Advertisement

Experimental Techniques

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 37–47 | Cite as

Effect of Shot Peening on Ballistic Limit of Al6061-T651 Aluminium Alloy Plates

  • M. Burak ToparliEmail author
Applications Paper
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

A series of impact experiments were conducted to Al6061-T651 plates to investigate the effect of shot peening to the ballistic limit. The experiments were carried out by a gas gun set-up and tungsten-based cube projectiles were employed. During the experiments, projectiles were impacted on the target plates either from the shot peened-surface or from the back-surface. The ballistic limits were obtained for the base plate and two shot peened-target plates processed with two different Almen intensities, 12A and 16A. In addition, hardness, residual stress and surface roughness measurements as well as elemental analysis were conducted for the base plate and shot peened plates. According to the experimental work, it was concluded that despite the hardness increase and compressive residual stress fields, two well-known benefits of shot peening for fatigue life enhancement, shot peening did not offer a significant improvement in the ballistic limit for the projectile-target set-up used in this study.

Keywords

Shot peening Ballistic limit Hardness Residual stress 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank to Salih Saran, Ilker Atik and Onur Dincer of TUBITAK SAGE. Dr. Caner Simsir, Zeynep Ozturk and Emin Tamer, members of The Metal Forming Center of Excellence of Atilim University, Turkey are also acknowledged for residual stress measurements.

