The aim of this paper is to shed some light on the discrepancy origins of a round‐robin test for X‐ray stress analysis in order to improve the specimen quality and to establish new guidelines for the coming works on set‐up certification. After a global overview of the return measurements and certificates, an original analysis method is proposed with a detailed study of the raw results emphasizing the most relevant uncertainties. It is shown that the standardization of stress calculus parameters widely reduces the inter‐laboratory discrepancy. A comparative analysis of the experimental patterns with some of the most common peak localization techniques also shows the importance of providing this information together with the stress values calculated even with quasi‐ideal cases such as shot‐peened aluminium alloy specimens. In this way, the value distributions can be easily fitted with a simple statistical law which allows the mean stress value to be considered as more representative.
FrançoisM.ConvertF.BranchuS.French round-robin test on X-ray stress determination on a shot-peened steel. Expl Mechanics, 2000, 40, 361–368.
2.
XPA 09–285. Essais non destructifs: méthodes d'essais pour l'analyse des contraintes résiduelles par diffraction des rayons X, 1999 (Association Française de Normalisation, La Plaine Saint-Denis).
FitzpatrickM. E.FryA. T.HoldwayP.KandilF. A.ShackletonJ.SuominenL.Determination of residual stresses by X-ray diffraction - measurement good practice guide. NPL Publications 52, 2002 (National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex).
5.
CastexL.LebrunJ. L.MaederG.SprauelJ. M.Détermination des contraintes résiduelles par diffraction des rayons X, Publns Scientifiques Techqs ENSAM, 1981, 22, 51–60.
6.
DehlezR.DeperoL. E.FrançoisM.FryT.GelfiM.LebrunJ. L.MichaudH.PfeifferW.VermeulenA.WoningL.X-ray residual stress analysis: the draft for a European normative, In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Experimental Mechanics, Politecnico di Bari, Italy, 2004.
7.
WI 00138097. Non-destructive testing - test method for residual stress analysis by X-ray diffraction. Draft supplied for the six month enquiry, November 2004.
8.
ASTM 3.01. Standard method for verifying the alignment of X-ray diffraction instrumentation for residual stress measurement, 1984, pp. 809–812 (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).
9.
HanabusaT.Japanese standard for X-ray stress measurement. In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Residual stresses, Oxford, UK, 2000, pp. 181–188 (IOM Communications Ltd, London).
10.
HilleyM. E.Residual stress measurement by X-ray diffraction. SAE Information Report SAE J784a, 1971 (Society of Automotive Engineers, New York).
YermanJ. A.KroenkeW. C.LongW. H.Accuracy evaluation of residual stress measurements. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Residual Stresses, Cluny, France, 1996.
13.
ISO 5725–2:1997. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 2: basic method for the determination of repeatability and reproducibility of a standard measurement method, 1997 (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva).
14.
FrançoisM.FerreiraC.BotzonR.Reference specimen for X-ray stress analysis, the French experience. Metrologia, 2004, 41, 33–40.
15.
DurieuxG.Experimental scattering in stress analysis with diffractometer using position sensitive scintillation detector technology. Joint Working Session on Residual Stresses, Saarbrucken, Germany, 2002.
16.
SusukiK.TanakaK.Proposal for standard method of X-ray stress measurement of ceramics. In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Residual stresses, Oxford, UK, 2000, pp. 1151–1159 (IOM Communications Ltd, London).
17.
FlamanM.HerringJ. A.SEM/ASTM round robin residual stress measurement study - phase 1. Expl Techqs, 1986, 10, 23–23.
18.
GläserM.Cycles of comparison measurements - uncertainties and efficiencies. Measmt Sci. Technol., 2000, 11, 20–24.
19.
ElsterC.LinkA.Analysis of key comparison data: Assessment of current methods for determining a reference value. Measmt Sci. Technol., 2001, 12, 1431–1438.
20.
PrielM.PerruchetM.Convergence entre la norme ISO 5725, exactitude des résultats et méthodes de mesure, et le guide pour l'expression des incertitudes de mesure. Contrôle Industriel, 1998, 215, 16–22.
21.
WilsonA. J. C.Statistical variance of line-profile parameters. Measures of intensity, location and dispersion. Acta Crystallographica A, 1967, 23, 888–988.
22.
FrançoisM.BourniquelB.NotC.GuillénR.DuvalC.Parameters influencing peak localization repeatability. Z. Metallkunde, 2000, 91, 414–421.
23.
WithersP. J.DaymondM. R.JohnsonM. W.The precision of diffraction peak location. J. Appl. Crystallography, 2001, 34, 737–743.
24.
DelhezR.KeijserT. H.MittemeijerE. J.Truncation in diffraction pattern analysis - I: Concept of a diffraction line profile and its range. J. Appl. Crystallography, 1986, 19, 459–466.
25.
LiJ.SunY.HeJ.Background analysis and its correction for X-ray stress measurements. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Residual stresses. Residual stress - III: science and technology, 1997, pp. 127–133 (Elsevier Applied Science, London).
ConvertF.Mesure des déplacements des pics de diffraction très larges dans l'analyse des contraintes par diffractométrie X. Rev. Fr. Mécanique, 1993, 1, 81–92.
28.
SprauelJ. M.Étude par diffraction X des facteurs mécaniques influençant la corrosion sous contraintes d'aciers inoxydables. PhD Thesis, University of Paris VI, 1988.
29.
PfeifferW.X-ray stress measurement - A new intensity and background correction procedure for -diffractometers. Materialprüf, 1995, 37, 292–295.
30.
HennionV.SprauelJ. M.MichaudH.Contribution in residual stress evaluation in high-stress-gradient zones by X-ray diffraction. J. Appl. Crystallography, 2000, 33, 26–34.
31.
JamesM. R.CohenJ. B.Geometrical problems with a position sensitive detector employed on a diffractometer, including its use in the measurement of stress. J. Appl. Crystallography, 1979, 12, 39–345.
32.
ZantopulosH.JatczakC. F.Systematic errors in X-ray diffractometer stress measurements due to specimen geometry and beam divergence. Adv. X-ray Anal., 1970, 14, 360–376.
33.
FerreiraC.FrançoisM.GuillénR.Residual stress error introduced by truncated patterns: Prediction and corrections. Mater. Sci. Forum, 2005, 490–491, 171–176.
