See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308606997

Finite element surface analysis of cosmetic finishing applications – Shot

Peening

Thesis · September 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23540.55688

CITATIONS READS

0 1,127

1 author:

Saptarshee Mitra

6 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

3D Printing Technology in the Fabrication of Sand Molds and Cores for Shape Casting of Light Alloys View project

Multiscale surface analysis, product and Process development for cosmetic finishing applications” – Shot Peening – Finite element analysis of single and multiple shots
in shot peening using ABAQUS. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Saptarshee Mitra on 25 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Finite element surface analysis of cosmetic
finishing applications – Shot Peening

A Master’s thesis submitted by

MITRA Saptarshee

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of Master of Engineering

Material processes and technology of Composites (2015-2016)

Lab Supervisor College Supervisor

Prof. Mohamed EL MANSORI Prof. Sebastien Comas Cardona

Dr. Julien Cabrero

Co Lab Supervisor

Dr. Nicolas Coniglio

Internship Tenure: 28th March 2016 – 16th September 2016

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Saint-Gobain CREE and Laboratory MSMP-Art et Metiers ENSAM,

for allowing me to perform the work I conducted over the last few months and the data

contained in this document. I would like to thank my supervisors, Prof. Mohamed EL

MANSORI and Dr. Julien Cabrero for providing me the opportunity to work with him by

placing trust in me. I also thank him for answering my numerous questions and guiding me

throughout my Internship tenure. The moral support that he provided during my six months

stay in Aix-en-Provence is very much appreciated. I would like to thank all the staff members

of the Lab for their warmth and friendship. I would also like to thank Dr. Nicolas Coniglio

for his continued guidance and support in completing my thesis. But not least, I must thank

my entire family for all of their support.

i
 ABSTRACT

With the substantial increase in importance for the design of aerospace and as well automobile
components, there exists a necessity to improve the fatigue life of such part. Multiple research
work has shown that the fatigue life of a component part could be improved significantly by
the method of shot peening. Because of such things, there is a multiple need for developing
numerical models which are capable of predicting accurately the surface deformation and
residual stresses been produced from peening operations in order to justify a relation between
shot peening and surface roughness. This thesis presents a mathematical model and its
implementation for the process of shot peening by the use of computer simulations using the
Johnson-Cook flow damage and stress model of AL-6063 and Ti-6Al-4V. Rigid models for the
shot was created. The analysis was carried out using both axisymmetric and 3D models.
Circumstances of single and also multiple shot impacts were studied. Such models developed
were used to determine and predict the effects that multiple shot impacts have on the
deformation and roughness profiles for the surface of the target. Results show that the predicted
deformation profiles using finite element method at ENSAM, follow the same trends as those
acquired from experimental results performed at Saint-Gobain CREE, as well as the finite
element modelling of the process of shot peening of single and multiple shots by past
researchers.

La thèse est réalisée sur l'application de la base de données empiriques d'un petit nombre
d'ensembles d'éléments d'évaluation et de prédiction de la déformation plastique qui seront
visibles sur le substrat cible. En utilisant les modèles de dynamique numérique pour les loisirs
des millions de morceaux de grenaille frappe ou ayant une incidence sur le substrat cible serait
plus coûteux. La recherche réalisée explore l'utilisation de modèles de contact et de l'utilisation
de réduction des données dans une coquille solide simplifié modèle pour la comparaison des
empiriquement prédites et éléments finis, déformation calculé car, 3D modèle quasi-statique
peut générer beaucoup mieux les modèles de prévision de la déformation et le stress qui seront
visibles dans le substrat cible. Ce papier se concentre sur l'établissement d'une méthode par
laquelle la déformation élastique-plastique causé par le processus de grenaillage de
précontrainte peut être analysé.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Literature Review ................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Shot peening process parameters ............................................................................ 5
1.4 Shot peening process control methods.................................................................... 6
1.4.1 Almen intensity ........................................................................................... 6
1.4.2 Surface coverage ......................................................................................... 6
1.4.3 Surface Roughness ...................................................................................... 7
2 MATERIALS ....................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Johnson-Cook model .............................................................................................. 8
2.1.1 Constitutive model of material .................................................................... 8
2.1.2 Damage criterion model .............................................................................. 8
2.2 Target material ........................................................................................................ 8
2.2.1 Aluminum alloy-Al 6063 ............................................................................ 9
2.2.2 Titanium alloy- Ti-6Al-4V.......................................................................... 9
2.3 Shot material ........................................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 Mild steel..................................................................................................... 9
2.3.2 Ceramics...................................................................................................... 9
3 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................ 10
3.1 Specific Tasks ....................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Analytical Calculations ......................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 Volume of an Indent ................................................................................. 11
3.2.2 Energy and work ....................................................................................... 11
3.2.3 Brinell hardness number ........................................................................... 12
3.3 Mathematical expression of shot peening............................................................. 13
3.3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 13
3.3.2 Equation in the polar coordinates.............................................................. 13
3.4 2D Axisymmetric Analysis ................................................................................... 16
3.4.1 Model setup ............................................................................................... 16
3.5 3D Modeling for single shot in ABAQUS ........................................................... 18
3.5.1 Establishment of geometrical model ......................................................... 18
3.5.2 Constitutive model of material .................................................................. 18
3.5.3 Damage criterion model ............................................................................ 18
3.5.4 Boundary conditions ................................................................................. 19

iii
 3.5.5 Defining model in ABAQUS explicit ....................................................... 19
3.6 Experimental study of shot peening...................................................................... 20
3.6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 20
3.6.2 Using Microblast ....................................................................................... 20
3.6.3 Experimental setup .................................................................................... 21
3.7 Finite Element Analysis for multiple shot peening .............................................. 22
3.7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 22
3.7.2 Calculation for coverage rate .................................................................... 22
3.7.3 Model setup in ABAQUS explicit ............................................................ 23
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ....................................................................... 24
4.1 Empirical Analysis ................................................................................................ 24
4.2 2D Axisymmetric Analysis ................................................................................... 24
4.2.1 Introduction to Finite Analysis results ...................................................... 24
4.2.2 Stress data ................................................................................................. 26
4.2.3 Surface displacement data ......................................................................... 27
4.2.4 Comparison with empirical and axisymmetric finite element analysis .... 28
4.3 3D Finite Element Analysis for single shot .......................................................... 28
4.3.1 Introduction to Finite element 3D results ................................................. 28
4.3.2 Surface deformation and Stress data ......................................................... 29
4.3.2.1 Result for Depth of Indent ................................................................................ 30
4.3.2.2 Result for Diameter of Indent ........................................................................... 31
4.3.3 Elliptical surface deformation ................................................................... 32
4.4 Experimental validation of shot peening .............................................................. 32
4.4.1 Introduction to experimental analysis ....................................................... 33
4.4.2 Surface deformation data .......................................................................... 33
4.4.3 Comparison with experimental and finite element analysis ..................... 34
4.5 Validation of Finite Element, Empirical and Experimental analysis.................... 34
4.6 Finite element analysis for multiple shot .............................................................. 36
5 CONCLUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................ 38
5.1 Conclusions........................................................................................................... 38
5.2 Recommendations for future study ....................................................................... 39
REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 40

APPENDIX A: Stress profile .......................................................................................... 41

APPENDIX B: Deformation profile ................................................................................ 43
APPENDIX C: Elliptical Deformation profile 3D analysis ........................................... 45

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page No.