References

  1. 1.
    Peyre P, Merrien P, Lieurade HP, Fabbro R, Bignonnet A (1993) Optimization of the residual stresses induced by laser shock treatment and fatigue life improvement of 2 cast Aluminium alloys. In: The fifth international conference on shot peening, pp 301–310Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hill M, Pistochini TE, DeWald A (2005) Optimization of residual stress and fatigue life in laser peened components. The ninth international conference of shot peening, pp 156–162Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Toparli MB (2012) Analysis of residual stress fields in aerospace materials after laser peening. In: Materials engineering. The Open University, Milton Keynes, UKGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Symth N (2014) Effect on fatigue performance of residual stress induced via laser shock peening in mechanically damaged 2024-T351 Aluminium sheet. In: School of Applied Sciences. Cranfield University, Cranfield, UKGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodopoulos CA, Kermanidis AT, Statnikov E, Vityazev V, Korolkov O (2007) The effect of surface engineering treatments on the fatigue behavior of 2024-T351 aluminum alloy. J Mater Eng Perform 16:30–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Backman ME, Goldsmith W (1978) The mechanics of penetration of projectiles into targets. Int J Eng Sci 16:1–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zukas JA (1990) High velocity impact dynamics. WileyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Forrestal MJ, Luk VK, Brar NS (1990) Perforation of aluminum armor plates with conical-nose projectiles. Mech Mater 10:97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Forrestal MJ, Luk VK, Rosenberg Z, Brar NS (1992) Penetration of 7075-T651 aluminum targets with ogival-nose rods. Int J Solids Struct 29:1729–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Piekutowski AJ, Forrestal MJ, Poormon KL, Warren TL (1996) Perforation of aluminum plates with ogive-nose steel rods at normal and oblique impacts. Int J Impact Eng 18:877–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Forrestal MJ, J. Piekutowski A. (2000) Penetration experiments with 6061-T6511 aluminum targets and spherical-nose steel projectiles at striking velocities between 0.5 and 3.0 km/s. Int J Impact Eng, 24: 57–67Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Børvik T, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS, Malo KA (1999) Ballistic penetration of steel plates. Int J Impact Eng 22:855–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sevkat E (2012) Experimental and numerical approaches for estimating ballistic limit velocities of woven composite beams. Int J Impact Eng 45:16–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tham CY (2005) Reinforced concrete perforation and penetration simulation using AUTODYN-3D. Finite Elem Anal Des 41:1401–1410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Børvik T, Hopperstad OS, Langseth M, Malo KA (2003) Effect of target thickness in blunt projectile penetration of Weldox 460 E steel plates. Int J Impact Eng 28:413–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Piekutowski AJ, Forrestal MJ, Poormon KL, Warren TL (1999) Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nose steel projectiles with striking velocities between 0.5 and 3.0 km/s. Int J Impact Eng 23:723–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Warren TL, Poormon KL (2001) Penetration of 6061-T6511 aluminum targets by ogive-nosed VAR 4340 steel projectiles at oblique angles: experiments and simulations. Int J Impact Eng 25:993–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Børvik T, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS, Malo KA (2002) Perforation of 12 mm thick steel plates by 20 mm diameter projectiles with flat, hemispherical and conical noses: part I: experimental study. Int J Impact Eng 27:19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dikshit SN, Kutumbarao VV, Sundararajan G (1995) The influence of plate hardness on the ballistic penetration of thick steel plates. Int J Impact Eng 16:293–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gurel B (2010) Investigation on the ballistic performance of a tempered dual phase steel. In: Mechanical Engineering. TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deniz T (2010) Ballistic penetration of hardened steel plates. In: Mechanical engineering. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reddy GM, Mohandas T (1996) Influence of welding process and residual stress on ballistic performance. J Mater Sci Lett 15:1633–1635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Flores-Johnson EA, Muránsky O, Hamelin CJ, Bendeich PJ, Edwards L (2012) Numerical analysis of the effect of weld-induced residual stress and plastic damage on the ballistic performance of welded steel plate. Comput Mater Sci 58:131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sureshkumar S, Sushinder K, Sudersan S. (2015) Finite element simulation of ballistic performance of dissimilar metallic plates welded joints. International Journal Of Vehicle Structures And Systems, 6(4).  https://doi.org/10.4273/ijvss.6.4.01
  25. 25.
    Kesemen L, Caliskan NK, Konokman HE, Durlu N (2015) Effect of composition on the high rate dynamic behaviour of tungsten heavy alloys. In: Cadoni E (ed) DYMAT 2015 - 11th international conference on the mechanical and physical behaviour of materials under dynamic loading. EPJ, Lugano, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fitzpatrick ME, Fry AT, Holdway P, Kandil FA, Suominen L (2005) Determination of residual stresses by X-ray diffraction - issue 2. Measurement Good Practice Guide No: 52. The National Physical Laboratory (NPL)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Clausen B, Lorentzen T, Leffers T (1998) Self-consistent modelling of the plastic deformation of f.c.c. polycrystals and its implications for diffraction measurements of internal stresses. Acta Mater 46:3087–3098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schajer GS (1988) Measurement of non-uniform residual stresses using the hole-drilling method. Part I---stress calculation procedures. J Eng Mater Technol 110:338–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Grant PV, Lord JD, Whitehead P. The measurement of residual stresses by the incremental hole drilling technique - issue 2. Measurement Good Practice Guide No: 53. The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steinzig M, Ponslet E (2003) Residual stress measurement using the hole drilling method and laser speckle interferometry: part 1. Exp Tech 27:43–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schajer GS, Steinzig M (2005) Full-field calculation of hole drilling residual stresses from electronic speckle pattern interferometry data. Exp Mech 45:526–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heckenberger UC, Hombergsmeier E, Holzinger V, von Bestenbostel W (2011) Laser shock peening to improve the fatigue resistance of AA7050 components. Int J Struct Integr 2:22–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sangid MD (2013) The physics of fatigue crack initiation. Int J Fatigue 57:58–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Odeshi AG, Adesola AO, Badmos AY (2013) Failure of AA 6061 and 2099 aluminum alloys under dynamic shock loading. Eng Fail Anal 35:302–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Owolabi GM, Odeshi AG, Singh MNK, Bassim MN (2007) Dynamic shear band formation in aluminum 6061-T6 and aluminum 6061-T6/Al2O3 composites. Mater Sci Eng A 457:114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Corran RSJ, Shadbolt PJ, Ruiz C (1983) Impact loading of plates — an experimental investigation. Int J Impact Eng 1:3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Defense Industries Research and Development Institute, (TUBITAK SAGE), P.K. 16, 06261MamakTurkey
  2. 2.Norm CıvataIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations