Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Characterization
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matchar

Localized plastic deformation and hardening in laser shock peened Inconel T

alloy 718SPF
⁎
Amrinder S. Gilla, Abhishek Telanga, Chang Yeb, , S.R. Mannavaa, Dong Qianc,
Vijay K. Vasudevana
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Material Science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0072, USA
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-3903, USA
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX 75080-3021, USA

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Localized plastic deformation and hardening was studied in laser shock peened (LSP) Inconel 718 SPF (Super
Laser shock peening plastic forming), a fine grained Ni-Base superalloy, using electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD), na-
Electro backscatter diffraction noindentation, and micro pillar compression testing. 718SPF samples were LSP-treated with two different laser
Inconel power densities. After LSP, the plastic deformation is manifested as increase in the fraction of low angle mis-
Image quality mapping
orientations and the formation of sub-grain boundaries. EBSD was used to study plastic deformation as a function
Misorientation
Micro pillar compression
of distance from the peened surface for different laser intensities. Different approaches like image quality
mapping and local misorientations analysis were used to study the in-depth distribution of the plastic strain.
Results show that EBSD is effective in the qualitative characterization of localized plastic strain of the materials
subjected to LSP.

1. Introduction to 40%) compared to LSP (5–7%). Thermal stability of residual stresses

Laser Shock Peening (LSP) is an advanced surface enhancement
process used to enhance the fatigue life of metal parts by introducing
deep compressive residual stresses in near surface regions. In the LSP
process, an ablative media, typically a tape or black paint is first applied
to the surface being treated over which a layer of water is passed. Upon
incidence of the laser pulse, the tape material ablates, forming plasma
which is confined by the water layer. This keeps plasma from dis-
sipating quickly and it absorbs more energy. On blowing off, this
plasma generates powerful shock waves, which can approach several
GPa, leading to plastic deformation near surface. The surrounding
material and subsurface reacts to this deformation leading to generation
of compressive residual stresses and microstructural changes. The
process and the underlying physics have been studied very well in the
literature.
LSP has also been shown to affect the surface morphology, me-
chanical properties and corrosion resistance of the material [1]. LSP has
several advantages over conventional shot peening treatment, including
the ability to introduce deeper compressive residual stresses, lower
surface roughness and low cold work. Prevey et al. [2] compared the
effects of different surface enhancement techniques on Inconel 718
(IN718) and found that shot peening introduced higher cold work (up
was also compared, and it was found that higher cold work leads to
high rates of thermal relaxation of residual stresses. The ability to in-
troduce deep compressive stresses with lower cold work is a very im-
portant advantage for the application of LSP to components subjected
to higher temperatures. LSP is a high strain rate deformation process in
which strain rates can reach up to 106 s−1 [3]. High strain rates lead to
non-uniform deformation due to short durations for heat diffusion [4]
leading to localization of deformation. Hence it is important to study
the extent and nature of the plastic deformation introduced in the
material by LSP.
LSP has been widely studied in the recent years [5–10]. Many
characterization tools, including scanning electron microscopy (SEM),
transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and X-ray diffraction (XRD)
were used to characterize the microstructure after LSP. Electron Back-
scatter Diffraction (EBSD) is a diffraction technique used for obtaining
micro textural information from bulk samples using the scanning
electron microscope [11]. In a recent study, EBSD was used to study the
misorientation in 304 stainless steel subjected to massive LSP treatment
[5]. Unfortunately, EBSD was carried out only at the surface of the
material, and it has not been used to map the plastic strain.
All mechanical surface enhancement techniques including LSP in-
volve introducing a non-uniform plastic deformation in the material to

