See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327542417

Fatigue improvement of welded bridge details in stainless steel using High-

Frequency Mechanical Impact treatment

Conference Paper · September 2018

CITATION READS

1 303

4 authors:

Mohammad Al-Emrani Poja Shams-Hakimi

Chalmers University of Technology Chalmers University of Technology
96 PUBLICATIONS   1,705 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   30 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Zuheir Barsoum Hans Groth

KTH Royal Institute of Technology Outokumpu Stainless AB
111 PUBLICATIONS   1,969 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   398 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fatigue and Fracture of Steel Structures (CEN TC250 SC3 WG9&10 and ECCS TC6) View project

Durability of FRP strengthening bonded to steel members View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Al-Emrani on 09 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fatigue improvement of welded bridge details in stainless steel using
High-Frequency Mechanical Impact treatment
M. Al-Emrani & P. Shams-Hakimi
Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden
C. Schneider
Swerea - Kimab, Stockholm, Sweden
Z. Barsoum
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
H. Groth
Outokumpu, Degerfors, Sweden

ABSTRACT: This paper reports the results from fatigue testing on welded non-load-carrying transverse at-
tachments made of C-Mn (S460) and stainless (LDX2101) steels. The tests are done on 40 mm thick speci-
mens in as-welded and HFMI-treated specimens. Measurements on weld toe radius and weld residual stresses
are also reported. The results show that the improvement of fatigue strength that can be achieved by HFMI-
treatment on welded LDX2101 steel is similar to what is obtained for equivalent C-Mn steels. Also in the as-
welded condition do these two types of steel show similar fatigue strength. HFMI-treatment gives more than 5
steps increase in fatigue strength for both steels, which is higher than what specified, for example by the rec-
ommendations of the International Institute of Welding.

