Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science and Engineering A

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

Improvement of fatigue property in 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy by laser

peening and shot peening
Y.K. Gao ∗
Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials, AVIC, P.O.Box 81-5, Beijing 100095, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The fatigue strength for 1 × 107 cycles of 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy was determined for machined,
Received 15 November 2010 laser-peened, and shot-peened specimens. Moreover, fatigue lives were compared under the same load
Received in revised form 18 January 2011 conditions. Results show that the laser peening induces a deeper compressive residual stress layer and
Accepted 19 January 2011
better surface finish, therefore, it improves fatigue properties more effectively. Fractographic examina-
Available online 26 January 2011
tion and analysis shows that the fatigue cracks initiate in the subsurface layer beneath the compressive
residual stress field for laser- and shot-peened specimens, whereas the fatigue cracks form at surface for
Keywords:
as-machined ones.
7050–T7451 aluminum alloy
Laser-peening © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Shot-peening
Residual stresses
Fatigue

1. Introduction
Surface enhancement technologies, which are mainly made by
modifying the surface integrity of parts, are widely employed to
improve the properties of components including fatigue, stress
corrosion cracking, wear, and fretting. Among these surface
enhancement technologies, shot peening is a conventional and
widely applied process to increase fatigue performance of parts,
which has been applied for many years in aircraft components.
Laser peening is a recently developed process and is being widely
investigated. Due to its accurate positioning and precise operation,
laser peening can be applied to many aircraft components such as
blades and gears with good repeatability and reliability, although it
costs more than shot peening due to its low production rate. Laser
peening induces compressive residual stress in the surface layer
by pulse laser impact energy and plastic deformation occurs in the
surface layer.
Surface integrity [1–8] changes induced by shot peening
mainly include: (1) Fine microstructure due to the formation
of subgrains, whose size can be micros to nanometers, depend-
ing on the peening intensity; (2) phase transformation caused
by deformation, such as the metstable austenite transfers to
martensite by shot peening; (3) work-hardening due to the
increase in the dislocation density, giving the surface layer
higher yield strength and hardness, but lower ductility; (4) sur-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 10 62496450, fax: +86 10 62456925.
E-mail address: yukuigao@gmail.com
face topography due to the dents by the shots, increasing the
roughness and stress concentration; (5) residual stress induced
by recovering its original geometric form by the elastically
deformed layer underneath and surrounding the dent-layer on the
top.
Shot peening has both the beneficial and detrimental effects,
therefore, it is a difficult and time-consuming task to determine the
optimized process parameters based on the fatigue life prolonging
factor (FLPF) under the same stress/strain conditions and/or fatigue
strength improvement percentage (FSIP) under the given fatigue
life, usually for the 1 × 107 cycles.
In order to reduce the surface roughness and deepen/enlarge
compressive residual stress field, many new surface enhancement
technologies such as double peening [9–11], laser peening [11,12],
ultrasonic peening [13,14], and/or pulsed electron beam treat-
ments [15,16] were developed. Laser peening is a novel process
and has recently been used in aeronautical engineering, but less
attention has been put on the surface integrity changes caused by
laser peening and its effects on fatigue performance of aluminum
alloys.
The objective of this paper is to explore the effects of laser peen-
ing and shot peening on the fatigue performance of a 7050–T7451
aluminum alloy, which has been employed in the fatigue-critical
aircraft components due to its high strength, good stress corrosion
cracking property, and high fracture toughness. Through com-
paring the effects of laser peening with that of shot peening on
fatigue strength and analyzing the difference of surface roughness,
compressive residual stress field induced by these two processes,
this paper will be of value for the application of these two sur-

0921-5093/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2011.01.077
3824 Y.K. Gao / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828

Fig. 2. Configurations and dimensions of fatigue specimens.

