Skip to main content

Assessment of Primary Slice Release Residual Stress Mapping in a Range of Specimen Types

Abstract

This paper further explores the primary slice removal technique for planar mapping of multiple components of residual stress and describes application to specimens with a range of alloys, geometries, and stress distributions. Primary slice release (PSR) mapping is a combination of contour and slitting measurements that relies on decomposing the stress in a specimen into the stress remaining in a thin slice and the stress released when the slice is removed from a larger body. An initial contour method measurement determines a map of the out-of-plane stress on a plane of interest. Subsequently, removal of thin slices and a series of slitting measurements determines a map of one or both in-plane stress components. Four PSR biaxial mapping measurements were performed using an aluminum T-section, a stainless steel plate with a dissimilar metal slot-filled weld, a titanium plate with an electron beam slot-filled weld, and a nickel disk forging. Each PSR mapping measurement described herein has one (or more) complementary validation measurement to confirm the technique. Uncertainty estimates are included for both the PSR mapping measurements and the validation measurements. Agreement was found between the PSR mapping measurements and validation measurements showing that PSR mapping is a viable technique for measuring residual stress fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

References

  1. Prime MB, Steinzig ML (2014) Beyond the streetlight effect: a united future for relaxation and diffraction methods for residual stress measurement. Adv Mater Res 996:234–242

  2. Prime MB (2001) Cross-sectional mapping of residual stresses by measuring the surface contour after a cut. J Eng Mater Technol 123(2):162–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Pagliaro P et al (2011) Measuring inaccessible residual stresses using multiple methods and superposition. Exp Mech 51(7):1123–1134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hosseinzadeh F, Bouchard PJ (2013) Mapping multiple components of the residual stress tensor in a large P91 steel pipe girth weld using a single contour cut. Exp Mech 53(2):171–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pagliaro P, Prime MB, Swenson H, Zuccarello B (2010) Measuring multiple residual stress components using the contour method and multiple cuts. Exp Mech 50(2):187–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pagliaro P et al (2008) Mapping multiple residual stress components using the contour method and superposition. In: ICRS-8-international conference on residual stresses, vol 52. pp 1–8

  7. Pagliaro P, Prime MB, Clausen B, Lovato ML, Zuccarello B (2009) Known residual stress specimens using opposed indentation. J Eng Mater Technol 131(3):031002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pagliaro P, Prime MB, Zuccarello B, Clausen B, Watkins TR (2007) Validation specimen for contour method extension to multiple residual stress components. Experimental analysis of Nano and Engineering Materials and Structures 635–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6239-1_315

  9. Olson MD, Hill MR (2015) A new mechanical method for biaxial residual stress mapping. Exp Mech 55(6):1139–1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Prime MB, Hill MR (Apr. 2006) Uncertainty, model error, and order selection for series-expanded, residual-stress inverse solutions. J Eng Mater Technol 128(2):175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee MJ, Hill MR (2007) Intralaboratory repeatability of residual stress determined by the slitting method. Exp Mech 47(6):745–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kotobi M, Honarpisheh M (2016) Uncertainty analysis of residual stresses measured by slitting method in equal-channel angular rolled Al-1060 strips. J Strain Anal Eng Des 52(2):83–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309324716682124

  13. Olson MD, Hill MR, Patel VI, Muránsky O, Sisneros T (2015) Measured biaxial residual stress maps in a stainless steel weld. J Nuc Eng Rad Sci 1(4):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hill MR, Olson MD, DeWald AT (2016) Biaxial residual stress mapping for a dissimilar metal welded nozzle. J Press Vessel Technol 138(1):011404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Olson MD, Robinson JS, Wimpory RC, Hill MR (2016) Characterisation of residual stresses in heat treated, high strength aluminium alloy extrusions. Mater Sci Technol 32(14):1427–1438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hill MR, Olson MD, DeWald AT (2014) Biaxial residual stress mapping for a dissimilar metal welded nozzle. In: ASME 2014 pressure vessels & piping division conference