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cye@uakron.edu (C. Ye).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2018.05.010
Received 1 December 2017; Received in revised form 5 May 2018; Accepted 7 May 2018
Available online 08 May 2018
1044-5803/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc.
A.S. Gill et al.
introduce compressive residual stresses. Plastic and elastic strains, both,
change the diffraction conditions of the lattice and that manifests in
Kikuchi patterns in different ways. Elastic strain result in changes in
interplanar spacing which reflect as change in width of Kikuchi bands
along with a shift in some zone axis. Plastic strain leads to distortion of
crystal leading to Kikuchi pattern degradation due to incoherent scat-
tering or super position of a number patterns which happens as de-
formed crystal deviates from Bragg's condition, diffracting at a range of
Bragg's angles, leading to the superimposing of patterns, which pro-
duces a diffused pattern. EBSD has been shown to measure orientations
with a high accuracy (0.5°–1.0°) [12]. This enables the study of plastic
strain that manifests itself in low angle misorientation. The EBSD
method is capable of providing a localized response to strain changes as
it can probe very small regions. Child and co-workers studied the strain
hardening in shot peened Nickel alloy using EBSD [13]. It was observed
that the strain-hardening depth is approximately half the residual stress
depth. Compared with shot peening, LSP can induce deeper strain-
hardening layer and compressive residual stress layer. After LSP, the
plastic deformation is manifested as increase in fraction of low angle
misorientations and formation of sub-grain boundaries. This cannot be
easily characterized in bulk samples using other methods. Compared
with other methods, EBSD is unique in that it can provide information
about the change of the plastic strain on a more localized scale. This
makes EBSD very suitable for characterizing the plastic strain in the
LSP-treated metals. However, the characterization of plastic strain and
thus the work-hardening of the LSP sample using EBSD is very rare and
thus is the focus of this paper.
The focus of EBSD has been on mapping of plastic strain although
several approaches have been tried to assess elastic strain using change
in Kikuchi band width and shift in zone axis [14,15]. These approaches
remain difficult due to problems in measuring edges of bands especially
in case of high index planes, which are more sensitive to strain. Also, in
cases where plastic deformation is involved, the plastic strain will
dominate the degradation of pattern than the elastic strain [11]. The
focus of this study is on qualitative mapping of plastic deformation.
There are various approaches to analyze plastic deformation using
EBSD: image quality (IQ) and local misorientations including grain
average misorientations, grain orientation spread, kernel orientation
spread, kernel average misorientation and kernel average center mis-
orientation. These approaches and the sensitivities associated with
them have been discussed in the literature [11].
Image quality, is a parameter describing the quality of Kikuchi
pattern. As plastic strain affects the quality of patterns, IQ can be used
to study the distribution of plastic strain. The image quality metric can
be defined in several ways: intensity mean of pattern (IQM), intensity
deviation (IQσ), entropy (IQE) and the conventional method, Hough
transform (IQHT) [16]. The image quality used in this study is based on
Hough transform, an imaging processing routine used to convert bands
into point and used to locate bands in Kikuchi pattern [17]. In a study
conducted by Wright et al. [16] to correlate the IQ and microstructural
features, it was found that IQHT gives the best description of strain and
grain boundaries. In this study all image quality maps were generated
by using this metric. IQ can be used to estimate strain but it can be
affected by factors like grain orientation and sample preparation, sec-
ondary phases, beam conditions and camera settings [11], limiting its
application for quantifying strains.
Misorientation refers to orientation of one crystal lattice with re-
spect to another. Plastic strain manifests itself as dislocations in metals,
which can cause rotation of crystal relative to original crystal orienta-
tion. Local misorientation can be studied in several ways. In our study,
misorientations were studied using different approaches:
I. Misorientations angle: Shows the distribution of grain boundary
misorientations
II. Grain orientation spread: Show the distribution of orientation
spread within the grains. For a given grain, it calculates the average
16
Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26
misorientation between all data points in the grain.
III. Kernel average misorientation: For a given data point calculates the
average misorientation between the data point and all of its
neighbors (excluding misorientations greater than some prescribed
value (5° in this case)). Kernel is defined as set of points (in our
analysis, up to third neighbor) around the point of scan.
IN718 SPF (super plastic forming) is a relatively new aero engine
alloy that can be super plastically formed, which allows complex shapes
to be produced. One of the potential application of LSP is to improve
the fatigue performance of Inconel alloys [18], especially at elevated
temperature. Material fatigue performance is dependent on the near-
surface microstructure and strain hardening [19], in addition to com-
pressive residual stresses. While the microstructure and residual
stresses induced by LSP have been extensively studied [5–10], the
plastic strain generated by LSP has not been thoroughly investigated
using experiments. This work investigates the in-depth distribution of
plastic strain and the resultant changes in microstructure, hardness and
mechanical properties of IN718 SPF after LSP treatment. EBSD makes
use of Kikuchi patterns to determine the crystallographic information
that can be analyzed to get information on texture, grains/grain
boundaries and phases. The EBSD results indicate that LSP causes an
increase in low angle misorientation and grain orientation spread.
Additionally, the micro-pillar tests indicate higher yield strength of the
material closer to the peened surface. Studying the localized micro-
structure change after LSP treatment gives us more insight into how LSP
affects the fatigue performance of Inconel 718 alloys.
2. Experimental Details
Inconel alloy 718SPF (a sheet of 2 mm in thickness) used in this
study was obtained from Special Metals Corporation. This sheet had
been solution-annealed (between 940 and 995 °C) as per AMS 5596G
specification. Coupons of dimensions 8 mm × 8 mm × 2 mm were
sectioned using electrical discharge machining (EDM). Samples for
metallography were prepared by grinding with successively finer SiC
grit papers and polishing with colloidal silica using a vibratory polisher.
A solution of 100 mL HCL and 0.5 mL H2O2 was used as an etchant.
Fig. 1 shows the optical micrograph of as-received material. The grain
size was determined to be ~6 μm.
The LSP treatment was performed using the GEN IV LSP system at
GE Aviation. One entire surface of the coupons was peened using black
vinyl tape as ablative medium and water as confinement media. A Q-
switched Nd:Glass laser (λ = 1.054 nm) was used with following
parameters: Laser energies of 4.7 J and 3.16 J, a pulse width of 20 ns,
and spot size of 2.9 mm. This results in power densities of 9 GW/cm2
Fig. 1. Microstructure of as-received IN718 SPF.
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

