Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of ball size and impact velocity on the microstructure and hardness of surface mechanical attrition–treated 304L steel: experiment and finite element simulations

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT), the processing parameters like the diameter of hardened steel balls/shots (D) and their impact velocity (V) are crucial in affecting the mechanical properties of the materials. This study is focused on understanding the effect of D and V on microstructural and hardness variation during the SMAT process. The SMAT has been performed on AISI 304L steel using 3-mm and 8-mm diameter balls with a combination of 1 m/s and 10 m/s impact velocity. Microstructure of the SMATed material shows twin distribution near the top surface changeover from coarser to finer when V increases from a low to significantly high value, whereas it changes marginally with an increase in D. Nanoindentation experiments performed along the depth of SMATed material reveal that the near-surface hardness is mainly governed by V and weakly influenced by D. However, the hardened layer thickness is enhanced by increasing either of these parameters. The complementary finite element (FE) simulations of the single impact SMAT process are performed using the rate-dependent Johnson–Cook plasticity model to provide the mechanistic reasons for the behavior observed from the experiments. A strategy to determine the hardness-depth profile of SMATed steel through FE simulations is developed. The hardness behavior of the SMATed steel is linked to the effects of D and V on the residual equivalent stress and equivalent plastic strain at the surface. The hardness away from the surface is influenced by the shot size and shot velocity. The empirical relations that show the dependence of hardness on the SMAT parameters are determined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Kheiri S, Mirzadeh H, Naghizadeh M (2019) Tailoring the microstructure and mechanical properties of AISI 316L austenitic stainless steel via cold rolling and reversion annealing. Mater Sci Eng, A 759:90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.05.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. San Marchi C, Ronevich JA, Sabisch JEC, Sugar JD, Medlin DL, Somerday B (2020) Effect of microstructural and environmental variables on ductility of austenitic stainless steels. Int J Hydrogen Energy 46(23):12338–12347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.09.069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Capeletti T, Louthan M Jr (1977) The tensile ductility of austenitic steels in air and hydrogen. J Eng Mater Technol 99(2):153–158. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3443426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hosseinalipour S, Ershad-Langroudi A, Hayati AN, Nabizade-Haghighi A (2010) Characterization of sol–gel coated 316L stainless steel for biomedical applications. Prog Org Coat 67(4):371–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2010.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rho BS, Hong HU, Nam SW (2000) The effect of δ-ferrite on fatigue cracks in 304L steels. Int J Fatigue 22(8):683–690. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-1123(00)00043-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Soyama H (2020) Comparison between shot peening, cavitation peening, and laser peening by observation of crack initiation and crack growth in stainless steel. Metals 10(1):63. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10010063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tian J, Villegas J, Yuan W, Fielden D, Shaw L, Liaw P, Klarstrom D (2007) A study of the effect of nanostructured surface layers on the fatigue behaviors of a C-2000 superalloy. Mater Sci Eng, A 468:164–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2006.10.150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang C, Wang C, Wang L, Lai Y, Li K, Zhou Y (2020) A dislocation density–based comparative study of grain refinement, residual stresses, and surface roughness induced by shot peening and surface mechanical attrition treatment. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 108:505–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05413-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ke L, Jian L (1999) Surface nanocrystallization (SNC) of metallic materials-presentation of the concept behind a new approach. J Mater Sci Technol 15(3):193–197. https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0000506802&origin=recordpage. Accessed date March 3, 2021

  10. Gatey A, Hosmani S, Singh R (2016) Surface mechanical attrition treated AISI 304L steel: role of process parameters. Surf Eng 32(1):69–78. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743294415Y.0000000056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhu L, Guan Y, Wang Y, Xie Z, Lin J (2017) Influence of process parameters of ultrasonic shot peening on surface nanocrystallization and hardness of pure titanium. Int J Adv Manuf Technol  89(5–8):1451–1468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9181-4

  12. Lin Y, Cai Z-B, Li Z-Y, Yin M-G, Wang W-J, He W-F, Zhou Z-R (2019) Study on the abrasive wear behavior of laser shock peening Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy under controlled cycling impact. Wear 426:112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2019.01.112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goli F, Jamaati R (2019) Effect of strain path during cold rolling on the microstructure, texture, and mechanical properties of AA2024 aluminum alloy. Materials Research Express 6(6):066514. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab0a1f

