TECHNIQUES by R. Rajendran, P. Baksi, S. Bhattacharya, and S.
Basu
EVALUATION OF NONUNIFORM RESIDUAL STRESS
USING BLIND-HOLE DRILLING TECHNIQUE
B
lind-hole drilling is a semi-destructive method for
evaluating the residual stress in a structure by dril-
ling a small hole into it to a depth that is equal to its
diameter at the geometric center of a specialized
three-element strain gage rosette.1 The measured strain relief
in the surrounding material is made use of for establishing
the residual stress. The hole that is made is so small (when
compared to the structural thickness) that it will not signifi-
cantly impair the integrity of the structure. The hole drilling
method can assess the residual stress that is either uniform or
varying with depth.2–10 For the stress that is uniform with
depth, the relieved strains are measured at the end of the
drilling operation. For a stress that is nonuniform with depth,
an incremental technique is used in which relieved strains are
measured during a series of small hole-depth increments. The
constants relating the principal stresses to the measured
strains are established using a calibration experiment.
Calibration constants define the sensitivity of the hole drilling
method. Numerical values of the calibration constants depend
on measurement conditions such as strain gage rosette geom-
etry, specimen material properties, hole diameter, and depth.
Calibration procedure accounts for the procedural influences
and the material dependent effects on the measured strain. It
improves the calculation accuracy and eliminates the effect of
initial residual stresses and machining stresses. In addition,
in order to assess the validity of the hole drilling method as
a means of measuring stress, the method must be tested by its
application to known stress conditions.11 Though cumber-
some, experimental calibration method is direct when com-
pared to finite-element method. Furthermore, experimental
determination of calibration coefficients is not feasible for
nonuniform residual stress.
A good comparison of experimental calibration constants with
the manufacturer supplied constants confirms that the hole
geometry, the hole diameter, and depth are acceptable for the
stress measurement. The material properties (Young’s modu-
lus and Poisson’s ratio) should be independently evaluated so
that it is possible to make a comparison between the manu-
facturer supplied and the experimentally determined calibra-
tion constants. Once the blind-hole drilling system is
successfully calibrated, it is applied to measure the residual
stress in a structure.
This article brings out the experimental calibration of the
blind-hole drilling system and its application for evaluating
the nonuniform residual stress.
THEORETICAL OVERVIEW
The introduction of a hole into a residually stressed body
relaxes the stresses at that location. Since the perpendicular
to the hole surface is a principal axis on which the shear and
R.Rajendran, P.Baksi, and S.Bhattacharya are Scientific Officers and S.Basu is
a Director affiliated with the BARC Facilities, Kalpakkam, India.
58 EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES May/June 2008
normal stresses are zero, the elimination of these stresses
on the hole surface changes the stress in the immediate
surrounding region, causing the local strains on the surface
of the structure change correspondingly. For a biaxial loa-
ding, the radial strain is given as follows1:
er 5 Aðsx 1 sy Þ 1 Bðsx 2 sy Þcos 2a ð1Þ
where a is the angle of local area on the plate from the direc-
tion of residual stress. The unknowns sx, sy, and a are solved
for by measuring the strains in three directions simulta-
neously and substituting them into Eq.1 as follows:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
e3 1 e1 1
smax 5 2 ðe3 2 e1 Þ2 1 ðe3 2 2e2 1 e1 Þ2 ð2aÞ
4A 4B
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
e3 1 e1 1
smin 5 1 ðe3 2 e1 Þ2 1 ðe3 2 2e2 1 e1 Þ2 ð2bÞ
4A 4B
ðe1 2 2e2 1 e3 Þ
tan 2a 5 ð2cÞ
ðe3 2 e1 Þ
The coefficients A and B are more accurately obtained by inte-
grating the strain over the areas of respective grid lengths
and designated as A and B.  The material independent dimen-
sionless a and b are given as follows10:
2EA
a 5 2 ð3aÞ
11n
b 5 2 2EB ð3bÞ
where E is the Young’s modulus and n is the Poisson’s ratio.
EXPERIMENTAL CALIBRATION
Experimental method eliminates errors due to integration
effects of the strain gage and to any imperfect geometry
of the hole.10 Two tension test specimens12 of the structural
material were prepared as per ASTM E-8, one for obtaining
the yield stress and the other for performing the calibration
test. The specimen dimensions adhered to the guidelines
given by ASTM E 837. Calibration is accomplished by install-
ing13 a Vishay CEA-06-062UM-120 residual stress rosette
(Vishay micro-measurements, Malvern, PA) on a tensile test
specimen12 as shown in Fig. 1. The rosette is oriented such
that grid no. 3 is aligned parallel to the direction of loading
and grid no. 1 along transverse axis. The gage rosette was
checked for gage resistance and installation resistance.
Approved soldering process was used. The rosette was coated
with a transparent protective coating to prevent shorting of
doi: 10.1111/j.1747-1567.2007.00224.x
Ó 2007, Society for Experimental Mechanics
 EVALUATION OF NONUNIFORM
RESIDUAL STRESS