Fig. 2. Schematic of the locations of EBSD observation.

Adopted from [13] with permission

Fig. 3. IPF (a) and IQ map (b) of an as-received sample, (c) IPF legend and (d) grain boundary misorientation legend. (All IPF images and IQ maps share the same
legends in this article).

Fig. 4. (a) Misorientation angle and (b) grain orientation vs fraction of boundaries for as-received sample.

and 6 GW/cm2 for two different energies used. A 50% overlap between 7.79 GPa and 6.29 GPa, respectively.
successive impacts was used. The peak pressures corresponding to these The samples for EBSD analysis were prepared from cross sections of
power densities were measured using X-cut quartz piezoelectric to be laser peened coupons at different locations, as schematic shown in

17
A.S. Gill et al.
Fig. 5. KAM map (3-neighbor, 5° maximum) for the as-received sample, all KAM maps in this article share the same legend.
(a)
Fig. 6. IPF (a) and IQ map (b) of the 9 GW/cm2 sample.
Fig. 2. The samples were mounted in cross section using a conductive
epoxy and carefully polished using automated polishing equipment.
Samples were grinded using 320 grit, 800 grit and 1200 grit for 2 min
each, followed by polishing using 3 μm and 1 μm diamond suspensions
for 15 min each. A load of 20 N was used during all the polishing steps.
Final polishing was performed on a vibratory polisher with colloidal
silica (50 nm particle size) for 2 h. A small amount of H2O2 was added
to colloidal silica to help the chemical polishing. All samples were
prepared under same conditions to eliminate any variation in sample
preparation. As EBSD is a surface sensitive technique, it is important to
verify that data results are not affected by sample preparation. To
achieve this, a separate sample of 8 mm × 8 mm × 2 mm was polished
with the procedure described previously and couples of fiducial marks
were made at the center of the top surface of the sample using a Vickers
indenter. Using these indents as a reference, EBSD data was collected
from the top surface of the sample at the same set of grains before and
then after peening with a single laser impact. Single pulse LSP was
performed using power density of 6 GW/cm2, using parameters de-
scribed earlier.
EBSD measurements were carried out using a TSL EBSD system in-
stalled on a Phillips XL 30 scanning electron microscope with a field
emission gun. For the analysis in this study, the misorientation angle for
a grain boundary was set to be 15° and for a sub grain boundary an
angle of 1°. The specimen was tilted 70° with respect to stage and all the
18
Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26
(b)
data was collected at a working distance of 9.5 mm. Scans were of
40 μm × 40 μm, with a step size of 0.5 μm.
Nano-indentation tests were carried out in a single LSP dimple using
a nano-indentation system (CSM Instruments) with a Berkovich in-
denter with a maximum load of 100 mN and 10 s holding time. Micro-
hardness tests were carried out on the cross-section of the laser peened
sample using a LECO M400-H1 micro-hardness tester. Micro-pillars,
measuring ~50 μm diameter and ~100 μm tall were fabricated from the
near-surface regions on cross-section LSP-treated samples using micro-
EDM and the compression of the micro-pillars was carried out in a MTS
nano-indentation system available at the Air Force Research
Laboratory, WPAFB, Dayton, OH.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Plastic Strain in the Virgin Sample
Fig. 3a shows the Inverse pole figure (IPF) map from the as-received
sample. The IPF map gives an indication of the crystal direction aligned
with the sample normal. There was no texture in the as-received ma-
terial and the grains in as-received sample are randomly oriented.
Fig. 3b shows the image quality map of the same area. Both maps have
been overlaid with misorientations as per the legend provided. Low
angle misorientations (< 15°) indicate presence of low angle grain
A.S. Gill et al.
(a)
(c)
Fig. 7. IQ maps at different depths (surface (a), 100 μm (b), 300 μm (c) and 500 μm (d)) in the 9 GW/cm2 sample.
boundaries which are an indication of plastic strain. It is clear that
virgin sample has very few boundaries with low angle misorientations
(red color) and hence has almost no plastic strain. Almost all the
boundaries (blue color) are high angle grain boundaries (> 15°). An-
other indication of plastic strain is given by the quality of the Kikuchi
patterns, as patterns become diffuse when the lattice is distorted. This is
done by studying the IQ maps where the contrast is provided by the
quality of patterns obtained, dark areas being the regions from where
the poor quality patterns were obtained. Uniform nature of IQ map of a
virgin sample indicates that lattice was free of plastic strain.
Fig. 4a shows the distribution of grain boundary misorientations as
a function of fraction of boundaries in the area of measurement. It is
clear that in the as-received sample there are very few low angle
boundaries. Fig. 4b shows the grain orientation spread within grain as a
function of number fraction. The grain orientation spread is < 1° in the
as-received material.
Fig. 5 shows the Kernel average misorientation (KAM) map of the
as-received sample. The map shows the distribution the average mis-
orientation between the data point and all of its neighbors. The results
show that these misorientations are of low magnitude (2° maximum).
3.2. Plastic Strain in the LSP Sample
Fig. 6(a, b) shows IPF and IQ maps overlaid with misorientations
from a 9 GW/cm2 sample.
19
Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26
(b)
(d)
The IPF map has been overlaid with SEM image to show the location
of scan with respect to peened surface. The scan was done slightly away
from the peened surface, to avoid any edge effects. It is clear from the
maps that number of low angle misorientations has increased sig-
nificantly in this case, indicating the presence of plastic strain.
The IQ map in this case shows variation as a function of distance
from peened surface. This indicates the gradient nature of the plastic
strain induced by LSP. It was possible to get good Kikuchi patterns from
near the surface where deformation should be highest. This indicates
that plastic strain introduced by LSP is not very high. This has been
noted in a study by Peyre et al. [2]. Results show that 9 GW/cm2 sample
shows higher fraction of boundaries with low angle misorientations
than the as-received sample. Fig. 7 shows the IQ maps from peened
surface in 9 GW/cm2 as a function of distance: at surface, 100 μm,
300 μm and 500 μm from surface. Maps indicate that low angle mis-
orientations (< 15°) decrease with the distance from peened area. At
300 μm, there are very low angle misorientations indicating that plastic
deformation is limited to around 300 μm. At 500 μm, there are no low
angle boundaries. This is reflected in misorientation angle profiles and
grain orientation spread plots as indicated in Figs. 8 and 9.
Fig. 10 shows the KAM map for the 9 GW/cm2 sample as a function
of distance from peened surface. Fig. 10(a–d) shows the KAM maps
from surface, 100 μm, 300 μm and 500 μm from the peened surface in
case of a 9 GW/cm2 sample. Clearly, there are significant areas with
deformation present at surface, 100 μm and 300 μm from peened
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 8. Misorienation angle vs number fraction at different depths (surface (a), 100 μm (b), 300 μm (c) and 500 μm (d)) of the 9 GW/cm2 sample.

