Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science & Engineering A

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

The effects of shot peening, laser shock peening and ultrasonic nanocrystal
surface modification on the fatigue strength of Inconel 718
Erfan Maleki a, Okan Unal b, Mario Guagliano a, Sara Bagherifard a, *
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: As most of the failures in engineering components initiate from the surface layer, applying surface treatments can
Inconel 718 play a crucial role in controlling material performance and lifetime. In this study, different surface severe plastic
Surface grain refinement deformation techniques including severe shot peening, laser shock peening and ultrasonic nanocrystal surface
Fatigue behavior
modification have been considered. The effects of process parameters and the kinetic energy of each treatment on
Surface peening
the microstructure, mechanical properties and fatigue behavior of nickel-based super-alloy Inconel 718 have
been investigated. The results revealed that using the proper parameters to increase the kinetic energy of the
applied surface treatments, it is possible to effectively promote surface grain refinement and induce a deep
compressive residual stress field in Inconel 718 samples. Among the applied treatments, ultrasonic nanocrystal
surface modification was found to be the most efficient one in improving the mechanical properties as it led to
the most significant fatigue performance, followed by severe shot peening and laser shock peening.

1. Introduction Fig. 1 depicts the schematic illustration of the selected techniques

As most of the mechanical failures in engineering components,
especially fatigue failures, start from the surface [1–4], in recent times
multiple surface severe plastic deformation (SSPD) methods such as
surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT) [5,6], shot peening (SP)
[7,8], ultrasonic shot peening (USP) [9,10], ultrasonic nanocrystal
surface modification (UNSM) [11,12] and laser shock peening (LSP) [13,
14] have been proposed to enhance the functionality and service life­
time of mechanical components. These processes are known to improve
the mechanical properties and fatigue behavior of the metallic materials
by means of three main factors: inducing grain refinement, generating
compressive residual stresses within the plastically deformed top surface
layer [15–18] and modifying the surface roughness.
In this study, we have selected three of the most efficient SSPD
treatments i.e. SP, UNSM and LSP process to investigate their effect on
microstructural and mechanical properties of Inconel 718. Nickel-based
super-alloys, such as Inconel 718 are considered as a key solution for
structural applications in aggressive environments, thanks to their su­
preme mechanical properties, corrosion resistance, welding character­
istics, good oxidation and high creep resistance at elevated temperatures
[19–22].
and their effects on the top surface layer of the treated material. In SP
process, the surface of the target material is bombarded with a random
flow of small shots accelerated by compressed air to reach a controlled
velocity (see Fig. 1a) [23]. Among various parameters, Almen intensity
and surface coverage are the most important ones used for controlling
the SP process [24,25]. Based on the amount of total kinetic energy of
the SP treatment, the process can be categorized into two classifications
of conventional shot peening (CSP) and severe shot peening (SSP). In the
SSP category, higher Almen intensity and/or coverage levels are used to
increase the total amount of the kinetic energy of the shot stream, in
comparison with CSP [12,26]. Due to this latter factor, SSP results in
notable surface grain refinement down to nanostructured (NS) regime,
generating a gradient structure. The increased kinetic energy in SSP
treatment leads also to deeper compressive residual stresses induced in
both surface and depth. These treatments have been applied to different
classes of materials, resulting in enhanced mechanical performance.
Axial fatigue limit of as-received AISI 304 steel remarkably improved
after CSP (Almen intensity of 14 A and coverage of 100%) and SSP
(Almen intensity of 36 A and coverage of 2000%) from 310 MPa up to
330 MPa and 435 MPa, respectively; although the roughness of the
as-received material with Ra = 0.8 μm increased to 1.73 μm after

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sara.bagherifard@polimi.it (S. Bagherifard).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2021.141029
Received 15 December 2020; Received in revised form 25 February 2021; Accepted 3 March 2021
Available online 7 March 2021
0921-5093/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
E. Maleki et al.
applying CSP and 2.8 μm after SSP [3]. Similarly, bending fatigue limit
of the as-received X70 microalloyed steel with 385 MPa was enhanced
up to 440 MPa after SSP with Almen intensity of 16 A and coverage of
1000% [27]. Wear and corrosion resistance of SSP treated pure Ti [28],
AZ31 and AZ91 magnesium alloys [29] were also reported to be highly
improved due to the surface nanocrystallization and high compressive
residual stresses induced by SSP.
UNSM, instead, is a mechanical impact-based surface treatment
applied by means of high ultrasonic vibration frequency via a hard
Al2O3, WC or Si3N4 spherical tip. The high frequency vibrations induced
by ultrasonic generator are amplified via booster through a horn and
probe system. The system applies a combination of static and dynamic
loads to the surface (see Fig. 1b). UNSM is reported to enhance wear,
fatigue, fretting fatigue, corrosion and stress corrosion resistance of
metallic materials [30–32]. The improvement is due to the surface grain
refinement and high compressive residual stresses induced in the
hardened top surface layer. Also, it was reported that the roughness
values are slightly increasing after applying UNSM and micro-dimpled
surface morphologies were obtained [33]. By regulating the ultrasonic
frequency and amplitude, notable grain refinement can be induced by
UNSM [34,35]. Recently, UNSM has been applied to convert the tensile
residual stresses induced during additive manufacturing to compressive
stresses for tool steel. Besides inducing compressive residual stresses,
UNSM was reported to transform the original austenitic structure to
metastable martensite. Thus, despite the significantly high hardness of
the tool steels, UNSM was reported to be able to further improve their
wear performance [36]. UNSM has been also applied as a pre-treatment
prior to thermal surface treatments (gas nitriding, carburizing, boriding)
to increase the thickness of the affected layers. The increase in the
thickness of the affected layer has been attributed to defect-dense
metastable martensitic structure of AISI M4 tool steel that can trigger
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of different surface SPD treatments and the corresponding plastically deformed top surface of the target material: (a) SP, (b) UNSM and
(c) LSP processes.
2
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
the diffusion capability of nitrogen in case of nitriding treatment.
Therefore, further improved wear and corrosion performance could be
obtained for ultra-high strength steel [34]. Liu et al. [35] studied the
effect of laser-assisted UNSM on the thickness of deformed surface layer
and local plasticity on Ti6Al4V. The results indicated 75.2% hardness
increase, 2.5 times thicker deformed layer and an average grain size of
37 nm on the topmost layer.
Laser shock peening (LSP), on the other hand, is a surface modifi­
cation process that employs high-energy pulsed laser beam to generate
shock waves on the surface of target material (see Fig. 1c). High energy
plasma emerges on the surface by vaporization of an absorption element
[37]. The plasma energy leads to the generation of residual stresses and
high plastic strains leading to surface grain refinement. LSP due its
localized thermal influence is less effective than mechanical treatments
such as SP and UNSM in grain refinement [38]. LSP is extensively
applied for improving fatigue, wear, fretting fatigue, and corrosion
resistance of metals. Decreased crack growth rate and improved fatigue
life (63.5%) were reported for 2024-T351 aluminum alloy after appli­
cation of LSP [37]. Likewise SSP, LSP treatment adversely affects surface
roughness. The roughness of magnesium alloy ZK60 was raised to from
0.32 μm to 9.3 μm after LSP applying laser power density of approxi­
mately 2.0 GW/cm2. However, the wear performance was increased by
17.6% after LSP [39]. Bikdeloo et al. [40] focused on raising the number
of peening impacts from 1 to 4 on 316 L stainless steel obtaining an
effective fatigue crack growth delay. LSP was also reported to provide
protection against oxidation for P91 grade ferritic-martensitic steel by
increasing the diffusivity of Cr and Mn due to the reduction of activation
energy of oxygen [41].
All the three abovementioned technologies are reported to induce
surface grain refinement and compressive residual stresses through
surface plastic deformation; however, their effects are of different
E. Maleki et al.
extents and vary with the material of interest.
There are few studies on the application of the aforementioned sur­
face SPD techniques on Inconel 718, a material frequently used in
different industrial sectors. Koltz et al. [42] applied different CSP pro­
cesses with different Almen intensities of 4 and 8 A at full coverage using
cast steel shots of S230 and conditioned carbon steel cut wire shots of
CW14, respectively; this study investigated the effects of the CSP
treatment by analyzing surface roughness, distribution and relaxation of
residual stresses and the fatigue life of CSP treated specimens compared
to that of polished specimens. The results indicated that CSP could in­
crease the high cycle fatigue life from 2 to 20 times, depending on the
process parameters [42]. It was reported that the surface roughness in
terms of Rt was increased from 7.15 μm for the polished specimens to
8.65 μm and 25.38 μm after applied CSP processes of 4 and 8 A,
respectively. Moreover, the residual stresses induced in the surface were
measured to be − 810 MPa and − 920 MPa for the treatments with 4 and
8 A intensities, respectively compared to the − 90 MPa as the surface
residual stress of the polished samples.
Amanov [43] studied the effects of a UNSM process on mechanical
properties of Inconel 718 using a static load of 50 N at different tem­
peratures of 25 ◦ C, 400 ◦ C and 600 ◦ C. Microhardness, fretting resistance
and tensile properties were reported to be remarkably enhanced after
UNSM. Surface hardness was increased up to 35% at room temperature
compared to the untreated specimen and it was further enhanced by
50% at 400 ◦ C and by 40% at 600 ◦ C.
Kattoura et al. [44,45] applied LSP process to Inconel 718 with a
laser power density of about 4.7 GW/cm2 to investigate the variations of
the hardness, surface roughness, compressive residual stresses and their
relaxation as well as tensile and fatigue behavior. They reported
increased hardness and tensile strength, as well as 14% fatigue limit
improvement corresponding to about 5 × 106 cycles for the LSP treated
material. Another study analyzed the microstructural properties of LSP
treated Inconel 718 with 6 and 9 GW/cm2 laser power densities which
revealed the grain refinement in the surface layer and increased dislo­
cation densities after LSP process [46,47].
In the present study, the effects of these three SPD surface treatments
i.e. SP, UNSM and LSP are investigated on Inconel 718 specimens and
compared in terms of mechanical properties. Three different SP pro­
cesses including CSP and SSP with different Almen intensity and
coverage, two UNSM processes with different static loads and two
different LSP processes with different laser power densities were
considered. The treated specimens were characterized in terms of
microstructure, surface roughness, hardness, residual stresses distribu­
tion and their relaxation in the fatigued specimens. The fatigue life of the
as-received (AR) and treated specimens were compared at specific stress
amplitudes.
2. Experimental procedure
2.1. Material and specimens
Commercially available cold-rolled and aged (in Accordance with
SAEAMS 5597 standard) Inconel 718 superalloy sheets with a thickness
of 6 mm were used. The nominal chemical composition and the me­
chanical properties of the supplied material are presented in Table 1 and
Table 2, respectively.
Fatigue specimens were prepared according to ASTM E466 standard
[48] to study the axial fatigue behavior of the AR and treated material.
Fig. 2a shows the microstructure of the AR material with an average
grain size of about 40 μm, as determined by stereological methods.
Table 1
Nominal chemical composition of Inconel 718 super-alloy (weight %).
C Mn Si Cr Co
0.03 0.15 0.06 17.81 0.36
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
Table 2
Mechanical properties of Inconel 718 super-alloy.
Young Poisson’s Yield Ultimate Elongation Hardness
modulus ratio strength strength (%) (HRC)
(GPa) (MPa) (MPa)
205 0.294 1100 1340 25 42.5
Solute banding lines caused by rolling can be observed using Nomarski
contrast in Fig. 2b. The dimensions of the fatigue test specimens and the
considered area for applying the surface treatments are represented in
Fig. 2c. All the four sides of the selected central zone were shot peened.
2.2. Severe plastic deformation surface treatments
The treatment parameters were determined, through some pre­
liminary analysis according to their effect on the mechanical perfor­
mance of the metallic materials. In particular the thickness of the
nanocrystallized surface layer and the depth of residual stresses were
considered as major aspects for setting UNSM, SSP and LSP parameters.
CSP was applied based on the range of parameters typically used for this
class of materials to serve for comparison. In order to increase the kinetic
energy of the processes and move towards more severe condition, Almen
intensity and surface coverage, static load and laser beam energy and
power density were selected respectively for SP, UNSM and LSP, also
based on indications provided in previous studies [3,9,10,33,34,37].
2.2.1. Shot peening
An air blast shot equipment was employed to carry out the SP
treatments. Standard steel shots with an average hardness of 52 HRC
were used for all the applied SP treatments with the dimensions listed in
Table 3. The shots were accelerated through a nozzle with a diameter of
6.35 mm at a stand-off distance of 10 cm. Almen intensities were
determined according to the SAE J443 standard [49]. Table 3 lists the
parameters of the different SP treatments including one CSP and two SSP
processes.
2.2.2. Ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification
Two UNSM treatments with different the treatment parameters were
considered. The corresponding parameters are presented in Table 4. The
probe impacted the specimen’s surface at an approximate frequency of
25000 pulses per second with a WC round tip of 2.5 mm diameter at
room temperature. Within each strike, static and dynamic loadings were
homogeneously applied and controlled by maintaining the displacement
amplitude at a certain value. The static load was set to 10 N and 50 N to
induce adequate surface plastic deformation.
2.2.3. Laser shock peening
A Q-switched Nd:Yag laser with maximum beam energy of 9 J was
employed for LSP. The treatments were performed via a nanosecond
pulse laser with a wavelength of 1064 nm and pulse duration of 10 ns.
An Aluminum foil of 200 μm covered the specimen’s flat surface to
provide homogenous absorption. Laser power density was selected as 3
GW/cm2 and 8 GW/cm2 for conventional and severe plastic deformation
ranges, respectively. LSP was performed with single pulse impact and a
water jet with a thickness of 2 mm was as employed as a transparent
tamping material. The parameters of different LSP processes are listed in
Table 5.
Mo Fe Ti Co Nb Ni
2.96 19.55 1.20 0.31 4.88 Bal.
3
E. Maleki et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029

Fig. 2. Representative optical micrographs of the as-received Inconel 718 (a) without and (b) with Nomarski contrast, respectively. (c) Shape and dimensions of axial
fatigue specimens.

Table 3
Parameters of the SP treatments.
Specimen Shot diameter (mm) Impact angle (◦ ) Projection pressure (MPa) Almen intensity (0.001 mm A) Peening duration (s) Coverage (%)

CSP 0.58 90 0.21 10 21 100

SSP1 0.58 90 0.21 10 21000 1000
SSP2 0.71 90 0.23 15 16000 1000

Table 4
Parameters of the UNSM treatments.
Specimen Frequency (kHz) Amplitude (μm) Linear speed (mm/min) Static load (N) Path Interval (μm) Ball diameter (mm)

UNSM1 25 40 2000 10 65 2.5

UNSM2 25 40 2000 50 65 2.5

Table 5
Parameters of the LSP treatments.
Specimen Frequency Pulse duration Beam diameter Laser source wavelength Pulse overlapping Laser beam energy Laser power density (GW/
(Hz) (ns) (mm) (nm) (%) (J) cm2)

LSP1 10 10 4 1064 50 1.5 3

LSP2 10 10 4 1064 50 4 8

2.3. Microstructural investigations and 2 g potassium disulfide. Due to the combination of increasing the
full width at half maximum (FWHM) and peak shift through right side by
The near-surface microstructure of the treated specimens were means of deformation, crystallite sizes on the surface could effectively
characterized via optical microscopy (OM) and field emission scanning be evaluated by Scherrer-Wilson a relationship which is expressed in Eq.
electron microscopy (FESEM) using Olympus, VEGA\TESCAN-XMU, (1):
and Mira 3-XMU microscopes, respectively. The specimens were
0.9λ
etched for 8 s by a solution of 100 mL distilled water, 100 mL hydro­ D= (1)
Bcosθ
chloric acid, 50 g ammonium hydrogen fluoride, 10 g copper (II) sulfate

