Surface Engineering

ISSN: 0267-0844 (Print) 1743-2944 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ysue20

Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens

and effect of shot peening

Y.-K. Gao

To cite this article: Y.-K. Gao (2008) Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens and effect of
shot peening, Surface Engineering, 24:5, 322-326, DOI: 10.1179/174329408X282497

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1179/174329408X282497

Published online: 19 Jul 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 69

View related articles

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ysue20
 Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated
specimens and effect of shot peening
Y.-K. Gao*
The fatigue limits of smooth specimens in 40Cr, 30CrMo, 20CrMnTi and 20Cr steels after
carbonitriding, carburising, nitriding and shot peening treatments were investigated quantita-
tively, and the compressive residual stress fields (CRSFs) were determined by X-ray diffraction
technique with step by step electrolytic polishing. The experimental results indicate that the
fatigue crack initiation sites (or fatigue crack sources) might be located in one of the following
three regions: at the surface, within the hardened layer, and beneath the hardened layer, where
the fatigue crack initiates depends on the surface strengthening technology and the residual
stress distribution along surface layer. The highest fatigue limit will be obtained when the crack
initiates beneath the hardened layer. A judgement that considers the crack initiation site for
optimum condition of surface strengthening technique to evaluate the surface chemical heat
treatments has been proposed. The strengthening technology can be considered to optimum if
Zs.Zo (Zo is the depth of compressive residual stress field and Zs is the distance of fatigue crack
initiation site from surface); otherwise, the strengthening technology is not good and should be
modified or a further shot peening may be needed while 0(Zs,Zo.
Keywords: Fatigue limit, Chemical heat treatment, Shot peening, Residual stresses

Introduction while for surface hardened specimens, the fatigue crack

Carburising, nitriding and carbonitriding are technolo-
gies widely used in industry to improve the fatigue
strength of metallic parts. In some cases, the technique
of shot peening is applied afterward to improve fatigue
strength.1–4
Researches on the effect of chemical heat treatment,
as well as that of shot peening, on the fatigue strength of
structural parts have been sufficient.5–7 These investiga-
tions are basically limited in qualitative analysis; the
credible methods for quantitative evaluation of the effect
of surface hardening are still few. Therefore, further and
quantitative research on fatigue behaviour of surface
strengthened metallic parts is obviously very important
from both theoretical and practical considerations.
In recent years, the effects of shot peening on the
fatigue strength of metallic specimens were investigated
and a concept of surface/internal fatigue limits of metals
was proposed for quantitative analysis of such effects.8–
10
In this paper, it is important to make clear whether
the concept of surface/internal fatigue limits of metals is
still valid for analysing the effect of different kinds of
chemical heat treatment on the fatigue strength of
specimen.
It is well known that for surface unhardened speci-
mens, the fatigue crack sources often lay at the surface;
Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials, Beijing 100095, China
*Corresponding author, email yukui.gao@biam.ac.cn
sources may occur either at the surface, or in the interior
beneath the compressive residual stress field. The critical
conditions for fatigue crack source initiation should be
different in these two cases, i.e. the ‘apparent fatigue
limit’ of surface hardened specimens should be deter-
mined by different factors. Whether the fatigue crack
source of hardened components will be located at or
under surface depends upon the conditions of strength-
ening technology and external loading.
Experimental procedure and
experimental results
The steels employed are 40Cr, 30CrMo, 20CrMnTi and
20Cr. The chemical composition and mechanical prop-
erty and heat/chemical heat treatment or surface
treatment of these steels are listed in Tables 1 and 2
respectively.
Three point bending fatigue tests were performed in
this investigation. The dimensions of specimen
employed are 15610650 mm. Take 15 to 20 specimens
as a group. The technological parameters of heat
treatment and shot peening intensity (arc height of a
type strip) used for different groups of specimens are
given in Table 2. Fatigue tests were made at an Amsler
high frequency fatigue test machine of model HFP 5000
and up and down (or stair step) method was employed
to determine the apparent fatigue limit swa for 56106
cycles, which was expressed by the maximum value of
the loading stress at the surface. The span distance

ß 2008 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining

Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 27 May 2007; accepted 20 December 2007
322 Surface Engineering 2008 VOL 24 NO 5 DOI 10.1179/174329408X282497
 Gao Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens and effect of shot peening

