Advertisement

IIW Recommendations on High Frequency Mechanical Impact (HFMI) Treatment for Improving the Fatigue Strength of Welded Joints

  • Gary B. MarquisEmail author
  • Zuheir Barsoum
Chapter
Part of the IIW Collection book series (IIWC)

Abstract

High-frequency mechanical impact (HFMI) has emerged as a reliable, effective and user-friendly method for post-weld fatigue strength improvement technique for welded structures. This guideline presents recommendations on proper treatment procedures, quality control measures and fatigue strength improvement assessment based on nominal, hot spot and effective notch stress methods. Recommendations on effect of loading conditions, variable amplitude loading, low cycle fatigue and consideration of low stress concentration details are also given. The guideline is applicable to steel structures of plate thicknesses of 5–50 mm and for yield strength ranging from 235 to 960 MPa.

Keywords

Peening Weld toe Fatigue improvement High-strength steels Fatigue strength Stress analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Marquis G. and Barsoum Z., Fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by HFMI: Proposed procedures and quality assurance guidelines, Welding in the World, No. 58, pp. 19−28, 2014Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marquis G., Mikkola E., H. Yildirim and Barsoum Z., Fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by HFMI: Proposed fatigue assessment guidelines, Welding in the World, No. 57, pp. 803−822, 2013Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haagensen P.J. and Maddox S.J., IIW Recommendations on methods for improving the fatigue strength of welded joints, ISBN:9781782420644, Woodhead Publishing, 2013Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barsoum Z. and Jonsson B., Influence of weld quality on the fatigue strength in seam welds, Engineering Failure Analysis, No. 18, pp. 971−979, 2011Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holmstrand T., Mrdjanov N., Barsoum Z., Åstrand E., Fatigue life assessment of improved joints welded with alternative welding techniques, Engineering Failure Analysis, pp. 10−21, Volume 42, 2014Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Volvo Group weld quality standard, STD 181-0004; 2008Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jonsson B., Samuelsson J., Marquis G., Development of weld quality criteria based on fatigue performance, Welding in the World, Volume 55, Issue 1112, pp 79−88, 2011Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khurshid M., Barsoum Z. and Marquis G., Behavior of compressive residual stresses in high strength steel welds induced by High Frequency Mechanical Impact treatment, ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, pp. 1−8, Vol. 136, 2014Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Applied Ultrasonics. In: http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/.
  10. 10.
    Structural Integrity Technologies Inc. (SINTEC) In: http://sintec.ca.
  11. 11.
    Lets Global. In: http://www.lets-global.com/.
  12. 12.
    Huo, L., Wang, D., Zhang, Y., Investigation of the fatigue behavior of the welded joints treated by TIG dressing and ultrasonic peening under variable-amplitude load International Journal of Fatigue, vol. 27, pp. 95−101, 2005Google Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Bousseau, M., Millot T. Fatigue life improvement of welded strucrtures by UNP compared to TIG dressing, International Institute of Welding., Paris, Document XIII-2125-06, 2006Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yildirim, H.C. and Marquis, G.B., A Round Robin study of high frequency mechanical impact (HFMI)-treated welded joints subjected to variable amplitude loading, Welding in the World, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 437−447, 2013.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yildirim, H.C. and Marquis, G.B., Overview of Fatigue data for high frequency mechanical impact treated welded joints, Welding in the World, 57, issue 7/8, 2012.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ISO 5817:2006; Welding–Fusion-welded joints in steel, nickel, titanium and their alloys (beam welding excluded)–Quality levels for imperfections, 2006.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yekta R.T., Ghahremani K and Walbridge S, Effect of quality control parameter variations on the fatigue performance of ultrasonic impact treated welds, Int J Fatigue, 55, 2013, pp. 245−256.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    AASHTO LRFD bridge construction specifications Chapter 11.9 ultrasonic impact treatment, 3rd Ed, American association of state highway and transportation officials: LFRD bridge design specifications, Washington, D.C., 2010.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Neher, M., HiFIT. Presentation to the IIW Commission XIII intermediate meeting, Espoo, Finland 15-16 March, 2012.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Applied Ultrasonics, Esonix UIT application guide: Post weld treatment for fatigue enhancement carbon steel welded structures. Alabama, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Le Quilliec, G., Lieurade, H.-P., Bousseau, M., Drissi-Habti, M., Inglebert, G., Macquet, P. and Jubin, L., Fatigue behaviour of welded joints treated by high frequency hammering: Part 1, Experimental study International Institute of Welding, Paris, IIW Document XIII-2394-11, 2011.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marquis, G.: Failure modes and fatigue strength of improved HSS welds, Engineering Fracture Mechanics., Vol.77, No.11, pp. 2051−2062, 2010.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yekta, R. T., and Walbridge, S., Acceptance Criteria for Ultrasonic Impact Treatment (UIT), Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Report HIIFP-110, St. Catherines, Ontario, Canada, 2012.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tilly, G. P., Jackson, P. A., Maddox, S. J. and Henderson, R., Proceedings of the ICE - Bridge Engineering, Volume 163, Issue 3, 01 September 2010, pp. 147–152.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Y. Kudryavtsev and J. Kleiman: Measurement of Residual Stresses in Welded Elements and Structures by Ultrasonic Method. International Institute of Welding. IIW Document XIII-2339-10, 2010.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lopez Martinez, L. and Haagensen, P. J., Life extension of Class F and Class F2 details using ultrasonic peening International Institute of Welding, Paris, IIW Document XIII-2143-06, 2006.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    PIT 10 Almen test: PIT equipment calibration procedures, PITEC GmbH, Heudorf, Germany, p. 6, 2011.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hobbacher, A., IIW Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components, WRC, New York, 2009.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fricke W. IIW guideline for the assessment of weld root fatigue, Welding in the World, 57, pp. 753−791, 2013.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yildirim, H. C. and Marquis, G. B., Fatigue strength improvement factors for high strength steel welded joints treated by high frequency mechanical impact. Int J Fatigue, 44, 2012, pp. 168−176.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Niemi, E., Random loading behavior of welded components, in Proc. of the IIW International Conference on Performance of Dynamically Loaded Welded Structures. SJ Maddox and M. Prager (eds), July 14-15, San Francisco, Welding Research Council, New York. (1997)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Niemi E, Fricke W and Maddox S, Fatigue analysis of welded joints - Designer’s guide to the structural hot-spot stress approach, Cambridge, Woodhead, 2006.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fricke, W, IIW Recommendations for the Fatigue Assessment of Welded Structures by Notch Stress Analysis, Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge, 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aalto UniversityHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations