Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 53, Issue 11, pp 8567–8589 | Cite as

Local strain redistribution in a coarse-grained nickel-based superalloy subjected to shot-peening, fatigue or thermal exposure investigated using synchrotron X-ray Laue microdiffraction

  • G. Altinkurt
  • M. FèvreEmail author
  • G. Geandier
  • M. Dehmas
  • O. Robach
  • J.-S. Micha


The Laue microdiffraction technique was used to investigate the strain field caused by the shot-peening operation and its redistribution after thermal hold or fatigue in a model nickel-based superalloy with an average grain size of \(40\,{\upmu }\hbox {m}\). Micrometer and millimeter size mappings showed that the plastic deformation introduced by shot-peening in the whole sample partially relaxes after a thermal exposure at \(450^{\circ }\hbox {C}\) and was fully redistributed by the fatigue of the material, except in the hardened layer close to the sample edge. Diffraction patterns permitted to measure separately the strains related to the average alloy (\(\gamma +\gamma ^{\prime }\)) and to the \(\gamma ^{\prime }\) phase. No difference was observed between the two deviatoric strain fields. Even if there were small stresses in the inner part of the samples, the sensitivity of the Laue microdiffraction method was large enough to quantitatively characterize the crystal misorientations and the deviatoric strain redistributions. Useful data were provided not only at the grain scale but also at the mesoscopic scale, thus bridging the gap between the \(\hbox {sin}^{2}\psi \) and Ortner’s methods used to determine residual stresses, respectively, in fine and single-grain microstructures. The obtained results are also of first interest for a quantitative comparison with HR-EBSD measurements in the scanning electron microscope. Energy coupled measurements with an energy-dispersive point detector were also performed to determine the full elastic strain tensors associated with the \(\gamma \) and \(\gamma ^{\prime }\) phases. We demonstrated that, for Ni-based superalloys, the accuracy on strains and stresses was, respectively, of the order of \(1\times 10^{-3}\) and 250 MPa for the diagonal components of tensors. The measurements suffered from the 150 eV resolution of the detector which made it difficult to the separate the energies of the \(\gamma \) and \(\gamma ^{\prime }\) phases. Owing to large crystal misorientations, the microdiffraction technique was not able to determine elastic strains and hardening in the highly deformed layer, where a large amount of plastic strain and a number of defects were accumulated. Some improvements are proposed to overcome these difficulties.



This work benefited from the support of the REMEDDIES project (ANR-13-BS09-016) of the French National Research Agency (ANR) and the French Aeronautical and Space Research Foundation (FRAE). The synchrotron data used in this article were collected during ESRF experiments MA3096, 32-02 778 and IN995. Authors gratefully acknowledge the BM32 staff for helpful discussions and technical support, as well as D. Locq, C. Liard and P. Kanouté from ONERA for the alloy development and mechanical testing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    McClung R (2007) A literature survey on the stability and significance of residual stresses during fatigue. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 30(3):173–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antolovich D (2015) Microstructural aspects of fatigue in Ni-base superalloys. Philos Trans R Soc A 373(2038):1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chaudonneret M (1993) A simple and efficient multiaxial fatigue damage model for engineering applications of macro-crack initiation. J Eng Mater Technol 115 115(4):373–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boittin G, Locq D, Rafray A, Caron P, Kanouté P, Gallerneau F, Cailletaud G (2012) Influence of \(\gamma ^{\prime }\) precipitate size and distribution on LCF behavior of a PM disk superalloy. In: Superalloys 2012. Wiley, pp 167–176Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Korsunsky A (2005) The modelling of residual stresses due to surface peening using eigenstrain distributions. J Strain Anal Eng 40(8):817–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cao W, Khadhraoui M, Brenier B, Guédou JY, Castex L (1994) Thermomechanical relaxation of residual stress in shot peened nickel base superalloy. Mater Sci Technol 10(11):947–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khadhraoui M, Cao W, Castex L, Guédou J (1997) Experimental investigations and modelling of relaxation behaviour of shot peening residual stresses at high temperature for nickel base superalloys. Mater Sci Technol 13(4):360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Evans A, Kim SB, Shackleton J, Bruno G, Preuss M, Withers P (2005) Relaxation of residual stress in shot peened Udimet 720Li under high temperature isothermal fatigue. Int J Fatigue 27(10–12):1530–1534 fatigue Damage of Structural Materials V5th International Conference on Fatigue Damage of Structural MaterialsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    John R, Buchanan D, Caton M, Jha S (2010) Stability of shot peen residual stresses in