Figure 1: Shot stream from a nozzle impacting the metal target (ceramics.org) ....................... 1

Figure 2: Shot peening process (cwst.co.uk) ............................................................................. 2

Figure 3: Illustration of the formation of residual stresses ........................................................ 4

Figure 4: Illustration of the residual and tensile stress of shot peening ..................................... 4

Figure 5: Effect of the peening parameters on the residual stress ............................................ 6

Figure 6: Almen strips dimension .............................................................................................. 6

Figure 7: Definition for roughness ............................................................................................. 7

Figure 8: Brinell Hardness Number ......................................................................................... 12

Figure 9: Geometry of an indent .............................................................................................. 12

Figure 10: Diagram of the disk and spherical indenter ............................................................ 15

Figure 11: 2D axisymmetric ABAQUS model ........................................................................ 16

Figure 12: Partitions used to refine the mesh........................................................................... 17

Figure 13: Velocity boundary conditions ................................................................................ 19

Figure 14: Mesh generated for the 3D-Model in ABAQUS explicit ....................................... 19

Figure 15: Microblast ............................................................................................................... 20

Figure 16: Machine used for shot blasting at Saint-Gobain CREE ........................................ 20

Figure 17: Impact distribution schemes for multiple shot ...................................................... 21

Figure 18: Shot distribution on target in ABAQUS ................................................................ 23

Figure 19: Evaluation of compressive residual stress induced showed in ABAQUS ............ 25

Figure 20: 𝜎𝑧 stress graph for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot ......................... 26

Figure 21: 𝜎𝑧 stress contour for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot ..................... 26

Figure 22: Deformation graph for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot .................. 27

Figure 23: Deformation contour for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot ............... 27

Figure 24: Evaluation of deformation and stress due to change of angle ............................... 28

v
Figure 25: Influence of change in angle on dent form ............................................................ 29

Figure 26: Influence of change in angle on dent and stress form ........................................... 29

Figure 27: Influence of speed and angle of shot on the depth by metallic and ceramic shot .. 30

Figure 28: Influence of speed and angle of shot on diameter by metallic and ceramic shot ... 31

Figure 29: Elliptic deformation ............................................................................................... 32

Figure 30: Shot peening of different target with ceramic shot ............................................... 32

Figure 31: Study of different shot peened material by using Scanning Electron Microscope 33

Figure 32: Comparison of empirical, experimental and numerical analysis .......................... 35

Figure 33: 25 shot model in ABAQUS ................................................................................... 36

Figure 34: Multiple shot analysis ............................................................................................ 36

Figure 35: Residual stress generated beneath the surface ....................................................... 37

Figure 36: Micro surface roughness formed due to shot peening ........................................... 37

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page No.

Table 1: Johnson cook damage constants for AL-6063 ............................................................. 9

Table 2: Johnson cook damage constants for Ti-6Al-4V .......................................................... 9

Table 3: Physical and material properties used in ABAQUS .................................................. 16

Table 4: 3D modelling parameters in ABAQUS ..................................................................... 18

Table 5: Shot peening process parameters ............................................................................... 21

Table 6: Peening parameters .................................................................................................... 23

Table 7: Predicted depth and diameter of indent ..................................................................... 24

Table 8: F.E.M analysed results for depth, diameter and stress on target material ................. 24

Table 9: Comparison between Emperical analysis and Finite element analysis ..................... 28

Table 10: Influence of shot angle on depth of indent .............................................................. 30

Table 11: Influence of shot angle on diameter of indent ......................................................... 31

Table 12: Influence of shot angle on dent form ....................................................................... 32

Table 13: Result of experimental analysis with different target .............................................. 33

Table 14: Experimental analysis Vs 3D-F.E.M analysis for single shot. ................................ 34

Table 15: Comparison of diameter of indent ........................................................................... 35

vii
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

V Volume

W Work

BHN Work needed to create a unit of volume (Brinell Hardness Number)

Di Indent Diameter

D Shot Diameter

E Energy

M Mass

v Velocity

 Density

P Efficiency (The Fraction of Energy actually used to do Work)

E Coefficient of Restitution

F Force

A Area

h Depth of indent

R Radius of Shot (D/2)

a Difference between R and h

viii
 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Shot peening is termed as the process of bombarding or hitting the surface of a metal target
with a stream of tiny, hard particles, called as shot. The impact of the shot with the target
material induces with some amount of stress beneath the surface, known as compressive
residual stress. This process of shot peening, as shown in Figure 1, can also be used for
cleaning the surface of the metal target and hence proving with a cosmetic surface finish. It
has also been shown to provide protection against stress corrosion cracking. However, for a
very extended period, the main purpose for the shot peening has been to improve the fatigue
strength. However, nowadays it has a significant influence over the cosmetic finish of the
metal target which leads to provide a significant beautiful appearance. The compressive
residual stress produced below the surface of the metal target using shot peening is very
much effective in justifying the tensile stress which results in cracking. There exist many
other applications for shot peening. However, we will concentrate mostly on the deformation
caused and also will focus for the roughness affecting the cosmetic finish by shot peening.

Figure 1 - Shot stream from a nozzle impacting the metal target (ceramics.org)

The process of shot peening is controlled by the following parameters: Intensity and
coverage. Intensity is measured using a standard Almen Strip. The Coverage is the number of
indents formed per unit area. The common thing between this two parameters the indent size.
Thus an increase in indent size gives rise to increasing in both intensity and coverage per
shot.

1
 1.2 Literature Review
Shot peening is the termed as the process of bombarding the surface of a target element with
multiple shots at high velocities, where each single shot which strikes the target material
behaves like a small peening hammer, which conveying to the surface of the target with a
small plastic indentation region bounded by a plastic zone. Once the contact in between the
shot and the target has finished, the elastically deformed stressed region intends to recover
back to the fully unloaded state of position, while the plastically deformed region withstands
with some permanent deformation.

These inhomogeneous elastic-plastic deformations intend for the development of a

compressive residual stress field beneath the surface of the metallic target as shown below in
Figure 2. The deposit of compressive residual stresses decreases the possibility of early
failure of the metal part under such conditions of cyclic loading (Meguid, 1975; Webster and
Ezeilo, 2001; Rodopoulos et al. 2004).

Figure 2: - Shot peening process (cwst.co.uk)

Many studies concerning shot peening has been conducted over the years. (Meguid S.S.,1999)
modelled using a hard or rigid shot impacts the target with two symmetry boundary
conditions, which showed that the simultaneous impacts had a significant influence on the
compressive residual stresses induced. (Klemenz, 2009) simulated multiple ordered shot
impacts using an isotropic-kinematic hardening law for modelling the behaviour of AISI
4140 steel. The constitutive law used, took into account both strain history and strain rate. A
better correlation was observed in between the predicted simulation results and the
experimental data for the deformation over the surface of the target and residual stresses.

2
(Guagliano,2001) have used properties from the fatigue behaviour and the work hardening
constitutive law for modelling multiple load cycles during multiple impacts on SAE 1070
steel target. (Schwarzer et al...,2002) proposed a 3D geometrical model for studying the
effect of multiple shots impacting the AISI 4140 steel target, which modelled the shot with
rigid or hard surfaces and mass and also rotational inertia components. They also have
evaluated the differences between consecutive and immediate neighbouring impacts.

(Meguid et al.,2002) presented asymmetry cell is representing succeeding rows of steel shot,
impacting the large AISI 4340 target surface. Stiffness damping and mass were used. The
deformation of the shot was studied and the hard or rigid material was used to represent the
shot material. The effect of the study of friction over the plastic strain generated was
considered negligible for coefficients of friction in between 0.25 and 0.5. (Wang et al.,2002)
presented a model using random finite element analysed model and proved that such type of
model could be utilised for studying the influence of shot peening parameters over residual
stress, saturation, coverage, surface roughness and cosmetic finish.

(Zimmermann et al.,2010) related deterministic and random finite element methodological

simulations relating the development of coverage, residual stress and surface topography.
Using asymmetry cell,(Kim et al.,2010) proved that the average calculated stress over a shot
peening impacted area produces results, which is closer to experimental x-ray diffraction
measurements of compressive residual stress rather to a 4-node average. (Kang et al.,2010)
Modelled a single and also multiple predefined impacts of shot on a square 2024-T351 target.
The authors proved that the multiple shot impacts intend to produce a uniform state within
the shot peened material and that the multiple shot impact modelling is much more
appropriate than the single shot impact model for the representation of shot peening. It should
also be noted that, within the models of (Wang et al.,2006), the temperature data was only
used as a numerical tool, and it is not linked to the actual process of shot peening.

(Wohlfahrt.,1984) described the two processes of shot peening generating competitive

residual stress, as shown in Figure 3. First one is considered as direct plastic elongation of the
upper surface layer of the target material because of various multiple shot indentations, as
shown at the left-hand side of Figure 3.(Principle 1). After the process of shot peening, the
plane of the target material component is separated into two sections. Section-A signifies
3
plastic deformation by shot peening while section-B signifies the surface region under the
plastic deformation. The elasto-plastic elongation of the surface consequences in generating
compressive residual stresses with a maximum magnitude at the surface region. The method
of generating the second residual stress can be described as the Hertzian pressure which
creates plastic deformation beneath the impact surface layer region, as shown at the right side
of Figure 3 (Principle 2). The residual stress generates maximum value at a distance of z =
0.47a below the surface layer region, where a is the radius of the plastic indentation.

Figure 3: Illustration of the formation of residual stresses: direct elongating of a surface layer
(Principle 1, left) andHertzian pressure (Principle 2, right) (Slim, 1995).

