2/22/2014

Residual stress determination - X-ray Diffraction - David Tanner

David Tanner
Home News Sitemap

Search this site

Research > Residual Stress in Aluminium Alloy Forgings >

Residual stress determination - X-ray Diffraction

Research
Transmission Electron Microscopy Finite Element Analysis Journal Publications Recent Conference Presentations Final Year Projects Residual Stress in Aluminium Alloy Forgings

This non-destructive technique measures surface residual stresses to depths of up to 0.025mm through measurement of a materials interatomic spacing. By layer removal, depth profiles can be determined, thus increasing the spectrum of applications to which it can be applied, while forfeiting its non-destructive nature. Stress magnitudes are determined through measurement of changes in the materials lattice spacing (d) due to the presence of a stress. From knowledge of the non-stressed lattice spacing, any stresses present can then be calculated using established equations [Noyan & Cohen, 1987; Prevey, 1988; Franois et al., 1996]. A collimated X-ray beam of wavelength (lambda) is focused onto a specimen and the number of X-rays diffracted (diffracted intensity) is counted as the angle between the X-ray tube and X-ray detector (theta) is changed. This allows a plot of diffracted intensity versus 2(theta) to be formed. From these peaks the lattice spacing, which will vary from stressed to non-stressed materials, can be determined using the Bragg equation.

Teaching
Automation Engineering 2 / Manufacturing Technology 5 Measurement and Inspection Advanced Analytical Techniques

Downloads
Curriculum Vitae

https://sites.google.com/site/temfemguy/research/residual-stress-in-aluminium-forgings/residual-stress-determination---x-ray-diffraction

1/4

2/22/2014

Residual stress determination - X-ray Diffraction - David Tanner

The Figure shown here on the left, indicates the impinging and diffracted X-ray beam on a magnified level. The angle psi is the angle between the surface normal and the bisector of the incident and diffracted X-ray beam. This is also the normal between the diffracted lattice planes and the samples surface. Part a) of the Figure shows the sample orientated so that the diffracting lattice planes are parallel to the surface. The compressive stress shown would not directly affect (except Poissons ratio affect) this lattice spacing as it is acting parallel to the diffracting lattice planes. In part b) the sample has been rotated through a known angle psi. The presence of the compressive stress causes the lattice spacing to be smaller than in the nonstressed state, which can be measured through determination of the shift in the diffracted intensity peaks. If this shift is measured for at least two orientations of y, then the lattice spacing, and hence the residual stresses, can be resolved.

Sample calculation for residual stress determination

https://sites.google.com/site/temfemguy/research/residual-stress-in-aluminium-forgings/residual-stress-determination---x-ray-diffraction

2/4

2/22/2014

Residual stress determination - X-ray Diffraction - David Tanner

Sources of error in the x-ray diffraction technique: 1. X-ray diffraction only concerns a small volume of the material, called the irradiated volume, which is

determined by the product of the irradiated surface (1-25mm2) and depth (15-30microns) [Franois et al., 1996]. Of this total irradiated volume only a small percentage (1% to 5%) will contribute to the diffracted peak. This volume is discontinuous and will vary with measurement direction. Some associated problems as a result of this are [Franois et al., 1996]: a) Large size crystallite problem. In cases where materials have undergone a re-crystallisation

process (such as aluminium alloys), crystallite size may exceed 100microns. The number of crystallites in the irradiated volume may therefore be insufficient to lead to a diffraction peak with a regular shape as it will only be made up of a small number of lattice planes. To overcome this problem, the irradiated surface can be increased or the sample can be orientated through the angles phi and psi during peak measurement. As the irradiated area increases, the data collection time necessary to achieve adequate precision diminishes. The precision with which the diffracted intensity can be determined varies as the inverse of the square root of the number of X-rays collected. To determine the intensity to 1% accuracy at a single point on the diffraction peak, 104 X-rays must be collected [Prevey, 1988]. Hauk [1987] further recommends the use of step counting to further improve the results by reducing the noise to intensity ratio; b) Stress gradients. In cases where there are steep stress gradients on the surface of the analysed sample, the d versus Sin2(y) plot will not follow a linear shape but a parabolic one. It therefore becomes necessary to express the strain as a function of its first derivative; c) Crystallographic texture. Materials which have a strongly preferred grain orientation (textured

materials) also result in curved (snake like pattern) d versus Sin2(psi) dependencies. When this texture effect is due to elastic anisotropy, the problem can be rectified using the Orientation Distribution Function (ODF). However, if these effects are caused by plastic anisotropy, the resolution of the internal stress distribution becomes more difficult, as the localised effect of strain incompatibilities leads to localised elastic strains. This causes the measured elastic strains to be no longer representative of the macroscopic strains; d) Multiphase materials. Measurements taken on multiphase materials generally analyse the elastic variations in only one phase. The measured strain becomes a combination of the macroscopic stress and the stresses incurred due to other phases resulting in a calculated stress which is an average of only the analysed phase, not the bulk material; 2. Effect of sample geometry. Very little surface preparation is required before carrying out stress

measurements - unless the surface is severely curved or rough about the irradiated area [Prevey, 1988]; 3. Instrument and positioning errors. Errors of 0.025mm in alignment of the diffracting apparatus or

positioning of the sample can result in errors in stress measurement of 14MPa [Prevey, 1988].
https://sites.google.com/site/temfemguy/research/residual-stress-in-aluminium-forgings/residual-stress-determination---x-ray-diffraction 3/4

2/22/2014

Residual stress determination - X-ray Diffraction - David Tanner

Generally, the alignment of X-ray machines is accounted for through the use of a silicon standard as outlined in the ASTM standards [ASTM E915 - 96, 1997] and the positioning of the sample can be accurately achieved through the use of dial gauges; 4. X-ray elastic constants (XECs). This technique does not measure macroscopic strains (first order) but the deformation of the crystallites constituting the diffracted volume. Therefore, in a polycrystalline material, the elastic properties differ from those seen on a macroscopic level. These elastic constants need to be determined as they can vary substantially in the bulk of the material due to elastic anisotropy [Prevey, 1988]. They can be measured by stressing a sample to known elastic stresses (usually measured using a strain gauge on one side of the sample) and then measuring the lattice spacing at each loading as outlined in ASTM E 1426-94 [1997]. It is possible to calculate the elastic constants of the diffracted volume by modelling the mechanical behaviour of the polycrystalline aggregate [Prevey, 1988]. It is recommended that for materials with no strongly preferred grain orientation and with no influence of texture on the X-ray analysis, the calculated X-ray elastic constants should be used - especially if they are in the same range as the macroscopic values [Hauk, 1987]. This is due to the negligible influence of the grain boundaries in these materials, resulting in the use of either the calculated or measured values giving the same result. At the University of Limreick, X-ray diffraction measurements are carried out using a Philips X-Pert X-ray diffractomter (Link).

Subpages (1): X-ray rotating stage design

Comments
Sign in | Recent Site Activity | Report Abuse | Print Page | Remove Access | Powered By Google Sites

https://sites.google.com/site/temfemguy/research/residual-stress-in-aluminium-forgings/residual-stress-determination---x-ray-diffraction

4/4