International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijfatigue

Analysis of the effects of controlled shot peening on fatigue

damage of high strength aluminium alloys
S. Curtis a, E.R. de los Rios a, C.A. Rodopoulos a,, A. Levers b
a

Division of Aeronautical Applications, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Structural Integrity Research Institute of the University of
Sheffield (SIRIUS), The University of Sheffield, P.O. Box 600 Mappin Street, Sheffield S1 4DU, UK
b
Airbus UK, Chester Road, Broughton, Chester CH4 0DR, UK
Received 13 December 2001; received in revised form 16 April 2002; accepted 22 April 2002

Abstract
The use of two micro-mechanical models for notch sensitivity and fatigue life allowed the development of boundary conditions
that would evaluate potential life improvement after controlled shot peening (CSP) in high strength aluminium alloys. The boundary
conditions describe the state of equal weight between surface roughening and residual stresses and the implication of material and
loading parameters. From the boundary conditions, the performance of CSP on crack arrest and fatigue life can be investigated.
2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: NavarroRios model; Notches; Controlled shot peening; Residual stresses; Surface roughness; Crack arrest; Fatigue life; Aluminium
alloys

1. Introduction
For many years, shot peening was considered as a surface treatment of questionable benefits regarding cyclic
loading [1]. These contradictory results were partly due
to ignorance of the shot peening process and partly due
to the lack of a sufficient background that would allow
the characterisation of the role of surface modifications
produced by shot peening in fatigue damage. Today, the
parameters that control the performance of shot peening,
i.e. media, intensity and coverage, are better understood
and the new designation, that of controlled shot peening
(CSP), has emerged.
CSP is a cold working treatment in which media
impinge the surface under controlled kinetic/impact conditions. The surface modifications produced by the treatment are: (a) roughening of the surface; (b) an increased,
near-surface, dislocation density (strain hardening); and
(c) the development of a characteristic profile of residual
stresses [24]. In terms of fatigue damage, surface

roughening will accelerate the nucleation and early

propagation of cracks, strain hardening will retard the
propagation of cracks by increasing the resistance to
plastic deformation and the residual stress profile will
provide a corresponding crack closure stress that will
reduce the driving force for crack propagation [4].
Considering that there is no relaxation of the residual
stress profile, caused by either the applied stress level,
the crack tip or the operating temperature, and that surface and not sub-surface fatigue cracks are responsible
for fatigue damage, it is plausible to assume that the
performance of CSP will depend on the balance between
its beneficial and detrimental effects. Hence, in order to
achieve a favourable fatigue performance, the role of the
above effects has to be analysed and understood. To achieve such undertaking, it is essential to simultaneously
acknowledge their interaction with other parameters,
such as the nature of the target material and the loading conditions.
2. CSP and fatigue damage

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-227-710; fax: +44-114227-890.

E-mail
address:
c.rodopoulos@sheffield.ac.uk
(C.A.
Rodopoulos).

In light of the residual stress profile, the magnitude of

the strain hardening and the corresponding amount of
surface roughening, it is realistic to assume that CSP will

0142-1123/02/$ - see front matter. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 2 - 1 1 2 3 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 4 9 - X

