English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

An accurate characterisation of residual stress plays an important role in the structural integrity assessment of an engineering component. Several techniques and tools are available for measuring and predicting residual stresses. For example, neutron diffraction (ND) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) are non-destructive techniques used for measuring through-thickness and surface residual stresses respectively, while the deep-hole drilling (DHD) and the incremental centre-hole drilling (ICHD) are semi-destructive techniques and measure through-thickness and sub-surface residual stress respectively. In most open literature, a more favoured method is traditionally used over others, with some degree of validation using finite element analysis (FEA) predictive tool. In this paper it will be shown that the different methods and tools available are not contradicting or more superior to the others, but rather, the use of more than one available technique complementary to each other can improve the quality and the confidence in the characterisation of the residual stress state in an engineering component. In particular, the accurate knowledge of the residual stress field for a safety critical component plays a vital role for subsequent structural integrity assessment.

Application of multiple analysis methods in optimising complex residual stress characterisation