4.5 Review

Why Is It So Challenging to Measure Residual Stresses ?

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS
Volume 62, Issue 9, Pages 1521-1530

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11340-022-00879-x

Keywords

Residual Stress; Measurement; Challenges

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. U.S. Department of Energy through the Los Alamos National Laboratory (National Nuclear Security Administration of U.S. Department of Energy) [89233218CNA000001]
  3. European Union [953219]
  4. Henry Royce Institute through EPSRC grants [EP/R00661X/1, EP/S019367/1, EP/P025021/1, EP/P025498/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study identifies and describes the challenges in residual stress measurement methods and provides approaches to address these challenges. Despite the challenges, residual stress measurements can be successfully undertaken in practice.
Background Residual stresses have a hidden character because they exist in a material without the presence of any external loads. They cannot easily be added or subtracted in a quantified manner, as is done when measuring applied stresses, and so are much more challenging to measure. Objective The objective here is to identify and describe the various features that make residual stress measurement methods challenging and to consider the ways that these challenges can be addressed in practice. Methods Various of the most common residual stress measurements methods are considered and the challenges associated with them are identified and classified. Results Five major challenges for residual stress measurements, and the approaches used for their resolution, are identified. Conclusions Despite the various challenges that need to be overcome, residual stress measurements can be successfully undertaken in practice. The most significant feature for success is a highly skilled and knowledge practitioner.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available