Está en la página 1de 15

I. Tensiones residuales y su medicin.

Las tensiones residuales (locked-in) en materiales o


componentes residuales son aquellas que existen en
un objeto sin la aplicacin de ningn tipo de carga o
servicio. Los procesos de manufactura son las
causas mas comunes de tensiones residuales.
Virtualmente todos los procesos de fabricacin y
manufacturacin son las causas mas comunes de
tensiones residuales-darle forma, soldar materiales,
maquinado, moldeado, tratamiento con calor, etc.-
introducen tensiones en el objeto fabricado. Otra
causa comn de tensiones residuales son los
servicios de reparacin o modificacin. En algunas
instancias, las tensiones pueden ser inducidas a lo
largo de la vida de la estructura, ya sea por efectos
de su instalacin o ensamblaje, sobrecargas, efectos
del suelo o subsuelo o por cargas muertas que
podran llegar a ser parte integral de la estructura.
Los efectos de las tensiones residuales pueden ser
beneficiosos o no dependiendo de la magnitud,
indicios y la distribucin de la tensin con respecto a
las tensiones provocadas por la carga. Comnmente
las tensiones residuales son la causa de accidentes,
y hay muchos casos documentados en donde las
tensiones fueron el factor predominante
contribuyendo en la fatiga de algunas estructuras as
como de algunas fallas estructurales cuando las
tensiones provocadas por el servicio se juntaron con
las tensiones residuales. Un aspecto particular de las
tensiones residuales es que nadie las nota hasta que
provocan una falla de funcionamiento.
La medicin de tensiones residuales en objetos
opacos no puede ser alcanzada por procedimientos
convencionales para el anlisis experimental de
tensiones, desde el medidor de deformacin o
presin (strain gage, photoelastic coating, etc.) es
totalmente insensible a la parte de la historia de la
pieza, y la medicin solo cambia en magnitud
despus de la instalacin del sensor. En orden para
medir las tensiones residuales con sensores estndar


Con sensores de tensin colocados estratgicamente
antes de diseccionar la parte, los sensores responden
a la deformacin provocada por la relajacin de la
tensin debida a la remocin de material. La tensin
residual inicial puede ser inferida por la medicin de
tensiones por consideraciones de elasticidad.
La mayora de estas tcnicas estn limitadas a
aplicaciones de laboratorio en especimenes planos o
cilndricos. Y no son adaptables a probar objetos
reales con medidas y formas arbitrarias.
La medicin de tensin por difraccin de rayos x,
ofrece una alternativa que no destruye a mtodos
alternos, pero tiene sus severas limitaciones. Dejando
un lado su tamao y su complejidad, la cual hace que
su aplicacin de campo imposible, la tcnica esta
limitada a la medicin de tensin solamente en la
superficie del material. Aunque otras tcnicas no
destructivas (electromagnetismo, ultrasonido) han
sido desarrolladas para realizar los mismos
propsitos, estos todava tienen que alcanzar una
amplia aceptacin como mtodo estandarizados para
el anlisis de tensiones residuales.

El mtodo Hole-Drilling.

La tcnica mas ampliamente usada para la medicin
de tensiones residuales es el mtodo hole-drilling
strain-gage de relajacin de tensin ilustrado en la
figura 1.
Brevemente resumido, el proceso de medicin
involucra seis pasos bsicos:
Una roseta especial strain-gage de 3 o seis
elementos es instalada para probar la pieza en
el punto donde la tensin residual va a ser
determinada.