IN100 subjected to creep and fatigue loading. Procedia Eng 2(1):1887–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stone H, Reed R, Holden T (1999a) Determination of the plane specific elastic constants of Waspaloy using neutron diffraction. Scr Mater 40(3):1797–1808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stone H, Holden T, Reed R (1999b) On the generation of microstrains during the plastic deformation of Waspaloy. Acta Mater 47(17):4435–4448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Connor L, Stone H, Collins D, Preuss M, Hardy M, Rae C (2014) The effect of cooling rate from solution on the lattice misfit during isothermal aging of a Ni-base superalloy. Metall Mater Trans A 45(5):2436–2444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Preuss M, da Fonseca JQ, Grant B, Knoche E, Moat R, Daymond M (2008) The effect of \(\gamma ^{\prime }\) particle size on the deformation mechanism in an advanced polycrystalline nickel-base superalloy. Proceedings of superalloys 2008Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buchanan D, John R (2008) Relaxation of shot-peened residual stresses under creep loading. Scr Mater 59(3):286–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Child D, West G, Thomson R (2011) Assessment of surface hardening effects from shot peening on a Ni-based alloy using electron backscatter diffraction techniques. Acta Mater 59(12):4825–4834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Foss B, Gray S, Hardy M, Stekovic S, McPhail D, Shollock B (2013) Analysis of shot-peening and residual stress relaxation in the nickel-based superalloy RR1000. Acta Mater 61(7):2548–2559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Messé O, Stekovic S, Hardy M, Rae C (2014) Characterization of plastic deformation induced by shot-peening in a Ni-base superalloy. JOM 66(12):2502–2515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Viereck D, Lhe D, Vhringer O, Macherauch E (1991) Relaxation of residual stresses in nickel-base superalloy due to dislocation creep. In: International conference of strength of metals and alloys 9, Freund Publishing, pp 14–19Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Musinski W, McDowell D (2015) On the eigenstrain application of shot-peened residual stresses within a crystal plasticity framework: application to Ni-base superalloy specimens. Int J Mech Sci 100:195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barabash R, Ice G (2014) Strain and dislocation gradients from diffraction: spatially-resolved local structure and defects. Imperial College Press, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kang K, Yao N, He M, Evans A (2003) A method for in situ measurement of the residual stress in thin films by using the focused ion beam. Thin Solid Films 443(1):71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Korsunsky AM, Sebastiani M, Bemporad E (2009) Focused ion beam ring drilling for residual stress evaluation. Mater Lett 63(22):1961–1963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salvati E, Lunt A, Ying S, Sui T, Zhang H, Heason C, Baxter G, Korsunsky A (2017) Eigenstrain reconstruction of residual strains in an additively manufactured and shot peened nickel superalloy compressor blade. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 320(Supplement C):335–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Benedetti M, Fontanari V, Winiarski B, Allahkarami M, Hanan J (2016) Residual stresses reconstruction in shot peened specimens containing sharp and blunt notches by experimental measurements and finite element analysis. Int J Fatigue 87(Supplement C):102–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Müller EMP (1961) Das sin\(^2\psi \)-verfahren der röntgenographischen spannungsmessung. Z Angew Phys 13(7):305–312Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ortner B (1983) Rontgenographische spannungsmessung an einkristallinen proben. In: Eingenspannungen, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Metallkunde, Oberursel, pp 49–68Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ortner B (1985) The choice of lattice planes in X-ray strain measurements of single crystals. Adv X-Ray Anal 29:113–118Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morançais A, Fèvre M, François M, Guel N, Kruch S, Kanouté P, Longuet A (2015) Residual stress determination in a shot-peened nickel-based single-crystal superalloy using X-ray diffraction. J Appl Cryst 48(6):1761–1776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wlodek S, Kelly M, Alden D (1992) The structure of N18. In: SD Antolovich RM RW Stusrud (ed) Superalloys 1992, Wiley, pp 467–471Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ulrich O, Biquard X, Bleuet P, Geaymond O, Gergaud P, Micha JS, Robach O, Rieutord F (2011) A new white beam X-ray microdiffraction setup on the BM32 beamline at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility. Rev Sci Instr 82(3):033,908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Robach O, Micha JS, Ulrich O, Gergaud P (2011) Full local elastic strain tensor from Laue microdiffraction: simultaneous Laue pattern and spot energy measurement. J Appl Cryst 44(4):688–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Micha JS, Robach O (2010).