Fig. 9. Grain orientation spread vs number fraction at different depths (surface (a), 100 μm (b), 300 μm (c) and 500 μm (d)) of the 9 GW/cm2 sample.

surface. At 500 μm, there are no areas with showing any deformation density of 6 GW/cm2. Fig. 11 shows IQ maps from near surface region
apart from a small spot. and region far from peened surface (~1700 μm) overlaid with mis-
Similar results can be seen in the sample peened with a power orientation boundaries. Near surface region shows regions with low

20
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 10. KAM maps (3-neighbor, 5° maximum) at different depths (surface (a), 100 μm (b), 300 μm (c) and 500 μm (d)) of the 9 GW/cm2 sample.

(a) (b)
Fig. 11. IQ map from the surface and 1700 μm below surface for the LSP sample (6 GW/cm2).

angle misorientations while far from peened surface (1700 μm), there is also reflected in the misorientation angle data (Fig. 12) and grain
are almost no low angle misorientations except at a scratch from sample orientation spread (Fig. 13). The number fraction of low angle mis-
preparation, all misorientations being high angle grain boundaries. This orientations in the 6 GW/cm2 sample (Fig. 12a) at surface is also lower

21
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

(a) (b)

Fig. 12. Misorienation angle vs number fraction at different depths (surface (a), and 1700 μm (b)) of the 6 GW/cm2 sample.

Fig. 13. Grain orientation spread vs number fraction at surface (a) and at 1700 μm (b) in the 6 GW/cm2 sample.

(a) (b)
Fig. 14. KAM maps (3-neighbor, 5° maximum), at surface (a) and at 1700 μm (b) in the 6 GW/cm2 sample.

than the sample treated with 9 GW/cm2 (Fig. 8a) indicating that 9 GW/
cm2 sample underwent higher deformation, and thus higher plastic
strain, than 6 GW/cm2 sample. Note that in Figs. 8c and 12b, the 6 GW/
cm2 sample at 1700 μm has slightly higher misorientation than the
9 GW/cm2 sample at 300 μm, if we only consider angles lower than 4°.
However, this does not indicate that the plastic deformation is larger for
lower laser intensity at deeper depth compared with that for higher
laser intensity at shallower depth. If we consider all misorientation
angles smaller than 15°, the 9 GW/cm2 sample at a depth of 300 μm still
has higher overall misorientations, and thus larger plastic strain. These
results are consistent with FWHM data obtained from X-ray diffraction
conducted on same samples [20] which indicated that the shock wave
deforms the material up to 400 μm or so. In-depth hardness distribution
has also been observed to show similar trends, although hardness re-
sults showed a moderate increase in hardness to a depth of ~500 μm or
so.
Fig. 14 shows the KAM maps from near surface region and at
1700 μm from peened surface in 6 GW/cm2 sample. Near surface region
shows widespread deformation as compared with the scan from
1700 μm away.
LSP uses a high pressure shock wave to deform the material in near
surface regions. The material is deformed up to a depth till which the
pressure generated exceeds the Hugoniot elastic limit (HEL). HEL is
related to dynamic yield strength σydyn and Poisson's ratio, ν [21]. In the