type, shot size, shot hardness, peening intensity, and coverage etc.)
in a pneumatic machine. Shot peening parameters are described
below in detail. The third group is the laser-peened ones under
different times (N = 2, 4, 6, 8 times, and the duration each time is
60 s) under the laser pulse energy density of 2 × 109 W/cm2 , the
pulse duration is 50 ns, and the pulse energy is 50 J at a frequency
Fig. 1. Microstructure of the heat treated 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy. of 0.54 Hz, with the Almen intensity of 0.08 C. The ablative layer
was the black paint coating and the flowing water was run over
the surface as translucent layer. Laser peening used a neodymium-
Table 1 doped glass (Nd: glass) slad laser system having a square-shaped
Chemical composition of 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy in wt%. laser spot with the wavelength  = 1064 nm. The energy level and
duration were determined with a pulsed energy sensor and a PIN
Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Cr Zn Ti Zr Others Al
photoelectric tester, respectively with the controlling by computer.
0.021 0.051 2.11 0.008 2.29 0.009 5.9 0.026 0.13 0.01 Balanced
The surface topography of all groups of specimens was studied
using the profilometer microscope and the values of surface rough-
ness, Ra , were determined. The residual stress distribution curves
face strengthening technologies in aircraft components made of as the function of distance from surface were determined by using
7050–T7451 aluminum alloy. an X-ray stress analyzer type AST Xstress3000 (manufactured in
Finland) with CrK␣ target and a step-by-step electrolytic-polishing
2. Material and experimental procedure procedure [17] for all specimens. The subsurface stresses were
obtained with measuring layer by layer and the effect of polishing
2.1. Material on stress relaxation was corrected [17].

The 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy plate with the thickness of 3. Results and discussion
40 mm was cold rolled to 20 mm and all samples were made along
rolling direction. The samples were heat treated at 474 ◦ C for solu- 3.1. Residual stresses caused by shot peening
tion, aged at 120 ◦ C for 4 h and 160 ◦ C for 24 h. Initial microstructure
of the heat treated specimens is shown in Fig. 1. Chemical compo- The compressive residual stress distribution along the surface
sition of the plate employed in this investigation is listed in Table 1 layer for shot-peened samples under different regimes is shown
and the mechanical properties are provided in Table 2. in Fig. 3. For the specimens peened at the intensity of 0.10 A by
the glass bead (GB150) with the diameter of 0.15 mm, the max-
2.2. Experimental procedure imum residual stress is at the surface, the absolute value is the
lowest among all peened samples, and moreover the depth of com-
Fatigue specimens were machined from 20-mm-thick rolled pressive layer is the thinnest compared with the others. For the
plates with the length directions of specimens parallel to the
longitudinal rolling direction. The final machining is the fine
grinding and the surface roughness of machined specimens is Ra
0.8–1.2. The configurations and dimensions of fatigue specimens
are shown in Fig. 2. Fatigue tests were carried out on a four-point-
rotating–bending fatigue test machine HY-10 with a frequency of
50 Hz at room temperature. The fatigue strength  −1 for 1 × 107
cycles was determined according to a stair-case method [1,2]. The
fracture surfaces of broken specimens were investigated using SEM
and the positions of fatigue crack sources were determined.
Three groups of specimens are used for fatigue tests. The first
group is untreated as machined, tested as the referenced ones. The
second group is the shot peened ones under different shot peen-
ing regimes (a regime of shot peening includes parameters of shot

Table 2
Mechanical properties of 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy.

Material Rp0.2 (MPa) Rm (MPa) Elongation (%) Reduction

of area (%)