1 Distribution of CRS along hardened layer (Z) of 40Cr

steel
during tests is 40 mm, fatigue stress ratio of minimum
stress to maximum R, is 0?05, and frequency is 135 Hz.
The fracture surfaces of broken specimens with stress
a little higher than their swa were studied under an SEM
of model S-570, and the positions of fatigue crack
sources were determined. For surface hardened speci-
mens, the residual stress versus depth was measured by
X-ray diffraction method with step by step electrolytic
polishing from surface. Cr Ka target and diffraction
2 Relationship between apparent fatigue limit swa and
depth of CRS field Z0 of 40Cr steel
from crystal plane (211) of a-Fe were selected, and the
peak position is determined by half width method.
Some typical curves of compressive residual stress
(CRS) along surface layer of 40Cr steel are shown in
Fig. 1, and the depth of CRS field Z0 was determined.
The relationship between apparent fatigue limit swa, and
the depth of CRS field Z0, is illustrated in Fig. 2. For

Table 1 Chemical composition and mechanical property of tested materials, wt-%

Yield Ultimate Percentage Percentage

strength strength elongation reduction of
Material C Cr Mo Ti Mn Si S P s0?2, MPa sb, MPa d, % area y, %

40Cr 0.41 0.99 – – 0.72 0.19 0.011 0.027 1530 1910 6 20

30CrMo 0.33 1.14 0.19 – 0.53 0.26 0.009 0.008 1230 1790 15 46
20CrMnTi 0.18 1.26 – 0.079 1.06 0.27 0.010 0.030 1045 1301 12 45
20Cr 0.23 1.28 – – 0.59 0.26 0.004 0.015 1285 1615 15 59

Table 2 Heat/chemical heat treatment of tested materials*

Material Specimen no. Heat treatment or surface treatment Fatigue limit swa, MPa

40Cr 1-0 840uC SS 20 min, OQ and T 200uC 2 h 1050

1-1 As 1-0zSP (0.1 A) 1260
1-2 As 1-0zSP (0.2 A) 1320
1-3 As 1-0zSP (0.3 A) 1330
1-4 As 1-0zSP (0.4 A) 1280
1-5 As 1-0zSP (0.5 A) 1210
1-5-1 As 1-0zSP (0.5 A)z EP (50 mm) 1360
1-6 As 1-0zSP (0.6 A) 940
1-6-1 As 1-0zSP (0.6 A)zEP (50 mm) 1300
1-7 As 1-0z490uC N 24 h, cooling with furnace 1120
1-8 As 1-7zSP (0.3 A) 1340
30CrMo 2-0 870uC SS 10 min, OQ and T 200uC 2 h 800
2-1 As 2-0z490uC N 24 h, cooling with furnace 1120
2-2 As 2-1zSP (0.4 A) 1240
2-3 As 2-0z900uC CN 7 h, 200uC T 2 h 1310
20CrMnTi 3-0 930uC SS 4 h, OQ and T 180uC 2 h 760
3-1 930uC C 6 h, OQ and T 180uC 2 h 980
3-2 As 3-1zSP(0.5 A) 1070
20Cr 4-0 870uC SS 10 min, WQ and T 200uC 2 h 880
4-1 As 4-1z860uC CN 4 h, 200uC T 2 h 1150
4-2 As 4-2zSP (0.5 A) 1360
*SS: salt solution; OQ and T: oil quenched and tempered; C: carbonising; CN: carbonitriding; D: hardened depth; WQ and T: water
quenched and tempered; N: nitriding, SP: shot peening; EP: electro-polishing; T: tempered.

Surface Engineering 2008 VOL 24 NO 5 323

Gao Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens and effect of shot peening