22
A.S. Gill et al.
Fig. 15. Optical micrograph of laser impact (dimple) and the indents in the red
circle. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
LSP process, when the shock pressure is higher than the HEL of the
material, plastic deformation occurs. As the shock wave propagates into
the material, its magnitude decreases gradually. Plastic deformation
occurs till a depth at which the shock pressure is no longer higher than
the HEL of the material. The near surface regions experience most de-
formation and have higher plastic strain that decreases as a function of
distance from the surface as shock waves attenuates rapidly. Studies
have shown that LSP creates a high density of dislocations in a variety
of materials [22–27]. Meyers et al. [27] studied shock deformed nickel
and concluded that plastic deformation in the case shock waves is the
result of dislocations generation at the rapidly moving shock front. So
in a process like LSP where time scales are short, dislocation generation,
not dislocation motion, is responsible for deformation. These disloca-
tions are responsible for introducing low angle grain boundaries in the
material.
3.3. Effect of Sample Preparation on Data Reliability
It is important to verify that sample preparation did not influence
the data. To this end, same grains of a polished sample were analyzed
before and after laser peening. This provides a direct comparison and
eliminates any error in data collection due to sampling different set of
grains or any variations in sample preparation. On a polished sample,
indents were near the center of the coupon using a Vickers indenter.
The center of coupon was then peened with a single laser impact.
Fig. 15 shows the resulting dimple with indents near the center.
After peening, the grains are discernible showing that grains
(a)
Fig. 16. Area around the indents before (a) and after (b) LSP.
23
Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26
changed orientations (Fig. 16). Slip bands are also visible indicating
deformation. Using these fiduciary marks, EBSD data was collected
before and after peening to see if EBSD is able to capture the de-
formation introduced by shock waves.
Fig. 17 shows the IQ maps of the area before and after peening. As
single LSP fire does not introduce much plastic strain in the material,
there is not much deterioration in the quality of Kikuchi pattern as
reflected in the IQ maps.
Figs. 18 and 19 show the misorientation distribution and grain or-
ientation spread data for the same region before and after peening.
Clearly there was an increase in low angle misorientations and as well
as in grain orientation spread. The misorientation distribution plot of
the single impact peened sample (Fig. 19b) shows fewer low angle
boundaries than the sample in which complete surface treated with
same power density (6 GW/cm2) in Fig. 12a. This apparent anomaly is
due to the way in which peening is performed over a larger area. When
peening a patch, laser impacts are overlapped to provide a uniform
coverage (50% overlap in consecutive laser impacts in our study).
Hence a spot is impacted up to 3–4 times. As the cold wok is cumula-
tive, this leads to more deformation in the samples where a patch is
peened versus a sample peened with just one impact. The ability to
capture such difference in deformation shows that EBSD is able to
successfully map subtle changes in the underlying microstructure.
3.4. Effect of LSP on Mechanical Properties
To study the effect of LSP on the local mechanical properties, in-
dentation tests and micro-pillar compression tests were carried out.
Fig. 20a shows the indents created by nano-indentation tests across the
center of a single indent dimple created by LSP. Fig. 20b shows the
indentation hardness as a function of distance from the center. It can be
observed that the center has the highest hardness (1.19 GPa) and de-
creases gradually as it goes away from the center. At the edge of the
dimple, the hardness decreased to 0.9 GPa. In a single LSP event, the
beam center has the highest work-hardening and decreases gradually
away from the center. This results in the highest indentation hardness
in the dimple center. Fig. 20c shows an optical image of the indents
created by indentation test at the cross-section of the laser peened
sample. The in-depth hardness profiles are shown in Fig. 20d. Both laser
intensities (6 and 9 GW/cm2) resulted in a gradient hardness distribu-
tion with the highest hardness on the top surface. This is caused by the
gradient distribution of the plastic strain and thus the work-hardening
level in the laser peened sample. The hardness of the 9 GW/cm2 is
higher than that of the 6 GW/cm2. The much higher shock pressure in
the 9 GW/cm2 LSP resulted in higher plastic strain and thus work-
hardening. Fig. 20e shows an SEM image of the micro-pillars created by
micro-EDM. The corresponding yield stress and flow stress as a function
of depth is shown in Fig. 20f. A gradient distribution of both the yield
stress and flow stress can be observed, with the values being higher
(b)
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

4 3 4 3

5 5
1 1
2 2
6 6

7 7
(a) (b)
Fig. 17. IQ maps of same set of grains before (a) and after (b) LSP, same grains were marked by the same numbers in different colors (red in a and black in b). (For
interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

(a) (b)

Fig. 18. Grain orientation spread vs number fraction of same set of grains before (a) and after (b) LSP.

(a) (b)

Fig. 19. Misorientation angle vs number fraction of same set of grains before (a) and after (b) peening.

closer to the LSP-treated surface and decreasing with distance through
the depth, consistent with the in-depth hardness profile.
4. Conclusions
Inconel alloy 718SPF was laser shock peened with different laser
power densities and samples were analyzed using EBSD to map plastic
deformation induced in the near surface region. The following con-
clusions can be made.
1. The LSP treatment introduced low angle misorientations in the
sample. The misorientations were mapped in several different ways
including studying IQ maps, KAM maps and grain orientation
spread.
2. Laser shock peened samples showed an increase in near-surface low
angle misorientations (< 15°), indicating the extent plastic de-
formation introduced by shock wave. Samples treated with higher
incident laser power density showed larger increase in small angle
misorientations (< 15°) and hence higher plastic strain than sam-
ples treated with lower power density.
3. The number of low angle misorientations induced by peening de-
crease as a function of distance from the peened surface. At
depths > 300 μm, the distribution of misorientations become similar
to a non-peened sample, indicating the extent of plastic deformation
introduced by the peening treatment. This is in agreement with the
results obtained by hardness measurements and by analyzing
FWHM of the diffraction peaks.
4. The near-surface plastic strain and associated high dislocation
density led to an increase in the local hardness and yield stress, that
were highest near the LSP-treated surface and decreased gradually