The variation of axial stress with axial strain is shown in

Fig. 2. The Young’s modulus is obtained from the slope of the
curve as 197GPa (the maker supplied value is 198GPa). The
variation of transverse strain as a function of the axial strain is
shown in Fig. 3. The slope of the curve yields the Poisson’s ratio
as 0.280 (the maker supplied value is 0.275). Substitution of
the experimentally derived Young’s modulus and Poisson’s

160

120

Axial stress (MPa)

Fig. 1: Schematic of the tensile test specimen used for the
calibration test
80
the exposed leads by metal chips. A three lead wire configu-
ration was adapted to connect the rosette elements to P-3
strain indicator and SB-10 channel switching unit. Bridge
balancing was carried out for the third and first gage elements 40
to make the initial reading zero. The gage factor was set to 2.0.

A 100-ton universal testing machine (Fuel Instruments and

Engineers Pvt., Ltd., Kolapur, Maharashtra, India) was used
for the experiments. Tension test was carried out on the first 0
specimen to obtain the yield strength as 560 MPa. Calibration 0 200 400 600 800
stress was kept less than 1/3 the yield stress on the second Axial strain (micro strain)
specimen. Calibration load was applied before and after the
blind-hole drilling in steps of 19,620 N up to 117,720 N. At Fig. 2: Variation of axial stress as a function of axial strain on
each step, the strain indicated by the meter was recorded. the tension test specimen during the calibration test
After reaching 117,720 N, the process of unloading was done
in steps of 19,620 N and the strains were recorded. Uniform
stress acting on the specimen is obtained as the load applied
divided by the gage area of cross section of the specimen.
Young’s modulus E and Poisson’s ratio n of the structural
material is given as follows: 0

sa
E5 ð4aÞ
ea -50
Transverse strain (micro strain)

et
n5 2 ð4bÞ
ea -100
where sa is the axial stress, ea is the axial strain, and et is the
transverse strain.
-150
The specimen was removed from the machine to drill a blind
hole at the center of the rosette using RS200 milling guide.
The process of tension test was repeated. For every load-step,
the strain recorded before the hole drilling was subtracted -200
from the strain recorded after the hole drilling to give calibra-
tion strains (e3)cal and (e1)cal from which calibration constants
were established as follows: -250
0 200 400 600 800
ðe3 Þcal 1 ðe1 Þcal
A 5 ð5aÞ Axial strain (micro strain)
2scal
Fig. 3: Variation of the transverse strain as a function of
ðe3 Þcal 2 ðe1 Þcal
B 5 ð5bÞ the axial strain on the tension test specimen during the
2scal calibration test

May/June 2008 EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES 59

 EVALUATION OF NONUNIFORM
RESIDUAL STRESS

recorded zero strain values at all depths ascertained that the

4
residual stress system functions without error, and the dril-
ling method was satisfactory.