As shown below Figure 4, demonstrates the distinctive residual stress field as described by
the five core terms, as described

 σ max: maximum compressive residual stress

 σ ten : maximum tensile residual stress
 σ sur : surface residual stress
 t 1 : depth of maximum compressive residual stress
 t 2 : depth where residual stress changes its sign (compressive too tensile)

Figure 4: - Illustration of the residual and tensile stress of shot peening.

4
 1.3 Shot peening process parameters
An increasing amount of shot peening parameters is identified, which have a significant
amount of influence on the efficiency of the treatment during shot peening. These process
parameters can be categorised into three groups (Kyriacou, 1996):

 Shot parameters: Type, shape, size, hardness, density, stiffness, yield strength.
 Target parameters: Chemical composition, Work hardness, stiffness, pre-stress
condition, stiffness.
 Flow parameters: Angle of impingement, Pressure, Mass flow rate, standoff distance,
velocity.

Figure 5: Effect of shot peening.

By operating on basic research of shot peening, (Herzog et al., 1996) investigated the
consequence of shot peening parameters on the resultant residual stress profile caused by
shot peening. The effect of the hardness of the target material component HVm , the
hardness of shot material HVs, the diameter of shot d, the velocity of shot v, the mass
flow rate of shot flow m, pressure p and time for shot peening t influences on the residual
stress profile was presented in Figure 5. In the provided figure, the directions of the
arrows show the effect of these process parameters on residual stress profile generated by
shot peening. Arrow 1 demonstrates that the value of the surface residual stress σsur
increases with the increasing HVs and HVm . Arrow 2 shows that the value of the
maximum compressive residual stress σmax increases with increasing v, p, d, t, HVs and
HVm . Arrow 3 indicates the depth of the maximum residual stress t1 decreases with
increasing HVm . Arrow 4 indicates, t1 increases with the increase of v, p, d, t and HVs.
5
 Figure 5: - Effect of the peening parameters on the residual stress (Herzog et al...1996).

1.4 Shot peening process control methods

The two foremost control procedures used to ensure the repeatability of the shot peening
processes in the industry and research laboratories are the measurement of Almen intensity
and surface coverage.

1.4.1 Almen intensity

The Almen test termed as the method by which the process of shot peening is usually
measured and controlled and is a gauge of its provided intensity. During performing the test,
a small metal strip is fixed firmly to a block and then subjected to the operation of shot
peening. When removed from the block the provided metal strip will intend to arc or bend
towards the direction of the shot peened face. The intensity of the operation of shot peening
process then referred by the height of the arc or bend and then can be measured with the help
of using an Almen gauge (Wilson, R., 1992).

Figure 6: Almen strips dimension (Kirk,1999)

1.4.2 Surface coverage

The surface coverage is well-defined as the ratio of the surface area covered by indentions
formed by shot peening to the whole surface being treated and expressed as a percentage. For
some practical reasons, the maximum coverage that can be evaluated visually is around 98%,
6
since the coverage percentages are hard to distinguish as 100% coverage is approached.
Therefore 98% of surface coverage is typically deliberated as full coverage. Also, 200%
coverage, defined as the process of shot-peening twice the exposure time required for
achieving full coverage (98%).

(Dr. Kirk and Abyaneh., 1993), and (Dr Kirk., 2002, 2005) deliberated the theory of coverage
rate developed for the random indentations, which adopts that the randomly sprinkled shot
particles reach the surface of the component’s at some constant rate and form circular
indentations of a constant size. (Karuppanan et al., 2002) has presented two theoretical
models for the prediction of the development of coverage.

1.4.3 Surface roughness

The process of shot peening generates compressive residual stress within the target
component but increases the roughness of the surface at the same time which affects the
physical, visual perception of the material affecting the cosmetic finish of the target. The two
common parameters for roughness utilised within the field of shot peening are peak-to-valley
roughness PV and average roughness Ra as shown in Figure 7. The value of PV is defined as
the distance between the highest peak Rpe and the lowest valley Rv, as shown in the Equation
(1.1). The average roughness Ra, defined as the arithmetic mean deviation of the surface of
the target component from the mean line. For a given sample length L, Equation (1.2).
PV = Rpe + Rv (1.1)
1 𝐿
𝑅𝑎 = ∫ |𝑍(𝑥)|𝑑𝑥
𝐿 0
(1.2)

Figure 7: Definition for roughness.

Remarks :
 Most of the previous work were done using metallic shot. Hence Ceramic kind of shot
is introduced in order to analyse the process of shot peening.
 Researchers mostly concentrated in determining the residual stress generated.
 No shot, with diameter of 100µm was considered before.
 Effect of shot peening on surface deformation and roughness is studied.

7
 2 MATERIALS

2.1 Johnson Cook model

The Johnson-Cook damagen material model offers a suitable demonstration of high
deformation rate material behaviour. For many years several models have been generated for
simulating the high deformation rate behavior of materials. From all of these models, the
Johnson-Cook model has developed as the most widely accepted model and is presently
being used by most of the national and international laboratories, military laboratories, as
well as also by several private industries.

2.1.1 Constitutive model of material

To consider the affect of factors on the plastic flow stress of target, Johnson-Cook
(BargeM,HamdiH, Rech J,et al ., 2005) model is used as the constitutive model of the
material, to which is implemented to describe the dynamic behaviour of metallic materials
from low strain rate to high strain.The form of model is

𝜎 = [𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛 ][1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀 ̇ ∗ ][1 − 𝑇 ∗𝑚 ] (2.1)

𝑇 ∗ = (𝑇 − 298)/(𝑇𝑚𝑒𝑙𝑡 − 298) (2.2)

Where, 𝜎 = stress ; 𝜀 = strain ; 𝜀̇∗ = strain rate ; 𝑛 = work hardening ; 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 = constants.

2.1.2 Damage criterion model

Within the proces of finite element method, the damage criterion is an important
parameter,used to analyse th critical damage value of the material.The failure occurs when
D=1.The current failure strain within the problem(𝜀𝑓 ) is a function of temperature, mean
stress, and strain rate.The fracture in the Johnson-Cook damage model is generated from the
provide damage law:

∆𝜀
D = Σ𝜀 ; 𝜀𝑓 = [𝐷1 + 𝐷2 exp(𝐷3 𝜎 ∗ )][1 + 𝐷4 ln 𝜀̇ ∗ ][1 + 𝐷5 𝑇 ∗ ] (2.3)
𝑓

Where, 𝜎 ∗ = stress ; ∆𝜀 = strain ; 𝜀̇ ∗ = strain rate ; 𝑛 = work hardening ; 𝐷𝑛 = constants.

8
 2.2 Target material
2.2.1 Aluminium Alloy – AL-6063
Aluminium alloy, AL-6063 is a medium strength alloy which is typically used in the shot
peening target model as it has a good surface finish, high corrosion resistance.

A (Mpa) B (Mpa) n C m
176.45 63.99 0.07 0.0036 0

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 T-melting T-transition
0.07413 0.0892 -2.441 -4.76 0 655 °C 25 °C

Table 1: Johnson cook damage constants for AL-6063

2.2.2 Ti-6Al-4V
Titanium alloy, Ti-6Al-4V has very toughness and high tensile strengths. It is light in weight,
and possesshigh corrosion resistance and to tolerate at high temperatures.

A (Mpa) B (Mpa) n C m
1098 1092 0.93 0.014 1.1

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 T-melting T-transition
-0.09 0.25 -0.5 0.014 3.87 1605 °C 21 °C

Table 2: Johnson cook damage constants for Ti-6Al-4V

2.3 Shot Material

2.3.1 Mild steel
Mild steel was selected as the material for shot for this research study as it is most broadly
used for shot peening materials. It has a density of 7800kg/m3, modulus of elasticity of
210Gpa and poisons ratio of 0.3.

2.3.2 Ceramic
Due to the regularity and accuracy of the surface finishes, ceramic beads were selected for
shot peening modelling as it is used widely for surface finishing and cleaning of complex
materials. It has a density of 3900kg/m3, modulus of elasticity of 200Gpa and poisons ratio of
0.3.
9
 3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Specific Tasks

The thesis performed over the application of the empirical data to a small number of sets of
elements for evaluation and prediction of the plastic deformation that will be visible on the
target substrate.Utilising the dynamic models for the recreation of the millions of pieces of
shot hitting or impacting the target substrate would be more computationally expensive.The
research performed explores the use of contact models and utilisation of reduction of data in a
simplified shell model for the demonstration of the simple application of empirically
predicted and calculated stress for shell element components in a 3D quasi-static model can
generate much better predictive models of the deformation that will be visible in te target
substrate.