60

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

Nomenclature
a
Crack length
Fatigue damage (crack and plastic zone)
ci
D
Grain diameter
Elastic stress concentration
Kt
Grain orientation factor of the ith grain
mi
Crack closure stress
s1
Resistance to plastic deformation
s2
Stress at the micro-structural barrier
s3
spiarrest Plain crack arrest stress of the ith half grain
(spiarrest)closure Crack arrest stress of the ith half grain for a peened component considering the effect of crack
closure
(spiarrest)notch
closure Crack arrest stress of the ith half grain for a peened component considering the effect of crack
closure and surface roughness
Fatigue limit
sFL
Fatigue limit after shot peening
sSP
FL
a
Notch depth
b
Notch half width
r
Notch radius
Notch factor of the ith half grain
Zi
mainly affect the stages of fatigue damage that correspond to the initiation and propagation of short cracks.
It is well documented that the above stages are responsible for more than 70% of the fatigue life of a component [5].
Crack initiation is a controversial subject, which for
many years provided the ground for numerous different
theories especially in the case of single crystals [6,7]. In
polycrystalline materials, where most commercial alloys
are classified, crack initiation is assumed to occur almost
immediately the component is loaded at stresses above
the fatigue limit [8]. Hence, the crack initiation stage can
be seen as the early propagation of a crack from the
materials micro-defects [9].
Based on the above observations, it is clear that the
steady propagation of a short crack will define the life
expectancy of the component. Similar to crack initiation,
the propagation of short fatigue cracks is another controversial subject of research, which throughout the last two
decades, has been approached by a variety of methodologies [1012].
Thus, to better understand the effects of CSP surface
modifications on fatigue damage, it is necessary to separate their role into: (a) the arrest of fatigue cracks, and
(b) the crack propagation stage, i.e. fatigue life.
2.1. CSPcrack arrest
It is well known that materials do not fail by fatigue
when tested at stresses below the fatigue limit. In the
early days, the fatigue limit was wrongly considered as
the stress level below which fatigue cracks do not
nucleate. During the last two decades, the understanding

of the fatigue limit has changed. Today, the fatigue limit

is considered as the maximum stress level below which
an existing crack or crack-like defect will not propagate
in to failure within a predetermined life span (10100
M cycles). With the realisation that grain boundaries and
other micro-structural features act as barriers to crack
propagation [1315], the KitagawaTakahashi threshold
stress [9] has been redefined as the applied stress that is
unable to overcome micro-structural barriers ahead of a
crack of a given length [15]. According to Navarro and
de los Rios [1517], the crack arrests when two conditions are satisfied: (a) the crack tip plastic zone is constrained by the barriers, and (b) the local stress at the
barriers ahead of the crack is unable to extend crack tip
plasticity beyond those barriers. The possibility of crack
arrest, as depicted in Fig. 1, will uphold for any cracks,
short or long, provided that the above conditions are met.
On shot peened surfaces, cracks are likely to form at
micro-notches (dents). Early studies by Smith and Miller
[18] and Tanaka [19] indicate that the propagation of
cracks from notches depends on the bluntness of the
notch, given by a / r. From these early works, our
understanding of the effects of notches has been considerably broadened. Today, the effect of the notch
geometry on fatigue is classified into three categories,
namely, short notches, crack-like notches, and blunt
notches [20]. However, most of the notch/fatigue models, a selection of which are presented in Ref. [5], fail
to provide a relationship between the geometry of the
notch and the micro-structure of the material. Such
relationship was successfully provided by Vallellano et
al. [21,22]. According to their work, the stress applied

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

61

Fig. 1. Experimental crack arrest data for 2024-T351 at a stress ratio

of 0.3. The average grain size is 52 m.

to the notched member, which is required for the crack

to overcome the ith barrier in the notch zone, is given by
sNiarrest Zispiarest

(1)

where sNiarrest is the threshold stress for a notched component, sPiarrest, the analogous stress for a plain surface and
Z represents the effect of the notch geometry given by
Zi

b
a

a b li 1 l2i

li

1/2

1
[a(a iD2 / 2)2a2 b2
a2b2

(2)

The parameters a (2a / D) and b (2b / D) represent,

in a dimensionless form, the notch depth a and the notch
half width b. The parameter D represents the distance
between two successive barriers. In the case of grain
boundaries, D is regarded as the grain diameter. The position of the ith barrier is defined by i 2a / D with a
being the crack length. In Ref. [17] it was proposed that
a model crack is constituted by three zones (see Fig. 2),
and when the system of internal and external forces are
in equilibrium, the stress at the active barrier is given by