2 A summary of the strain data and the evaluated stresses on

the structure is shown in Table 1. The variation of e1 1 e3 and
e1 2 e3 as a function of the hole depth Z to the hole diameter Do
is shown in Fig. 5. This trend, in comparison with ASTM
Deviation (%)

0 E-837, clearly shows that there is variation of stress along

0 40 80 120 160 the depth. Calibration constants for different incremental
Stress (MPa) hole depths are estimated as a function of strain gage rosette
-2 mean diameter D, hole diameter Do, and hole depth Z,14,15
from which the biaxial principal stresses and their direction
with reference to the first element of the rosette are esti-
mated. For the complete hole depth, experimental calibration
-4 Abar constants are applied. A plot of the maximum principal stress
Bbar and the minimum principal stress as a function of the ratio of
the hole depth (Z) to the hole diameter (Do) is shown in Fig. 6.
For the full depth, the residual stresses have stabilized.
-6

Fig. 4: Deviation of the experimental calibration constants CONCLUSIONS

from the gage supplier constants
ratio into Eq. 3 along with the rosette maker supplied material
independent calibration constants a and b yield maker sup-
plied material dependent calibration constants A and B.  The
variation of the calibration constants with the maker supplied
reference values is shown in Fig. 4. The deviation of the cali-
bration constants is within 5%. This ensures the validity of the
residual stress measurement system.
RESIDUAL STRESS MEASUREMENT
An incremental blind hole was made on a stress-free plate of
the same structural steel recording strains at every step. The
A comprehensive methodology was evolved to estimate the
residual stress undergone by a structure. A tension test was
performed to arrive at the yield stress of the structural mate-
rial, which forms the basis for the estimation of the incremen-
tal load for calibration. The rosette along with the structural
material and the hole drilling system was calibrated as per
ASTM E 837 to ensure that the hole geometry, the hole diam-
eter, and depth are acceptable for the stress measurement.
The isotropic elastic homogeneous properties of the structural
material were obtained as an auxiliary product of the calibra-
tion experiment. These properties help arriving at the mate-
rial independent calibration coefficients. In order to calibrate
the system for field application, incremental hole drilling was
employed on a stress-free plate of the same structural steel
that showed zero strain on all the three arms at all the time.

Table 1—A summary of the relieved strain data

2A 2B smax smin
Z Z/Do Z/D e1 e2 e3 
a 
b (3 10213) (3 10213) (MPa) (MPa) a (º)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.2 0.1 0.03898 0 0 0 — — — — 0 0 0
0.4 0.2 0.07797 21 10 19 0.080 0.160 2.575 4.061 25.0 229.9 25.7
0.6 0.3 0.11695 240 15 93 0.120 0.240 3.863 6.091 21.4 289.9 9.7
0.8 0.4 0.15594 284 41 195 0.150 0.300 4.829 7.575 35.3 2151.8 5.7
1.0 0.5 0.19493 2124 55 267 0.170 0.360 5.634 9.090 44.5 2171.4 4.8
1.2 0.6 0.23391 2162 70 330 0.180 0.400 5.795 10.010 49.5 2194.4 3.2
1.4 0.7 0.27290 2198 77 379 — — — — — — —
1.6 0.8 0.31890 2224 77 408 — — — — — — —
1.8 0.9 0.35088 2245 76 427 — — — — — — —
2.0 1.0 0.38986 2258 73 436 0.210 0.540 6.439 13.636 58.2 2196.5 2.6
2.2 1.1 0.42884 2267 71 441 — — — — — — —
2.4 1.2 0.46783 2271 70 446 — — — — — — —

Do 5 2.0 mm; D 5 5.13 mm.

60 EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES May/June 2008

 EVALUATION OF NONUNIFORM
RESIDUAL STRESS

1.00
on the structure varied with the depth from the surface but
got almost stabilized at its full depth.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
0.80
Acknowledgments are due to Mr. M.A.K. Iyer, Cental work
Normalised relieved strain

shop, Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research, for the

help in tension test and Mr. B. Chandrasekar for strain
0.60 measurement.

