A process model for shot peen forming

Wang, T.; Platts, MJ; Levers, Andrew

doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.09.006

Cited by 72 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this value was obtained with J Mater Sci a different methodology and for a different coverage, it remains in the same range as that obtained in this work. The difference is likely due to the difference in shot peening coverage, since it has been shown that increasing coverage results in larger depth of material with increased hardness [28]. Even though the microindentation results from Gariepy et al revealed that the maximum hardness values were not located at the surface (between z = 50 lm and z = 100 lm), [6] their results obtained using a X-ray diffraction method illustrated that the location of greatest work-hardening was situated at the surface of the shot peened material, which is consistent with our results.…”

Section: Hardness Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Residual stress near single shot peening impingements determined by nanoindentation and numerical simulations

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The near-surface hardness and residual stresses resulting from a single shot peening impingement on aluminum alloy 2024-T351 were assessed by nanoindentation with spatial mapping of mechanical properties on cross sections through an impingement. For residual stress, a procedure was developed to couple nanoindentation experiments with numerical simulations for better understanding and predicting the effects of shot peening. A surface preparation method was developed that exposes the cross section of a single shot impingement for nanoindentation tests, while at the same time obtaining accurate measurements of the impingement dimensions. Starting parameters for the numerical simulation in terms of shot diameter and the shot velocity were selected to best match measurements of the impingement depth and diameter. The experimental results indicated that the greatest hardness was located at the nearest indent to the peened surface, whereas the maximum compressive residual stress was located sub-surface. When comparing experimental and numerical residual stresses, the experimental results showed a greater maximum compressive residual stress that was in closer proximity to the peened surface. Overall, residual stress fields compared between experimental and numerical results were similar, and differences could be explained in terms of the effect of strain hardening. The current work demonstrated the usefulness of coupling nanoindentation experiments with numerical simulations for evaluating the surface modifications resulting from a single shot peening impingement.

show abstract

Section: Hardness Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Residual stress near single shot peening impingements determined by nanoindentation and numerical simulations

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, if this deflection curve is compared with the one along line AC in the unpeened surface, a global or macroscopic trend of deflection can be observed. This deflection can be regarded as bending or in-plane deformation for a shell structure, which is a basic assumption for the process model of shot peen forming [16].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple impact modelling for shot peening and peen forming

Kang

Wang²,

Platts

2009

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact modelling for shot peening or peen forming has progressed from simulating a single impact (or local multiple impacts) to simulating a large number of multiple impacts. It is the aim of this paper to provide quantitative results with a detailed finite element study, and to compare the effects of a single impact and global multiple impacts. Using a two-dimensional (2D) axisymmetric single impact model with a very fine mesh as reference, an appropriate three-dimensional (3D) mesh density for the target material is chosen by evaluating the 3D results against the axisymmetric results. A 3D explicit dynamic finite element analysis combined with a static springback analysis is then used to simulate a large number of steel shot impacts on an aluminium 2024-T351 target. The multiple impact modelling results indicate a clear difference of residual stress profiles between those obtained from single and multiple impact modelling. This difference is due to the global uniformity effects of shot peening, which involves numerous impacts. In addition, equivalent plastic strain obtained from the analysis is compared with microhardness test data on an experimental sample. Finally, the shot peen forming effect of multiple impacts is also evaluated by showing the macroscopic surface deformation. The comparison between single and multiple impact modelling results indicates that it is appropriate and important to model an appropriate coverage of multiple impacts for shot peening and peen forming at its various coverage.

show abstract

“…This leaves the material in a deformed configuration. More details of the model can be found in Wang (2003) and Wang et al (2006).…”

Section: The Process Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As recognized in their paper, Homer and VanLuchene (1991) stated that the experimental data are based on peening of unconstrained specimens but assumed to be applicable for constrained specimens, which may introduce error because in reality various constraints, such as geometry, jigs (pre-stresses), and peening sequences, are possible. Wang (2003) and Wang et al (2006) presented a process model and verified it in various experimental conditions with different constraints. This model has also been discussed and further developed by Blackwell et al (2004) tionship between the peening parameters and deflection of specified points can be set up.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The optimisation of shot peen forming processes

Wang

Platts

2008

Journal of Materials Processing Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An optimisation method based on an effective process model is presented. The calibrated and verified process model simulates peening on realistic components and provides a non-linear relationship between peening parameters and deflections. An optimal solution can be found by minimising the deviation of the computed deformed shape from the desired shape subject to certain constraints. This optimal solution of peening parameters can be directly used for practical operations. An optimisation example for forming a cylindrical shape on a 76x76x3 mm sample is provided. The experimental results demonstrate the applicability of the present optimisation method

show abstract

A process model for shot peen forming

Cited by 72 publications

References 8 publications

Residual stress near single shot peening impingements determined by nanoindentation and numerical simulations

Residual stress near single shot peening impingements determined by nanoindentation and numerical simulations

Multiple impact modelling for shot peening and peen forming

The optimisation of shot peen forming processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About