Kinematic modeling and deformation mechanics in shot peening of functional ceramics

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

The applications of functional ceramics are significantly limited by the brittleness and low reliability. Recent studies have shown that compressive residual stress can be created in ceramics by shot peening, which improves the contact strength and fatigue of ceramic components. However, the formation mechanism of residuals stress in shot peening is yet to understand. In this study, a pressure-dependent plasticity model has been incorporated into a finite element simulation model of shot peening to understand the process mechanism underpinning the residual stress formation. Since shot velocity is the key process parameter to dominate the impact energy which determines the deformation state of the peened surface and the resultant residual stress, a new kinematic model of shots has also been developed by incorporating air drag and travel distance inside and outside the peening nozzle. The results have shown that the shot velocity model can be used to predict shot velocity. The experiment-based model may help understand the process mechanism underpinning the residual stress formation.

Keywords

Shot peening Residual stress Ceramics plasticity Almen intensity Finite element simulation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ferraris E, Vleugels J, Guo YB, Bourell D, Kruth JP, Lauwers B (2016) Shaping of engineering ceramics by electro, chemical and physical processes. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 65(2):761–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pfeiffer W, Frey T (2002) Shot peening of ceramics: damage or benefit? CFI-Ceramic Forum Int 79(4):E25–E28Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moon W, Ito T, Uchimura S, Saka H (2004) Toughening of ceramics by dislocation sub-boundaries. Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 387–389:837–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tomaszewski H, Godwod K, Diduszko R, Carrois F, Duchazeaubeneix J (2006) Shot peening—a new method for improving mechanical properties of structural ceramics. Key Eng Mater 317:277–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pfeiffer W, Frey T (2006) Strengthening of ceramics by shot peening. J Eur Ceram Soc 26(13):2639–2645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Takahashi K, Nishio Y (2012) Improvement of the contact strength of Si3N4/SiC by a combination of shot peening and crack-healing. JSME Int J Ser A 6(2):144–153Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tanaka K, Akiniwa Y, Morishita Y (2005) Residual stress distribution in the sub-surface region of shot-peened ceramics. Transe Jpn Soc Mech Eng 71:1714–1721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Takahashi K, Nishio Y, Kimura Y, Ando K (2010) Improvement of strength and reliability of ceramics by shot peening and crack healing. J Eur Ceram Soc 30(15):3047–3052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kirk D (2007) Generation of air-blast shot velocity. Shot Peener 21(1):24–30Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li HZ, Wang J, Fan JM (2009) Analysis and modelling of particle velocities in micro-abrasive air jet. Int J Mach Tool Manu 49(11):850–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Almen J, Black JPH (1963) Residual stresses and fatigue in metals. McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miao HY, Larose S, Perron C, Lévesque M (2010) An analytical approach to relate shot peening parameters to Almen intensity. Surf Coat Tech 205(7):2055–2066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Al-Obaid YF (1990) Three-dimensional dynamic finite element analysis for shot-peening mechanics. Comput Struct 36(4):681–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meguid S, Shagal G, Stranart J (2007) Development and validation of novel FE models for 3D analysis of peening of strain-rate sensitive materials. J Eng Mater-T ASME 129(2):271–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim T, Lee H, Kim M, Jung S (2012) A 3D FE model for evaluation of peening residual stress under angled multi-shot impacts. Surf Coat Tech 206(19–20):3981–3988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hong T, Ooi JY, Shaw BA (2008) A numerical study of the residual stress pattern from single shot impacting on a metallic component. Adv Eng Softw 39(9):743–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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):1023–1038CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Frija M, Hassine T, Fathallah R, Bouraoui C, Dogui A (2006) Finite element modelling of shot peening process: prediction of the compressive residual stresses, the plastic deformations and the surface integrity. Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 426(1–2):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bagherifard S, Ghelichi R, Guagliano M (2012) Numerical and experimental analysis of surface roughness generated by shot peening. Appl Surf Sci 258(18):6831–6840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gangaraj SMH, Guagliano M, Farrahi GH (2014) An approach to relate shot peening finite element simulation to the actual coverage. Surf Coat Tech 243:39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas PJ (1999) Simulation of industrial processes for control engineers. Butterworth-HeinemannGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Momber A (2008) Blast cleaning technology. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rajaratnam N (1976) Turbulent Jets. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnson GR, Holmquist TJ (1994) An improved computational constitutive model for brittle materials. High-pressure science and technology, Colorado Springs, CO, USA, AIP Conference ProceedingsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anderson C, Johnson G, Holmquist T (1995) Ballistic experiments and computations of confined 99.5% Al2O3 ceramic tiles. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Ballistics, Israel, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guo YB, Sealy MP, Guo C (2012) Significant Improvement of corrosion resistance of biodegradable metallic implants processed by laser shock peening. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 61(1):583–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Deshpande VS, Gamble EAN, Compton BG, McMeeking RM, Evans AG, Zok FW (2011) A constitutive description of the inelastic response of ceramics. J Am Ceram Soc 94:s204–s214CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.School of Mechanical EngineeringShandong UniversityJinanChina
  3. 3.Institute for Advanced ManufacturingShandong University of TechnologyZiboChina

Personalised recommendations