4
E. Maleki et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029

where D is the crystallite size average,λ is the X-ray diffraction wave­ data was reported.
length, B is the line broadening (FWHM) and θ is the Bragg angle.
3. Results and discussion
2.4. Mechanical properties characterization
3.1. Microstructural characterizations
Hardness of the AR and treated specimens were measured by mean of
Cross-sectional OM micrographs of the specimens after different
Qness GmbH Q30A microhardness tester at a load of 15 gf with a
surface treatments are shown in Fig. 3. The microscopical observations
duration of 10 s using a Vickers indenter. The tests were performed up to
illustrate an apparent grain refinement in the surface layers. The top row
a depth of 500 μm on the cross-sectional surface with intervals of 20 μm.
images correspond to the specimens treated using lower kinetic energy
Surface roughness of the specimens was analyzed using a contact
compared to the ones depicted in the bottom, for each process. The
stylus profilometer by Mitutoyo surface roughness tester. The mea­
higher kinetic energy was obtained by increasing Almen intensity and
surements were performed on five different locations to determine the
coverage in SP, increasing the static load in UNSM and enhancing the
main roughness parameters of Ra (arithmetic mean), Rq (root mean
laser beam energy in LSP. Overall, considering both low and high energy
square) and Rt (total height). The roughness parameters were assessed
treatments for all series, the specimens treated with higher kinetic en­
according to ISO 4287 [47]. Huvitz Digital Microscope HDS-5800 was
ergy, exhibit a higher depth of the plastically deformed surface layer.
used study the surface morphology.
Also, microstructural observations with higher magnification per­
Compressive residual stresses were measured by XRD analysis using
formed by means of FESEM on the cross-sections of the treated speci­
Xstress 3000 G2/G2R X-ray Stress Analyzer (radiation Cr Kα, irradiated
mens are presented in Appendix A. The sharp boundary separating the
area of 4 mm diameter, sin2ψ method, diffraction angle (2θ) ~156◦
generated NS layer from the underlying grain refined and work hard­
scanned between 45◦ and − 45◦ ). The measurements were carried out in
ened material, can be clearly identified similar to what reported for
depth step by step by removing a very thin layer of material (~20 μm)
materials treated by to SP-based and UNSM treatments [43,50–52].
through electro-polishing with a solution of acetic acid (94%) and
To obtain the grain size in the top surface of the treated specimens,
perchloric acid (6%) up to the depth of 500 μm.
two approaches of stereological analysis and XRD analysis were used for
the specimens based on the extent of grain size refinement. CSP, LSP1
2.5. Fatigue test and LSP2 specimens were subjected to lower kinetic energy treatments
and were expected to have a less notable surface grain refinement. Thus,
Axial fatigue behavior of the AR and treated specimens were studied for these specimens, the top surface was gently polished removing a very
using SANTAM SAF-250 universal fatigue test equipment. Fatigue tests thin layer of about 3 μm and subsequently etched for OM observation
were performed at room temperature under a frequency of 20 Hz at an and image analysis. The average grain size of the CSP, LSP1 and LSP2
air relative humidity of 50%. Tension-tension fatigue tests considering a specimens were measured to be around 30 μm, 35 μm, 26 μm respec­
stress ratio of R = 0.1 with a maximum stress set at 900 MPa were tively. For the specimens with higher extent of grain refinement
considered in order to compare the effect of the applied surface treat­ including SSP1, SSP2, UNSM1 and UNSM2, the surface crystallite size
ments on fatigue life. Three specimens were tested at each stress level to was measured using Scherer’s equation to determine the mean
achieve the fatigue strength at the fixed stress level and the average of

Fig. 3. Cross-sectional OM micrographs of the treated specimens: (a) SP, (c) UNSM and (c) LSP. The top row images correspond to specimens treated using lower
kinetic energy for each treatment in comparison with the bottom row specimens.