1 INTRODUCTION material saving was partly enabled by upgrading the

The design of steel and composite (steel-
concrete) bridges is generally determined by the Fa-
tigue Limit State. This has practically meant that
high strength steels are very seldom – if ever – rele-
vant in bridge applications. In fact, even for conven-
tional construction steels, such as S355, the strength
of the material is often not fully utilized in design as
the fatigue strength of welded details sets the roof in
term of utilization ratios. Being able to “bypass” this
limitation opens for interesting possibilities in term
of material saving, weight reduction and more opti-
mized designs. This has been the driving force be-
hind the rather extensive research conducted in re-
cent years in the field of fatigue strength
enhancement of welded bridge details by means of
various post-weld treatment method. In this respect,
High Frequency Mechanical Impact (HFMI) tech-
niques have gained most attention. This category of
methods promises high efficiency to relatively low
cost and can be applied both in workshop and in
situ. In addition, HFMI treatment has proven to be
particularly effective in the high-cycle fatigue re-
gime where bridges usually operate. Several previ-
ous studies have demonstrated considerable material
and weight saving with HFMI treatment applied to
critical, fatigue governing details in steel and com-
posite bridges. Shams Hakimi et al. (2015) showed
for example that for simply-supported railway
bridges with spans ranging between 10 and 30 m a
weight saving between 30 and 20% can be achieved
if fatigue critical details are treated with HFMI. This
steel strength from S355, which is most common in
steel railway bridges, to S460. Several other studies
show similar results on C-Mn steels. Today, the use
of HFMI treatment for enhancing the fatigue
strength of welded steel bridges is gaining increas-
ing applicability and the method has been used both
in the design of new bridges and for the rehabilita-
tion of existing ones, see for example Shams Hakimi
& Al-Emrani (2014).
To date, almost all research related to HFMI has
been conducted on C-Mn steels. Particularly high
strength steels in relatively thin plates (mostly up to
16 mm even if some work exist on thicker plates)
have been in focus, see e.g. Shams-Hakimi et al.
(2017a) where 582 fatigue test results are compiled
and evaluated.
Recently, the interest in using stainless steel as
structural material in bridges has increased both in
Sweden and elsewhere in the world. The main driv-
ing force has often been the lower total life cycle
costs promised by stainless steels compared to con-
ventional C-Mn steels.
There are two reasons why fatigue strength en-
hancement of welded details in stainless steel is of
high interest. On the one hand, stainless steels are
typically several times more expensive than conven-
tional constructions steels. Material saving in stain-
less steel is therefore expected to have a larger im-
pact on the total cost of a steel bridge compared to
bridges made of conventional steels. In addition,
stainless steels, such as Duplex and Lean Duplex
have higher strength than conventional construction
steel used in bridge applications (S355 or even
S420) and can thus better meet the potential offered
by the increase in fatigue strength after HFMI-
treatment.
Studies on fatigue improvement of welded details
in stainless steels are very limited. Toe grinding was
investigated by Baptista et al. (2008) on stainless
steels subjected to salt water corrosion. Xu et al.
(2014) studied the efficiency of weld toe dressing
with low transformation temperature (LTT) welding
wires on 304L (1.4306) stainless steel specimens
with welded transverse attachments. The only exten-
sive experimental study known to the authors where
HFMI treatment (in addition to grinding, TIG- and
plasma dressing) was investigated on welded details
in stainless steel is the one reported by Marquis &
Maddox (2009). Relatively thin plates were used in
this investigation (3 and 10 mm) and in many cases
fatigue cracking in the tested specimens initiated Figure 1. Test specimen dimensions and loading arrangement,
Shams-Hakimi et al. (2017b).
elsewhere than in the treated area at the weld toe.
This paper presents the results from an extensive Table 1. Overview of the experimental program.
testing program done within the research Project
INNODEFAB. The entire testing program included Min. yield
74 fatigue tests. Focus here is however on test re- Series Specimens Steel type stress k
sults obtained on specimens made of LDX2101 [MPa]
1 460-38-AW S460M 460 7
stainless steel. Results from similar tests from spec-
4 460-40-HFMI S460M 460 11
imens made of S460 steel are also presented for
7 LDX-40-AW LDX2101 450 10
comparison. In addition to fatigue testing, measure- 8 LDX-40-HFMI LDX2101 450 10
ments of weld toe profile and weld residual stresses
have also been conducted. A more detailed reporting
of the test program with focus on C-Mn steels is 2.1 Manufacturing
given by Shams-Hakimi et al. (2017b). The C-Mn and LDX specimens were welded in
two different workshops and some important pro-
duction aspects differed between the two different
2 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM specimen batches. The C-Mn specimens were weld-
ed in a bridge production workshop and common
The entire experimental program for bridges procedures were followed to reproduce a weld quali-
within INNODEFAB included 74 fatigue tests, 54 of ty similar to that found in bridges. Therefore, the C-
C-Mn steel and 20 of LDX2101 stainless steel. In Mn HFMI-treated specimens were ground prior to
this paper, the results from the stainless steel speci- HFMI-treatment to obtain a weld quality of class B
mens (series 7 and 8) are presented and compared to according to ISO 5817. The as-welded C-Mn speci-
the corresponding results for C-Mn steel (series 1 mens were on the other hand not ground. A view of
and 4), see Table 1. The test specimens resemble the welds in the as-welded and HFMI-treated speci-
typical welded connections of vertical stiffeners in mens is given in Figure 2 for the C-Mn series. Weld-
steel bridges, see Figure 1. ing of the C-Mn specimens was conducted in verti-
Fatigue testing was performed in 4-point bending cal position of the specimens which resulted in large
in two different testing rigs with frequencies that radius for the weld toe at the main plate side.
varied between 3 and 20 Hz. The distance between
loading points was chosen so as to avoid local ef-
fects from loading close to the welded detail. Strain
gauges were used to obtain the nominal stress in the
main plate between the loading points. The target
stress ratio in the tests was 0.1. However, the actual
stress ratio varied between 0.01 and 0.2 depending
on load level and testing rig. As-welded (C-Mn) Ground then HFMI-treated (C-Mn)

