also conducted the testing revealed that wear scars of the un coined dimple against gimbal a thinnest carbon overcoat was smaller than the wear scars for gimbal b and c respectively the wear scar of the un coined dimple versus gimbal d was of the same order of magnitude as that of gimbal a the largest wear scar was obtained for the un lubricated sst dimple while the smallest wear scar was seen to occur for the lubricated sst gimbal friction coefficient tests were conducted for a coined dimple as a function of wear cycles against gimbal a 10 nm dlc thickness gimbal b 50 nm dlc thickness gimbal c 250 nm dlc thickness gimbal d 500 nm dlc thickness and a lubricated and an un lubricated stainless steel gimbal the testing revealed that the friction coefficient of gimbal a with the thinnest carbon overcoat was lower than that of gimbal b or gimbal c the friction coefficient of gimbal d was lower than that of gimbal b and c but higher than that of gimbal a the friction coefficient for the un lubricated stainless steel was highest while the friction coefficient of the lubricated sst gimbal falls between the other tests this behavior was found to be very similar to that of the un coined dimple.