This research focusses on establishing a method by which the elastic-plastic deformation

caused by the process of shot peening can be predicted by the following steps:

 Prediction of dent form using Emperical formulation for single shot with different
target material.
 Prediction of dent form using commercial axisymmetric finite element analysis
coding software in ABAQUS for single shot with different target material.
 Comparing the emperical calculation and finite element analysis in order to validate
the model.
 Prediction of dent form generating a 3D model using commercial finite element
analysis coding software in ABAQUS for single shot with different target material,
shot angles and shot velocities.
 Experimental analysis of shot peening for different material with different shot speed
and angle.
 Comparing and validating the finite element analysis model with the experimental
data.
 Numerical simulation of more than one shot(25 shot’s) and identify the parameters
influencing the process of shot peening for the generation of rough surface.

10
 3.2 Analytical Calculations
3.2.1 Volume of an Indent
Kirk derived extensively about shot peening, he presented, the diameter bonds the two
important parameters, shot coverage and intensity, of the shot peening; both are explained
(Kirk.,2004).
The volume (V) of the indent can be derived by the equation below:
V = W/B (3.1)
Where: W is the work done by shot, and B is work needed for generating a unit of volume.

The hemispherical indent volume V of the shot is given by the equation below:
𝑉 = 𝜋𝐷𝑖 4 /32𝐷 + 𝜋𝐷𝑖 6 /64𝐷 (3.2)
For further simplification, the second term is ignored.The new equation:
𝑉 = 𝜋𝐷𝑖 4 /32𝐷 (3.3)

3.2.2 Energy and Work

The energy (E) present in a shot is derived using relation of kinetic energy:
1
𝐸= 𝑚𝑣 2 (3.4)
2

Where m is the mass of shot and v is the velocity of the shot.

Mass (m) = V . ρ (3.5)
Where ρ is the density of the shot.

Substituting mass equation (equation 2.5) into energy equation (equation 2.4),one obtain:
𝐸 = 𝜋𝐷3 𝜌𝑣 2 /12 (3.6)

Some energy retained by the shot particle, termed as the coefficient of restitution, e.
𝑃 = (1 − 𝑒 2 ) (3.7)

Using equation 2.6 for energy of shot, the work done by shot can be determined:
𝐸 = 𝑃. 𝐸 = 𝑃𝜋𝐷3 𝜌𝑣 2 /12 (3.8)

Therefore the work done by shot particle can be calculated as,

𝑊 = (1 − 𝑒 2 )𝜋𝐷3 𝜌𝑣 2 /12 (3.9)

11
 3.2.3 Brinell Hardness Number
The Brinell Hardness Number(BHN) also can be considered as the amount of the work done
per unit volume of the hemispherical indent, measured in Kg/mm2.

𝑳𝒐𝒂𝒅 𝒐𝒏 𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒐𝒐𝒍 (𝒌𝒈𝒇) 𝑭

B = BHN = ; BHN = 𝝅 (3.10)
𝑺𝒖𝒓𝒇𝒂𝒄𝒆 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 (𝒎𝒎𝟐 ) 𝑫.(𝑫−√𝑫𝟐 −𝑫𝒊𝟐 )
𝟐

Figure 8.1: Work done for compression of cylinder. Figure 8.2: Brinell Hardness Number.

Now it is possible to derive the diameter of the indent formed:

4
𝑉 = 𝑊 ⁄𝐵 = 𝜋𝐷𝑖 /32𝐷 = (1 − 𝑒 2 )𝜋𝐷3 𝜌𝑣 2 /12/𝐵 (3.11)

Solving it for 𝐷𝑖 gives : 𝐷𝑖 = 1.278𝐷(1 − 𝑒 2 ).25 𝜌.25 𝑣 .5 /𝐵 .25 (3.12)

In order to transform kg/mm2 to N/mm2 (Pa), multiply by 9.8 x 106 ; Therefore:

𝐾𝑔𝑓
𝐵𝐻𝑁 = 𝑚𝑚2 × 9.8 × 106 = 𝐺𝑃𝑎 (3.13)

Calculating the depth/height (ℎ) of the indent, which can be solved by the use of Pythagorean
Theorem, as shown in the figure : ℎ =𝑅−𝑎 ; Since D=100µ.

𝐷𝑖
𝑎 = √𝑅 2 − ( 2 )2 (3.14)

𝑎 = √0.05𝟐 − (𝒙)𝟐 (3.15)

Figure 9: Geometry of an indent.

Thus Height of the Indent is calculated, ℎ = 0.05 − 𝑎 .

12
 3.3 Mathematical expression for a Shot Peening problem
3.3.1 Introduction
In this provided section, the mathematical expression for the process of shot peening has been
explained. For solving the problem, the polar coordinates for the 2D axisymmetric analysis
was explained theoretically. In conclusion, the formulation of finite element analysis for the
process of a shot peening problem is explained to provide a sound understanding of the
methods used by ABAQUS for solving the problem.

3.3.2 Equations in the Polar Coordinates

Within the engineering applications, material elements are subjected to forces like normal,
shear, and body forces, resulting in the formation of stresses on the material element. Still, at
a provided time, the equilibrium of any element within the material component required
being maintained. Thus the following equilibrium equations of r, θ and z-direction are
derived (Hearn, E., 1997).

𝜕 1 𝜕 𝜕 (𝜎𝑟𝑟 −𝜎𝜃𝜃 ) 𝜕2 𝑢𝑟
(𝜎𝑟𝑟 ) + 𝑟 𝜕𝜃 (𝜏𝑟𝜃 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜏𝑟𝑧 ) + + 𝐹𝑅 = 𝜌
𝜕𝑟 𝑟 𝜕𝑡 2

𝜕 1 𝜕 𝜕 2𝜏𝑟𝜃 𝜕2 𝑢𝜃
(𝜎𝑟𝜃 ) + 𝑟 𝜕𝜃 (𝜎𝜃𝜃 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜏𝜃𝑧 ) + + 𝐹𝜃 = 𝜌 (3.16)
𝜕𝑟 𝑟 𝜕𝑡 2

𝜕 1 𝜕 𝜕 𝜏𝑟𝑧 𝜕2 𝑢𝑟
(𝜏 ) + 𝑟 𝜕𝜃 (𝜏𝜃𝑧 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜎𝑧𝑧 ) + + 𝐹𝑟 = 𝜌
𝜕𝑟 𝑟𝑧 𝑟 𝜕𝑡 2

For axial symmetry, (𝜏𝑟𝜃 = 0), the equations simplified like following(Hearn, E., 1997):

𝜕 𝜕 (𝜎𝑟𝑟 −𝜎𝜃𝜃 ) 𝜕2 𝑢𝑟
(𝜎𝑟𝑟 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜏𝑟𝑧 ) + + 𝐹𝑅 = 𝜌
𝜕𝑟 𝑟 𝜕𝑡 2

1 𝜕 𝜕 𝜕2 𝑢𝜃
(𝜎𝜃𝜃 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜏𝜃𝑧 ) + 𝐹𝜃 = 𝜌 (3.17)
𝑟 𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝑡 2

𝜕 1 𝜕 𝜕 𝜏𝑟𝑧 𝜕2 𝑢𝑧
(𝜏𝑟𝑧 ) + 𝑟 𝜕𝜃 (𝜏𝜃𝑧 ) + 𝜕𝑧 (𝜎𝑧𝑧 ) + + 𝐹𝑧 = 𝜌
𝜕𝑟 𝑟 𝜕𝑡 2

13
Equations for elastic stress-strain relation for normal force (Hearn, E., 1997):
𝐸
𝜎𝑟𝑟 = (1+𝑣)(1−𝑣) [𝜀𝑟𝑟 + 𝑣(𝜀𝜃𝜃 + 𝜀𝑧𝑧 − 𝜀𝑟𝑟 )]
𝐸
𝜎𝜃𝜃 = (1+𝑣)(1−𝑣) [𝜀𝜃𝜃 + 𝑣(𝜀𝑟𝑟 + 𝜀𝑧𝑧 − 𝜀𝜃𝜃 )] (3.18)
𝐸
𝜎𝑧𝑧 = (1+𝑣)(1−𝑣) [𝜀𝑧𝑧 + 𝑣(𝜀𝑟𝑟 + 𝜀𝜃𝜃 − 𝜀𝑧𝑧 )]

Equations for elastic stress-strain relation for shear stress (Hearn, E., 1997):
𝐸
𝜏𝑟𝜃 = 2(1+𝑣) 𝛾𝑟𝜃 = 𝐺𝛾𝑟𝜃
𝐸
𝜏𝜃𝑧 = 2(1+𝑣) 𝛾𝜃𝑧 = 𝐺𝛾𝜃𝑧 (3.19)
𝐸
𝜏𝑧𝑟 = 2(1+𝑣) 𝛾𝑧𝑟 = 𝐺𝛾𝑧𝑟

2𝐺(1+𝑣)
Where, 𝐸 = 2𝐺(1 + 𝑣) and 𝐸 = 3𝐾(1 − 2𝑣) ; Therefore: 𝐾 = (3.20)
3(1−2𝑣)

In the process of shot peening, plastic deformation takes place.So, elasto-plastic stress-strain
relationships are presented.For the elastic part, (Equation 2.18,2.19) is used. However, for the
plastic part of the problem, new stress-strain relationship defined utilising Johnson-Cook
material damage model as shown below, (Lesuer, d., 2000).

