4.7 Article

Prediction and characterization of residual stresses from laser shock peening

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FATIGUE
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 96-108

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2011.08.011

Keywords

Finite elements; Laser shock peening; Residual stresses; Fatigue; Statistics

Funding

  1. Air Force Research Laboratory
  2. DoD [USAF-3446-31-SC-0001]
  3. AFRL/RBSM
  4. AFRL/RXLMN
  5. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
  6. AFRL/RXP

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of laser shock peening (LSP) to enhance the fatigue resistance of metals offers several potential advantages over more conventional surface enhancement techniques such as shot peening, including deeper penetration of the residual stresses, more reliable surface coverage, and the potential for reduced microstructural damage. In the last decade, computational hardware and software resources have advanced to a state that permits numerical simulation of practical LSP processing at a reasonable level of detail, including complex geometric features, multiple and overlapping laser pulses, and intensity variations within the individual laser spots. This article offers some further developments in simulating LSP processes on a realistic scale, as well as some simple methods for distilling and interpreting results from such simulations. A key point of interest is the local variations in residual stress that occur within the processed region, which are quite sensitive to processing variables, and not easily measured experimentally. The simulations suggest that X-ray diffraction measurements of the residual stress field offer only a coarse description of the final residual stress field, and should be interpreted with some caution. We propose some methods for interpreting the simulation results statistically, to provide a clear but accurate characterization of the surface treatment and its effect on fatigue behavior. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available