3 Distribution of residual stress of 20CrMnTi steel

shot peened specimens, the value of fatigue limit is

greatest when the peening intensity is 0?3 A, the fatigue
strength will decrease when the peening intensity is
larger than 0?3 A because of the increment of surface
roughness caused by shot peening. Therefore it is
necessary and important to check surface quality such
as surface damage introduced by overpeening in
engineering, otherwise the great surface roughness and
other surface damages will make the fatigue limit
decrease as shown in Fig. 2 and Table 3. The effect of
surface roughness on fatigue performance was detailed
analysed in Refs. 11–14. It can be improved by
eletropolishing after shot peening with decreasing sur-
face roughness or eliminating other surface damages and
the fatigue limit of 40Cr steel is about 1300 MPa when
the surface treatment is optimum.
For all kinds of surface hardened specimens, the
residual stress at surface is compressive, but the
magnitude of stresses and profiles are quite different,
as illustrated in Fig. 3. The characters of CRS profiles of
carburised, carbonitrided and nitrided specimens as well
as shot peened specimens are similar: the CRS value
increases with depth to a peak value and then decreases.
After shot peening on carburised, carbonitrided and
nitrided specimens, the CRS is increased at the surface
territory and, especially, the value of surface residual
stress is more important to fatigue strength. Some
typical SEM fractographs are shown in Fig. 4 and the
short arrows in Fig. 4 show the fatigue crack source.
The depths of fatigue crack sources from the surface Zs
were measured according to SEM fractographs. The
a unsurface treated specimens; b carburised speci-
depth of fatigue crack sources from the surface Zs and mens; c carburised plus shot peened specimens
the depth of CRS field Z0, are shown in Table 3 for all 4 Fractograph (SEM) of fatigue specimens in 20CrMnTi
metals employed. steel
For a given material, there is a range for shot peening
intensity. The fatigue crack source will be located in different surface treated specimens, the positions
surface because of some surface damages caused by of fatigue crack source are rather different. Here
improper shot peening such as overpeening (specimens three kinds of cases are observed:
of 1-4, 1-5 and 1-6) or thinner compressive residual a. Zs50, i.e. the fatigue crack sources are still
stress field by underpeening (specimen of 1-1). located at the surface (specimens of 1-0, 1-1,
The values of swa of these steels are certainly 1-4,1-5, 1-6, 2-0,3-0, 3-1 and 4-0)
improved by proper surface strengthening treatments, b. 0,Zs,Z0, i.e. the fatigue crack sources are
but the degree of increasing is different. Several located inside the hardened layer within CRS
phenomena should be taken into attention: zone, such cases were observed in thick layer
(i) the fatigue crack sources of untreated specimens nitrided, carbonitrided, and carburised speci-
are always located at the surface. Whereas, for mens (specimens of 1-7, 2-1 and 4-1)

324 Surface Engineering 2008 VOL 24 NO 5

 Gao Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens and effect of shot peening

c. Zs.Z0, i.e. the fatigue crack sources are carbonitrided and shot peened specimens can be predicted
located beneath the CRS zone, as in some conservatively as (1?30–1?35)sws . In this paper, internal
specimens studied in this paper (specimens of fatigue limit swi, is near to 0?2 offset yield strength for all
1-2, 1-3, 1-5-1,1-6-1, 1-8, 2-2, 2-3, 3-2 and 4-2) metals employed just as shown in Table 1. Therefore, it is
(i) the surface strengthening effects have certain very useful to predict the effect of shot peening or
connection with the positions of fatigue crack carburising, carbonitriding and nitriding because time and
source Zs, the values of swa of the specimens with money will be saved on fatigue tests, and great economic
fatigue crack source beneath CRS layer (Zs.Z0) effect will be gained in industry.
are always higher than those of specimens with Finally, the strengthening effect of surface hardening
surface fatigue cracks. Moreover, when the treatment can be evaluated according to the fatigue
fatigue crack source is located in the interior, crack source position determined under SEM. If the
the fatigue limit for a given material is almost the fatigue crack source is at the territory of hardened layer
same. For 40Cr steel, the fatigue limit for and the matrix or at the matrix below the hardened
specimens of 1-2, 1-3, 1-8, 1-5-1 and 1-6-1 is layer, Zs is larger; the technique of treatment is effective
almost the same although the surface treatment and applicable. If the fatigue crack source is within the
processes are different for these specimens hardened layer, Zs is small, the treatment is not proper
(ii) for carbonitrided and shot peened specimens, swa and needs to be improved or undergoes further shot
are improved 31–57% (except for some specimens peening to make the hardened layer even stronger and to
with weak structure within the hardened layer); retard the crack initiation within the hardened layer.
and for carburised and nitrided specimens, the Therefore, the potency of the material will be fully used
value of swa is higher, with further shot peening, and comparatively good strengthening effect could be
the value of swa can be improved more and get gained.
the highest. The strengthening effect of further The fatigue crack source transfers from surface to the
shot peening on the nitrided specimens is interior and the swi of metal is higher than its sws are
significant. two reasons for the improvement of apparent fatigue
limit of shot peened specimens. In Ref. 13, the relation-
ship of swi to sws was proposed and fatigue crack source
Discussion position and apparent fatigue limit was analysed. The
Carbonitriding and shot peening can ‘push’ fatigue internal fatigue limit of metal is higher than its surface
crack source to be initiated within subsurface tensile fatigue limit, and is another mechanism for the
residual stress (TRS) zone which beneath the CRS field. improvement of apparent fatigue limit of shot peened
For any steel, as long as the fatigue crack source is specimens13. The concept of surface/internal fatigue
located within TRS zone (Zs.Z0) after suitable surface limits of metals is also valid for analysing the effect of
strengthening treatment, its fatigue limit is highest. No different kinds of chemical-heat treatment on the fatigue
matter how great the strengthening intensity (i.e. the strength of specimen.
depth of CRSF) is, and no matter what kind of TRS is
formed, the critical stress to fatigue fracture is approxi-
mately equal and this constant fatigue limit is defined as
Conclusions
‘internal fatigue limit’ swi. 1. The fatigue cracks of carbonitrided, nitrded and
The concept of internal fatigue limit can explain shot peened steels may be initiated at three places: at
the fatigue behaviour of strengthened specimens surface, within hardened layer and beneath hardened
successfully. Moreover, the fatigue limits of nitrided, layer.
2. The fatigue limit of surface strengthened steels has
Table 3 Values of Ra, Zs and Z0 for tested materials certain connection with the position of crack source. The
greatest increment of fatigue limit is obtained with
Specimen Ra, Z0, Zs , Fatigue limit
fatigue crack source beneath the hardened layer. The
Material no. mm mm mm swa, MPa
strengthening technology is considered to be optimum if
40Cr 1-0 0.84 0 0 1050 Zs.Zo; the strengthening technology is not good and
1-1 1.24 110 0 1260 should be modified or a further shot peening is needed,
1-2 1.60 177 240 1320 while if 0(Zs,Zo
1-3 1.92 278 320 1330 3. For a given material, there is a range for shot
1-4 2.68 380 0 1280
peening intensity. The fatigue crack source will be
1-5 3.80 468 0 1210
1-5-1 0.52 418 620 1360 located in surface because of some surface damages
1-6 4.20 510 0 940 caused by improper shot peening such as over-
1-6-1 0.56 460 650 1300 peening or thinner compressive residual stress field by
1-7 0.92 450 150 1120 underpeening.
1-8 1.32 310 350 1340 4. Carburised, carbonitrided and nitrided specimens
2-0 0.96 0 0 800
sometimes need further shot peening with proper
2-1 1.04 350 150 1120
30CrMo
2-2 1.28 380 600 1240 intensity, thus it can push the fatigue crack source into
2-3 0.98 1180 1240 1310 the TRS region and leads to optimum strengthening
20CrMnTi 3-0 1.12 0 0 760 effect.
3-1 1.08 980 0 980
3-2 1.32 980 1330 1070
20Cr 4-0 1.02 0 0 880 References
4-1 1.08 930 760 1150 1. A. Goldsteinas: Indust. Heat., 2007, LXXIV, (5), 71–76.
4-2 1.60 670 910 1360 2. B. Lim and Y Choi: Key Eng. Mater., 2007, 345/346, 291–294.