𝜎 = [𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛 ][1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀 ̇ ∗ ][1 − 𝑇 ∗𝑚 ] (3.21)

Where, 𝜎 = stress ; 𝜀 = strain ; 𝜀̇∗ = strain rate ; 𝑛 = work hardening ; 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 = constants.

Strain-Displacement equation for normal strain (Hearn, E., 1997):

𝜕𝑢𝑟 𝑢𝑟 1 𝜕𝑢𝜃 𝜕𝑢𝑧

𝜀𝑟𝑟 = ; 𝜀𝜃𝜃 = + ; 𝜀𝑧𝑧 = (3.22)
𝜕𝑟 𝑟 𝑟 𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝑧

Strain-Displacement equation for shear strain (Hearn, E., 1997):

1 𝜕𝑢𝑟 𝜕𝑢𝜃 𝑢𝜃
𝛾𝑟𝜃 = 𝑟 + +
𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝑟 𝑟
1 𝜕𝑢𝑧 𝜕𝑢𝜃
𝛾𝜃𝑧 = 𝑟 + (3.23)
𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝑧
1 𝜕𝑢𝑟 𝜕𝑢𝑧
𝛾𝑧𝑟 = 𝑟 +
𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑟

14
In the next step, the boundary condition is provided. As shown below in the Figure 10.1,10.2
is the layout of the shot and the disk used for the 2D-Axisymmetric analysis.

Figure 10.1: Shown above is a diagram of Figure 10.2: As Shown above is the
the disk and spherical indenter.The shaded diagram depicting the general setup for
portion represents the small part of the the 2D axisymmetric analysis.
disk as illustrated in figure 10.2.

Based on the figure, one can notice that the disk is fixed along the central axis and as well as
along the bottom.So the following boundary condition is applied on the central axis of the
disk.
𝑢𝑟 = 0 ; ∅𝑧 = 0 ; ∅𝜃 = 0 ; (3.24)
For the bottom of the disk,
𝑢𝑧 = 0 ; ∅𝜃 = 0 ; (3.25)
For the movement of the indenter,
𝑢𝑟 = 0 ; ∅𝑧 = 0 ; ∅𝜃 = 0 ; (3.26)
For the initial velocity of shot,
𝑣° = 𝐶 (3.27)

For calculating elastic stresses along the central axis of the disk at varying depths, z, from the
surface of the target component.The following equations were taken from Johnson’s book of
contact mechanics (Johnson, K., 1985).
−1
𝑧2
𝜎𝑧 = −𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 (1 + 𝑎2 ) (3.28)

𝑧 𝑎 1 𝑧2
𝜎𝑟 = 𝜎𝜃 = 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 [−(1 + 𝑣) {1 − (𝑎) tanh−1 ( 𝑧 )} + 2 (1 + 𝑎2 )] (3.29)

15
 3.4 2D Axisymmetric Analysis
3.4.1 Model Setup
For the simulation of 2D axisymmetric shot peening the models were constructed
representing one impact of the ceramic and steel shot with the aluminium and titanium target.
The impact happened directly at the centre axis of the target with all proceeding impacts
located in the same position. The reason behind the simulation was to verify the progress of
the deformation along the central axis of the target component in both the z-direction and the
r-direction with every single added impact.

Figure 11.1: Shown above is a diagram Figure 11.2: Shown above is the 2D
of the disk and the spherical indenter. A axisymmetric ABAQUS model that was
small portion target was designed using created in order to simulate the impact
2Daxisymmetric model with ABAQUS. of a single shot with the target.

Figure 11.1,11.2 shows the model geometry.It was only necessary to create a section of the
disk because of the axisymmetric model. The physical and material properties used for
defining the model is shown in Table 3.

Target Material’s Shot Material’s

Material : Aluminium Alloy – 6063 – T6 Material : Mild - Steel
Dimension : 5.3 x 2 mm Diameter : 0.1 mm
Density : 2.7e-9 tonne/mm3 Density : 7.8e-9 tonne/mm3
Elastic Modulus : 69000 Mpa Elastic Modulus : 210000 Mpa
Poisson’s Ratio = 0.33 Poisson’s Ratio = 0.3
Material : Titanium Alloy-Ti-6Al-4v Material : Ceramics
Dimension : 5.3 x 2 mm Diameter : 0.1 mm
Density : 4.4e-9 tonne/mm3 Density : 3,9e-9 tonne/mm3
Elastic Modulus : 114000 Mpa Elastic Modulus : 200000 Mpa
Poisson’s Ratio = 0.342 Poisson’s Ratio = 0.3

Table 3: Physical and material properties used in ABAQUS.

16
The process of peening of the target was simulated using single shot with the target using
commercial finite element analysis code ABAQUS. The shot was modelled as rigid. As this
kind of simulation was used in past researches with great success (Hong, T., 2008). Also the
analysis of deformable shot been shown in past(Guagliano, M., 2001), revealed that
deformable shot generates same results to rigid shot(Meguid, S., 1999). While the shot size
can variate from 0.1mm to 2mm in diametre, a single shot of 0.1 diametre was selected for
the research. Also,the velocities varies from 30m/s to 80m/s so for the purpose of research a
velocity in middle of range is considered.
The boundary conditions assigned to the shot and the target component are presented in
Figure 11.2. The boundary conditions were assigned to the central axis of the target
component, and to the bottom. Especially, an XSYMM was utilised at the central axis where
U1 = UR2 = UR3 = 0. Boundary state used for the bottom was U2 = UR3 = 0. An XSYMM
boundary state was also applied to the central axis of the shot to the reference point.
Surface to Surface contact was assigned to the shot and the target,using master-slave
method. "Hard" contact model was used where exists no contact pressure unless the slave
surface contact the master surface (ABAQUS. Theory and users Manual).

Figure 12.1: Above shown are 5 partitions Figure 12.2: Above shown is the meshed
used to refine the mesh within the target. target used for the study of single impact.

After applying suitable boundary conditions, the target was meshed. Figure 12 is the fully
meshed target. For meshng the target component, CAX4R liniear quadrilateral and CAX3
liniear trianguular elements were used.In order to minimize the computational time, different
mesh size was used in each partitions. In the bottom portion of the target, the mesh is very
coarse, but with each added partition the mesh becomes finer.

17
 3.5 3D Modelling for single shot in ABAQUS
3.5.1 Establishment of geometrical model
For the 3D model, aluminium and titianium is chosen as target and ceramic and steel
material for the shot. Initial residual stress of the target is 0.However, 3D finite element
simulation provides a general referance for the real process of shot peening.The shot is
considered to be rigid with a diametre of 0.1mm.

Properties
Shot Type : Mild Steel,Ceramics
Target Type : AL-6063 , Ti-6Al-4V
Number of Shot : 1.
Shot Diameter : 0.1 mm.
Shot Velocities : 30 , 75 (m/s).
Shot Angles : 90° , 85° , 60° , 45°

Table 4: 3D modelling parameters in ABAQUS

3.5.2 Constitutive model of material

To consider the affect of factors on the plastic flow stress of target, Johnson-Cook
(BargeM,HamdiH, Rech J,et al ., 2005) model is used as the constitutive model of the
material, to which is implemented to describe the dynamic behaviour of metallic materials
from low strain rate to high strain.The form of model is

𝜎 = [𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛 ][1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀 ̇ ∗ ][1 − 𝑇 ∗𝑚 ] (3.30)

Where, 𝜎 = stress ; 𝜀 = strain ; 𝜀̇∗ = strain rate ; 𝑛 = work hardening ; 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 = constants.