5
E. Maleki et al.
crystallite size by considering the full width half maximum (FWHM) of
diffraction peaks [53,54]. XRD patterns of these specimens are shown in
Fig. 4a and b. As presented in Fig. 4c, the most notable grain refinement
in terms of grain size and extent of grain refined layer was observed in
UNSM samples followed by SP and LSP treated specimens.
Fig. 4d illustrates the depth of plastically deformed layers. The depth
of the deformed layer was determined via OM. By increasing the process
kinetic energy, the depth of the plastically deformed layers was
considerably increased both SSP and UNSM treatments.
3.2. Mechanical properties and fatigue behaviour
Fig. 5a depicts the microhardness profiles of the AR and treated
specimens from the top surface towards the core material. The results
reveal that for each treatment, higher kinetic energy resulted in higher
surface microhardness. UNSM and SSP treatments were recognized to be
more efficient in increasing microhardness compared to CSP and LSP.
The surface hardness improvement obtained from UNSM2, SSP2, SSP1,
UNSM1, LSP2, CSP and LSP1 was estimated about 44, 35, 27, 24, 18, 15
and 9%, respectively. These results highlight the notable effect of higher
kinetic energy as well as the efficiency of UNSM followed by SSP
treatments.
Fig. 5b shows the distribution of the induced compressive residual
stresses from the treated surface into depth of the material. UNSM
Fig. 4. XRD patterns of the SSP and UNSM specimens along different diffraction angles of 2θ (a) 30–150◦ , (b) 42–45.5◦ , (c) surface grain size for the AR and treated
specimen and (d) depth of the plastically deformed layer induced by surface treatments of SP, UNSM and LSP.
6
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
induced higher compressive residual stresses compared to the other
applied treatments. LSP2 and LSP1 induced higher surface compressive
residual stresses compared to SSP2 and SSP1, respectively; CSP speci­
mens showed the lowest range of residual stresses among all series.
While, the induced compressive residual stresses by UNSM and SP
processes were less than − 50 MPa at the depth of 500 μm, the
compressive residual stresses induced by LSP treatments were around
− 200 MPa at the same depth. The results indicate that the UNSM
treatment can be notably efficient in increasing the surface and in depth
compressive residual stress field.
Fig. 5c reveals the surface roughness parameters of the AR and the
treated specimens. The Ra value of the AR specimens was approximately
0.85 μm. CSP led to an increased Ra of 4.5 μm. The deformation increase
by SSP further enhanced Ra to 4.8 μm. On the contrary UNSM and LSP
maintained Ra values around 3–3.5 μm. All the applied treatments
resulted in surface roughness increase, which became more notable as
the kinetic energy of the process was raised. While SSP and UNSM
caused notable surface roughness increase, the surface roughening effect
of LSP remained limited.
All the mentioned mechanical properties and parameters including
depth of the plastically deformed layer, grain size, microhardness,
compressive residual stresses and surface roughness have their relative
importance on alteration of the fatigue behavior of the specimens [55,
56]. A fixed maximum stress level of 900 MPa was considered to
E. Maleki et al.
Fig. 5. Obtained results for (a) microhardness profiles (b) distribution of the compressive residual stresses (c) surface roughness parameters and (d) fatigue lives at
maximum stress of 900 MPa.
compare the high cycle fatigue life of the specimens subjected to
different surface treatments. The fatigue life improvement of UNSM2,
UNSM1, SSP2, LSP2, SSP1, LSP1 and CSP specimens (as shown in
Fig. 5d) was estimated to be about 5.25, 4.69, 3.71, 3.21, 2.32, 2.06 and
1.65 times higher than that of the AR specimen, respectively. UNSM2
specimens that had the smallest surface grain size and highest depth of
deformed and NS layers, highest hardness and compressive residual
stresses and not the highest surface roughness represented the most
significant fatigue life improvement.
Comparing LSP2 and SSP1 specimens, it can be observed that despite
the lower thickness of the affected layer and the lower microhardness of
the LSP treated specimen compared to the SSP1 specimen, the lower
surface roughness and higher compressive residual stresses led to higher
fatigue life at the maximum stress of 900 MPa.
To have a better understanding about the effects of the induced
compressive residual stresses on fatigue life improvement, residual
stress relaxation was investigated at different cycles of loading i.e., first
cycle, followed by 0.3, 0.5 and 0.7Nf of each series, according to the
obtained average fatigue lives. Fig. 6a to f depict the distributions of the
compressive residual stresses in the fatigued specimens at the above­
mentioned cycle intervals. A direct relation can be observed between the
residual stress relaxation and the number of cycles. Fig. 6g illustrates the
distribution of residual stresses after fatigue loading at N = 0.7 Nf; it can
be seen that the compressive residual stresses of the UNSM specimens
were higher in both surface and depth compared to the other series. The
higher stability of residual stresses in UNSM series could have contrib­
uted to the higher fatigue lives of these specimens.
7
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
Fig. 6h presents the difference percentage of surface residual stress
relaxation in different states. Considering the initial state and the
fatigued specimens at the 1st cycle, significant relaxation (about
20–35%) takes place; similar results about notable residual stress
relaxation in the first stages of fatigue loading is reported in the litera­
ture [45,46,57–59]. However, considering the difference percentage
between the surface residual stresses from 0.5Nf to 0.7Nf cycles, about
3–13% residual stress relaxation was observed. About 46–68% of the
induced compressive residual stresses were relaxed at 0.7 Nf compared
to the not fatigue tested specimens, as shown in Fig. 6h.
4. Conclusions
In this study, various surface treatments based on severe plastic
deformation including severe shot peening (SSP), ultrasonic nanocrystal
surface modification (UNSM) and laser shock peening (LSP) were
applied to Inconel 718 specimens using different process parameters.
The effects of these treatments and their process parameters were
investigated on microstructural and mechanical properties of the treated
material. The conclusions are summarized as following:
• All the applied treatments effectively induced plastic deformation on
the surface of the treated specimens. Average depth of the affected
layer for the treatments of highest kinetic energy was measured to be
160 μm for UNSM, 110 μm for SSP, and 45 μm for LSP. UNSM and
SSP were found to be more efficient in extending the depth of severe
plastic deformation.
E. Maleki et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029

Fig. 6. (a–f) Distributions of the compressive residual stresses in the fatigued specimens after 1, 0.3 Nf, 0.5 Nf and 0.7Nf cycles (g) Comparison of the residual stress
distributions of fatigue loaded specimens at N = 0.7Nf (h) difference percentage of surface compressive residual stress measured at different cycle intervals (Nf is the
fatigue life of the corresponding series).