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Astaraee AH, Miresmaeili R, Bagherifard S, Guagliano M, Aliofkhazraei M (2017) Incorporating the principles of shot peening for a better understanding of surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT) by simulations and experiments. Mater Des 116:365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.12.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wen M, Wen C, Hodgson P, Li Y (2012) Thermal oxidation behaviour of bulk titanium with nanocrystalline surface layer. Corros Sci 59:352–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2012.03.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang L, Wang Z, Lu K (2011) Grain size effects on the austenitization process in a nanostructured ferritic steel. Acta Mater 59(9):3710–3719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Frontán J, Zhang Y, Dao M, Lu J, Gálvez F, Jérusalem A (2012) Ballistic performance of nanocrystalline and nanotwinned ultrafine crystal steel. Acta Mater 60(3):1353–1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.11.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bahl S, Shreyas P, Trishul M, Suwas S, Chatterjee K (2015) Enhancing the mechanical and biological performance of a metallic biomaterial for orthopedic applications through changes in the surface oxide layer by nanocrystalline surface modification. Nanoscale 7(17):7704–7716. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5NR00574D

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Olugbade TO, Lu J (2020) Literature review on the mechanical properties of materials after surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT). Nano Materials Science 2(1):3–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoms.2020.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dureau C, Novelli M, Arzaghi M, Massion R, Bocher P, Nadot Y, Grosdidier T (2020) On the influence of ultrasonic surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT) on the fatigue behavior of the 304L austenitic stainless steel. Metals 10(1):100. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10010100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chan H, Ruan H, Chen A, Lu J (2010) Optimization of the strain rate to achieve exceptional mechanical properties of 304 stainless steel using high speed ultrasonic surface mechanical attrition treatment. Acta Mater 58(15):5086–5096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2010.05.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tao N, Wang Z, Tong W, Sui M, Lu J, Lu K (2002) An investigation of surface nanocrystallization mechanism in Fe induced by surface mechanical attrition treatment. Acta Mater 50(18):4603–4616. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(02)00310-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang X, Lu J, Shi S (2011)A computational study of plastic deformation in AISI 304 induced by surface mechanical attrition treatment. Mech Adv Mater Struct 18(8):572–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2011.621828.

  24. Tao N, Zhang H, Lu J, Lu K (2003) Development of nanostructures in metallic materials with low stacking fault energies during surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT). Mater Trans 44(10):1919–1925. https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.44.1919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Arifvianto B, Mahardika M, Dewo P, Iswanto P, Salim U (2011) Effect of surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT) on microhardness, surface roughness and wettability of AISI 316L. Mater Chem Phys 125(3):418–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2010.10.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Samih Y, Beausir B, Bolle B, Grosdidier T (2013) In-depth quantitative analysis of the microstructures produced by Surface Mechanical Attrition Treatment (SMAT). Mater Charact 83:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2013.06.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Novelli M, Bocher P, Grosdidier T (2018) Effect of cryogenic temperatures and processing parameters on gradient-structure of a stainless steel treated by ultrasonic surface mechanical attrition treatment. Mater Charact 139:197–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2018.02.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Edberg J, Lindgren LE, Ken-Ichiro M (1995) Shot peening simulated by two different finite element formulations. International Conference on Numerical Methods in Industrial Forming Processes: Balkema Publishers, AA/Taylor & Francis The Netherlands, 18/06/1995–21/06/1995

  29. Guagliano M (2001) Relating Almen intensity to residual stresses induced by shot peening: a numerical approach. J Mater Process Technol 110(3):277–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00893-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chen Z, Sun Z, Panicaud B (2018) Constitutive modeling of TWIP/TRIP steels and numerical simulation of single impact during Surface Mechanical Attrition Treatment. Mech Mater 122:69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2018.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Herrera C, Ponge D, Raabe D (2011) Design of a novel Mn-based 1 GPa duplex stainless TRIP steel with 60% ductility by a reduction of austenite stability. Acta Mater 59(11):4653–4664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mahato B, Sahu T, Shee S, Sahu P, Sawaguchi T, Kömi J, Karjalainen L (2017) Simultaneous twinning nucleation mechanisms in an Fe–Mn–Si–Al twinning induced plasticity steel. Acta Mater 132:264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2017.04.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Abreu HF, Carvalho SS, Lima Neto PD, Santos RP, Freire VN, Silva PM, Tavares SS (2007) Deformation induced martensite in an AISI 301LN stainless steel: characterization and influence on pitting corrosion resistance. Mater Res 10(4):359–366. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-14392007000400007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tiamiyu A, Szpunar J, Odeshi A (2019) Strain rate sensitivity and activation volume of AISI 321 stainless steel under dynamic impact loading: grain size effect. Mater Charact 154:7–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2019.05.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Miao HY, Larose S, Perron C, Lévesque M (2009) On the potential applications of a 3D random finite element model for the simulation of shot peening. Adv Eng Softw 40(10):1023–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2009.03.013