References
0.40 1. American Society for Testing of Materials, Determining
Residual Stress by the Hole-Drilling Strain-Gage Method, ASTM
E 837-01e1 (2001).
0.20 2. Rendler, N.J., and Vigness, I., ‘‘Hole-Drilling Strain-Gage
epsilon3+epsilon1
Method of Measuring Residual Stress,’’ Experimental Mechanics
epsilon3-epsilon1 6(12): 577–586 (1966).
3. Flaman, M.T., ‘‘Brief Investigation of Induced Drilling Stress
0.00 in the Centre Hole Method of Residual Stress Measurement,’’ Exper-
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 imental Mechanics 22(1): 26–30 (1982).
Hole depth/Hole diameter 4. Anderson, L.F., ‘‘Experimental Method for Residual Stress
Evaluation through the Thickness of the Plate, Transactions of
the ASME,’’ Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology
Fig. 5: Variation of normalized relieved strain as a function
124:428–433 (2002).
of the ratio of the hole depth to the hole diameter
5. Schajer, G.S., and Altus, E., ‘‘Stress Calculation Error Anal-
ysis for Incremental Hole-Drilling Residual Stress Measurements,
Transactions of the ASME,’’ Journal of Engineering Materials and
Incremental blind-hole drilling was employed on the struc- Technology 118:120–126 (1996).
ture for which residual stress was to be evaluated. The cali- 6. Alvarez-Caldas, C., San Romain, J.L., Rodriguez-Fernandez,
bration constants for incremental depths were employed to S., and Olmeda, E., ‘‘Methodology to Determine Stresses Due to Own
arrive at the biaxial principal stresses. The residual stress Weight by Using Residual Stresses Techniques,’’ Experimental
Techniques 30(4): 29–32 (2006).
7. Niku-Lari, Lu, J., and Flavenot, J.F., ‘‘Measurement of Resid-
ual Stress Distribution by the Incremental Hole Drilling Method,’’
100 Experimental Mechanics 25(2): 175–185 (1985).
8. Flaman, M.T., and Manning, B.J., ‘‘Determination of Resid-
ual Stress Variation with Depth by the Hole-drilling Method,’’
Experimental Mechanics 25(9): 205–207 (1985).
9. Schajer, G.S., ‘‘Strain Data Averaging for the Hole-Drilling
Method,’’ Experimental Techniques 15(2): 25–28 (1991).
0 10. Schajer, G.S., and Tootoonian, M., ‘‘A New Rosette Design for
Stress (MPa)

More Reliable Hole Drilling Residual Stress Measurements,’’ Exper-

Sigma max imental Mechanics 37(3): 299–306 (1977).
Sigma min 11. Tech Note TN503-6, Measurement of Residual Stresses by
Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method, Vishay Measurements, Raleigh,
NC (2003).
-100 12. American Society for Testing of Materials, Standard Test
Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, ASTM E 8-01,
Philadelphia (2001).
13. American Society for Testing of Materials, Test Method for
Performance Characteristics of Bonded Resistance Strain Gages,
ASTM E 251-89, Philadelphia (1989).
-200 14. Schajer, G., ‘‘Measurement of Non-Uniform Residual Stresses
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 by Hole-Drilling Method, Part-I—stress Calculation Procedures,’’
Hole depth/ Hole diameter ASME Journal of Engineering Materials Technology 110:338–343
(1988).
15. Schajer, G., ‘‘Measurement of Non-Uniform Residual Stresses
Fig. 6: Variation of maximum and minimum principal by Hole-Drilling Method, Part-II—practical Application of the
stresses as a function of the ratio of the hole depth to the Method,’’ ASME Journal of Engineering Materials Technology
hole diameter 110:344–349 (1988). n

May/June 2008 EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES 61