8
E. Maleki et al.
• UNSM and SSP treatments with proper set of parameters inducing
high kinetic energy, significantly contributed to surface grain
refinement down to nano-regime. The average grain size was
measured to be 23.1 nm and 21.95 nm for SSP and UNSM specimens,
respectively
• Surface microhardness was improved by 44%, 35% and 15%
respectively for UNSM, SSP and LSP treatments with the highest
kinetic energy.
• UNSM was found to be the most effective treatment in the surface
region in terms of compressive residual stresses (higher than 1000
MPa). LSP and SSP processes showed comparable data on surface.
However, considering the depth of compressive residual stress field,
the effect of SSP treatments disappeared at approximately 250 μm,
while the average depth was around 400 μm for UNSM specimen.
• Regarding the depth of the layer affected by compressive residual
stresses, LSP was found to be the most effective surface treatment
with an affected thickness of 500 μm. However, the residual stresses
induced by UNSM were found to be more stable also in depth after
fatigue cycling. The most stable data regarding the distribution of
residual stresses after relaxation was obtained in the cases of UNSM2
and SSP2.
• Fatigue life improvement of 5.25, 3.71, and 3.21 times higher than
the as received specimens was obtained after UNSM, SSP, and LSP
treatments, respectively, when treated by the highest kinetic energy
Appendix A
Fig. A. Cross-sectional FESEM observations of (a) SP, (c) UNSM and (c) LSP specimens.
References
[1] E. Maleki, S. Bagherifard, M. Bandini, M. Guagliano, Surface post-treatments for
metal additive manufacturing: progress, challenges, and opportunities, Addit.
Manuf. 37 (January 2021), 101619, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
addma.2020.101619.
[2] J. Correia, N. Apetre, A. Arcari, A. De Jesus, M. Muñiz-Calvente, R. Calçada,
F. Berto, A. Fernández-Canteli, Generalized probabilistic model allowing for
various fatigue damage variables, Int. J. Fatig. 100 (Part 1) (July 2017) 187–194,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.03.031.
[3] E. Maleki, O. Unal, Fatigue Limit Prediction and Analysis of Nano-Structured AISI
304 Steel by Severe Shot Peening via ANN, Eng. Comput, 2020, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00366-020-00964-6.
[4] E. Maleki, N. Maleki, A. Fattahi, O. Unal, M. Guagliano, S. Bagherifard, Mechanical
characterization and interfacial enzymatic activity of AISI 316L stainless steel after
surface nanocrystallization, Surf. Coating. Technol. 405 (January 2021), 126729,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.126729.
9
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
for each treatment. This trend could be attributed to the compressive
residual stresses and the grain refinement in the surface layer.
• The roughness increase on the surface could limit the improvement
of the fatigue resistance; alternative secondary post treatments could
be considered for roughness reduction. The choice of proper process
parameters for optimized range of surface grain refinement,
compressive residual stresses and surface quality, could be achieved
through numerical simulations methods to optimize the process pa­
rameters at a reduced cost.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Erfan Maleki: Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization,
Writing – original draft. Okan Unal: Methodology, Investigation,
Formal analysis, Resources. Mario Guagliano: Writing – review &
editing, Supervision. Sara Bagherifard: Validation, Writing – review &
editing, Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
[5] S. Liu, S.Y. Gao, Y.F. Zhou, X.L. Xing, X.R. Hou, Y.L. Yang, Q.X. Yang, A research on
the microstructure evolution of austenite stainless steel by surface mechanical
attrition treatment, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 617 (3 November 2014) 127–138, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.08.049.
[6] A. Heydari Astaraee, R. Miresmaeili, S. Bagherifard, M. Guagliano,
M. Aliofkhazraei, Incorporating the principles of shot peening for a better
understanding of surface mechanical attrition treatment (SMAT) by simulations
and experiments, Mater. Des. 116 (February 2017) 365–373, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matdes.2016.12.045.
[7] G.H. Farrahi, J.L. Lebrijn, D. Couratin, Effect of shot peening on residual stress and
fatigue life of a spring steel, Fatig. Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 18 (1995) 211–220,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.1995.tb00156.x.
[8] E. Maleki, G.H. Farrahi, K. Reza Kashyzadeh, O. Unal, M. Gugaliano,
S. Bagherifard, Effects of conventional and severe shot peening on residual stress
and fatigue strength of steel AISI 1060 and residual stress relaxation due to fatigue
loading: experimental and numerical simulation, Met. Mater. Int. (2020), https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12540-020-00890-8.
E. Maleki et al.
[9] J. Marteau, M. Bigerelle, P.E. Mazeran, S. Bouvier, Relation between roughness and
processing conditions of AISI 316L stainless steel treated by ultrasonic shot
peening, Tribol. Int. 82 (Part B) (February 2015) 319–329, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.triboint.2014.07.013.
[10] A.K. Gujba, M. Medraj, Laser peening process and its impact on materials
properties in comparison with shot peening and ultrasonic impact peening,
Materials 7 (12) (2014) 7925–7974, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7127925.
[11] A. Amanov, R. Karimbaev, E. Maleki, O. Unal, Y.S. Pyun, T. Amanov, Effect of
combined shot peening and ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification processes
on the fatigue performance of AISI 304, Surf. Coating. Technol. 358 (2019)
695–705, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2018.11.100.
[12] Y. Efe, I. Karademir, F. Husem, E. Maleki, R. Karimbaev, A. Amanov, O. Unal,
Enhancement in microstructural and mechanical performance of AA7075
aluminum alloy via severe shot peening and ultrasonic nanocrystal surface
modification, Appl. Surf. Sci. 528 (October 2020), 146922, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apsusc.2020.146922.
[13] S. Prabhakaran, A. Kulkarni, G. Vasanth, S. Kalainathan, P. Shukla, V.
