汽缸套法蘭耳的蓋板式鉆床夾具設(shè)計(jì)3張CAD圖
汽缸套法蘭耳的蓋板式鉆床夾具設(shè)計(jì)3張CAD圖,汽缸,法蘭,板式,鉆床,夾具,設(shè)計(jì),CAD
設(shè)計(jì)（XX）任務(wù)書(shū)
Ⅰ、畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)（論文）題目：
蓋板式鉆床夾具
Ⅱ、畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)（論文）工作內(nèi)容（從專(zhuān)業(yè)知識(shí)的綜合運(yùn)用、論文框架的設(shè)計(jì)、文
獻(xiàn)資料的收集和應(yīng)用、觀點(diǎn)創(chuàng)新等方面詳細(xì)說(shuō)明）：
通過(guò)畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)，使學(xué)生對(duì)所學(xué)課程能融會(huì)貫通，能靈活運(yùn)用各類(lèi)知識(shí)，并使得到深化，鞏固和提高。全面系統(tǒng)的進(jìn)行一次有關(guān)機(jī)械工程設(shè)計(jì)的基礎(chǔ)訓(xùn)練，培養(yǎng)學(xué)生的工程能力，培養(yǎng)學(xué)生獨(dú)立分析，解決問(wèn)題的能力。通過(guò)畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)檢驗(yàn)學(xué)生對(duì)所學(xué)課程的掌握程度以及對(duì)所學(xué)知識(shí)的運(yùn)用能力。
畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)的要求：1.收集資料，包括生產(chǎn)綱領(lǐng)，零件工序圖，加工工序要求，收集夾具設(shè)計(jì)的依據(jù)；2.根據(jù)六點(diǎn)定位原理，確定工件的定位方式，選擇定位元件； 3.工件定位誤差分析；4.合理選擇銑削加工余量，計(jì)算刀具切削力以及夾緊工件所需的夾緊力；5.確定工件的夾緊方式，選擇合適的夾緊機(jī)構(gòu)，設(shè)計(jì)夾緊裝置；6.主要定位元件的強(qiáng)度校核;7.設(shè)計(jì)的夾具裝配圖、零件圖符合使用和制造工藝要求。
其他要求：說(shuō)明書(shū) 1 萬(wàn)字以上（35 頁(yè)）、5000 字英文文獻(xiàn)翻譯、300 字中英文摘要。課題折合 0 號(hào)圖 2 張圖紙；除至少有 1 張 A1 手工繪圖外，其余圖紙皆為CAD 繪圖；設(shè)計(jì)說(shuō)明書(shū)需打印輸出，并遵守相應(yīng)規(guī)范，參考文獻(xiàn)中除設(shè)計(jì)手冊(cè)和工具書(shū)外，至少含有 5 篇以上中文論文文獻(xiàn)和 3 篇以上外文文獻(xiàn)。
Ⅲ、進(jìn)度安排：
2014 年 11 月 2 日～2014 年 11 月 15 日（2 周）：外文翻譯、資料的準(zhǔn)備、 文獻(xiàn)的查閱；
2014 年 11 月 16 日～2013 年 11 月 30 日（3 周）：文獻(xiàn)的查閱,夾具整體結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)草圖；
2014 年 11 月 30 日～2013 年 12 月 7 日（2 周）：結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)的優(yōu)化、標(biāo)準(zhǔn)件確定；
2014 年 12 月 8 日～2015 年 3 月 15 日（4 周）：主要零部件設(shè)計(jì)、校核；
2015 年 3 月 1 日～2015 年 4 月 11 日（2 周）：裝配圖、零件圖的繪制；
Ⅳ、主要參考資料：
[1] 馮辛安，關(guān)慧貞.機(jī)械制造裝備設(shè)計(jì) [M]. 3 版. 北京：機(jī)械工業(yè)出版社，2009.
[2] 黃健求.機(jī)械制造技術(shù)基礎(chǔ) [M]. 北京：機(jī)械工業(yè)出版社，2005.
[3] 濮良貴，紀(jì)名剛.機(jī)械設(shè)計(jì) [M]. 北京：高等教育出版社，2006.
[4] 王躍進(jìn).機(jī)械原理 [M]. 北京：北京大學(xué)出版社，2009.
[5] 曾志新，呂明.機(jī)械制造技術(shù)基礎(chǔ) [M]. 武漢：武漢理工大學(xué)出版社， 2001.