V I S HAY MI CRO- ME A S URE ME NT S
Measurement of Residual Stresses
by the Hole-Drilling* Strain Gage Method
Tech Note TN-503 Strain Gages and Instruments
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
www.vishaymg.com
19
Revision 15-Aug-07
I. Residual Stresses and Their Measurement
Residual (locked-in) stresses in a structural material
or component are those stresses that exist in the object
without (and usually prior to) the application of any
service or other external loads. Manufacturing processes
are the most common causes of residual stress. Virtually
all manufacturing and fabricating processes casting,
welding, machining, molding, heat treatment, etc.
introduce residual stresses into the manufactured object.
Another common cause of residual stress is in-service
repair or modication. In some instances, stress may also
be induced later in the life of the structure by installation
or assembly procedures, by occasional overloads, by
ground settlement effects on underground structures, or
by dead loads which may ultimately become an integral
part of the structure.
The effects of residual stress may be either beneficial
or detrimental, depending upon the magnitude, sign,
and distribution of the stress with respect to the load-
induced stresses. Very commonly, the residual stresses are
detrimental, and there are many documented cases in which
these stresses were the predominant factor contributing
to fatigue and other structural failures when the service
stresses were superimposed on the already present residual
stresses. The particularly insidious aspect of residual stress
is that its presence generally goes unrecognized until after
malfunction or failure occurs.
Measurement of residual stress i n opaque objects
cannot be accomplished by conventional procedures for
experimental stress analysis, since the strain sensor (strain
gage, photoelastic coating, etc.) is totally insensitive to
the history of the part, and measures only changes in
strain after installation of the sensor. In order to measure
residual stress with these standard sensors, the locked-in
stress must be relieved in some fashion (with the sensor
present) so that the sensor can register the change in
strain caused by removal of the stress. This was usually
done destructively in the past by cutting and sectioning
the part, by removal of successive surface layers, or by
trepanning and coring.
With strain sensors judiciously placed before dissecting
the part, the sensors respond to the deformation produced
by relaxation of the stress with material removal. The
initial residual stress can then be inferred from the
measured strains by elasticity considerations. Most of
these techniques are limited to laboratory applications on
at or cylindrical specimens, and are not readily adaptable
to real test objects of arbitrary size and shape.
X-ray di ffraction strai n measurement, which does
not require stress relaxation, offers a nondestructive
alternative to the foregoing methods, but has its own severe
limitations. Aside from the usual bulk and complexity of
the equipment, which can preclude eld application, the
technique is limited to strain measurements in only very
shallow surface layers. Although other nondestructive
techniques (e.g., ultrasonic, electromagnetic) have been
developed for the same purposes, these have yet to achieve
wide acceptance as standardized methods of residual
stress analysis.
The Hole-Drilling Method
The most widely used modern technique for measuring
residual stress is the hole-drilling strain-gage method of
stress relaxation, illustrated in Figure 1.
Briey summarized, the measurement procedure involves
six basic steps:
A special three- (or six-) element strain gage rosette is
installed on the test part at the point where residual
stresses are to be determined.
The gage grids are wired and connected to a multi-
channel static strain indicator, such as the Vishay
Micro-Measurements Model P3 (three-element gage),
or System 5000 (six-element gage).
Figure 1. Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
Strain Gage
Rosette
Drilled Hole
* Drilling implies all methods of introducing the hole (i.e., drilling,
milling, air abrasion, etc).
V I S HAY MI CRO- ME A S URE ME NT S
Measurement of Residual Stresses
by the Hole-Drilling* Strain Gage Method
Tech Note TN-503 Strain Gages and Instruments
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
www.vishaymg.com
19
Revision 15-Aug-07
I. Residual Stresses and Their Measurement
Residual (locked-in) stresses in a structural material
or component are those stresses that exist in the object
without (and usually prior to) the application of any
service or other external loads. Manufacturing processes
are the most common causes of residual stress. Virtually
all manufacturing and fabricating processes casting,
welding, machining, molding, heat treatment, etc.
introduce residual stresses into the manufactured object.
Another common cause of residual stress is in-service
repair or modication. In some instances, stress may also
be induced later in the life of the structure by installation
or assembly procedures, by occasional overloads, by
ground settlement effects on underground structures, or
by dead loads which may ultimately become an integral
part of the structure.
The effects of residual stress may be either beneficial
or detrimental, depending upon the magnitude, sign,