K. Vasudevan, Laser shock peening without coating induced residual stress
distribution, wettability characteristics and enhanced pitting corrosion resistance
of austenitic stainless steel, Appl. Surf. Sci. 428 (2018) 17–30, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.09.138.
[14] H. Luong, M.R. Hill, The effects of laser peening and shot peening on high cycle
fatigue in 7050-T7451 aluminum alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. 527 (2010) 699–707,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2009.08.045.
[15] J.C. Villegas, L.L. Shaw, Nanocrystallization process and mechanism in a nickel
alloy subjected to surface severe plastic deformation, Acta Mater. 57 (19)
(November 2009) 5782–5795, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2009.08.005.
[16] M. Abdulstaar, M. Mhaede, M. Wollmann, L. Wagner, Investigating the effects of
bulk and surface severe plastic deformation on the fatigue, corrosion behaviour
and corrosion fatigue of AA5083, Surf. Coating. Technol. 254 (September 2014)
244–251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2014.06.026.
[17] S. Bagherifard, C. Colombo, M. Guagliano, Application of different fatigue strength
criteria to shot peened notched components. Part 1: fracture Mechanics based
approaches, Appl. Surf. Sci. 289 (January 2014) 180–187, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apsusc.2013.10.131.
[18] A. Heydari Astaraee, S. Bagherifard, A. Bradanini, P. Duó, S. Henze, B. Taylor,
M. Guagliano, Application of shot peening to case-hardened steel gears: the effect
of gradient material properties and component geometry, Surf. Coating. Technol.
398 (September 2020), 126084, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.126084.
[19] J. Warren, D.Y. Wei, The cyclic fatigue behavior of direct age 718 at 149, 315, 454
and 538 ◦ C, Mater. Sci. Eng. 428 (1–2) (July 2006) 106–115, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.msea.2006.04.091.
[20] J.M. Pereira, B.A. Lerch, Effects of heat treatment on the ballistic impact properties
of Inconel 718 for jet engine fan containment applications, Int. J. Impact Eng. 25
(8) (September 2001) 715–733, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00018-
5.
[21] S. Ghorbanpour, M. Zecevic, A. Kumar, M. Jahedi, J. Bicknell, L. Jorgensen, I.
J. Beyerlein, M. Knezevic, A crystal plasticity model incorporating the effects of
precipitates in superalloys: application to tensile, compressive, and cyclic
deformation of Inconel 718, Int. J. Plast. 99 (December 2017) 162–185, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2017.09.006.
[22] A. Ayodeji, Y. kuo Liu, PWR heat exchanger tube defects: trends, signatures and
diagnostic techniques, Prog. Nucl. Energy 112 (April 2019) 171–184, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2018.12.017.
[23] O. Unal, E. Maleki, Shot peening optimization with complex decision-making tool:
multi criteria decision-making, Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 125 (2018), https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.04.077.
[24] Q. Lin, H. Liu, C. Zhu, R.G. Parker, Investigation on the effect of shot peening
coverage on the surface integrity, Appl. Surf. Sci. 489 (September 2019) 66–72,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.05.281.
[25] Y. Wang, H. Xie, Z. Zhou, X. Li, W. Wu, J. Gong, Effect of shot peening coverage on
hydrogen embrittlement of a ferrite-pearlite steel, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (11)
(February 2020) 7169–7184, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.01.021.
[26] E. Maleki, O. Unal, K. Reza Kashyzadeh, Surface layer nanocrystallization of
carbon steels subjected to severe shot peening: analysis and optimization, Mater.
Char. 157 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109877, 109877.
[27] K. Miková, S. Bagherifard, O. Bokuvka, M. Guagliano, L. Trško, Fatigue behavior of
X70 microalloyed steel after severe shot peening, Int. J. Fatig. 55 (2013) 33–42,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.04.021.
[28] O. Unal, A.C. Karaoglanli, Y. Ozgurluk, K.M. Doleker, E. Maleki, R. Varol, Wear
behavior of severe shot peened and thermally oxidized commercially pure
titanium. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79005-3_29, 2019.
[29] C. Liu, H. Zheng, X. Gu, B. Jiang, J. Liang, Effect of severe shot peening on
corrosion behavior of AZ31 and AZ91 magnesium alloys, J. Alloys Compd. 770
(January 2019) 500–506, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.08.141.
[30] A. Amanov, I.S. Cho, D.E. Kim, Y.S. Pyun, Fretting wear and friction reduction of
CP titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy by ultrasonic nanocrystalline surface
modification, Surf. Coating. Technol. 207 (August 2012) 135–142, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.06.046.
[31] A. Amanov, O.V. Penkov, Y.S. Pyun, D.E. Kim, Effects of ultrasonic nanocrystalline
surface modification on the tribological properties of AZ91D magnesium alloy,
Tribol. Int. 54 (October 2012) 106–113, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
triboint.2012.04.024.
[32] A. Amanov, R. Umarov, The effects of ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification
temperature on the mechanical properties and fretting wear resistance of Inconel
10
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
690 alloy, Appl. Surf. Sci. 441 (May 2018) 515–529, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apsusc.2018.01.293.
[33] A. Amanov, I.S. Cho, Y.S. Pyoun, C.S. Lee, I.G. Park, Micro-dimpled surface by
ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification and its tribological effects, Wear
286–287 (May 2012) 136–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2011.06.001.
[34] W. Zhao, D. Liu, H. Qin, X. Zhang, H. Zhang, R. Zhang, Z. Ren, C. Ma, A. Amanov,
Y.S. Pyun, G.L. Doll, Y. Dong, C. Ye, The effect of ultrasonic nanocrystal surface
modification on low temperature nitriding of ultra-high strength steel, Surf.
Coating. Technol. 375 (October 2019) 205–214, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
surfcoat.2019.07.006.
[35] J. Liu, S. Suslov, Z. Ren, Y. Dong, C. Ye, Microstructure evolution in Ti64 subjected
to laser-assisted ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification, Int. J. Mach. Tool