3.5.3 Damage criterion model

Within the proces of finite element method, the damage criterion is an important
parameter,used to analyse th critical damage value of the material.The failure occurs when
D=1.The current failure strain within the problem(𝜀𝑓 ) is a function of temperature, mean
stress, and strain rate.The fracture in the Johnson-Cook damage model is generated from the
provide damage law:
∆𝜀
D = Σ𝜀 ; 𝜀𝑓 = [𝐷1 + 𝐷2 exp(𝐷3 𝜎 ∗ )][1 + 𝐷4 ln 𝜀̇ ∗ ][1 + 𝐷5 𝑇 ∗ ] (3.31)
𝑓

Where, 𝜎 ∗ = stress ; ∆𝜀 = strain ; 𝜀̇ ∗ = strain rate ; 𝑛 = work hardening ; 𝐷𝑛 = constants.

18
 3.5.4 Boundary Conditions
The displacement boundary condition for the the bottom of the plate is fully constrained and
a symmetry boundary conditions were applied on z=0 and x=0.Initial velocity boundary
condition were applied to the shot particle, according to the angle of shot x,y,z axis
displacements and velocities were specified for each type.

Figure 13.1: Shot angle Figure 13.2: Velocity boundary conditions

3.5.5 Defining model in ABAQUS explicit

Both brick and tetrahedral finite elements, with large strain and displacement capabilities,
were utilised to simulate the process of single shot peening. General contact interactions All*
with self, boundary conditions were applied. Depending upon the shot peening parameters as
provided in Table 2, the initial velocity boundary conditions were provided as shown in
Figure 13.1, 13.2. Accordingly meshing was done to the shot and the target surface as shown
below in Figure 14.

Figure 14: Mesh generated for the 3D-Model in ABAQUS explicit.

19
 3.6 Experimental study of shot peening
3.6.1 Introduction
The main reason of this experimental work is to experimentaly study the shot peening effects
on residual stress, deformation and roughness in detail.

3.6.2 Using Microblast

Saint-Gobain ZirPro’s Microblast fine ceramic beads are used as the blasting media for the
appliaction for surface finishing. Microblast type B205, B170 and B120 blasting shot beads
provides the smoothest finish and a unique satin effect on a stainless steel, aluminum,
titanium, magnesium and also even for plastic surfaces.

Microblast ceramic beed blasting media are categorised by:

 Enormously fitted particle size distributions
 Process refined spherical beads in shape
 Very high mechanical strength

Figure 15.1: Microblast Zirconia Shots Figure 15.2: Microscopic view of beads

The mixture of these exclusive features confirms reliability of media and durable
performance during the operation of shot peening. Microblast ceramic shot beads are easy to
handle in many categories of equipment for air pressure peening. Microblast is available
within the following standard size ranges:

Figure 15.3: Shown above are the detailed size ranges

20
 3.6.3 Experimental setup
The process of shot peening was performed at Saint-Gobain CREE (European Research and
Studies Center),France with a portable blasting Machine as shown in Figure 15 , and a robot
controller arm. Ceramic Zirshot B120 ceramic bead shots with approximate Young’s
modulus of 200GPa , Poisson’s ratio of 0.3 and a density of 3900kg/m3 were utilised during
the peening experiments. Table 5 shown below lists the cases of parameters of the process of
shot peening used for this study. The shot flow velocity was measured by “Shotmeter”.

Figure 15: Machine used for shot blasting at Saint-Gobain CREE

Shot Material Target Material Shot Angle Shot Speed

Ceramic Aluminium Alloy 85° 75
Ceramic Aluminium Alloy 45° 75
Ceramic Alluminium Alloy 85° 30
Ceramic Titainium Alloy 85° 75
Table 5: Shot peening process parameters

The above shown Table 3, shows that four target Aluminium plates with dimensions
(100mm x 100mm x 2mm) were shot peened with different shot velocities in order study the
influence of shot velocity over the elasto-plastic deformation and roughness of the target.

Figure 16.1: Unpolished AL-6063 Figure 16.2: Polished AL-6063

21
3.7 Finite Element Analysis for multiple shot peening
3.7.1 Introduction
In order to understand the influence of shot peening on elasto-plastic deformation and
increasing surface roughness caused, multiple number of shots(25) are simulated.

3.7.2 Calculation for coverage rate

The impact distribution can be referred in several cases. The calculation of the coverage
rate “c” can be derived as a function of the shot distribution, the contact radius a* and the
distance between impact d. The term subscript s refers the number in the subscript
referencing the coverage rate and the case of a square distribution as shown below.

Figure 17.1: Impact distribution schemes for several cases Figure 17.2: F.E.M

22
3.7.3 Model setup in ABAQUS explicit
Accordingly, in order to suggest a much better and realistic model for the process of shot
peening, the following main step was to generate a FE model with ABAQUS, considering
into account 25 number of identical ceramic shots impacting the aluminium target surface
with an angle perpendicular to the target surface, and in orderly structures, Figure.

Figure 18: Shot distribution on target in ABAQUS

Large number of simulations of the same plan as single impact were performed with the
finite elemnt software ABAQUS on the base of the full actorial plan, with the one single
shot peening parameter that are shot diameter, surface coverage, shot angle and shot
velocity, in order to gage the size of the impact for each case. The parameters that were
used by the software for the simulation are listed in Table 6.

Shot Peening Parameters used in ABAQUS

Coverage : 100%
Shot Type : Ceramics
Target Type : AL-6063
Number of Shot : 25.
Shot Diameter : 0.1 mm.
Shot Velocity : 75 (m/s).
Shot Angles : 90°
Table 6: Peening parameters.

23
 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Empirical Analysis
These results were obtained using the emperical calculation used by Kirk for the prediction of
target surface deformation in terms of depth and diameter of the indent.
Target material Shot material Shot velocity Indent depth Indent Diameter
(m/s) (µm) (µm)
AL-6063 Steel 30 3.65 37.49
AL-6063 Steel 75 9.13 59.27
AL-6063 Ceramics 30 2.53 31.47
AL-6063 Ceramics 75 5.91 49.76
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 30 1.66 25.59
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 75 4.27 40.46
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 30 1.17 21.52
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 75 2.98 34.02
Table 7: Predicted depth and diameter of indent

4.2 2D Axisymmetric Analysis

4.2.1 Introduction to Finite element analysis results
In this section,the reults of 2D axisymmetric analysis which was performed using steel and
ceramic shot on Aluminium alloy and titanium alloy target. The results were presented are in
the form of displacement and compressive residual stress present on the target surface.
Target Shot Shot velocity Indent depth Indent Diameter Max stress
material material (m/s) (µm) (µm) (Mpa)
AL-6063 Steel 30 3.53 36.8 -162.23
AL-6063 Steel 75 8.96 56.86 -170.76
AL-6063 Ceramics 30 2.49 31.49 -159.49
AL-6063 Ceramics 75 6.24 50.14 -166.22
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 30 1.38 25.81 -607.41
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 75 3.60 40.59 -720.04
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 30 0.96 21.10 -560.89
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 75 2.51 32.67 -675.39
Table 8: F.E.M analysed results for depth, diameter and stress on target material

24
 Steel shot – Aluminium Target – 30m/s Steel shot – Aluminium Target – 75m/s

Ceramic shot – Aluminium Target – 30m/s Steel shot – Aluminium Target – 75m/s

Steel shot – Titanium target – 30m/s Steel shot – Titanium target – 75m/s

Ceramic shot – Titanium target – 30m/s Ceramic shot – Titanium target – 75m/s

Figure 19: Evaluation of compressive residual stress induced showed in ABAQUS

25
 4.2.2 Stress data
After different analyses were simulated, stresses in the z-direction were deliberated. A
contour plot presenting the z stress distribution in the case for a single impact between the
shot and the target is shown in Figure below. Considering one case as others are repetative, so
stress analysis of ceramic shot on AL-6063 for velocity of 75m/s is shown.

Figure 20: 𝜎𝑧 stress graph for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot.

As anticipated, a small amount of compressive stress is generated on the target surface

directly about the contact area. This compressive stress gradually increases until it goes to
maximum value of 30μm below the target surface. Succeeding the change from compressive
stress to tensile stress at approximately 80μm beneath the surface of the target, the stress
remains tensile throughout the remaining target depth, but decreases asymptotically after
reaching a maximum value approximately 100μm beneath the surface.

Figure 21: 𝜎𝑧 stress contour for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot.

26
 4.2.3 Surface displacement data
After studying the stress profile data which was obtained, the surface displacements along the
surface of the Aluminium alloy, Al-6063 target in the z-direction were studied. It can be
ascribed to the steady strain hardening of the Al-6063 target for a single shot impact.
Considering only one case as most of the others are repetative, so the deformation analysis of
ceramic shot on aluminium target for velocity of 75m/s is shown.

Figure 22: Deformation graph for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot.