  36. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wu G, Wang Z, Gan J, Yang Y, Meng Q, Wei S, Huang H (2019) FE analysis of shot-peening-induced residual stresses of AISI 304 stainless steel by considering mesh density and friction coefficient. Surf Eng 35(3):242–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/02670844.2018.1470817

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Cai S, Liu J, Zhang P, Li C, Cheng Y (2020) Dynamic response of sandwich panels with multi-layered aluminum foam/UHMWPE laminate cores under air blast loading. Int J Impact Eng 138:103475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.103475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Maurel-Pantel A, Fontaine M, Thibaud S, Gelin J-C (2012) 3D FEM simulations of shoulder milling operations on a 304L stainless steel. Simul Model Pract Theory 22:13–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2011.10.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tasdemirci A, Sahin S, Kara A, Turan K (2015) Crushing and energy absorption characteristics of combined geometry shells at quasi-static and dynamic strain rates: experimental and numerical study. Thin-Walled Structures 86:83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2014.09.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Singh D, Basha DA, Singh A, Devan RS, Hosmani SS (2020) Microstructural and passivation response of severely deformed AISI 304 steel surface: the role of surface mechanical attrition treatment. J Mater Eng Perform 29(10):6898–6911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-020-05161-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Iida K (2000) Dent and affected layer produced by shot peening. The Shot Peener 14(3):4-7

  43. Ghelichi R, Crispiatico G, Guagliano M, Bagherifard S (2018) An energetic approach to predict the effect of shot peening-based surface treatments. Metals 8(3):190. https://doi.org/10.3390/met8030190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhou F, Jiang W, Du Y, Xiao C (2019) A comprehensive numerical approach for analyzing the residual stresses in AISI 301LN stainless steel induced by shot peening. Materials 12(20):3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12203338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Meguid S, Shagal G, Stranart J (2002) 3D FE analysis of peening of strain-rate sensitive materials using multiple impingement model. Int J Impact Eng 27(2):119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00043-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Jianming W, Feihong L, Feng Y, Gang Z (2011) Shot peening simulation based on SPH method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56(5–8):571–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3193-x

  47. Hirmukhe S, Prasad KE, Singh I (2020) Investigation of pressure sensitive plastic flow in nanoglasses from finite element simulations. Scripta Mater 180:45–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2020.01.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lichinchi M, Lenardi C, Haupt J, Vitali R (1998) Simulation of Berkovich nanoindentation experiments on thin films using finite element method. Thin Solid Films 312(1–2):240–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6090(97)00739-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Nanoindentor Facility at the Dept. of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science, IIT Bombay, is kindly acknowledged.

Funding

This research was supported by the Science and Engineering Research Board under Grant No. EMR/2017/001196.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Metallurgy Engineering and Materials Science, Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Simrol, Indore, 453552, India

    Vikesh Kumar & Santosh Sattappa Hosmani

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Simrol, Indore, 453552, India

    Anurag Sharma & Indrasen Singh

Authors
  1. Vikesh Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anurag Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Santosh Sattappa Hosmani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Indrasen Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Vikesh Kumar: conceptualization, experimentation, simulation and analysis, and writing-original draft. Anurag Sharma: simulation and analysis. Santosh Sattappa Hosmani: conceptualization, experimentation, project administration, supervision, reviewing, and editing. Indrasen Singh: conceptualization, simulation and analysis, project administration, supervision, reviewing, and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Indrasen Singh.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This research does not involve human participants and/or animals.

Consent to participate

All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Consent for publication

All authors have read and agreed to publish the final version of the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, V., Sharma, A., Hosmani, S.S. et al. Effect of ball size and impact velocity on the microstructure and hardness of surface mechanical attrition–treated 304L steel: experiment and finite element simulations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 120, 3251–3267 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-08978-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-08978-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation