On the Influence of Cold Work on Eddy Current Characterization of Near-Surface Residual Stress in Shot-Peened Nickel-Base Superalloys
Source abstract
Abstract
Shot-peened nickel-base superalloys exhibit 1–2% increase in apparent eddy current conductivity (AECC), which can be exploited for nondestructive residual stress assessment. Experimental evidence indicates that the excess AECC is due in part to elastic strains, i.e., residual stress, and in part to plastic strains, i.e., cold work. The very fact that the conductivity increases rather than decreases was originally thought to indicate that there was no significant cold work contribution to the observed AECC increase. This assumption was also supported by X-ray diffraction (XRD) results on fully relaxed specimens showing that the cold work induced widening of the diffraction beam only partially vanishes when both the residual stress and the AECC completely disappear due to thermal relaxation. However, we show in this paper that assuming that the conductivity change is entirely due to residual stress via the piezoresistivity of the material could result in an unacceptable overestimation of the magnitude of the compressive residual stress. Therefore, we investigated the different mechanisms through which cold work could influence the AECC in surface-treated nickel-base superalloys. It was found that neither the magnetic susceptibility nor the piezoresistivity of the material is affected significantly by cold work up to 50% plastic strain level, but the electrical conductivity does substantially increase due to microstructural changes. Based on these observations, we suggest that in future research the complex variations caused by cold work should be modeled by at least two main types of cold work parameters rather than by a single one in order to properly account for the otherwise contradictory effects of plastic deformation on eddy current conductivity and XRD measurements.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses · Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. N. Goldfine, Real-time, quantitative materials characterization using quasistatic spatial mode sensing, 41st Army Sagamore Conference (August, 1994).
2. N. Goldfine, D. Clark, and T. Lovett, Materials characterization using model based meandering winding eddy current testing (MW-ET), EPRI Topical Workshop: Electromagnetic NDE Applications in the Electric Power Industry (Charlotte, NC, August 21–23, 1995).
3. F. C. Schoenig, Jr., J. A. Soules, H. Chang, and J. J. DiCillo, Eddy current measurement of residual stresses induced by shot peening in titanium Ti-6Al-4V, Mat. Eval. 53, pp. 22 (1995).
4. N. Goldfine and D. Clark, Near surface material property profiling for determination of SCC susceptibility, EPRI Balance-of Plant Heat Exchanger NDE Symposium (Jackson, WY, 1996).
5. H. Chang, F. C. Schoenig, Jr., and J. A. Soules, Eddy current offers a powerful tool for investigation of residual stress and other metallurgical properties, Mat. Eval. 57, pp. 1257 (1999).
6. A Primer on the Alternating Current Potential Difference Technique (Matelect Systems, Nepean, Ontario, 1999, pp. 18–21).
7. A. I. Lavrentyev, P. A. Stucky, and W. A. Veronesi, in Review of Progress in QNDE (AIP, Melville, Vol. 19, pp. 1621–1628, 2000).
8. J. M. Fisher, N. Goldfine, and V. Zilberstein, Cold work quality assessment and fatigue characterization using conformable MWMTM eddy current sensors, 49th Defense Working Group on NDT (October 31–November 2, 2000).
9. V. Zilberstein, Y. Sheiretov, A. Washabaugh, Y. Chen, and N.~J. Goldfine, in Review of Progress in QNDE (AIP, Melville, Vol. 20, pp. 985–995, 2001).
10. M. P. Blodgett and P. B. Nagy, Eddy current assessment of near-surface residual stress in shot-peened nickel-base superalloys, J. Nondestr. Eval. 23, pp. 107 (2004).10.1023/B:JONE.0000048866.40648.fe ↗
11. F. Yu and P. B. Nagy, Simple analytical approximations for eddy current profiling of the near-surface residual stress in shot-peened metals, J. Appl. Phys. 96, pp. 1257 (2004).10.1063/1.1762708 ↗
12. F. Yu and P. B. Nagy, Dynamic piezoresistivity calibration for eddy current nondestructive residual stress measurements, J. Nondestr. Eval. 24, pp. 143 (2005).10.1007/s10921-005-8783-9 ↗
13. F. Yu, M. P. Blodgett, and P. B. Nagy, Eddy current assessment of near-surface residual stress in shot-peened inhomogeneous nickel-base superalloys, J. Nondestr. Eval. 25, pp. 17 (2006).10.1063/1.2184689 ↗
14. N. M. White and J. D. Turner, Thick-film sensors: past, present and future, Meas. Sci. Technol. 8, pp. 1 (1997).10.1088/0957-0233/8/1/002 ↗
15. S. U. Jen, T. C. Wu, and C. H. Liu, Piezoresistance characteristics of some magnetic and non-magnetic metal films, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 256, pp. 54 (2003).10.1016/S0304-8853(02)00371-2 ↗
16. S. S. Hecker, M. G. Stout, K. P. Staudhammer, and J. L. Smith, Effects of strain state and strain rate on deformation-induced transformation in 304 stainless-steel, 1. Magnetic measurements and mechanical-behavior, Metall. Trans. A 13, pp. 619 (1982).10.1007/BF02644427 ↗
17. A. I. Ivanenko, M. V. Fursa, and P. A. Shcherbakov, Fluxmeter for measuring the magnetic susceptibility of stainless steel samples, Instrum. Exp. Tech. 44, pp. 573 (2001).10.1023/A:1017941525932 ↗
18. D. O'Sullivan, M. Cotterell, and I. Meszaros, The characterisation of work-hardened austenitic stainless steel by NDT micro-magnetic techniques, NDT & E Int. 37, pp. 265 (2004).10.1016/j.ndteint.2003.10.001 ↗
19. K. Mumtaz, S. Takahashi, J. Echigoya, Y. Kamada, L. F. Zhang, H. Kikuchi, K. Ara, and M. Sato, Magnetic measurements of the reverse martensite to austenite transformation in a rolled austenitic stainless steel, J. Mat. Sci. 39, pp. 1997 (2004).10.1023/B:JMSC.0000017761.64839.fc ↗
20. S. Nagarjuna, K. Balasubramanian, and D. S. Sarma, Effect of prior cold work on mechanical properties and structure of an age-hardened Cu-1.5wt Ti alloy, J. Mat. Sci. 32, 3375 (1997).10.1023/A:1018608430443 ↗
21. P. S. Prevéy, X-ray diffraction residual stress techniques, Metals Handbook, 9th ed. (ASM International, Metals Park, Vol. 10, pp. 380, 1986).
22. M. G. Moore and W. P. Evans, Mathematical correction for stress in removed layers in X-ray diffraction residual stress analysis, SAE Trans. 66, pp. 340 (1958).
23. D. L. Sikarskie, On a series form of correction to stresses measured using X-ray diffraction, AIME Trans. 239, pp. 577 (1967).
24. Y. F. Al-Obaid, Shot peening mechanics: experimental and theoretical analysis, Mech. Mater. 19, pp. 251 (1995).10.1016/0167-6636(94)00036-G ↗
25. M. Kobayashi, T. Matsui, and Y. Murakami, Mechanism of creation of compressive residual stress by shot peening, Int. J. Fatigue 20, pp. 351 (1998).10.1016/S0142-1123(98)00002-4 ↗
26. G. H. Majzoobi, R. Azizi, and A. Alavi Nia, A three-dimensional simulation of shot peening process using multiple shot impacts, J. Mater. Process. Techn. 164, pp. 1226 (2005).10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.02.139 ↗
27. M. P. Blodgett, F. Yu, and P. B. Nagy, Review of Progress in QNDE (AIP, New York, Vol. 24, pp. 1347–1354, 2005).
28. F. Yu and P. B. Nagy, Review of Progress in QNDE (AIP, New York, Vol. 24, pp. 1371–1358, 2005).
29. J. Reekie and Y. L. Yao, Magnetic anisotropy and cold worked texture of titanium, Proc. Phys. Soc. B 69, pp. 417 (1956).10.1088/0370-1301/69/4/301 ↗
30. B. L. Morris and A. Wold, Faraday balance for measuring Magnetic susceptibility, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 39, pp. 1937 (1968).10.1063/1.1683276 ↗
31. G. J. Hill, The influence of positioning errors on susceptibility measurements, J. Sci. Instrum. 1, pp. 52 (1968).10.1088/0022-3735/1/1/311 ↗
32. A. Rais, Absolute method of calibration of a Faraday microbalance, Measurement 35, pp. 289 (2004).10.1016/j.measurement.2003.08.010 ↗
33. M. S. Seehra and V. S. Babu, Low temperature magnetic transition and high temperature oxidation in Inconel alloy 718, J. Mater. Res. 11, pp. 1133 (1996); Erratum and Addendum J. Mater. Res. 20, pp. 1081 (2005).10.1557/JMR.1996.0145 ↗
34. M. P. Blodgett, C. V. Ukpabi, and P. B. Nagy, Surface roughness influence on eddy current electrical conductivity measurements, Mat. Eval. 61, pp. 765 (2003).
35. K. Kalyanasundaram and P. B. Nagy, A simple numerical model for calculating the apparent loss of eddy current conductivity due to surface roughness, NDT&E Int. 37, pp. 47 (2004).10.1016/j.ndteint.2003.08.005 ↗
36. F. Yu and P. B. Nagy, Numerical method for calculating the apparent eddy current conductivity loss on randomly rough surfaces, J. Appl. Phys. 95, pp. 8340 (2004).10.1063/1.1737474 ↗
37. G. T. Medan, Electrical Resistance of Metals, (Plenum Press, New York, pp. 122–123 1965).10.1007/978-1-4899-5717-7 ↗