[6] 吳宗澤，羅圣國(guó).機(jī)械設(shè)計(jì)課程設(shè)計(jì)手冊(cè) [M]. 第 3 版. 北京：高等教育出版社，2006.
[7] 成大先.機(jī)械設(shè)計(jì)手冊(cè) [S]. 第五版. 北京：化學(xué)工業(yè)出版社，2010.
[8] 劉鴻文.材料力學(xué) [M]. 第 5 版. 北京：高等教育出版社，2010. 指導(dǎo)教師：（簽名： ）， 年 月 日
學(xué)生姓名：（簽名： ），專(zhuān)業(yè)年級(jí)：
系負(fù)責(zé)人審核意見(jiàn)（從選題是否符合專(zhuān)業(yè)培養(yǎng)目標(biāo)、是否結(jié)合科研或工程實(shí)際、綜合
訓(xùn)練程度、內(nèi)容難度及工作量等方面加以審核）：
專(zhuān)業(yè)負(fù)責(zé)人簽字： ， 年 月 日
Laser shock processing with twodifferent laser sources on2050-T8 aluminum alloyPatrice Peyre, Neila Hfaiedh and Hongbin SongPIMM Laboratory, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Me tiers Paris-Tech,Paris, FranceVincent JiICMMO, UMR CNRS 8182, Universite Paris-Sud, Orsay Cedex, FranceVincent VignalICB, UMR 5209 CNRS-University of Burgundy, Dijon, FranceWilfrid SeilerPIMM Laboratory, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Me tiers Paris-Tech,Paris, France, andStephane BranlyThales Optronique SA, Elancourt, FranceAbstractPurpose The purpose of this paper is to conduct a comparative study of the surface modificationsinduced by two different lasers on a 2050-T8 aluminum alloy, with a specific consideration of residualstress and work-hardening levels.Design/methodology/approach Two lasers have been used for Laser shock peening (LSP)treatment inwater-confined regime: a Continuum Powerlite Plus laser, operating at 0.532 mmwith 9 nslaser pulses, and near 1.5mm spot diameters; a new generation Gaia-R Thales laser delivering 10 J-10ns impacts, with 4-6mm homogeneous laser spots at 1.06 mm. Surface deformation, work-hardeninglevels and residual stresses were analyzed for both LSP conditions. Residual stresses were comparedwith numerical simulations using a 3D finite element (FE) model, starting with the validation ofsurface deformations induced by a single laser impact.Findings Similar surface deformations and work-hardening levels, but relatively lower residualstresses were obtained with the new large 4-6mm impact configuration. This was attributed to areduced number of local cyclic loadings (2) compared with the small impact configuration (4).Additionally, more anisotropic stresses were obtained with small impacts. FE simulations usingJohnson-Cooks material behavior were shown to simulate accurately surface deformations, but tooverestimate maximum stress levels.Research limitations/implications This work should provide LSP workers a betterunderstanding of the possible benefits from the different LSP configurations currently co-existing:using small (,2 mm) impacts at high-cadency rates or large ones ( . 4-5 mm). Moreover,experimental results and simulated data had never been presented on 2050-T8 Al alloy.Originality/value An experimental (and numerical) comparison using two distinct laser sourcesfor LSP, has never been presented before. This preliminary work should help LSP workers to chooseadequate sources.Keywords Stress (materials), Alloys, SimulationPaper type Research paperThe current issue and full text archive of this journal is available alloy87International Journal of StructuralIntegrityVol. 2 No. 1, 2011pp. 87-100q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1757-9864DOI 10.1108/175798611111086441. IntroductionSince the early days of laser shock peening (LSP) in the late 1970s, many laserdevelopments have been made to improve the feasibility and cost-efficiency of the LSPtreatment.WecanmentionfirsttheoldgenerationofNd:Glasslasers,whichcandeliverupto100Jin30-50ns,butlimitedbythethermalconductivityofglasstoapproximatelyone shot every 5minutes, the small Nd:YAG lasers, operating either at 1.06 or 0.53mm,and delivering a large range of pulse durations and output energies (0.1J-3J/pulse), andinturnalargerangeofimpactdiameters(between0.1and2mmspotsize).Recently,thelaser developments carried out at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, andsupported by MIC, have commenced to the designing of a new generation of lasers withunique features such as spatial beam smoothing and squared-shape impacts nearly5mm in size.Additionally, a change of wavelength is known to modify