0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Manufacturing, Materials, and Metallurgy

Improved High Cycle Fatigue Damage Tolerance of Turbine-Engine Compressor Components by Low Plasticity Burnishing

[+] Author and Article Information
Paul S. Prevéy

 Lambda Technologies, 3929 Virginia Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45227pprevey@lambdatechs.com

N. Jayaraman

 Lambda Technologies, 3929 Virginia Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45227njayaraman@lambdatechs.com

Ravi A. Ravindranath

 NAVAIR Propulsion and Power, 22195 Elmer Road, Patuxent River, MD 20670-1534ravi.ravindranath@navy.mil

Michael Shepard

 WPAFB AFRL/MLLMN, 2230 10th Street, WPAFB, OH 45433-7817michael.shepard@wpafb.af.mil

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 130(1), 012102 (Jan 11, 2008) (5 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2771244 History: Received June 14, 2006; Revised July 21, 2006; Published January 11, 2008

Significant progress has been made in the application of low plasticity burnishing (LPB) technology to military engine components, leading to orders of magnitude improvement in damage tolerance. Improved damage tolerance can facilitate inspection, reduce inspection frequency, and improve engine operating margins, all leading to improved military readiness at significantly reduced total costs. Basic understanding of the effects of the different LPB process parameters has evolved, and finite element based compressive residual stress distribution design methodologies have been developed. By incorporating accurate measurement of residual stresses to verify and validate processing, this combined technology leads to a total solution approach to solve damage problems in engine components. An example of the total solution approach to develop LPB processing of a first stage Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane to improve the foreign object damage tolerance from 0.002in.to0.025in. is presented. The LPB process, tooling, and control systems are described, including recent developments in real-time process monitoring for quality control. Performed on computer numerical control (CNC) machine tools, LPB processing is easily adapted to overhaul and manufacturing shop operations with quality assurance procedures meeting military and industry standards, facilitating transition to military depots and manufacturing facilities.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

(a) FDD for Ti-6Al-4V and (b) demonstration of the use of FDD

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

The Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane with FOD limited trailing edge. The arrow indicates the region sensitive to foreign object damage (FOD).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Effect of simulated FOD on the fatigue strength of feature specimens of Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

A magnified version of the Ti-6Al-4V FDD for simulated FOD of 0.020in. in blade-edge specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

LPB-induced compressive residual stress distribution of the TE of Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane shown in the form of a contour plot

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Stress contours showing the location and magnitude of compensatory tension due to LPB-induced compression on the TE of Ti-6Al-4V vane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Photograph showing the fatigue test setup for Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane TE in a Sonntag SFF-1U fatigue machine in cantilever loading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Fatigue test results for Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane comparing LPB processed and shot peened (SP) vanes taken from service. Scatter in the SP vane is attributed to widely distributed field generated FOD.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

FDD for the Ti-6Al-4V vane with the test result of the LPB treated vane plotted

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Photograph showing the LPB process setup in a five-axis CNC milling machine with a caliper tool set ready for LPB processing of the TE of a Ti-6Al-4V compressor vane

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Typical plot of the variation of every step of the vane LPB processing showing a range within 1% for processing window of ±16%

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In