  33. 33.
    Larson B, Yang W, Ice G, Budai J, Tischler J (2002) Three-dimensional X-ray structural microscopy with submicrometre resolution. Nature 415(6874):887–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang W, Larson B, Tischler J, Ice G, Budai J, Liu W (2004) Differential-aperture X-ray structural microscopy: a submicron-resolution three-dimensional probe of local microstructure and strain. Micron 35(6):431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chung J, Ice G (1999) Automated indexing for texture and strain measurement with broad-bandpass X-ray microbeams. J Appl Phys 86(9):5249–5255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hofmann F, Eve S, Belnoue J, Micha JS, Korsunsky A (2011) Analysis of strain error sources in micro-beam Laue diffraction. Nucl Instrum Methods A 660(1):130–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ice G, Chung J, Lowe W, Williams E, Edelman J (2000) Small-displacement monochromator for microdiffraction experiments. Rev Sci Instrum 71(5):2001–2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Send S, von Kozierowski M, Panzner T, Gorfman S, Nurdan K, Walenta AH, Pietsch U, Leitenberger W, Hartmann R, Strüder L (2009) Energy-dispersive Laue diffraction by means of a frame-store pnCCD. J Appl Cryst 42(6):1139–1146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Robach O, Micha JS, Ulrich O, Geaymond O, Sicardy O, Härtwig J, Rieutord F (2013) A tunable multicolour ‘rainbow’ filter for improved stress and dislocation density field mapping in polycrystals using X-ray Laue microdiffraction. Acta Cryst A 69(2):164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lautridou JC, Guédou JY (1994) Heat treatment upgrading on PM superalloy N18 for high temperature applications. In: Coutsouradis D, et al (eds) Materials for advanced power engineering, Part II. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 951–960Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Honnorat Y (1991) N18, damage tolerant nickel-based superalloy for military aircraft turbine discs. Mater Tech 79(5–6):19–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chao J, Mark A, Fuller MS, McIntyre NS, Holt R, Klassen R, Liu W (2009) Study of residual elastic- and plastic-deformation in uniaxial tensile strained nickel-based alloy 600 samples by polychromatic X-ray microdiffraction (PXM) and neutron diffraction methods. Mater Sci Eng A 524(1–2):20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wright S, Nowell M, Basinger J (2012) Angular precision of automated electron backscatter diffraction measurements. In: Textures of materials—ICOTOM 16, Trans Tech Publications, Materials Science Forum, vol 702, pp 548–553Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brough I, Bate PS, Humphreys FJ (2006) Optimising the angular resolution of EBSD. Mater Sci Technol 22(11):1279–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Altinkurt G, Fèvre M, Robach O, Micha JS, Geandier G, Dehmas M (2017) Full elastic strain tensor determination at the phase scale in a powder metallurgy nickel-based superalloy using X-ray Laue microdiffraction. J Appl Cryst 50(6):1754–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Salvati E, Korsunsky AM (2017) An analysis of macro- and micro-scale residual stresses of Type I, II and III using FIB-DIC micro-ring-core milling and crystal plasticity FE modelling. Int J Plast 98:123–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Voigt W (1928) Lehrbuch der Kristallphysik. TeubnerGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Reuss A (1929) Berechnung der Fliessgrenze von Mischkristallen auf Grund Plastizitätsbedingung für Einkristalle. ZAMM-Z Angew Math Mech 9(1):49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire d’Étude des Microstructures, UMR 104 CNRS-ONERAChâtillonFrance
  2. 2.IJL, UMR 7189 CNRS-Université de LorraineNancyFrance
  4. 4.Université Grenoble AlpesGrenobleFrance
  5. 5.CEA-INAC-MEMGrenobleFrance
  6. 6.CNRSGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations