Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting
Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual s...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Olson, M. D. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Experimental mechanics - Springer US, 1961, 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:62 ; year:2021 ; number:3 ; day:20 ; month:10 ; pages:393-402 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2078126799 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2078126799 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230505231829.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 221220s2021 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2078126799 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 690 |q VZ |
| 100 | 1 | |a Olson, M. D. |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 | ||
| 520 | |a Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Residual stress measurement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Slitting method | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Crack compliance method | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Slitting mapping | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Biaxial stress mapping | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Shear stress error | |
| 700 | 1 | |a DeWald, A. T. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hill, M. R. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Experimental mechanics |d Springer US, 1961 |g 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 |w (DE-627)129593990 |w (DE-600)240480-1 |w (DE-576)015086852 |x 0014-4851 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:62 |g year:2021 |g number:3 |g day:20 |g month:10 |g pages:393-402 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-UMW | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-ARC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TEC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHY | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 62 |j 2021 |e 3 |b 20 |c 10 |h 393-402 | ||
| author_variant |
m d o md mdo a t d at atd m r h mr mrh |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:00144851:2021----::esrmnlyufreiultesap |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w doi (DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 VZ Olson, M. D. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 aut Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting 2021 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error DeWald, A. T. aut Hill, M. R. aut Enthalten in Experimental mechanics Springer US, 1961 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 (DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 0014-4851 nnns volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY AR 62 2021 3 20 10 393-402 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w doi (DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 VZ Olson, M. D. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 aut Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting 2021 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error DeWald, A. T. aut Hill, M. R. aut Enthalten in Experimental mechanics Springer US, 1961 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 (DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 0014-4851 nnns volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY AR 62 2021 3 20 10 393-402 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w doi (DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 VZ Olson, M. D. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 aut Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting 2021 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error DeWald, A. T. aut Hill, M. R. aut Enthalten in Experimental mechanics Springer US, 1961 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 (DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 0014-4851 nnns volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY AR 62 2021 3 20 10 393-402 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w doi (DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 VZ Olson, M. D. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 aut Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting 2021 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error DeWald, A. T. aut Hill, M. R. aut Enthalten in Experimental mechanics Springer US, 1961 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 (DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 0014-4851 nnns volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY AR 62 2021 3 20 10 393-402 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w doi (DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 690 VZ Olson, M. D. verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 aut Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting 2021 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error DeWald, A. T. aut Hill, M. R. aut Enthalten in Experimental mechanics Springer US, 1961 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 (DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 0014-4851 nnns volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY AR 62 2021 3 20 10 393-402 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Experimental mechanics 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Experimental mechanics 62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402 volume:62 year:2021 number:3 day:20 month:10 pages:393-402 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error |
| dewey-raw |
690 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Experimental mechanics |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Olson, M. D. @@aut@@ DeWald, A. T. @@aut@@ Hill, M. R. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-10-20T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
129593990 |
| dewey-sort |
3690 |
| id |
OLC2078126799 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2078126799</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505231829.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">221220s2021 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2078126799</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Olson, M. D.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual stress measurement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Slitting method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Crack compliance method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Slitting mapping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biaxial stress mapping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shear stress error</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DeWald, A. T.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hill, M. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Experimental mechanics</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer US, 1961</subfield><subfield code="g">62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129593990</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)240480-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015086852</subfield><subfield code="x">0014-4851</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:62</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:20</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:393-402</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">62</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">20</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield><subfield code="h">393-402</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Olson, M. D. |
| spellingShingle |
Olson, M. D. ddc 690 misc Residual stress measurement misc Slitting method misc Crack compliance method misc Slitting mapping misc Biaxial stress mapping misc Shear stress error Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| authorStr |
Olson, M. D. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)129593990 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
690 - Buildings |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0014-4851 |
| topic_title |
690 VZ Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting Residual stress measurement Slitting method Crack compliance method Slitting mapping Biaxial stress mapping Shear stress error |
| topic |
ddc 690 misc Residual stress measurement misc Slitting method misc Crack compliance method misc Slitting mapping misc Biaxial stress mapping misc Shear stress error |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 690 misc Residual stress measurement misc Slitting method misc Crack compliance method misc Slitting mapping misc Biaxial stress mapping misc Shear stress error |
| topic_browse |
ddc 690 misc Residual stress measurement misc Slitting method misc Crack compliance method misc Slitting mapping misc Biaxial stress mapping misc Shear stress error |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Experimental mechanics |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
129593990 |
| dewey-tens |
690 - Building & construction |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Experimental mechanics |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)129593990 (DE-600)240480-1 (DE-576)015086852 |
| title |
Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2078126799 (DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p |
| title_full |
Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| author_sort |
Olson, M. D. |
| journal |
Experimental mechanics |
| journalStr |
Experimental mechanics |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
393 |
| author_browse |
Olson, M. D. DeWald, A. T. Hill, M. R. |
| container_volume |
62 |
| class |
690 VZ |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Olson, M. D. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-9886-9825 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825 |
| dewey-full |
690 |
| title_sort |
measurement layout for residual stress mapping using slitting |
| title_auth |
Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| abstract |
Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 |
| abstractGer |
Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence. © Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
DeWald, A. T. Hill, M. R. |
| author2Str |
DeWald, A. T. Hill, M. R. |
| ppnlink |
129593990 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T18:56:51.721Z |
| _version_ |
1803585335300456448 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2078126799</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505231829.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">221220s2021 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2078126799</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11340-021-00791-w-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Olson, M. D.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-9886-9825</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Measurement Layout for Residual Stress Mapping Using Slitting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Residual stress spatial mapping has been developed using various measurement methods, one such method comprising a multiplicity of one-dimensional slitting method measurements combined to form a two-dimensional (2D) map. However, an open question is how to best distribute the individual slitting measurements for 2D mapping. Objective This paper investigates the efficacy of different strategies for laying out the individual slitting measurements when mapping in-plane residual stress in thin stainless steel slices removed from a larger dissimilar metal weld. Methods Three different measurement layouts are assessed: independent measurements on nominally identical specimens (i.e., one slitting measurement per specimen, with many specimens), repeatedly bisecting a single slice, and making nominally sequential measurements from one side of the specimen towards the other side of the specimen. Additional comparison measurements are made using neutron diffraction. Results The work shows little difference between the independent and bisecting slitting measurement layouts, and some differences with the sequential measurements. There is good general agreement between neutron diffraction measurement data and the data from the independent and bisecting layouts. Conclusions This work suggests that when using slitting to create a 2D map of in-plane residual stress, a cutting layout that repeatedly bisects the specimen works well, requires a small number of specimens, and avoids potential errors from geometric asymmetry or measurement sequence.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual stress measurement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Slitting method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Crack compliance method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Slitting mapping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biaxial stress mapping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shear stress error</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DeWald, A. T.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hill, M. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Experimental mechanics</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer US, 1961</subfield><subfield code="g">62(2021), 3 vom: 20. Okt., Seite 393-402</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129593990</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)240480-1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015086852</subfield><subfield code="x">0014-4851</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:62</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:20</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:393-402</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-021-00791-w</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">62</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">20</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield><subfield code="h">393-402</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4021406 |