Advertisement

Metallurgical Transactions A

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 251–257 | Cite as

Surface residual stresses, surface topography and the fatigue behavior of Ti-6AI-4V

  • G. R. Leverant
  • B. S. Langer
  • A. Yuen
  • S. W. Hopkins
Mechanical Behavior

Abstract

Fatigue tests have been conducted on Ti-6Al-4V from 293 to 589 K to determine the influence of surface residual stresses and surface topography on low and high cycle fatigue properties. Four types of machined surfaces as well as shot peened surfaces were included in the investigation. It was found that surface residual stresses play a key role in controlling the development of microcracks and, therefore, overall fatigue lives at both room and elevated temperature. X-ray measurement of the stability of surface residual stresses under thermal activation and/or cyclic loading demonstrated that, for the conditions studied, cyclic loading was primarily responsible for residual stress decay. In addition, the magnitude of the decay was dependent on the relationship between the sign of the residual stress and the sign of the imposed mean strain. Finally, it was demonstrated that the sharpness of machining grooves is more important than their depth in controlling fatigue resistance.

Keywords

Fatigue Surface Residual Stress Peened Surface Elevated Temperature Cycling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E. C. Reed and J. A. Viens:Trans. ASME, Series B, 1960, vol. 82, p. 76.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. S. Prevey and W. P. Koster: ASTM STP 520, p. 522, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. N. Williams and R. A. Wood: Effects of Surface Condition on the Mechanical Properties of Titanium and Its Alloy, MCIC-71-01, August, 1971.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. S. Maiya:Scr. Met., 1975, vol. 9, p. 1277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Yuen, S. W. Hopkins, G. R. Leverant, and C. A. Rau:Met. Trans., 1974, vol. 5, p. 1833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. H. Marion and J. B. Cohen:Advances in X-ray Analysis, vol. 18, p. 466, 1974.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. H. Marion and J. B. Cohen:J. Appl. Crystallog., 1975, vol. 8, p. 430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. S. Prevey: Proc. of Workshop on Nondestructive Evaluation of Residual Stress, NTIAC-76-2, p. 62, 1976.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. H. Burck, C. P. Sullivan, and C. H. Wells:Met. Trans., 1970, vol. 1, p. 1595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Laird: ASTM STP 415, p. 131, 1967.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. H. Weber and R. W. Hertzberg:Met. Trans., 1973, vol. 4, p. 595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. S. Tetelman and A. J. McEvily: Fracture of Structural Materials, p. 48, John Wiley & Sons, 1967.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society for Metals and the Metallurgical Society of AIME 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. R. Leverant
    • 1
  • B. S. Langer
    • 2
  • A. Yuen
    • 3
  • S. W. Hopkins
    • 4
  1. 1.Metallurgy, Southwest Research InstituteSan Antonio
  2. 2.United Nuclear CorporationUncasville
  3. 3.Albany Medical CollegeAlbany
  4. 4.Failure Analysis AssociatesPalo Alto

Personalised recommendations