the process efficiency andaffect the dielectric breakdown thresholds Ith. For instance, relatively higher pressurescanbeobtainedwitha0.53mmthanwitha1.06mmbelowIth,butthepressuresaturationoccurs earlier lowering Ithvalues (Berthe et al., 1997). In both cases, maximum effectivepressures were shown to be in 5-6GPa range for 10-30ns impacts.At constant laser power densities, the modification of impact diameter is alreadyknown to have several effects on the process feasibility and the resulting surfacemodifications:.protective coatings are usually more resistant to large impacts than to very smallones, due to lower local shear stress amplitudes; and.the use of small impacts (,2mm) tends to reduce the plastically affected depths,by a combination of 2D effects during shock wave propagation.Consequently, even at similar irradiation conditions, the kind of lasers for LSP requiredand the resulting combined influence of impact diameter, spatial pressure distributionP f(x,y,t) and overlap is expected to have non-negligible effects on the surfacemodifications.In this work, a comparative study of the surface modifications induced by twodifferent lasers is conducted, with a specific consideration of residual stress andwork-hardening levels.2050-T8 was selected as a reference material for this purpose, since it has alreadybeen widely investigated for mechano-electrochemical aspects (Peyre et al., 2010).2. Experimental conditionsTwo lasers have been used for LSP treatment in a water-confined regime:(1) AContinuumPowerlitePluslaser,operatingeitherat1.06mm(3Joutputenergy)or at 0.532mm with a frequency doubling crystal (1.5J output energy) with9-10ns laser pulses at 10Hz maximum frequency. With these conditions,1.3-1.8mmd0diametershavebeenused(Figures1(a)and2(a).Differentoverlaps(Dd/d0 100) were also used (33, 50 and 66 per cent) to investigate the surfacestress distribution. For a 50 per cent overlap LSP, the material was locallysubmitted to 2-4 shock loading. Using a classical LSP configuration, the targetwas completely immersed in water (5-10cm thick), and a high-pressure waternozzle was used to remove ablation dusts.IJSI2,188(2) AnewgenerationGaia-RlaserdesignedbyThalesOptronique,withahighenergyand high average laser power specifically dedicated to laser shock processing.It delivers up to24J at1.064mm and14J at0.532mm atup to5Hzrepetition rate.Thebeamprofileisflattopwithnomodulationandcanbeeitherroundorsquareon demand. The pulse duration is within 8-12ns. With these conditions, 4-6mmimpactshavebeenusedformaterialsprocessing(Figures1(b)and2(b).Fortheseexperiments, a simple confinement with a 2-5mm water film was used.For both conditions, a 80mm-thick aluminum adhesive was used as a protectiveoverlay to avoid ablation or heating of the impacted surface.3. The 2050-T8 aluminum alloy2050 (Al 3.53, Cu 0.9, Li 0.3, Mg 0.05,Fe 0.37 Mn 0.37) isa newlydevelopedaeronautical AlCuLi aluminum alloy with numerous applications such as stiffenersofcivilaircrafts,whichexhibitsgoodmechanicalandstresscorrosioncrackingresistanceFigure 1.Analysis of single laserimpacts(a)2 mm2 mm(b)Notes: (a) A series of 1.5 mm impacts; (b) a 5mm laser impact2050-T8aluminum alloy89comparedtootheraluminumalloys(near510MPayieldstrength).However,thismaterialis susceptible to exfoliation corrosion and pitting corrosion in chloride environment(Liu et al., 2008), with a possible extension to fatigue crack initiation. Cylinders with14mm diameter 8mm thick, or 30 30 10 square shaped samples were extractedfrom a 15mm thick plate of 2050-T8 commercial aluminum alloy supplied by EADS InnovationWorksCie.TheT8treatmentwasobtainedbyahomogenizationtreatmentof5308C 1hfollowedbyawaterquenchingandatemperingtreatmentof4h 1508C.Thereceived material was shown to exhibit elongated grains between 30 and 500mm sizes.Prior to LSP treatments, surfaces were first ground with SiC papers (500, 1,000, 2,400,4,000grades),thenfollowedbya3and1mmdiamondsuspensionfinish.Consequently,aspolished surface exhibited a 240-20MPa isotropic residual stress field.4. Experimental results4.1 Roughness and hardness