(s2s1)sin1n1s2sin1n2 s
1
cos n2
2

(3)

where s1 is the closure stress acting on the crack wake,

s2, the resistance to plastic deformation and s3, the
stress at barrier. More details regarding this micro-structural fracture mechanics crack model can be found in
Ref. [15]. Based on Eq. (3), the conditions of crack arrest
are satisfied when n1 n2 1. Hence, Eq. (3) can be
written as
2 i 1 i
s cos n2 si1 spiarrest
3

The parameter spiarrest is the stress required by the crack

to overcome the ith barrier in a plain specimen. In Ref.
[16], it was shown that Eq. (4) can be written as
4
m s (r / iD)1/2 si1 spiarrest
i c 0

b(a iD / 2)]

s3

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the three zones (crack, plastic

zone, grain boundary), which comprise the fatigue damage according
to the Navarrode los Rios model [17]. The parameter i represents half
grain intervals (i 1,3,5). The parameter iD /2 represents the extend
of the fatigue damage (ci), D is the grain size and r0 is the width of
the grain boundary.

(4)

(5)

where the parameters r0 and D are given in Fig. 2 and

mi is the grain orientation factor. The plain fatigue limit
is found by calculating spiarrest for i 1 (first grain)
4
m s (r / D)1/2 si=1
1 sFL
1 c 0

(6)

From Eqs. (5) and (6) the crack arrest can be

expressed as
mi sFLsi=1
1
si1 spiarrest
m1
i

(7)

The grain orientation factor, (mi / m1), for aluminium

alloys has been experimentally estimated to follow the
progression [23]
mi
1 0.35ln(i)
m1

(8)

Eq. (7) is plotted in Fig. 3. Any combination of

applied stress and crack length below the curve will
result in crack arrest. In the case of CSP material, the
curve will shift either up or down depending on whether
the CSP process is beneficial or detrimental in terms of
the fatigue resistance. The two CSP effects that are significant for the crack arrest capability of a surface engineered material are the compressive residual stresses and
surface roughness, the former being beneficial and the
latter detrimental.

62

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

of the material by CSP. Such boundary condition is

obtained by determining the closure stress that will fully
neutralise the effect of the notch. Such rationale is
expressed as

mi sFL
mi sFL
Zi
si1
m 1 i
m 1 i

(12)

From Eq. (12) the parameter si1 can be calculated as

si1

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of the KitagawaTakahashi diagram

showing the possible effect of CSP on the crack arrest capability of a
surface engineered material. The arrows indicating loss or gain are
used to show either the beneficial or detrimental effect of CSP. The
mechanical parameters used are: sFL 220MPa and D 52m.

In practical terms, it is important to derive the CSP

conditions that produce benefits to the fatigue resistance
of the material, i.e. when the positive aspect
(compressive residual stress) of CSP compensates the
negative aspect (surface roughness). In this respect, it is
imperative to identify the limit conditions by which
crack closure derived from the compressive residual
stress will counteract the stress concentration due to
roughness. Such analysis is discussed subsequently.
In Eq. (7) si1 is the closure stress of a crack spanning
over the ith barrier. It should be noted that for i 1,
spiarrest in Eq. (7) converts into the plain (un-notched)
fatigue limit. If we temporarily neglect the effect of the
surface roughness and consider only the effect of the
closure stress introduced by the CSP, Eq. (7) should read
(spiarrest)closure

i=1
mi sCSP
FL s1
si1
m1
i

(9)

i1
where sCSP
. The parameter sCSP
FL sFL s1
FL makes
clear that the fatigue limit will increase due to the closure stress exerted within the first half grain. Hence, Eq.
(9) becomes
p
iarrest closure

(s

mi sFL

si1
m 1 i

(10)

Using Eqs. (1) and (9), the effect of both crack closure
and surface roughness on the ability of the peened
component to arrest cracks is given by
p
notch
iarrest closure

(s

Zi(s

p
iarrest closure

(11)