  17. Prime MB, DeWald AT (2013) The contour method. In: Schajer GS (ed) Practical residual stress measurement methods, Ch 5. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 109–138

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Schajer GS, Prime MB (2006) Use of inverse solutions for residual stress measurements. J Eng Mater Technol 128:375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hill MR (2013) The slitting method. In: Schajer GS (ed) Practical residual stress measurement methods. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 89–108

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Olson MD, DeWald AT, Hill MR, Prime MB (2014) Estimation of uncertainty for contour method residual stress measurements. Exp Mech 55(3):577–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Olson MD, DeWald AT, Hill MR (2018) Validation of a contour method single-measurement uncertainty estimator. Exp Mech 58:767–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-018-0385-4

  22. SAE Aerospace (2006) Aerospace material specification 4342: aluminum alloy extrusions: solution heat treated, stress relieved, straightened, and overaged. 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096, USA: SAE Aerospace; 2006. Report No.: 4342

  23. Wong W, Hill MR (2013) Superposition and destructive residual stress measurements. Exp Mech 53(3):339–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. ISO (2005) Non-destructive testing - standard test method for determining residual stresses by neutron diffraction. International organization for standardization, ISO/TS 21432

  25. Coleman HW, Steele WG (2009) In Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Prime MB, Gnäupel-Herold T, Baumann JA, Lederich RJ, Bowden DM, Sebring RJ (2006) Residual stress measurements in a thick, dissimilar aluminum alloy friction stir weld. Acta Mater 54(15):4013–4021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rangaswamy P et al (2005) Residual stresses in LENS® components using neutron diffraction and contour method. Mater Sci Eng A 399(1–2):72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hosseinzadeh F, Toparli MB, Bouchard PJ (2012) Slitting and contour method residual stress measurements in an edge welded beam. J Press Vessel Technol 134(1):011402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chantzis D, Van-der-Veen S, Zettler J, Sim WM (2013) An industrial workflow to minimise part distortion for machining of large monolithic components in aerospace industry. Procedia CIRP 8:281–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sim WM (2011) Residual stress engineering in manufacture of aerospace structural parts. Proceedings of 3rd international conference on distortion engineering. Bremen, Germany, pp 187–194

  31. Li J-G, Wang S-Q (2017) Distortion caused by residual stresses in machining aeronautical aluminum alloy parts: recent advances. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89:997–1012

  32. Masoudi S, Amini S, Saeidi E, Eslami-Chalander H (2015) Effect of machining-induced residual stress on the distortion of thin-walled parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 76(1):597–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang Z-J, Chen W-Y, Zhang Y-D, Chen Z-T, Liu Q (2005) Study on the machining distortion of thin-walled part caused by redistribution of residual stress. Chin J Aeronaut 18(2):175–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Garcia DR, Hill MR, Aurich JC, Linke BS (2017) Characterization of machining distortion due to residual stresses in quenched aluminum. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2017 12th international manufacturing science and engineering conference, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge, with gratitude, the U.S. Air Force for providing financial support for this work (contract FA8650-14-C-5026). We would also like to acknowledge Steve McCracken from the Electric Power Research Institute for suppling and fabricating the stainless steel plate with a dissimilar metal slot-filled weld, Brian Streich from Honeywell for providing the nickel forgings, and Andrew Mugnaini from Sciaky for fabricating the titanium samples. Special acknowledgement to Jeffrey Bunn, Paris Cornwell, and Andrew Payzant from Oak Ridge National Laboratory for their help with the neutron diffraction measurements.

A portion of this research was performed at ORNL’s High Flux Isotope Reactor and was sponsored by the Scientific User Facilities Division, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, US Department of Energy (proposal IPTS 14081.1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. D. Olson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olson, M.D., DeWald, A.T. & Hill, M.R. Assessment of Primary Slice Release Residual Stress Mapping in a Range of Specimen Types. Exp Mech 58, 1371–1388 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-018-0420-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-018-0420-5

Keywords

  • Residual stress
  • Measurement
  • Primary slice release
  • Contour method
  • Slitting