Manufact. 136 (January 2019,) 19–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijmachtools.2018.09.005.
[36] M. seob Kim, W. jin Oh, G. yoon Baek, Y. kwan Jo, K. yong Lee, S. hu Park, D. sik
Shim, Ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification of high-speed tool steel (AISI
M4) layered via direct energy deposition, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 277 (2020),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.116420, 116420.
[37] X. kai Meng, H. Wang, W. sheng Tan, J. Cai, J. zhong Zhou, L. Liu, Gradient
microstructure and vibration fatigue properties of 2024-T351 aluminium alloy
treated by laser shock peening, Surf. Coating. Technol. 391 (June 2020), 125698,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.125698.
[38] S.J. Lainé, K.M. Knowles, P.J. Doorbar, R.D. Cutts, D. Rugg, Microstructural
characterisation of metallic shot peened and laser shock peened Ti–6Al–4V, Acta
Mater. 123 (January 2017) 350–361, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
actamat.2016.10.044.
[39] Y. Guo, S. Wang, W. Liu, Z. Sun, G. Zhu, T. Xiao, Effect of laser shock peening on
tribological properties of magnesium alloy ZK60, Tribol. Int. 144 (April 2020),
106138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2019.106138.
[40] R. Bikdeloo, G.H. Farrahi, A. Mehmanparast, S.M. Mahdavi, Multiple laser shock
peening effects on residual stress distribution and fatigue crack growth behaviour
of 316L stainless steel, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 105 (2020), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tafmec.2019.102429, 102429.
[41] P. Yella, K.V. Rajulapati, G.V. Prasad Reddy, R. Sandhya, P. Prem Kiran, R.
K. Buddu, K. Bhanu Sankara Rao, Effect of laser shock peening on high cycle
fatigue characteristics of 316LN stainless steel, Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip. 176 (2019),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2019.103972, 103972.
[42] T. Klotz, D. Delbergue, P. Bocher, M. Lévesque, M. Brochu, Surface characteristics
and fatigue behavior of shot peened Inconel 718, Int. J. Fatig. 110 (May 2018)
10–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.01.005.
[43] A. Amanov, Improvement in mechanical properties and fretting wear of Inconel
718 superalloy by ultrasonic nanocrystal surface modification, Wear 446–447
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2020.203208, 203208.
[44] M. Kattoura, A. Telang, S.R. Mannava, D. Qian, V.K. Vasudevan, Effect of
Ultrasonic Nanocrystal Surface Modification on residual stress, microstructure and
fatigue behavior of ATI 718Plus alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 110 (May 2018)
186–196, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.11.043.
[45] M. Kattoura, S.R. Mannava, D. Qian, V.K. Vasudevan, Effect of laser shock peening
on residual stress, microstructure and fatigue behavior of ATI 718Plus alloy, Int. J.
Fatig. 102 (2017) 121–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.04.016.
[46] A.S. Gill, A. Telang, V.K. Vasudevan, Characteristics of surface layers formed on
inconel 718 by laser shock peening with and without a protective coating, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 225 (2015) 463–472, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmatprotec.2015.06.026.
[47] A.S. Gill, A. Telang, C. Ye, S.R. Mannava, D. Qian, V.K. Vasudevan, Localized
plastic deformation and hardening in laser shock peened Inconel alloy 718SPF,
Mater. Char. 142 (2018) 15–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2018.05.010.
[48] E466-15, Practice for Conducting Force Controlled Constant Amplitude Axial
Fatigue Tests of Metallic Materials, ASTM B. Stand., 2015, https://doi.org/
10.1520/E0466-15.2.
[49] SAE International, SAE J443, Procedures for using standard shot peening almen
strip, Surf. Veh. Recomm. Pract. (2010).
[50] M. Umemoto, Y. Todaka, K. Tsuchiya, Formation of a nanocrystalline surface layer
on steels by air blast shot peening, J. Mater. Sci. 44 (2003) 1488–1493, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10853-007-1659-x.
[51] Y. Todaka, M. Umemoto, Y. Watanabe, K. Tsuchiya, Formation of nanocrystalline
structure in steels by air blast shot peening and particle impact processing, Mater.
Sci. Forum 449–452 (2004) 1149–1152. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.
net/msf.449-452.1149.
[52] H. Saitoh, T. Ochi, M. Kubota, Formation of a nanocrystalline surface layer on
steels by air blast shot peening, in: proc. 10th Int. Conf. Shot Peen. ICSP-10,
2008115, https://www.shotpeener.com/library/detail.php?anc=2008115, 2008.
Tokyo, Japan.
[53] D.L. Dorset, X-Ray diffraction: a practical approach, Microsc. Microanal. 4 (5)
(October 1998) 513–515, https://doi.org/10.1017/S143192769800049X.
[54] E. Maleki, O. Unal, Roles of surface coverage increase and re-peening on properties
of AISI 1045 carbon steel in conventional and severe shot peening processes,
Surfaces and Interfaces 11 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2018.03.003.
[55] S. Bagherifard, Enhancing the structural performance of lightweight metals by shot
peening, Adv. Eng. Mater. 1 (7) (July 2019), 1801140, https://doi.org/10.1002/
adem.201801140.
[56] E. Maleki, O. Unal, A. Amanov, Novel experimental methods for the determination
of the boundaries between conventional, severe and over shot peening processes,
Surfaces and Interfaces 13 (December 2018) 233–254, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
surfin.2018.09.003.
E. Maleki et al.
[57] K. Zhan, C.H. Jiang, V. Ji, Residual stress relaxation of shot peened deformation
surface layer on S30432 austenite steel under applied loading, Mater. Trans. 53 (9)
(2012) 1578–1581, https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.M2012111.
[58] O.S. Zaroog, A. Ali, B.B. Sahari, R. Zahari, Modeling of residual stress relaxation of
fatigue in 2024-T351 aluminium alloy, Int. J. Fatig. 33 (2) (February 2011)
279–285, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2010.08.012.
11
Materials Science & Engineering A 810 (2021) 141029
[59] A. Cherif, Y. Pyoun, B. Scholtes, Effects of ultrasonic nanocrystal surface
modification (UNSM) on residual stress state and fatigue strength of AISI 304,
J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 19 (2010) 282–286, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-009-
9445-3.