From Eq. (11) it is clear that in crack arrest of CSP

components, the two competing effects are the crack
closure stress and the surface roughening. It is, therefore,
necessary to determine a lower limit above which there
would be an improvement of the crack arrest capacity

mi sFL 1
1
m 1 i Z i

(13)

Li et al. [24], proposed that the elastic stress concentration Kt introduced by multiple micro-notches in CSP,
is somehow lower than the one determined in the case
of a single notch of similar depth and width. The above
finding reflects the uniformity of the micro-notches on
the surface. According to Li et al., the resulting Kt from
CSP is given by
Kt 1 2.1

Rt
S

(14)

where the parameters Rt and S are, respectively, the

means of peak-to-valley heights and spacing of adjacent
peaks in the surface roughness profile. In the case of a
semi-elliptical notch and a high degree of uniformity
(CSP coverage percentage of more than 100%), Eq. (14)
can be written as
Kt 1 2.1

a
2b

(15)

At the beginning of this section it was pointed out that

the bluntness of the notch can significantly affect the
strain generated at the root of the notch and consequently
the propagation rate of the crack. In light of that, Smith
and Miller [18] proposed that Kt should be determined
by

Kt 1 2

(16)

where r is the notch root radius. In the case of a semielliptical notch, the notch root radius can be approximated by r (a2 / g) and thus Eq. (16) can be rewritten as

Kt 1 2

(17)

where g is the notch half width that considers the bluntness of the notch. By equating Eq. (17) with Eq. (15),
the parameter g can be expressed in terms of the parameters a and b. Substitution of g into Eq. (17) can provide the dual effects of multiple micro-notches and notch
bluntness in terms of a single notch

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

Fig. 4. The distribution of the required crack closure stress to fully

neutralise the effect of surface roughness for crack arrest in 2024T351. The parameters used in the calculation are: S 2b ranging from
170 to 250 m, Rt a 50m and sFL 220MPa. The negative
sign (compression) in the closure stress values represent compression.

a
Kt 1 1.05
b

(18)

In Fig. 4, the limit closure stress given by Eq. (13) is

plotted in terms of crack length. The data correspond to
a notch depth of a 50m, D 52m and different
Kt values. The curves in Fig. 4 represent the boundary
condition established by Eq. (13). Closure stress values
either below or above the curve will, respectively,
decrease or increase the crack arrest capacity of the
material.
A closer examination of Eq. (13) reveals the ability
of the boundary condition to provide an insight into the
complex relationship between CSP surface modifications, the material and the loading conditions. The
effect of the stress ratio and the mechanical properties
of the material in Eq. (13) is shown in Figs. 5 and 6.

63

Fig. 6. The limit value of the closure stress to enhance the crack
arrest capacity of two different aluminium alloys for Kt 1.4 at
R 0.1. The values used are; 2024-T351: sFL 220, D 52m and
7150-T651: sFL 270MPa, D 58m.

From Fig. 5, it is clear that the use of CSP components

at high stress ratios will require a significantly higher
magnitude of closure stresses to neutralise the effect of
the surface roughness. In addition, Fig. 6 reveals that
CSP could have a more profound effect (in a sense that
it will be more feasible to achieve improvement) on the
crack arrest capacity of the materials that are characterised by low values of fatigue limit and smaller grain size.
The above-mentioned observation comes as a consequence to the fact that fine grained materials are more
sensitive to stress raisers.
2.2. CSP and fatigue life
In Ref. [25], de los Rios et al. proposed that the
fatigue life of polycrystalline materials can be determined by
N

nic

ic

(iD / 2)1m2dni1
1
A2i 1
CTODm2

(19)

ns

where A2, m2 are the parameters from the Paris law of

crack propagation, CTOD, the crack tip opening displacement and nis, and nic are the limit values of n1. In
Eq. (19) the parameters nis and nic represent, respectively,
the position of the crack tip at the beginning and end of
each interval i of crack growth. These two parameters
are calculated by

nic cos

ssiarrest
2 s2
p

i2
nis ni2
,i 1
c
i
Fig. 5. The effect of the stress ratio on the magnitude of the crack
closure stress to neutralised surface roughening for Kt 1.4.

0.2
ni=1
s

(20)

64

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

where s2 is the flow resistance of the material. The condition nis 1 0.2 is justified in Ref. [17]. From Eq. (20)
it is clear that the number of cycles required by the crack
to propagate throughout the ith grain, depends solely on
the parameter nic for the same CTOD.
For CSP components, the parameter nic has to be
modified in a way that it would take into account the
roughening of the surface and the crack closure stresses
nic cos

s / Zi(siarrest)closure
2
s2si1
p

notch

(21)

where the parameter Zi is identical to that used in Eq.

(2) and (spiarrest)notch
closure is given by Eq. (11). The applied
stress s is divided by Zi in order to increase the applied
stress due to the surface roughness. Determination of the
closure stresses needed to fully neutralise the surface
roughening effect can be achieved by equating Eq. (20)
with Eq. (21) and solving for si1
si1

s2i(1Zi)s

Zi((mi / m1)sFL i(s2s))

Fig. 7. Magnitude of the crack closure stress necessary to fully neutralise the effect of surface roughness at different applied stress levels
for 2024-T351. The results were obtained considering Kt 1.4 and
R 0.1.

(22)

In Eq. (22), the negative sign is to convert the residual

stress into compressive. To express Eq. (22) in terms
of crack length, knowledge of the crack tip plasticity is
required. In the case of s s2, such condition is fulfilled by making use of the Dugdale plastic strip model
[26]. According to Dugdale, the extent of fatigue damage, ci, can be approximated by
D
ci i a[sec(s / 2s2)]
2

(23)

hence,
i

2a[sec(s / 2s2)]
D

(24)

It should be noted that the strain hardening effect of

CSP has been intentionally neglected. Such disregard
can be justified by observing that: (a) the strain hardening due to CSP is usually less than the intrinsic hardening of cyclically hardening materials; (b) strain hardening is usually limited to a depth close to the free surface
(for 2024-T351 that ranges to a depth of 200 m [25]);
and (c) solution of Eq. (22) would give conservative
results. Figs. 79, show the effect of different stress levels, different materials and different stress ratios on Eq.
(22). Fig. 7 shows that the amount of closure stress
increases with the applied stress. The analysis justifies
the fact that CSP has little or no effect on the low cycle
fatigue region. Fig. 8 reveals the effect of different
mechanical and micro-structural properties on Eq. (22).
In general, CSP on materials with high values of cyclic
yield stress is expected to have a more profound effect.
Such notion should not be generalised since different
materials could have different responses to CSP. Finally,

Fig. 8. Closure stress distribution for two different materials at

s 300MPa and Kt 1.4. Values of cyclic yield stress of 450 and
495 MPa were, respectively, used for the 2024-T351 and the 7150T651 aluminium alloys.

Fig. 9 gives an indication towards the effect of stress

ratio on CSP components. According to Eq. (22), low
values of sFL (low or negative R) would require higher
magnitude of closure stresses and therefore would
reduce the beneficial effect of CSP.

3. Determination of the residual stress profile

The residual stress profile of CSP has been, in most
cases, successfully represented by the Robertson formula [27]
Y Aexp

2(xxd)2
B
W2

(25)

where Y is the residual stress, x, the depth below the

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

Fig. 9. The effect of stress ratio on the required closure stress for
2024-T351. The applied stress was 300 MPa and a Kt 1.4 was used.

surface, A B, the maximum residual stress, W, a measure of the width of the curve and xd, is the depth to the
maximum residual stress. In Ref. [25], it was proposed
that integration of Eq. (25) can provide the corresponding crack closure stress

1
s1
x

Aexp

2(xxd)2
B
W2

(26)

where x is now the crack length. A typical profile of

residual and crack closure stresses is shown in Fig. 10.
Due to the mathematical nature of the Robertsons formula and the crack closure profile produced from the
application of Eq. (22), a direct relationship between
Eqs. (26) and (22) is impossible to be defined accurately.
To overcome such difficulty the following assumptions
are implemented: (a) B 0, rationalised by the fact that
the residual stresses will realistically tend to zero with

Fig. 10. Residual and corresponding closure stress profiles according

to Robertson considering arbitrary values of A B 231.5MPa,
W 0.228mm and xd 0.190mm.