Figure 2. Difference between the as-welded and HFMI-treated

specimens of the C-Mn speicmens, Shams-Hakimi et al.
(2017b).
 As-welded (C-Mn) As-welded (LDX)
Figure 3. Difference of toe radius due to vertical positioning of
the C-Mn specimens and horizontal positioning of the LDX
specimens during welding. Different indenter tip radii for
HFMI-treatment were therefore used.
For the LDX specimens, welding was performed
as the specimens were lying in a horizontal position,
as would be the case in bridge production. As a re-
sult, the weld toe radius on the main plate side was
smaller. The effect of specimen positioning during
welding on the weld toe radius is illustrated in Fig-
ure 3 for the two different cases. Furthermore, none
of the LDX specimens were ground at any point.
The HFMI-treatment was conducted using an Ul-
trasonic Needle Peening device with a sonotrode (in-
ternal vibration component) frequency of 20 kHz
and a vibration range of 40 μm. Due to the differ-
ence of the weld toe radii of the C-Mn and LDX
specimens, an indenter tip radius of 3 mm was used
for the C-Mn specimens while an indenter with a ra-
dius of 1.5 mm was used for the LDX specimens.
The average treatment speed varied between 200-
300 mm/min.
In all specimens, full-penetration K-welds were
used to join the transverse attachment to the main
plate in order to avoid root failure in the joints. The
length of the transverse attachment was chosen so
that at least 10 mm free distance was obtained be-
tween the ends of the welds and the edges of the
main plates, see Figure 1.
2.2 Weld scanning
All specimens were laser-scanned to provide aver-
age weld toe radii and standard deviations. Post-
processing of the scanning raw data was performed
by an algorithm developed by Stenberg et al. (2012).
As expected, due to vertical positioning, the as-
welded C-Mn series was found to have a large aver-
age toe radius. In addition, relatively large variations
were registered for the different C-Mn specimens.
For the ground and subsequently HFMI-treated C-
Mn series, an average toe radius similar to the in-
denter radius (3mm) was measured with considera-
bly more consistent values for the individual speci-
mens, see Figure 4.
Figure 4. Weld toe scanning results. Normality test were not
conducted since the purpose only was illustrative. The C-Mn
results are reported in Shams-Hakimi et al. (2017b).
The as-welded LDX series had significantly smaller
average toe radius than the as-welded C-Mn speci-
mens. The average weld toe radius increased as a re-
sult of HFMI-treatment of the LDX series, however,
smaller values were registered as compared to the C-
Mn HFMI series due to the smaller indenter radius
used (1.5 mm). The measurement results are also
given in Table 2.
Table 2. The average value, μ, and standard devia-
tion, σ, of the weld toe radii.
Series Specimens μρ [mm] σρ [mm]
1 460-38-AW 4.38 1.88
4 460-40-HFMI 2.72 0.67
7 LDX-40-AW 1.02 0.57
8 LDX-40-HFMI 2.05 0.54
2.3 Residual stress measurements
Residual stress measurements were performed by
X-ray diffraction with an X3000 device from Stress-
tech Oy. The details of various measurement param-
eters have been reported by Shams-Hakimi et al.
(2017b). Measurements were performed both at the
surface and in the depth direction, however, only the
depth measurements at the weld toes (HFMI-
grooves) are presented here. The measurements in
the depth direction were performed by successive
etching (saturated aqueous NH4Cl solution) and
electropolishing (13 V) in the centre of the HFMI
groove on one side of the attachment.
For the C-Mn ground specimen (i.e. prior to
HFMI treatment), the transverse residual stresses at
the weld toe were approximately -100 MPa, see Fig-
ure 5. After HFMI treatment these values changed to
ca -300 MPa, successively approaching zero at a
depth of approximately 1.5 mm below the weld toe
surface. Similar values were measured for the LDX
specimens which were not ground. However, it is
 HFMI-treated

 
Figure 5. Through-thickness residual stresses profiles from the As-welded
weld toes. The C-Mn results are reported in Shams-Hakimi et
al. (2017b).

observed in Figure 5 that the measurement uncer-

tainties were larger for the LDX specimens. It can
also be seen that the compressive stresses induced
by HFMI treatment in the LDX specimens ap-
proached zero at a smaller depth, less than 1 mm.