7050–T7451 470 539 13.6 38.0 Fig. 3. Compressive residual stress field caused by shot peening.
 Y.K. Gao / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828
Fig. 4. Compressive residual stress field caused by laser peening.
specimens peened at the intensity of 0.20 A by ceramic bead (Z150)
with the diameter of 0.15 mm and cast steel shot (S110) with the
diameter of 0.28 mm, the values of both the surface residual stress
and the maximum residual stress are increased and the compres-
sive residual stress field is deeper. Recently, double shot peening,
which is the shot peening with the high intensity at first to induce a
deep compressive residual stress field, followed by the second shot
peening with a low intensity to modify surface topography and to
further increase the surface compressive residual stresses, has been
developed in the laboratory and can be employed in the indus-
try. To determine the effect of double shot peening on the fatigue
property of 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy, the compressive residual
stress fields are also illustrated in Fig. 3 for specimens peened at
the intensity of 0.20 A by cast steel shot at first and then peened at
the intensity of 0.10 A by ceramic bead (marked as S110 + Z150) and
glass bead (marked as S110 + GB150), respectively. Shot peening by
glass bead with the low intensity induces the surface deformation
much lower than that of steel shot or ceramic bead, so the sur-
face residual stress is lower and the depth of compressive residual
stress field is thinner than others. For these specimens peened at
the intensity of 0.2 A, both the surface residual stress and the max-
imum residual stress are greater than the specimens peened by the
glass bead at the intensity of 0.1 A and the depth of compressive
residual stress filed is also increased. The maximum residual stress
under different regimes at the intensity of 0.2 A is almost the same
and the value is about 370 MPa, although the surface residual stress
can be changed by the second peening in double shot peening. This
phenomenon also occurs in other metallic materials [18].
3.2. Residual stresses caused by laser peening under different
times
The compressive residual stress distribution along surface layer
for laser-peened specimens under different regimes is shown in
Fig. 4. For the specimens peened for 120 s (N = 2), the value of surface
compressive residual stress is 320 MPa and the depth of compres-
sive residual stress field is about 1.8 mm. For the specimens peened
for 240 and 360 s (N = 4 and 6), the value of surface compressive
residual stress is 350MPa and the depth of compressive residual
stress field is about 2.0 mm. The surface compressive residual stress
makes relaxation and the compressive residual stress distribution
along surface layer becomes complex for the specimens peened
for 480 s (N = 8). The effect of impact times (N) on residual stresses
should be related to the plastic deformation in surface layer. When
the peening time is short, the surface makes cold work but cannot
3825
get the enough good effect. The surface plastic deformation may be
saturated at a give peening time, as in the case of N = 4 or 6. When
the time of peening is longer, the residual stresses will make relax-
ation because of soft effects induced by high store energy at the
surface layer.
Comparing with the compressive residual stress field caused by
shot peening, the depth of compressive residual stress field induced
by laser peening is larger and it is about ten times the one of shot
peened specimens. Moreover, the maximum compressive residual
stress is at surface, and the value of surface residual stress is near to
the value of maximum residual stress caused by shot peening and
is not changed greatly for different laser peening regimes.
3.3. Fatigue life prolonging factor (FLPF)
To determine the effect of surface enhancement on fatigue prop-
erty and get the optimum parameters, the FLPF analysis under the
same stress load or strain load conditions is usually employed. In
this study, the fatigue lives of specimens for different surface con-
ditions under the same load stress 300 MPa were determined. Took
five specimens as a group and made the average fatigue life as the
fatigue of the group. The FLPF is calculated as:
Nmodified–specimen
FLPF = −1 (1)
Nbasline–specimen
For the different surface conditions, the fatigue lives of spec-
imens and FLPF are listed in Table 3. It can be seen that double
peening significantly improves fatigue lives, whose effect is larger
than most of single peening and is almost the same as that of
laser peening. The optimum shot peening is double peening with
S110 + GB150 and optimum laser peening is N = 4 for 7050–T7451
aluminum alloy investigated in this study.
3.4. Fatigue strength improvement percentage (FSIP)
To determine the effect of surface enhancement on fatigue prop-
erty and get the optimum parameters, sometimes FSIP analysis is
employed. In this study, the fatigue strength for 1 × 107 cycles of
specimens for different surface conditions was obtained. Took fif-
teen to twenty specimens as a group and determined the fatigue
strength by the stair-case method [1,2]. The FSIP is calculated as:
 
−1,modified–specimen
FSIP = −1 × 100% (2)
−1,basline–specimen
For the different surface conditions, the fatigue strength of spec-
imens and FSIP are listed in Table 4. It can be seen that the double
peening can also increase fatigue strength larger than the single
peening and it almost gets the same enhancement effect as laser
peening. From the FSIP viewpoint, the bettest shot peening should
be the double peening with S110 + GB150 and the bettest laser
peening is the one with N = 4 for 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy.
It is well known that compressive residual stresses induced by
surface enhancement processes are beneficial to fatigue property,
the double peening SP-S110 + Z150, therefore, should be better than
single peening Z150, but the test results of fatigue property show
that single peening Z150 can get the same enhancement effect as
double peening. Therefore, both the beneficial compressive resid-
ual stress and the detrimental surface roughness effects should
be considered when analyzing the influence of surface strength-
ening technologies such as shot peening and laser peening. The
effect of the surface roughness by the shot peening treatments on
stress contraction, Kt , is quantified in Table 5, where the results of
profilometer measurements are also summarized. Accordingly, the
estimated peak-to-peak distance (Dp ) was in good agreement with
the SEM micrographs depicted in Fig. 5.
3826 Y.K. Gao / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828

Table 3
Fatigue lives of specimens and FLPF under 300 MPa stress.

Surface treatment Minimum fatigue life Maximum fatigue life Average fatigue life FLPF

Machined baseline 2.41 × 104

2.69 × 104
2.55 × 104
0
SP-GB150 5.18 × 104 5.52 × 104 5.49 × 104 1.153
SP-S110 4.74 × 104 5.27 × 104 4.84 × 104 0.898
SP-Z150 8.84 × 104 9.46 × 104 9.23 × 104 2.620
SP-S110 + Z150 8.65 × 104 9.21 × 104 8.97 × 104 2.518
SP-S110 + GB150 1.15 × 105 1.24 × 105 1.19 × 105 3.667
LP-N = 2 9.19 × 104 1.15 × 105 9.92 × 104 2.890
LP-N = 4 1.52 × 105 2.14 × 105 1.94 × 105 6.608
LP-N = 6 1.46 × 105 1.91 × 105 1.65 × 105 5.471
LP-N = 8 9.54 × 104 1.08 × 105 9.98 × 104 2.914

Fig. 5. Typical surface topography of specimens (a) machined, (b) SP110, (c) SP-S110 + GB150, and (d) LP-N = 4.

Shot peening makes many dents in surface and marks the in Fig. 5. The mean value, within an assessment length of 2 mm,
machined trance, as illustrated in Fig. 5. Whereas, laser peening of the maximum peak to valley height (Rt ) and the mean spac-
makes a good surface finish and gets little change on the surface ing of adjacent local peaks (Dp ) were used to estimate the notch
topography except for eliminating machined trance, as also shown effect exerted by the surface dimples according to the following

Table 4 Table 5
Fatigue strength of specimens and FSIP for different surface conditions. Surface roughness and its notch effect.

Surface treatment Fatigue strength,  −1 (MPa) FSIP Surface treatment Ra (mm) Rt (mm) Dp (mm) Kt

Machined baseline 185 0 Machined baseline 0.84 2.40 – –

SP-GB150 190 2.7% SP-GB150 1.29 6.12 115 1.09
SP-S110 223 20.5% SP-S110 4.15 16.49 221 1.14
SP-Z150 248 34.1% SP-Z150 2.42 8.01 259 1.04
SP-S110 + Z150 245 32.4% SP-S110 + Z150 2.81 8.95 190 1.08
SP-S110 + GB150 250 35.0% SP-S110 + GB150 2.06 7.46 272 1.04
LP-N = 2 225 21.6% LP-N = 2 0.92 3.32 – –
LP-N = 4 263 42.2% LP-N = 4 0.92 3.49 – –
LP-N = 6 258 39.5% LP-N = 6 1.24 5.92 – –
LP-N = 8 240 30.0% LP-N = 8 0.98 3.04 – –
 Y.K. Gao / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828
Fig. 6. Typical fatigue fracto-graphs of specimens (a) machined, (b) SP110, (c) SP-S110 + GB150, and (d) LP-N = 4.
expression proposed by [19]:
 1.3
Rt
Kt = 1 + 4
Dp
It can be seen that the notch effect caused by surface roughness
during peening is greater for the double-peened S110 + Z150 sam-
ples than that by single peening with ceramic bead Z150, moreover
the depth of compressive residual stress filed is almost the same
for these two conditions, although residual stresses near surface
are some bigger for double-peened samples. Balancing these differ-
ences, the surface enhancement effect, therefore, should be almost
the same in these two cases. The fatigue strength should be related
to the critical local yield stress for initiating fatigue crack, and there-
fore it is very important to determine the location of fatigue crack
source [20]. The fatigue cracks often form at surface for machined
specimens, as shown in Fig. 6, whereas for peened specimens, the
fatigue cracks initiate in subsurface beneath compressive residual
stress filed, as illustrates in Fig. 6. It can be seen that surface fatigue
cracks occur from machined trance for machined specimens and
subsurface cracks initiate at inclusions or other defects for peened
specimens.
4. Summary
To summarize, this study demonstrated that the effect of shot
peening and laser peening on fatigue performance, and analyzed
the effects of surface integrity in both beneficial and detrimental
viewpoints. Moreover, surface topography, surface roughness and
residual stress fields were also investigated. The following conclu-
sions can be drawn from the work:
3827
1) Laser peening can induce deeper compressive residual stress
fields and good surface finish, and therefore, it makes metallic
materials have better fatigue performance than shot peening.
(3) 2) The fatigue strength for 1 × 107 cycles of 7050–T7451 aluminum
alloy was increased by shot peening and laser peening. Fatigue
strength of the best-laser-peened specimens is 42% higher than
as-machined specimens and the fatigue strength of the best-
shot- peened specimens is 35% higher than as-machined.
3) The fatigue cracks initiate in subsurface layer beneath the
compressive residual stress field for both the laser-peened spec-
imens and shot-peened specimens, whereas the fatigue cracks
form at surface for as-machined specimens.
4) Ceramic shot peening and double peening make better fatigue
performance due to good surface finish and deeper residual
stresses in surface layer, and almost get the same enhancement
effect of laser peening.
References
[1] G.S. Geng, J.H. Xu, Surface integrity and fatigue property of a high speed milled
titanium alloy, Advanced Materials Research 53–54 (2008) 305–310.
[2] Y.-K. Gao, F. Lu, M. Yao, Influence of mechanical surface treatments on fatigue
property of 30CrMnSiNi2A steel, Surface Engineering 21 (2005) 325–328.
[3] J.P. Davim, Surface Integrity in Machining, Springer, 2010.
[4] Y.-K. Gao, X.-B. Li, Q.-X. Yang, Y. Mei, Influence of surface integrity on fatigue
strength of 42CrNi2Si2MoVA steel, Materials Letters 61 (2007) 466–469.
[5] BrianGriiths, Manufacturing Surface Technology—Surface Integrity & Func-
tional Performance, Penton Press, 2001.
[6] Y.-K. Gao, Microstructure changes and residual stress of each phase caused by
shot peening in 304 austenitic stainless steel, Journal of Aeronautical Materials
24 (2004) 18–22.
[7] Y.-K. Gao, F. Lu, Y.-F. Yin, M. Yao, Effect of shot peening on fatigue property of
0Cr13Ni8Mo2Al steel, Materials Science and Technology 19 (2003) 371–374.
[8] Y.-K. Gao, X.R. Wu, F. Lu, Influence of shot peening on fatigue properties in
ultra-high strength steels, Materials Science Forum 490–491 (2005) 448–453.
3828 Y.K. Gao / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 3823–3828
[9] A. Tange, K. Ando, Improvement of spring fatigue strength by new warm stress
double shot peening process, Materials Science and Technology 18 (2002)
642–648.
[10] K. Matsui, H. Eto, K. Yukitake, Increase in fatigue limit of gears by compound
surface refining using vacuum carburizing, contour induction hardening and
double shot peening, JSME International Journal Series A-Solid Mechanics and
Material Engineering 45 (2002) 290–297.
[11] H. Luong, M.R. Hill, The effects of laser peening and shot peening on high cycle
fatigue in 7050–T7451 aluminum alloy, Materials Science and Engineering A
527 (2010) 699–707.
[12] B.X. Wu, S. Tao, S.T. Lei, Numerical modeling of laser shock peening with fem-
tosecond laser pulses and comparisons to experiments, Applied Surface Science
256 (2010) 4376–4382.
[13] B.N. Mordyuk, M.O. Iefimov, G.I. Prokopenko, Structure, microhardness and
damping characteristics of Al matrix composite reinforced with AlCuFe or Ti
using ultrasonic impact peening, Surface and Coatings Technology 204 (2010)
1590–1598.
[14] A. Cherif, Y. Pyoun, B. Scholtes, Effects of ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modifi-
cation (UNSM) on residual stress state and fatigue strength of AISI 304, Journal
of Materials Engineering and Performance 19 (2010) 282–286.
[15] M.C. Li, S.Z. Hao, C. Dong, Improved wear resistance of magnesium alloys AZ91
by high current pulsed electron beam treatment, Transactions of the Indian
Institute of Metals 62 (2009) 485–487.
[16] Y.-K. Gao, F. Lu, Q. Wang, Influence of pulsed electron beam polishing modifi-
cation on surface morphologies of TC21 titanium alloy, Metal Heat Treatment
34 (2009) 42–44.
[17] Gao Yukui, Effect of surface strengthening on fatigue crack initiation and small
crack growth, Dissertation of Ph. D, Beijing: Beijing Institute of Aeronautical
Materials, 2008.
[18] Y.-K. Gao, M. Yao, J.-K. Li, An analysis of residual stress fields caused by
shot peening, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 33A (2002) 1775–
1778.
[19] J.K. Li, M. Yao, D. Wang, R. Wang, An analysis of stress concentration
caused by shot peening and its application in predicting fatigue strength,
Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures 15 (1992) 1271–
1279.
[20] Y.-K. Gao, M. Yao, P.-G. Shao, Y.-H. Zhao, Another mechanism for fatigue
strength improvement of metallic parts by shot peening, Journal of Materials
Engineering and Performance 12 (2003) 507–511.