65

Fig. 11. Comparison between the requested closure stress profile provided by Eq. (22) and the exponential fitting in terms of Eq. (26). The
conditions are; 2024-T351: s 300MPa, R 0.1 and Kt 1.4. The
fitting parameters are: A 117MPa, W 0.1mm and xd
0.013mm.

depth, and (b) the parameters xd and A should be determined directly from Eq. (22). By implementing the above
assumptions, the application of a technique to provide
the parameters A, W and xd is possible. The technique
is based on the iterative fitting of an exponential formula
to Eq. (26). Completion of the iteration is achieved with
the interception of the two curves. The above condition
allows the minimisation of the fitting error. A typical
outcome in terms of closure stress and residual stress
profile is depicted in Figs. 11 and 12, respectively.

4. Discussion and conclusions

In this work, surface roughness and residual stress distribution are considered to be the dictating parameters
that determine the performance of CSP in terms of

Fig. 12. The residual stress profile according to the fitting parameters
determined in Fig. 9.

66

S. Curtis et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 25 (2003) 5966

fatigue resistance. Operating under the assumptions that:

(a) the residual stresses will not relax; (b) strain hardening is not significant in the case of cyclic hardened
materials; and (c) the stress gradient will not promote
sub-surface cracking, it is sound to argue that the compressive residual stresses are beneficial to fatigue resistance, while surface roughening is expected to decrease
the fatigue life of the engineering components by
allowing the earlier initiation and faster propagation of
short fatigue cracks.
In order to understand the competition between the
detrimental and beneficial effects of CSP, a boundary
condition was sought that would allow the total neutralisation of the surface roughening by the crack closure
stress profile. Such boundary was established using a
micro-mechanical notch sensitivity model and the Navarrode los Rios model for crack propagation. The
approach allows the determination of a closure stress
profile from which a corresponding residual stress profile
can be obtained. Making use of the advantages provided
by the micro-mechanical notch sensitivity model, the
effects of material and mechanical properties on the
boundary condition were analysed. From these analyses,
the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the
performance of CSP:

[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

[10]

[11]
[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

High values of stress ratio will promote fatigue life

improvement by CSP.
Low values of stress ratio will promote crack arrest
improvement by CSP.
The benefits from CSP are expected to be more significant for conditions of high cycle fatigue (low
applied stress levels).
In general, CSP is expected to increase the fatigue
life of high fatigue limit and yield stress materials.

[16]

[17]

[18]
[19]
[20]

Acknowledgements
The authors are indebted to the Royal Academy of
Engineering, The Engineering and Physical Science
Research Council, Airbus UK, and the technical staff of
SIRIUS for their support.

[21]

[22]

[23]

References
[24]
[1] OHara P. Superfinishing and shot peening of surfaces to optimise
roughness and stress. In: Brebbia CA, Kenny JM, editors. Surface
treatment IV. Wessex, UK: WIT Press; 1999, p. 32130.
[2] Wagner L, Lu tjering G. Influence of shot peening on the fatigue
behaviour of Ti-alloys. In: Shot peening. Oxford: Pergamon
Press; 1981, p. 45360.
[3] Martin U, Altenberger I, Scholtes B, Kremmer K, Oettel H. Cyclic deformation and near surface microstructures of normalised
shot peened steel SAE 1045. Mater Sci Eng A 1998;246:6980.
[4] Turnbull A, de los Rios ER, Tait RB, Laurant C, Boabaid JS.

