Advances in Scratch Characterization of Automotive Clearcoats

  • Pierre MorelEmail author
  • Linqian Feng
  • Nadia Benhamida
  • Warren Denning
  • Brandon Frye
  • Andrew T. Detwiler
  • Leslie T. Baker
  • Deepanjan Bhattacharya
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)


Resistance to scratch and mar damage has been emphasized by both OEMs and consumers as a critical factor to maintain a vehicle’s appearance over its service lifetime. As coating formulators improve the quality of their products, the traditional testing methods used in the paint industry are not always capable of reliably showing the improvement in mechanical properties and scratch resistance. Fundamental methodologies including instrumented indentation and scratch testing at multiple scales are used in this work as part of a product development strategy to better understand the scratch and mar behavior of automotive topcoats. A comparative study between several polyol resins technologies used in automotive clearcoats is reported in this study. A comparison between some industry standard methods such as the Amtec–Kistler car wash test and the crockmeter, with a combined approach using instrumented indentation and instrumented scratch testing at different scales is presented. The latter combined testing approach provides a more complete understanding of the mechanical and viscoelastic properties of the coatings studied.


Scratch resistance Instrumented scratch testing Micro scratch Viscoelasticity Automotive clearcoats Amtec–Kistler carwash Crockmeter Tribology 


  1. 1.
    Bertrand-Lambotte P, Loubet JL, Verpy C, Pavan S (2001) Nano-indentation, scratching and atomic force microscopy for evaluating the mar resistance of automotive clearcoats: study of the ductile scratches. Thin Solid Films 398–399:306–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Noh SM, Lee JW, Nam JH, Park JM, Jung HW (2012) Analysis of scratch characteristics of automotive clearcoats containing silane modified blocked isocyanates via carwash and nano-scratch tests. Prog Org Coat 74:192–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Seubert C, Nichols M, Henderson K, Mechtel M, Klimmasch T, Pohl T (2010) The effect of weathering and thermal treatment on the scratch recovery characteristics of clearcoats. J Coat Technol Res 7:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Seubert C, Nietering K, Nichols M, Wykoff R, Bollin S (2012) An overview of the scratch resistance of automotive coatings: exterior clearcoats and polycarbonate hardcoats. Coatings 2:221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    LeBeau P (2015) Americans holding onto their cars longer than ever. In: CNBC.
  6. 6. vehicle requirements, “Good condition with no cosmetic damage”
  7. 7.
    Kutschera M, Sander R, Herrmann P, Weckenmann U, Poppe A (2006) Scratch resistance of automobile clearcoats: chemistry and characterization on the micro-and nanoscale. JCT Res 3:91–97Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lin L, Blackman GS, Matheson RR (2001) Quantitative characterization of scratch and mar behavior of polymer coatings. Mater Sci Eng A 317:163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin L, Blackman GS, Matheson RR (2000) A new approach to characterize scratch and mar resistance of automotive coatings. Prog Org Coat 40:85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ASTM_D7187-15 (2015) Standard test method for measuring mechanistic aspects of scratch/mar behavior of paint coatings by nanoscratching. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
  11. 11.
    Gauthier C, Durier AL, Fond C, Schirrer R (2006) Scratching of a coated polymer and mechanical analysis of a scratch resistance solution. Tribol Int 39:88–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Demirci I, Gauthier C, Schirrer R (2005) Mechanical analysis of the damage of a thin polymeric coating during scratching: role of the ratio of the coating thickness to the roughness of a scratching tip. Thin Solid Films 479:207–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seubert CM, Nichols ME (2007) Scaling behavior in the scratching of automotive clearcoats. J Coat Technol Res 4:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oliver WC, Pharr GM (1992) An improved technique for determining hardness and elastic modulus using load and displacement sensing indentation experiments. J Mater Res 7:1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oliver WC, Pethica JB (1989) Method for continuous determination of the elastic stiffness of contact between two bodies. US Patent No. 4,848,141, 18 July 1989Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hay J, Herbert E (2013) Measuring the complex modulus of polymers by instrumented indentation testing. Exp Tech 37:55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Asif SA, Wahl KJ, Colton RJ (1999) Nanoscale surface mechanical property measurements using force modulation technique. Abstr Pap Am Chem Soc 217:U626Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jardret V, Zahouani H, Loubet JL, Mathia TG (1998) Understanding and quantification of elastic and plastic deformation during a scratch test. Wear 218:8–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Burnett PJ, Rickerby DS (1987) The relationship between hardness and scratch adhesion. Thin Solid Films 154:403–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Morel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Linqian Feng
    • 2
  • Nadia Benhamida
    • 3
  • Warren Denning
    • 1
  • Brandon Frye
    • 1
  • Andrew T. Detwiler
    • 2
  • Leslie T. Baker
    • 2
  • Deepanjan Bhattacharya
    • 2
  1. 1.Anton Paar USAAshlandUSA
  2. 2.Eastman Chemical CompanyKingsportUSA
  3. 3.Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, IncSuperior TownshipUSA

Personalised recommendations