determinationsSurface finish was investigated first, using a 2D profilometer, and using 5mm scanningdistances. For nearly similar power densities (5GW/cm2), results reveal lower roughnessRaandRtwiththelargerimpactconfiguration(TableI).Thiswasattributedtothehigherpercentage overlap used with smaller impacts, which promoted larger surfacedeformations. Vickers Hardness tests were carried out at the surface of impactedmaterialswitha25gloadresultinginnearly30mm-widthindentations.Atsimilarpowerdensities(Figure3),resultsindicatesimilarhardnessvariations(15percent)with1.5or5mm impacts: starting from H 1.3-1.5GPa for the as polished condition, and up to1.7GPaafterLSPtreatment.Suchlimitedwork-hardeninglevelsareconsistentwithmostof the previous works on aluminum alloys after LSP treatments (Ocan a et al., 2008).Figure 2.2050-T8 surfaceslaser-shock peened with(a) 1.5mm impacts or (b)5mm impacts(a)(b)IJSI2,1904.2 Residual stressesX-ray determinations,using the well-known sin2Cmethod, alongwithaCr anticathodeand 311 diffraction planes (2Q 1398), were carried out to measure residualstress surface fields after both 1.5 and 5mm LSP impacts. Different X-ray collimators(0.5, 1, 2mm) were used for analyzing stress distributions. Considering xx as the mainLSP orientation, the surfaces treated with smaller impacts experienced a moreSurface preparationRa(mm)Rt(mm)As-polished0.050.2LSP d 1.5mm 50 % overlap0.552.7LSP d 1.5mm 25 % overlap0.52.5LSP d 5mm 25 % overlap0.251.8Note: LSP carried out at 5GW/cm2Table I.RoughnessmeasurementsFigure 3.Comparison of thehardness values obtainedon 2050-T8 after LSPtreatment with (a) 1.5mmimpacts or (b) 5mmimpacts at a similar powerdensity (4-5GW/cm2)1.91.71.51.31.10.90.70.5024(a)6PolishedCL-4GW/cm281.9As polishedAs polished + LSPLSP zoneH (GPa)1.71.81.51.61.31.41.21.110510 x (mm)(b)152050-T8aluminum alloy91anisotropic and more homogeneous stress field (jsyyj . jsxxj) than surfaces treatedwith large impacts. This anisotropy was investigated analytically (Hirano et al., 2006),andisattributedtothedifferencebetweensrandsQonasinglelaserimpact.Relativelyhigher stresses were also obtained with small impacts (2300MPa) than with largerimpacts (2210MPa). This was mainly attributed to a higher number of cyclic shockloadings:fourlocalimpactsfora50percentoverlapLSPvs1-2impactswithlarge5mmimpacts (Figure 4(b).It should be mentioned that the maximum stress level obtained with LSP(260 per cent sY) is rather low compared with data previously obtained on otheraluminum Al-Cu alloys having nearly similar mechanical properties (Ocan a et al.,2008). The specific materials behavior of dispersion-strengthened Al-Cu-Li alloysunder LSP loading, and their dynamic behavior is still questionable to understandingthis result.Figure 4.Residual surface stressesinduced by LSP in2050-T8 after a 50 per centoverlap 1.5mm impactsLSP (a) or a 25 per centoverlap 5mm impacttreatment; (b) at a similarpower density (5GW/cm2).050100150200300250350StressesStresses (MPa)x (mm)LSPLSP zone0246x8101214(a)050100150200300250350s22s1102468101214(b)Note: Error bars are comprised between 20 and 50 MPaIJSI2,1925. Numerical simulations5.1 General trendsFiniteelementsimulationswerecarriedouttocalculateresidualstressfieldsinducedbybothLSPconfigurations.Followingpreviousfiniteelement(FE) procedure byDingandYe (2003), a 3D model was specifically implemented on AbaqusTM6.7 Explicit for thispurpose.The LSP 3D modeling was carried out in different steps:(1) Simulation of a single laser impact and comparison with experimental data tovalidate pressure loading P f(t,x,y) to be used in the next step.(2) Definition of an optimum time increment Dt for the explicit simulation: theexplicit algorithm is in conditionally stable during an explicit calculationprovided that Dt , (Dl/C0) where Dl element thickness (m) and C0 soundspeed(m/s).Convergencetestswereperformedtocheckthatsimulatedvaluesdonot vary when using shorter increments.