[25]

[26]
[27]

Improving the fatigue resistance of wasp alloy by shot peening.

Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 1998;21:151324.
Suresh S. Fatigue of materials. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1991.
Forsyth PJE. Slip band damage and extrusion. Proc R Soc Lond
1957;A242:198202.
Cottrell AH, Hull D. Extrusion and intrusion by cyclic slip in
copper. Proc R Soc Lond 1957;A242:2113.
Miller KJ. Materials science perspective of metal fatigue resistance. Mater Sci Technol 1993;9:45362.
Kitagawa H, Takahashi S. Applicability of fracture mechanics to
very small cracks or cracks in the early stage. In: The Second
International Conference on Mechanical Behaviour of Materials,
ICM2. Ohio: ASM Metal Park; 1976, p. 62731.
Morris WL, Buck O. Crack closure load measurements for
microcracks developed during the fatigue of Al 2219-T851. Metall Trans 1977;A8:597601.
Suresh S. Crack deflection: implications for growth of long and
short fatigue cracks. Metall Trans 1983;A14:237585.
El Haddad MH, Dowling ME, Topper TH, Smith Jr. KN. J-integral applications for short-fatigue-crack modelling. Int J Fracture
1980;16:1530.
Blom AF, Hedlund A, Zhao W, Fathulla A, Weiss B, Sticker ER.
Short fatigue crack growth behaviour in Al 2024 and Al 7475.
In: Miller KJ, de los Rios ER, editors. The behaviour of short
fatigue cracks, MEP. 1986, p. 3766.
Bolingbroke RK, King JE. A comparison of long and short
fatigue crack growth in a high strength aluminium alloy. In:
Miller KJ, de los Rios ER, editors. The behaviour of short fatigue
cracks, MEP. 1986, p. 10114.
de los Rios ER, Navarro A. A. Considerations of grain orientation
and work hardening on short-fatigue-crack modelling. Philos
Mag 1990;61:43549.
de los Rios ER, Navarro A. A. Microstructural fracture mechanics
in high-cycle fatigue. In: Soboyejo WO, Srivatsan TS, editors.
High cycle fatigue of structural materials, TMS. 1997, p. 15766.
Navarro A, de los Rios ER. Fatigue crack growth modelling by
successive blocking of dislocations. Proc R Soc Lond
1992;A437:37590.
Smith RA, Miller KJ. Prediction of fatigue regimes in notched
components. Int J Mech Sci 1978;20:2016.
Tanaka K. Engineering formulae for fatigue strength reduction
due to crack-like notches. Int J Fracture 1983;22:R39R45.
Taylor D. A mechanistic approach to critical-distance methods in
notch fatigue. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2001;24:21524.
Vallellano C, Navarro A, Domnguez J. Fatigue crack growth
threshold conditions at notches. Part I: theory. Fatigue Fract Eng
Mater Struct 2000;23:11321.
Vallellano C, Navarro A, Domnguez J. Fatigue crack growth
threshold conditions at notches. Part II: generalisation and application to experimental results. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct
2000;23:1238.
Curtis SA, Solis Romero J, de los Rios ER, Rodopoulos CA,
Levers A. Predicting the interfaces between fatigue crack growth
regimes in 7150-T651 aluminium alloy using the fatigue damage
map. Mater Sci Eng, in press.
Li JK, Yao M, Wang D, Wang R. An analysis of stress concentrations caused by shot peening and its application in predicting
fatigue
strength.
Fatigue
Fract
Eng
Mater
Struct
1992;15(12):12719.
de los Rios ER, Trull M, Levers A. Modelling fatigue crack
growth in shot-peened components of Al 2024-T351. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2000;23:70916.
Dugdale DS. Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech
Phys Solids 1960;8:1008.
Robertson GT. The effect of shot size on the residual stresses
resulting from shot peening. The Shot Peener 1997;11(3):468.