However, it can be understood that with for a single ceramic shot impact, the distance at
which that shot impact occurs from the center axis of the disk increases. The tendency
becomes more apparent when the deformation of the target surface is showed in Figure 23.
For the single ceramic shot impact case the aluminium target material begins to deform
approximately 50μm from the centerline of the and the depth of the deformation reaches to a
maximum value of 6μm beneath the surface of the target.

Figure 23: Deformation contour for a single impact analysis using a ceramic shot.

27
 4.2.4 Comparing emperical analysis to axisymmetric finite element analysis

Target Shot Shot Empirical F.E.M Error,%

material material velocity Depth Diameter Depth Diameter Depth Diameter
(m/s)
AL-6063 Steel 30 3.65 37.49 3.53 36.8 3.39 1.87
AL-6063 Steel 75 9.13 59.27 8.96 56.86 1.89 4.23
AL-6063 Ceramics 30 2.53 31.47 2.49 31.49 1.60 -0.04
AL-6063 Ceramics 75 5.91 49.76 6.24 50.14 -5.36 -0.74
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 30 1.66 25.59 1.38 25.81 19.88 -0.85
Ti-6AL-4V Steel 75 4.27 40.46 3.60 40.59 18.71 -0.30
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 30 1.17 21.52 0.96 21.10 21.49 1.96
Ti-6AL-4V Ceramic 75 2.98 34.02 2.51 32.67 18.70 4.13
Table 9: Comparison between Emperical analysis and Finite element analysis

Discussion:
1. Only the Diameter of indent can be calculated correctly with Empirical Model but not
the depth , as the depth of indent error is much higher in some cases.
2. We see much difference, when we perform it on a much harder surface.
3. It would be interesting by considering the shot to be Elastic-Plastic and run the
simulation and hence comparing both to see some changes.

4.3 3D-Finite Element Analysis for single shot

4.3.1 Introduction to F.E.M-3D analysis results
In this section,the reults of 3D analysis was performed using steel and ceramic shot on
Aluminium alloy and titanium alloy target with different angle and velocities. In the provided
Figure below, we notice the change in stress and deformation shape due to change in angle.

Figure 24: Evaluation of deformation and stress due to change of angle.

28
 4.3.2 Surface deformation and stress data
In this section the deformation caused by peening is presented. Due to change in angle of the
process of shot peening, the indent shape gradualy deforms from spherical to elliptical. Also
the returned velocity changes which gives rise to change in coefficient of restitution.

Figure 25: Influence of change in angle on dent form

The influence of velocity of shot on the dent form is shown above in Figure: 25. Also the
dent size increases with increasing velocity of shot and change in stress form as in Figure: 26.

A1: Dent form, θ=85° A2: Stress form, θ=85°

B1: Dent form, θ=60° B2: Stress form, θ=60°

Figure 26: Influence of change in angle on dent and stress form

29
 4.3.2.1 Result for Depth of Indent (µm) :
The influence of shot angle on the dent form is shown in Table: 10, where one can notice the
gradual change in height of the indent with increasing shot angle and speed.
Material Shot Velocity 90° 85° 60° 45°
Steel - AL 6063 30m/s 3.8 3.7 2.9 1.9
Ceramic - Al 6063 30m/s 2.312 2.304 2.01 1.65
Steel - AL 6063 75m/s 8.9 8.8 7.69 4.79
Ceramic - Al 6063 75m/s 5.91 5.89 5.25 4.4
Table 10: Influence of shot angle on depth of indent

a. Depth of indent by Steel shot b. Depth of indent by Ceramic shot

c. Metal vs Ceramic shot (30m/s) d. Metal vs Ceramic shot (75m/s)

Figure 27: Influence of speed and angle of shot on the depth by metallic and ceramic shot.

Discussion : The depth of indent increases with increase in shot angle and velocity. And also
a stable liniear kind of increment can be seen with ceramic shot at high speed.
30
 4.3.2.2 Result for Diameter of Indent (µm) :
The influence of shot angle on the dent form is shown in Table: 11, where one can notice the
gradual change in diameter of the indent with increasing shot angle and speed.
Material Shot Velocity 90° 85° 60° 45°
Steel - AL 6063 30m/s 36 34.02 32.01 30.04
Ceramic - Al 6063 30m/s 30.119 30.116 28.53 25.91
Steel - AL 6063 75m/s 56.48 56.40 52.10 47.71
Ceramic - Al 6063 75m/s 48.24 47.78 46.17 44.39
Table 11: Influence of shot angle on diameter of indent

a. Diameter of indent by Steel shot b. Diameter of indent by Ceramic shot

c. Metal vs Ceramic shot (30m/s) d. Metal vs Ceramic shot (75m/s)

Figure 28: Influence of speed and angle of shot on diameter by metallic and ceramic shot.

Discussion : The diameter of indent increases with increase in shot angle and velocity, and
also a stable kind of increment can be seen with ceramic shot.
31
 4.3.3 Elliptical surface deformation
Due to change in angle in shot peening, the indent shape gradualy deforms from spherical to
elliptical.Due to similarity only ceramic shot on Al-6063 with speed of 30m/s is shown.

Table 12: Influence of shot angle on dent form

Figure 29.1: Elliptic deformation-major axis Figure 29.2: Elliptic deformation-minor axis

4.4 Experimental validation of shot peening

4.4.1 Introduction to experimental analysis
Saint-Gobain ZirPro’s, Microblast fine ceramic beads are used as peening media for the
experimental analysis on four different target material..

Al-6063 Unpolished Al-6063 Polished Ti-6Al-4V Unpolished Ti-6Al-4V Polished

Figure 30: Shot peening of different target with ceramic shot
32
 4.4.2 Surface deformation data
The influence of shot angle on the dent form plays a vital role in shot peening. This can be
validated by experiment where one can notice the gradual change in diameter of the indent
with increasing shot angle and speed as shown in Table 13.

Shot Type Target Material Angle (θ) Speed (m/s) Diameter (µm)
Ceramic Aluminium Alloy 85° 75 47.12
Ceramic Aluminium Alloy 45° 75 46.34
Ceramic Aluminium Alloy 85° 30 32.31
Ceramic Titanium Alloy 85° 75 30.86
Table 13: Result of experimental analysis with different target

a. Al-6063 polished - 45°- 75m/s b. Al-6063 polished - 85°- 75m/s

c. Al-6063 polished - 85°- 30m/s d. Ti-6Al-4V polished - 85°- 75m/s

Figure 31: Study of different shot peened material by using Scanning Electron Microscope
33
 4.4.3 Comparing experimental analysis with finite element analysis
In this section, the results obtained by 3D finite element analysis were compared with the
experimental analysis in order to justify he 3D model generated with ABAQUS shown in
Table 14.This will help to further modify the model to generate much accurate data rather to
real time shot peening.

Target Shot Angle Velocity Experimental F.E.M Error %

(°) (m/s) (µm) (µm)

Ceramic AL-6063 85° 75 47.12 47.75 -1.31

Ceramic AL-6063 45° 75 46.34 44.39 4.39

Ceramic AL-6063 85° 30 32.31 30.11 7.30

Ceramic Ti-6Al-4v 85° 75 30.86 32.34 -4.57

Table 14: Experimental analysis Vs 3D-F.E.M analysis for single shot.

Discussion:
1. F.E.M 3D-modelling is much accurate method for generating better results.
2. Although , time consuming but much efficient, since the error percentage is below
9%.
3. Thus, we are able to generate 3D-numerical model by finite element analysis method
by using ABAQUS.

4.5 Validation of Finite Element, Empirical and Experimental analysis

In this section a comparison is defined in order to understand the efficiency on modelling of
shot peening. Analysing for a single case, for shot material to be ceramic and target material

34
is Aluminium alloy. The shot velocity is 30m/s and in order to simplify the analysis and
generate a comparison, the empirical angle of 90° is closely considered as 85°. All the cases
is considered to be 90° impact for shot and target material and velocity of 30m/s is kept
constant.
𝒗 Experimental F.E.M Empirical
30 32.31 30.11 31.47
75 47.12 47.75 49.76

Table 15: Comparison of diameter of indent

60

50
Diameter of Indent, µm

40

Experimental
30
F.E.M
Empirical
20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Shot velocity, m/s

Figure 32 : Comparison of empirical, experimental and numerical analysis.

Discussion:
1. F.E.M 3D-modelling is much accurate method for generating better results.
2. Although , time consuming but much efficient, since Comparison between numerical
analysed results and classic emperical formulation elatio-plastic zone depth and
diameter values shows a acceptable agreement.
3. Thus, 2D-Axisymmetric analysis,3D F.E. analysis and along with the emperical
analysis shows a nice corelation in order to compare the analysed results with the
experimented results.
35
 4.6 Finite element analysis for multiple shot
Accordingly, in order to suggest a much better and realistic model for the process of shot
peening, the following main step was to generate a FE model with ABAQUS, considering
into account 25 number of identical ceramic shots impacting the aluminium target surface
with an angle perpendicular to the target surface, and in orderly structures, Figure.33,34,35.