(3) Calculation of n LSP impacts overlap using pressure loadings optimized inSection 1. Calculations can then be compared with experimental data (surfaceprofilometry and X-ray diffraction (XRD) determinations).2759918 continuum solid hexahedral linear elements were used to mesh a24 24 5mm finite body, with a severe mesh refinement near the impacted surface(BIAS function on Abaqus) resulting in 100 100 5mm element dimensions(Figure 5(a) near the surface. More precisely, the use of a 5mm-thick surface elementallows analyzing correctly a 20ns half width at half maximum P f(t) pressure pulsewith shock waves propagating approximately at 6mm/ns.Finally, the use of 0.5mm thick infinite elements all around the 3D finite body as anon-reflecting boundary condition was previously shown on 2D models (Peyre et al.,2007) to be an accurate method for reaching stabilized stress and deformation values.5.2 Materials behaviorA Johnson-Cook like material was used to represent strain rate sensitivity between1022s21and 106s21(laser-shock loading condition). The usual temperaturedependence of Johnson-Cooks equation was neglected, considering that thermaleffects are not to be considered during shock wave propagation (a strongly coupledsimulation using DC3D8T elements revealed a very small thermal rise during thepropagationofa5GPa 20nspressureloading(Song,2010).Forsuchlimitedpressurevalues,theuseofaGru neisenequationofstate(EOS)forthehydrostaticpartofthestresssensorwasshowntohavelittleeffectontheshockwavepropagationoronthestressandstrain values, as predicted from previous analytical work (Ballard, 1991). Comparisonsbetween Johnson-Cooks equation and elastic-visco-plastic behavior (with tabular datafor s,1and d1/dt) were also considered, but did not reveal distinct modifications of theresidual stresses and deformations. Consequently, all simulations were carried out withanexplicitalgorithmusingaGru neisenEOS(equation1)andasimplifiedJCequation(2)for the deviatoric behavior:P r0C0h1 2 Sh2: 1 2G0h2? G0r0E12050-T8aluminum alloy93Withr0 initial density, C0 sound speed,h0 volume compression coefficient,S and G0 materials constants, E energy, P hydrostatic pressure:s sy K1n1 C:Ln_ 1_ 10?2withsy yield stress, K work-hardening modulus, n hardening coefficient,C strain rate sensitivity coefficient, _ 1 strain rate, _ 10reference strain rate.Johnson-Cooks law coefficients are presented in Table II for 2050-T8 Aluminumalloy. The C value was estimated by checking the elastic precursor ( PH) value withFigure 5.(a) 25 25 5mm3D model, (b) detail ofthe finite element/infiniteelement boundary ofthe 3D model25 mm25 mmP = f(x,y,t)Loading sideInfiniteelements(a)(b)5 mmsy(MPa)K(MPa)nC_ 105102000.450.021022Table II.Johnson-Cookscoefficients used for thecalculation (2050-T8)IJSI2,194a VISAR interferometer system. In turn, the dynamic yield stresssdynywas calculatedusing the Hugoniot Elastic Limitsdyny PH 1 2 2n=1 2 n and the C value (0.02)was obtained by comparingsdynytosy.5.3 Optimization of the pressure loading: simulation of one laser impactThevalidationofplasma-inducedpressureloadingP f(x,y,t)wasmade,bycomparingsurface deformations induced by single laser impacts. A Fortran subroutine was used(*VDLOADtypeonAbaqusTM)togeneratenon-uniformspatialandtemporalloadings.By using small impacts generated by the Continuum laser, the best agreement withexperimental surface deformations (Figure 6) was found for a near-spherical spatialdistribution ofpressure P f(x,y)(equation 3).For largeimpactsfromthe Thales laser,Figure 6.Comparison betweenexperimental andsimulated single laserimpacts202x (mm)(a)SimulationExperimentalDeformation (mm)134246810120420684x (mm)(b)SimulationExperimentalDeformation (mm)210122468100Notes: (a) 1.5mm 7 GW/cm2 impact (4.5 GPa) simulation with aquasi-spherical P = f(x,y) distribution; (b) 5mm 6 GW/cm2 impact(4 GPa) simulation with a uniform P = P0 distribution)2050-T8aluminum alloy95simulationswerecarriedoutwithaconstantP(x,y) P0spatialdistribution,revealinga better spatial distribution of laser energy:Px;y;t P0t:ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi1 2 0:5x2r2y2r2?s3Simulations carried out with P 3.5-4.5GPa maximum pressures (4-7GW/cm2),reproducesurfacedeformationswell(Figure6),usingeithersphericaloruniformspatialdistributions. This allows us to use adequate P f(x,y,t) data for the simulation of alarge number of impact overlaps.5.4 Simulation of the LSP treatment of an extended areaUsing the same Fortran program as with single impacts to simulate a large number oflaser-shock loadings, with dedicated overlaps between impacts, simulations of4 4 16 or 5 5 25 impacts were carried out, using 1.5 or 5mm diameters.Residual stress fields obtained are clearly heterogeneous, as shown in Figures 7(a)and8(a),duetotherepetitionofcentralsingularitiesonsingleimpactsandtotheperiodicmultiplication of overlaps.Alternatively, the simulation of impact overlaps does not fit well with experimentalXRD determinations, for both impact conditions (Figures 7 and 8). The simulationsystematically overestimates residual stress fields (factor of 2 difference for 5mmimpacts; Figure 8(b).The stress anisotropy is confirmed by FE simulation, with a more pronouncedtendency for the LSP treatment with small impacts (1.6mm; Figure 7(b) confirmingprevious analytical results (Hirano et al., 2006).It is also confirmed that an increase of overlapping rate (from 33 to 66 per centoverlap) tends to reduce surface stress gradients (Figure 7(b), and favors surface stresshomogeneity.Future tests should be done to confirm these results and validate the 3D model,maybe on another AlCuLi aluminum alloy, having smaller grain sizes and less texture,to facilitate XRD analysis.5.5 DiscussionThree-dimensional numerical simulations have been carried out and compared withexperimental XRD stress determinations. With material constitutive laws similar tothose successfully used on steels (Peyre et al., 2007) or titanium alloys (Peyre et al.,2004), FE simulation was shown to overestimate residual stresses on 2050 alloy,especially for the large impacts configuration.Many reasons can explain that:.Experimental data: inthecase oflarge impacts, reduced impact pressures,maybedue to a bad confinement effect of water (water layer too thin or polluted byablation dusts) are possible.Experiments vs simulation is difficult to carry out, due to the averaging effectof X-ray diffraction (stresses are determined inside a 1.5mm diameter spot).Considering averaged values (on the same area) for the simulation,or micro-diffraction data (for instance with a 50mm XRD spot) could beinformative.IJSI2,196Figure 7.(a) s11and s22simulatedstresses for a 50 per centoverlap and P 4GPa,(b) influence of impactoverlap on s11and s22stress distributionS, S11(avg: 75%)S, S22(avg: 75%)(a)30033%50%66%Axe X (mm)XRD 50% overlap0123456711 (MPa)200100100200300400500030040050033%50%66%Axe X (mm)XRD 50% overlap0123456722 (MPa)200100100200300400500Note: Experimental versus simulated RS fields for a 50 per cent overlap (1.5mm impacts)0(b)1122+1.71810+02+2.22310+02+1.54610+02+8.68210+01+1.90810+014.86710+011.16410+021.84210+022.51910+023.19610+023.87410+024.55110+025.22910+025.90610+02+1.09710+02+4.75610+011.45410+017.66310+011.38710+022.00810+022.62910+023.25010+023.87110+024.49210+025.11310+025.73410+022050-T8aluminum alloy97.Even if calculations using a strong thermal-mechanical coupling did not evidencesignificanteffectofhighstrainrateplasticdeformationonthelocaltemperatureandresidual stresses, local annealing effects are still possible due to adhesive coatingissues. For instance, coating-metal interface debonding can favor surface heatingand annealing.6. ConclusionsTheabilityoftwodifferentpulsedlasersourcestogeneratehighamplitudecompressivestresses and work-hardening in a high-resistance aluminum alloy was demonstrated,withacombinedexperienceandsimulationapproach.Simulationsusinga3Dmodelandrealistic data for the shock loading P f(t) and the materials properties providedsatisfactory data for the LSP treatment with small impacts, but not for the largeFigure 8.(a) FEM simulation of RSinduced by 5mm impactsat 3.5GPa (5GW/cm2),(b) experience vssimulation (5GW/cm2)(a)200X (mm)S11 (MPa)S22 (MPa)XRD27121722Stress (MPa)1000100200300400500600Note: XRD error bars are around 50 MPa1122+1.68310+02+1.0
收藏