive particles, grinding discs, and processing specimens

Fig. 42. Influence curve of abrasive particle size on SSD^[69]

Fig. 43. Influence curve of grinding pressure on SSD^[69]

Fig. 44. Influence curve of grinding disc hardness on SSD^[69]

Fig. 45. Influence curve of grinding disc speed on SSD^[69]

Fig. 46. Influence curve of slurry concentration on SSD^[69]