Figure 33 : 25 shot model in ABAQUS.

Figure 34 : Multiple shot analysis.

36
 Figure 35 : Residual stress generated beneath the surface.

From single shot analysis, it can be seen that the deformation over the surface changes with
increase in speed and angle of shot. This gices rise to micro surface roughness formed over
the target surface. This micro roughness, Figure 35 changes the appearance and wettability of
the target surface giving rise to different cosmetic finish for different material and shot.

Figure 36 : Micro surface roughness formed due to shot peening.

37
 5 CONCLUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusion
Within the mechanics of the process of shot peening, there presents an exciting challenge in
order to formulate it. The process of peening is a hybrid process, which involves many
disciplines of dynamic and static elasticity and plasticity. In this paper special consideration
was specified to justify the behaviour of a target material impacted upon by a single spherical
shot.
The 3D-finite element model for a single shot and multiple shot were developed in order to
simulate the process of shot peening. The influence of the velocity of shot, angle of impact,
and dent form upon increasing surface roughness were examined and are explained in detail.
 The modelling of the shot peening process presented the form of an indent formed on
the target plate and compression stress field distribution at the surface of the target
plate due to the impact of the shot, generating a peak of residual stress beneath the
target surface.
 Comparison between numerical analysed results and classic emperical formulation
elatio-plastic zone depth and diameter values shows a acceptable agreement.
 2D-Axisymmetric analysis,3D F.E. analysis and along with the emperical analysis
shows a nice corelation in order to compare the analysed results with the
experimented results.
 Only with the generation and application of simulation with multiple impacts, its is
rather possible to obtain an uniform layer of compressive residual stress and surface
roughness calculation.
 The dent form, the depth and diameter of the elasto-plastic zone defines the transition
region between the values of traction and compressive and residual stress.
 The process of shot peening can be sucessfully simulated with the help of commercial
finite element code ABAQUS. This numerical simulation of shot peening allows a
parametric study for the process, which proves with a much better understanding of
the shot peening process.
 The suggested analytical model for the shot peening can easily predict the dent form
for any arrangement of shot peening parameters (shot velocity,peening angle, size and
type). The predicted results were validated with experimental and finite element
analysis results.
38
 5.2 Recommendation

It would be interesting to simplify this model and use a peak stress at a certain depth to make
the analysis much quicker and remain accurate for prediction of deformation. Quantify and
relate various input parameters like energy input, shot velocity and mass, to induced stress
and surface deformation.

This research could have benefitted greatly from the use of a shot angle measuring device for
calculating the real coefficient of restitution. Unfortunately, it was not available.

Obviously, it would also be interesting for studying the effect on just shot size on how
stresses are induced in a substrate.

The angle of incidence of the shot with the substrate should also be researched as it plays a
crucial part in the process of shot peening. This type of study could evaluate the energy
transferred for the formation of indent and how substrate surface deformation is influenced.
Friction would be an important aspect in such a study, as in the case of current study, friction
is been neglected.

The nozzle size, for compressed air shot peening machine, could be assessed in order to
determine the effects on shot velocity and the intensity.

More attention could be given to the surface roughness generated from the shot peened parts
as well. The influence of how the deformation occurs while being shot peened to the final
shape would be an important aspect of predicting the cosmetic surface appearance.

Finally, more efficient and dynamic finite element models may make it easier to study the
effects of shot peening on surface roughness.

39
 REFERENCES

1. Webster, G.A. and Ezeilo, A.N., 2001. Residual stress distributions and their influence on
fatigue lifetimes. International Journal of Fatigue, 23, S775–S383.
2. Rodopoulos, 2004. Optimisation of the fatigue resistance of aluminium alloys by controlled
shot peening methodology, results and analysis. Journal of Fatigue, 26, pp. 849–856.
3. Meguid, S., 1999, “Finite element modelling of shot-peening residual stresses, “Trans.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 92-93, pp. 401-404.
4. Klemenz, M. S. (2009). Application of the FEM for the prediction of the surface layer
characteristics after shot peening. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 4093- 4102.
5. Guagliano, M. (2001). Relating Almen intensity to residual stresses induced by shot peening:
a numerical approach. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 277-286.
6. Schwarzer, J. S. (2002). Finite element simulation of shot peening - evaluate the influence of
peening parameters on surface characteristics. Conference shot peening ICSP8 (pp. 507-515)
7. Meguid, S. S. (2002). 3D FE analysis of peening of strain-rate sensitive materials using
multiple impingement model. Journal of Material Processing Technology, 119-134.
8. Zimmerman, M. S. (2010). Finite element modelling of coverage effects during shot peening
of IN718. International Journal of Materials Research, 951-962.
9. Wang, T. P. (2006). A process for shot peen. Materials Processing Technology, 159-162.
10. Kang, X. W. (2010). Multiple impact modelling for shot peening. Engineering Manufacture,
689-697.
11. Kim, T. L. (2010). An area-average approach to peening residual stress under multi- impacts
using a 3D symmetry-cell model with plastic shots. Materials and Design, 50-59.
12. Wohlfahrt, H., 1984. The influence of peening conditions on the resulting distribution of
residual stress. 2nd International Conference on Shot Peening, pp. 316–331.
13. Kyriacou, S., 1996. Shot-peening mechanics, a theoretical study. pp. 505–516.
14. Herzog, R., Zinn, W., Scholtes, B., and Wohlfarth, H., 1996. The significance of Almen
intensity for the generation of shot peening residual stresses. pp. 270–281.
15. Wilson, R., 1992, - Shot peening effect on fatigue strength, Engineering Sciences Data Unit.
16. Kirk, D., and Abyaneh, M. Y., 1993. Theoretical basis of shot peening coverage control. 5th
International Conference on Shot Peening, pp. 183–190.
17. Kirk, D. D. (2004). Prediction and Control of Indent Diameter. The Shot Peener, 18-21.
18. Kirk, D. D. (Summer 2010). Peening Indent Dimensions. The Shot Peener, 24-32.
19. Karuppanan, S., Romero, J. S., de los Rios, E. R., Rodopoulos, C., and Levers, A., 2002.
A theoretical and experimental investigation into the development of coverage in shot
peening.pp. 101–107.
40
 APPENDIX A: Stress profile

Steel – Aluminium – 30ms-1 Ceramic – Aluminium – 30ms-1

Steel – Titanium – 30ms-1 Ceramic – Titanium – 30ms-1

Steel – Aluminium – 75ms-1 Ceramic – Aluminium – 75ms-1

41
 Steel – Titanium – 75ms-1 Ceramic – Titanium – 75ms-1

RESULT’s : Ceramic Shot – Al-6063 -30m/s

Initial Kinetic Returned Energy Angle Depth Diameter Returned Ratio of

Energy (Microjoule) (μm) (μm) Velocity Velocity
(Microjoule)

0.918185 0.06927 90 2.5 31.48 8109.1 0.27

0.918185 0.07349 85 2.4 30.49 8822.29 0.29

0.918185 0.20479 60 2.1 28.65 20635.7 0.68

0.918185 0.354007 45 1.7 27.3 26176.8 0.87

42
 APPENDIX B: Deformation profile

Steel – Aluminium – 30ms-1 Ceramic – Aluminium – 30ms-1

Steel – Titanium – 30ms-1 Ceramic – Titanium – 30ms-1

Steel – Aluminium – 75ms-1 Ceramic – Aluminium – 75ms-1

43
 Steel – Titanium – 75ms-1 Ceramic – Titanium – 75ms-1

RESULT’s : Ceramic Shot – Al-6063 -75m/s

Initial Kinetic Returned Energy Angle Depth Diameter Returned Ratio of

Energy (Microjoule) (μm) (μm) Velocity Velocity
(Microjoule)

5.73866 0.19135 90 5.91 48.24 13642.3 0.18

5.73866 0.21715 85 5.89 47.75 15079.5 0.20

5.73866 1.0058 60 5.25 46.17 42434.5 0.56

5.73866 1.84446 45 4.4 44.39 49318.8 0.65

44
 APPENDIX C: Elliptical Deformation profile 3D analysis

Ceramic Shot - AL6063 TARGET - Shot Velocity = 30ms-1

45
 Ceramic Shot - AL6063 TARGET - Shot Velocity = 75ms-1

46

View publication stats