Abstract
The present study addresses the effect of waterjet peening parameters on aluminum alloy 5005. The approach was based on the response surface methodology utilizing the Box–Behnken experimental design. Workable empirical models were developed to predict surface roughness (R a ) and hardness (HV). Increasing the number of passes, pressure, and standoff distance produces a higher surface roughness as well as a higher hardness. On the contrary, increasing the feedrate produces a lower surface roughness and hardness. The developed empirical models for R a and HV have reasonable correlations between the measured and predicted responses with acceptable coefficients of determinations. A different set of optimum parameters was generated based on different desirability functions for each response. The predicted and the actual responses for optimized R a and HV are satisfactory with good reliability. It is shown that the models are workable in predicting the responses of R a and HV in the present research. A proper selection of peening parameters can be formulated to be used in practical works.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Daoming G, Jie C (2006) ANFIS for high-pressure waterjet cleaning prediction. Surf Coat Technol 201:1629–1634
Cui L, An L, Gong W, Jiang H (2007) A novel process for preparation of ultra-clean micronized coal by high pressure water jet comminution technique. Fuel 86:750–757
Arola D, McCain ML, Kunaporn S, Ramulu M (2002) Waterjet and abrasive waterjet surface treatment of titanium: a comparison of surface texture and residual stress. Wear 249:943–950
Ramulu M, Arola D (1994) The influence of abrasive waterjet cutting conditions on the surface quality of graphite/epoxy laminates. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 34:295–313
Cadavid-Giraldo R (2004) Cutting with fluidjets of small diameter. Dissertation, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern
Meguid SA, Shagal G, Stranart JC (1999) Finite element modelling of shot-peening residual stresses. J Mater Process Technol 92–93:401–404
Eftekhari A, Talia JE, Mazumdar PK (1995) Influence of surface condition on the fatigue of an aluminium-lithium alloy (2090-T3). Mater Sci Eng, A 199:L3–L6
Braisted W, Brockman R (1999) Finite element simulation of laser shock peening. Int J Fat 21:719–724
Ding K, Ye L (2006) Simulation of multiple laser shock peening of a 35CD4 steel alloy. J Mater Process Technol 178:162–169
Grinspan AS, Gnanamoorthy R (2006) A novel surface modification technique for the introduction of compressive residual stress and preliminary studies on Al alloy AA6063. Surf Coat Technol 201:1768–1775
Chillman A, Ramulu M, Hashish M (2007) Waterjet peening and surface preparation at 600 MPa: a preliminary experimental study. J Fluids Eng 129:485–490
Ju DY, Han B (2009) Investigation of water cavitation peening-induced microstructures in the near-surface layer of pure titanium. J Mater Process Technol 209:4789–4794
Qin M, Ju DY, Oba R (2006) Investigation of the influence of incidence angle on the process capability of water cavitation peening. Surf Coat Technol 201:1409–1413
Azhari A, Schindler C, Kerscher E, Grad P (2012) Improving surface hardness of austenitic stainless steel using waterjet peening process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. doi:10.1007/s00170-012-3962-1
Seeberger© (2012) Material data sheet 3.3315. Seeberger GmbH & Co. KG. http://www.seeberger.net/_assets/pdf/werkstoffe/aluminium/en/3.3315.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2012
Macodiyo DO, Soyama H (2006) Optimization of cavitation peening parameters for fatigue performance of carburized steel using Taguchi methods. J Mater Process Technol 178:234–240
Rajesh N, Ramesh BN (2005) Empirical modelling of water-jet peening of 6063-T6 aluminium alloy. J Produc Eng 86:22–26
Chi G, Hu S, Yang Y, Chen T (2012) Response surface methodology with prediction uncertainty: a multi-objective optimization approach. Chem Eng Res Des. doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2011.12.012
Alao A-R, Konneh M (2012) Surface finish prediction models for precision grinding of silicon. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 58:949–967
Montgomery DC, Peck EA, Vining GG (2001) Introduction to linear regression analysis. Wiley, New York
Wang J, Guo DM (2003) The cutting performance in multipass abrasive waterjet machining of industrial ceramics. J Mater Process Technol 133:371–377
Oka YI, Mihara S, Miyata H (2007) Effective parameters for erosion caused by water droplet impingement and applications to surface treatment technology. Wear 263:386–394
Chillman A, Ramulu M, Hashish M (2010) Waterjet and water-air jet surface processing of a titanium alloy: a parametric evaluation. J Manufac Scie Eng 132:011012
Azmir MA, Ahsan AK (2009) A study of abrasive water jet machining process on glass/epoxy composite laminate. J Mater Process Technol 209:6168–6173
Fowlkes WY, Creveling CM (1995) Engineering methods for robust product design: using Taguchi methods in technology and product development. Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts
Grinspan AS, Gnanamoorthy R (2006) Surface modification by oil jet peening in Al alloys, AA6063-T6 and AA6061-T4: residual stress and hardness. App Surf Sci 253:989–996
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Azhari, A., Schindler, C. & Li, B. Effect of waterjet peening on aluminum alloy 5005. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67, 785–795 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-4522-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-4522-4