Surface Engineering 2008 VOL 24 NO 5 325

Gao Fatigue limit of chemical heat treated specimens and effect of shot peening

3. M. A. Golozar, A. Saatchi and M. A. Soltani: Proc. 10th
Cong. IFHT/3rd ASM Int. Eur. Conf. on ‘Heat treatment
and surface engineering’, Brighton, UK, September 1996, ASM,
71–79.
4. Y.-K. Gao, X.-B. Li, Q.-X. Yang and M. Yao: Mater. Lett., 2007,
61, 466–469.
5. T. Hirsch, H. Wohlfahrt and E. Marcherauch: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf.
on ‘Shot Peening’ (ICSP-3), 547–560; 1987, Oberursel, DGM
Verlag.
6. A. J. Collins: ‘Failure of material in mechanical design’, 369–373;
1981, New York, John Wiley & Sons.
7. K. J. Kang, J. H. Songand and Y. Y. Earmme: Fatig. Fract. Eng.
Mater. Struct., 1990, 13, (1), 1–13.
8. Y.-K. Gao, F. Lu, Y.-F. Yin and M. Yao: Mater. Sci. Technol.,
2003, 3, (19), 372–274.
9. Y.-K. Gao, M. Yao, P.-G. Shao and Y.-H. Zhao: J. Mater. Eng.
Perform., 2003, 5, (12), 507–511.
10. Y.-K. Gao, X.-R. Wu, F. Lu, M. Yao and Q.-X. Yang: Mater. Sci.
Forum, 2005, 490–491, 448–453.
11. F. Pitt and M. Ramulu: J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 2007, 16, 163–
169.
12. O. Hatamleh, J. Lyons and R. Forman: Fatig. Fract. Eng. Mater.
Struct., 2007, 30, 115–130.
13. E. B. Damm: Mater. Sci. Technol., 2005, 2, A107–A114.
14. B. N. Mordyuk and G. I. Prokopenko: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2006,
A437, 396–405.

326 Surface Engineering 2008 VOL 24 NO 5