24
A.S. Gill et al. Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Peened surface

(e)
(f)

Fig. 20. (a) Nano-indents in a single dimple, (b) hardness distribution across the dimple center, (c) indentation test from the cross-section, (d) in-depth hardness
comparison for 6 and 9 GW/cm2, the averages and error bars were obtained from eight measurements, hardness of virgin sample 2450 MPa, (e) an SEM image of the
micro-pillars created by FIB, (f) 0.2% yield stress and 2% flow stress as a function of depth, the averages and error bars were obtained from five measurements, (for
the data reported in c, d, e and f, whole surface covered by LSP impacts with 50% overlap).

through the depth.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Science Foundation
(Grant Nos. DMR-0706161, CMMI-1334538 and CMMI-1335204) for
financial support of this research and Special Metals for supplying the
IN718 SPF alloy sheet for this study. We would also like to thank Dr.
Mike Uchic and Mr. Allan Smith from the Air Force Research
Laboratory, WPAFB, Dayton, OH for help with the fabrication and
compression testing of the micropillars. We also gratefully acknowledge
the contribution of the State of Ohio, Department of Development and
Third Frontier Commission, which provided funding in support of
“Ohio Center for Laser Shock Processing for Advanced Material and
Devices” and the experimental and computational equipment in the
Center that was used in this work. Any opinions, findings, conclusions,
or recommendations expressed in these documents are those of the
author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF or the State
of Ohio, Department of Development.

