Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T00:27:23.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diagnosing Engineering Problems with Neutrons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

Get access

Extract

In the past, many unexpected failures of components were due to poor quality control or a failure to calculate—or to miscalculate—the stresses or fatigue stresses a component would experience in service. Today, improved manufacturing, fracture mechanics, and computational finite element methods combine to provide a solid framework for reducing safety factors, enabling leaner design. In this context, residual stress—that is, stress that equilibrates within the structure and is always present at some level due to manufacturing—presents a real problem. It is difficult to predict and as hard to measure. If unaccounted for in design, these stresses can superimpose upon in-service stresses to result in unexpected failures.

Neutron diffraction is one of the few methods able to provide maps of residual stress distributions deep within crystalline materials and engineering components. Neutron strain scanning, as the technique is called, is becoming an increasingly important tool for the materials scientist and engineer alike. Point, line-scan, area-scan, and full three-dimensional (3D) maps are being used to design new materials, optimize engineering processes, validate finite element modeis, predict component life, and diagnose engineering failures.

Type
Neutron Scattering in Materials Research
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Allen, A.J., Hutchings, M.T., and Windsor, C.G., Adv. Phys. 34 (4) (1985) p. 445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Krawitz, A.D. and Holden, T.M., MRS Bull. XV (11) (1990) p. 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Hutchings, M.T. and Krawitz, A.D., eds., Measurement of Residual and Applied Stress Using Neutron Diffraction (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 1992) p. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Lester, H.H. and Aborn, R.M., Army Ordnance 120 (1925).Google Scholar
5.Kröner, E., Z. Phys. 151 (1958) p. 404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Webster, G.A., Technology Transfer Report, 1999 (Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards TWA20, 1999).Google Scholar
7.Stone, H.J., Roberts, S.M., Holden, T., Withers, P.J., and Reed, R.C., in Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Weld Residual Stresses (ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 1998) p. 955.Google Scholar
8.Stone, H., Holden, T.M., and Reed, R.C., National Research Council of Canada Report, NPMR-ANDI-122 (1998).Google Scholar
9.Stone, H.J., Withers, P.J., Holden, T., Roberts, S.M., and Reed, R.C., Metall. & Mater. Trans. 30A (1999) p. 1797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Spooner, S. and Wang, X.L., J. Appl. Crystallogr. 30 (1997) p. 449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Webster, P.J., Mills, G., Wang, X.D., Kang, W.P., and Holden, T.M.. J. Neutron Res. 3 (1996) p. 223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Bourke, M.A.M., Rangaswamy, P., Holden, T.M., and Leachman, R., Mater. Sei. Eng., A 257 (1998) p. 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Turner, P.A. and Tomé, C.N., Acta Metall. Mater. 42 (1994) p. 4143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Clausen, B. and Lorentzen, T., Metall. Mater. Trans. A 28 (1997) p. 2537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Pang, J.W.L., Holden, T.M., and Mason, T.E., J. Strain Anal. 33 (1998) p. 373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Withers, P.J. and Clarke, A.P., Acta Mater. 46 (1998) p. 6585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Daymond, M.R. and Withers, P.J., J. Appl. Composites 34 (1997) p. 621.Google Scholar