3 FATIGUE TEST RESULTS

Figure 6 shows the fatigue test results of all spec-

imens that failed from weld toe. Runouts are exclud-
ed as well as one HFMI-treated stainless steel spec- Figure 6. Fatigue test results. The C-Mn results are reported in
imen which failed in the base material. The results Shams-Hakimi et al. (2017b).
of the stainless steel specimens are also listed in Ta-
ble 3. It is observed that HFMI treatment of the
stainless steel resulted in a quite similar fatigue Table 3. Fatigue test results of the LDX series.
strength as that of treated C-Mn specimens, although
Type Steel Δσ N Site
somewhat lower. For the stainless steel, an average
fatigue strength of 249 MPa at 2 million cycles was AW LDX2101 108 2 651 108 Toe
obtained with a fixed slope of m = 5, whereas for the AW LDX2101 105 3 136 992 Toe
C-Mn steel, the corresponding value was 272 MPa. AW LDX2101 148 668 148 Toe
AW LDX2101 127 920 049 Toe
The results of HFMI-treated specimens are all AW LDX2101 214 200 609 Toe
well above the S-N curve suggested by the Interna- AW LDX2101 215 304 048 Toe
tional Institute of Welding (IIW), FAT140, which AW LDX2101 129 1 108 135 Toe
corresponds to an increase of five FAT-classes. Fur- AW LDX2101 99 3 051 425 Toe
thermore, looking at the runout specimens, the aver- AW LDX2101 90 5 047 341 Toe
age stress range at which these specimens were test- AW LDX2101 90 3 987 746 Toe
ed was 258 MPa, which is similar to the runout          
stress ranges reported by Shams-Hakimi et al. HFMI LDX2101 254 1 959 311 Toe
(2017b). HFMI LDX2101 265 774 354 Toe
For the as-welded test results, a much more sig- HFMI LDX2101 269 1 641 897 Toe
nificant difference in fatigue strength is observed be- HFMI LDX2101 268 1 978 639 Toe
tween C-Mn and LDX steels. The stainless steel HFMI LDX2101 254 11 488 755 Runout
specimens had a fatigue strength of 111 MPa which HFMI LDX2101 254 9 387 489 Runout
is closer to the design S-N curve of FAT80, relevant HFMI LDX2101 254 9 764 355 Runout
for this detail. The fatigue strength for the specimens HFMI LDX2101 268 10 348 390 Runout
in C-Mn steel was 149 MPa. HFMI LDX2101 258 10 213 693 Runout
HFMI LDX2101 270 2 552 427 Base
4 DISCUSSION AND FINAL REMARKS
The fatigue strength of all HFMI-treated speci-
mens presented in this study was much higher than
what is given in the IIW recommendation for the
studied detail and steel strength classes. One reason
for this might be the fact that, unlike most of other
available test - Leitner et al. (2014), Kuhlmann &
Günther (2009), Kuhlmann et al. (2005) and Tehrani
(2012) – the attachment plates were here terminated
at a distance from the edges of the main plate. This
should give a better fatigue strength compared to
cases where the weld is extended to the edge of the
load-carrying plate. Also, the test specimens in this
study were HFMI-treated individually, whereas in
some other experimental studies, the treatment was
first done on wider plates which were then sliced in-
to smaller specimens after the HFMI treatment. This
may result in partial relaxation of the beneficial local
compressive stresses generated by the HFMI-
treatment. Similar observation was lately reported
by Zhang et al. (2017).
The fatigue strength of the HFMI-treated stain-
less steel specimens was on par with that obtained
for C-Mn specimens. The difference in derived fa-
tigue strength for the two materials (271 vs 249 MPa
in Figure 6) should be seen in view of the limited
number of failures obtained for the LDX specimens.
Even if this difference holds statistically, it could
very well be a result of the difference in weld toe ra-
dii after HFMI-treatment in these two types of spec-
imens (3 vs 2 mm for C-Mn and LDX respectively).
The difference in yield stress may also provide some
answers. The actual minimum yield stress of the
batch of C-Mn was actually 566 MPa. Similar in-
formation is not available for the stainless steel, but