25
A.S. Gill et al.
References
[1] C.S. Montross, T. Wei, L. Ye, G. Clark, Y.-W.W. Mai, Laser shock processing and its
effects on microstructure and properties of metal alloys: a review, Int. J. Fatigue 24
(2002) 1021–1036, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-1123(02)00022-1.
[2] P.S. Prevéy, The Effect of Cold Work on the Thermal Stability of Residual
Compression in Surface Enhanced IN718, 20th ASM Mater. Solut. Conf. Expo,
(2000).
[3] P. Peyre, R. Fabbro, P. Merrien, H.P. Lieurade, Laser shock processing of aluminium
alloys. Application to high cycle fatigue behaviour, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 210 (1996)
102–113, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0921-5093(95)10084-9.
[4] R.J. Clifton, J. Duffy, K.A. Hartley, T.G. Shawki, On critical conditions for shear
band formation at high strain rates, Scr. Metall. 18 (1984) 443–448, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/0036-9748(84)90418-6.
[5] J.Z. Lu, W.W. Deng, K.Y. Luo, L.J. Wu, H.F. Lu, Surface EBSD analysis and
strengthening mechanism of AISI304 stainless steel subjected to massive LSP
treatment with different pulse energies, Mater. Charact. 125 (2017) 99–107, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2017.01.036.
[6] J.Z. Lu, K.Y. Luo, Y.K. Zhang, G.F. Sun, Y.Y. Gu, J.Z. Zhou, X.D. Ren, X.C. Zhang,
L.F. Zhang, K.M. Chen, C.Y. Cui, Y.F. Jiang, A.X. Feng, L. Zhang, Grain refinement
mechanism of multiple laser shock processing impacts on ANSI 304 stainless steel,
Acta Mater. 58 (2010) 5354–5362, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2010.06.
010.
[7] S. Huang, J.Z. Zhou, J. Sheng, J.Z. Lu, G.F. Sun, X.K. Meng, L.D. Zuo, H.Y. Ruan,
H.S. Chen, Effects of laser energy on fatigue crack growth properties of 6061-T6
aluminum alloy subjected to multiple laser peening, Eng. Fract. Mech. 99 (2013)
87–100, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.01.011.
[8] C. Ye, S. Suslov, X. Fei, G.J. Cheng, Bimodal nanocrystallization of NiTi shape
memory alloy by laser shock peening and post-deformation annealing, Acta Mater.
59 (2011) 7219–7227, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.07.070.
[9] C. Ye, S. Suslov, B.J. Kim, E.A. Stach, G.J. Cheng, Fatigue performance improve-
ment in AISI 4140 steel by dynamic strain aging and dynamic precipitation during
warm laser shock peening, Acta Mater. 59 (2011) 1014–1025, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.actamat.2010.10.032.
[10] S. Prabhakaran, S. Kalainathan, Warm laser shock peening without coating induced
phase transformations and pinning effect on fatigue life of low-alloy steel, Mater.
Des. 107 (2016) 98–107, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.06.026.
[11] S.I. Wright, M.M. Nowell, D.P. Field, A. Fiel, A Review of strain analysis using
electron backscatter diffraction, Microsc. Microanal. 17 (2011) 316–329, http://dx.
doi.org/10.1017/S1431927611000055.
[12] B.S. El-Dasher, B.L. Adams, A.D. Rollett, Viewpoint: experimental recovery of
geometrically necessary dislocation density in polycrystals, Scr. Mater. 48 (2003)
141–145, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6462(02)00340-8.
[13] D.J. Child, G.D. West, R.C. Thomson, Assessment of surface hardening effects from
shot peening on a Ni-based alloy using electron backscatter diffraction techniques,