a lower proof stress should usually be expected for
LDX2101. For the comparison of the as-welded test
results, the significant difference in fatigue strength
is mainly attributed to the difference in toe radii as a
result of specimen position during welding.
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The work described in this paper has been funded
through the Swedish Vinnova office within the pro-
gram LIGHTer. The authors would like to
acknowledge the contribution of all partners in the
INNODEFAB project (Dnr 2014-05133). Special
thanks to Lars-Åke Bylund from Böhler Welding
Group. Sonats is also acknowledged for helping with
the HFMI-treatment and the residual stress meas-
urements.
6 REFERENCES
ISO standard, “Welding – Fusion-welded joints
in steel, nickel, titanium and their alloys (beam
welding excluded) – Quality levels for imperfections
(ISO 5817:2014).” European Committee for Stand-
ardization, 2014.
Baptista, R., Infante, V. & Branco C.M.: Study of
the fatigue behavior in welded joints of stainless
steels treated by weld toe grinding and subjected to
salt water corrosion. International Journal of Fatigue
30 (2008) 453–462.
Kuhlmann, U. & Günther, H. P.: “Experimentelle
untersuchungen zur ermüdungssteigernden wirkung
des PIT-verfahrens,” Vers. Univ. Stuttg. Inst. Für
Konstr. Entwurf, 2009.
Kuhlmann, U., Bergmann, J., Dürr, A., Thumser,
R., Günther, H.-P. & Gerth, U.: “Erhöhung der
Ermüdungsfestigkeit von geschwei\s sten höherfes-
ten Baustählen durch Anwendung von Nachbehand-
lungsverfahren,” Stahlbau, vol. 74, no. 5, pp. 358–
365, 2005.
Leitner, M., Stoschka, M. & Eichlseder, W.: “Fa-
tigue enhancement of thin-walled, high-strength
steel joints by high-frequency mechanical impact
treatment,” Weld. World, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 29–39,
Jan. 2014.
Marquis, G. B. & Barsoum, Z. IIW Recommen-
dations for the HFMI Treatment - For Improving the
Fatigue Strength of Welded Joints. Singapore:
Springer Singapore, 2016.
Marquis, G. & Maddox, S. J.: "Post-weld Fatigue
Improvement Technologies for Stainless Steel
Welds". 20th International Conference on Structural
Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 20) Es-
poo, Finland. SMiRT 20-Division II, Paper 2032.
August 9-14, 2009
Shams Hakimi, P. & Al-Emrani, M.: “Post weld
treatment - Implementation on bridges with special
focus on HFMI,” Chalmers University of Technolo-
gy, Report, 2014.
Shams Hakimi, P., Mosiello A., Kostakakis K. &
Al-Emrani M.: ”Fatigue life improvement of welded
bridge details using high frequency mechanical im-
pact (HFMI) treatment,” Proceedings of the 13th
Nordic steel construction conference, 2015.
Shams-Hakimi, P., Yıldırım, H. C. & Al-Emrani,
M.: “The thickness effect of welded details im-
proved by high-frequency mechanical impact treat-
ment,” Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 99, Part 1, pp. 111–124,
Jun. 2017a.
Shams-Hakimi, P., Zamiri, F., Al-Emrani, M. &
Barsoum, Z.: “Experimental study of transverse at-
tachment joints with 40 and 60 mm thick main
plates, improved by high-frequency mechanical im-
pact treatment (HFMI),” Eng. Struct., Nov. 2017b.
Stenberg, T., Lindgren, E. & Barsoum, Z.: “De-
velopment of an algorithm for quality inspection of
welded structures,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J.
Eng. Manuf., vol. 226, no. 6, pp. 1033–1041, Jun.
2012.
Tehrani Yekta, R.: “Acceptance Criteria for Ul-
trasonic Impact Treatment of Highway Steel Bridg-
es,” University of Waterloo, 2012.
Xu, L. Y., Wang, Y. F., Jing, H. Y. & Han, Y. D.:
Fatigue strength improvement of stainless steel
using weld toes dressing with low transformation
temperaturer welding wire. Science and Technol-
ogy of Welding and Joining, 19:8, 664-672, 2014.
Zhang, H., Wang, D., & Deng, C.: “Optimal
Preparation Process for Fatigue Specimens Treated
by Ultrasonic Peening,” Exp. Tech., pp. 1–9, Oct.
2017.

View publication stats