Acta Mater. 59 (2011) 4825–4834, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2011.04.
26
Materials Characterization 142 (2018) 15–26
025.
[14] A.J. Wilkinson, Methods for determining elastic strains from electron backscatter
diffraction and electron channelling patterns, Mater. Sci. Technol. 13 (1997) 79–84,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/026708397790242879.
[15] R.R. Keller, A. Roshko, R.H. Geiss, K.A. Bertness, T.P. Quinn, EBSD measurement of
strains in GaAs due to oxidation of buried AlGaAs layers, Microelectron. Eng. 75
(2004) 96–102, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mee.2003.11.010.
[16] S.I. Wright, M.M. Nowell, EBSD image quality mapping, Microsc. Microanal. 12
(2006) 72–84.
[17] N.C. Krieger-Lassen, K. Conradsen, D.J. Jensen, Image processing procedures for
analysis of electron back scattering patterns, Scanning Microsc. 6 (1992) 115–121.
[18] 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, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.
2015.06.026.
[19] H. Guechichi, L. Castex, Fatigue limits prediction of surface treated materials, J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 172 (2006) 381–387, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmatprotec.2005.10.010.
[20] A.S. Gill, Z. Zhou, U. Lienert, J. Almer, D.F. Lahrman, S.R. Mannava, D. Qian,
V.K. Vasudevan, High spatial resolution, high energy synchrotron X-ray diffraction
characterization of residual strains and stresses in laser shock peened Inconel
718SPF alloy, J. Appl. Phys. 111 (2012) 84904, , http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.
3702890.
[21] A.H. Clauer, D.F. Lahrman, Laser shock processing as a surface enhancement pro-
cess, Key Eng. Mater. 197 (2001) 121–144, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.
scientific.net/KEM.197.121.
[22] I. Nikitin, B. Scholtes, H.J. Maier, I. Altenberger, High temperature fatigue behavior
and residual stress stability of laser-shock peened and deep rolled austenitic steel
AISI 304, Scr. Mater. 50 (2004) 1345–1350, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
scriptamat.2004.02.012.
[23] J.P. Chu, J.M. Rigsbee, G. Banaś, H.E. Elsayed-Ali, Laser-shock processing effects on
surface microstructure and mechanical properties of low carbon steel, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 260 (1999) 260–268, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(98)00889-2.
[24] I. Altenberger, E.A. Stach, G. Liu, R.K. Nalla, R.O. Ritchie, An in situ transmission
electron microscope study of the thermal stability of near-surface microstructures
induced by deep rolling and laser-shock peening, Scr. Mater. 48 (2003) 1593–1598,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6462(03)00143-X.
[25] P. Forget, M. Jeandin, A. Lyoret, Determination of laser shock treatment conditions
for fatigue testing of Ni-based superalloys, J. Phys. IV 3 (1993) C7–921.
[26] B.P. Fairand, B.A. Wilcox, W.J. Gallagher, D.N. Williams, Laser shock-induced mi-
crostructural and mechanical property changes in 7075 aluminum, J. Appl. Phys. 43
(1972) 3893–3895, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1661837.
[27] M.A. Meyers, K.C. Hsu, K. Couch-Robino, The attenuation of shock waves in nickel:
second report, Mater. Sci. Eng. 59 (1983) 235–249, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
0025-5416(83)90171-4.