and distribution of the stress with respect to the load-
induced stresses. Very commonly, the residual stresses are
detrimental, and there are many documented cases in which
these stresses were the predominant factor contributing
to fatigue and other structural failures when the service
stresses were superimposed on the already present residual
stresses. The particularly insidious aspect of residual stress
is that its presence generally goes unrecognized until after
malfunction or failure occurs.
Measurement of residual stress i n opaque objects
cannot be accomplished by conventional procedures for
experimental stress analysis, since the strain sensor (strain
gage, photoelastic coating, etc.) is totally insensitive to
the history of the part, and measures only changes in
strain after installation of the sensor. In order to measure
residual stress with these standard sensors, the locked-in
stress must be relieved in some fashion (with the sensor
present) so that the sensor can register the change in
strain caused by removal of the stress. This was usually
done destructively in the past by cutting and sectioning
the part, by removal of successive surface layers, or by
trepanning and coring.
With strain sensors judiciously placed before dissecting
the part, the sensors respond to the deformation produced
by relaxation of the stress with material removal. The
initial residual stress can then be inferred from the
measured strains by elasticity considerations. Most of
these techniques are limited to laboratory applications on
at or cylindrical specimens, and are not readily adaptable
to real test objects of arbitrary size and shape.
X-ray di ffraction strai n measurement, which does
not require stress relaxation, offers a nondestructive
alternative to the foregoing methods, but has its own severe
limitations. Aside from the usual bulk and complexity of
the equipment, which can preclude eld application, the
technique is limited to strain measurements in only very
shallow surface layers. Although other nondestructive
techniques (e.g., ultrasonic, electromagnetic) have been
developed for the same purposes, these have yet to achieve
wide acceptance as standardized methods of residual
stress analysis.
The Hole-Drilling Method
The most widely used modern technique for measuring
residual stress is the hole-drilling strain-gage method of
stress relaxation, illustrated in Figure 1.
Briey summarized, the measurement procedure involves
six basic steps:
A special three- (or six-) element strain gage rosette is
installed on the test part at the point where residual
stresses are to be determined.
The gage grids are wired and connected to a multi-
channel static strain indicator, such as the Vishay
Micro-Measurements Model P3 (three-element gage),
or System 5000 (six-element gage).
Figure 1. Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
Strain Gage
Rosette
Drilled Hole
* Drilling implies all methods of introducing the hole (i.e., drilling,
milling, air abrasion, etc).
V I S HAY MI CRO- ME A S URE ME NT S
Measurement of Residual Stresses
by the Hole-Drilling* Strain Gage Method
Tech Note TN-503 Strain Gages and Instruments
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
www.vishaymg.com
19
Revision 15-Aug-07
I. Residual Stresses and Their Measurement
Residual (locked-in) stresses in a structural material
or component are those stresses that exist in the object
without (and usually prior to) the application of any
service or other external loads. Manufacturing processes
are the most common causes of residual stress. Virtually
all manufacturing and fabricating processes casting,
welding, machining, molding, heat treatment, etc.
introduce residual stresses into the manufactured object.
Another common cause of residual stress is in-service
repair or modication. In some instances, stress may also
be induced later in the life of the structure by installation
or assembly procedures, by occasional overloads, by
ground settlement effects on underground structures, or
by dead loads which may ultimately become an integral
part of the structure.
The effects of residual stress may be either beneficial
or detrimental, depending upon the magnitude, sign,
and distribution of the stress with respect to the load-
induced stresses. Very commonly, the residual stresses are
detrimental, and there are many documented cases in which
these stresses were the predominant factor contributing
to fatigue and other structural failures when the service
stresses were superimposed on the already present residual
stresses. The particularly insidious aspect of residual stress
is that its presence generally goes unrecognized until after
malfunction or failure occurs.
Measurement of residual stress i n opaque objects
cannot be accomplished by conventional procedures for
experimental stress analysis, since the strain sensor (strain
gage, photoelastic coating, etc.) is totally insensitive to
the history of the part, and measures only changes in
strain after installation of the sensor. In order to measure
residual stress with these standard sensors, the locked-in
stress must be relieved in some fashion (with the sensor
present) so that the sensor can register the change in
strain caused by removal of the stress. This was usually
done destructively in the past by cutting and sectioning
the part, by removal of successive surface layers, or by
trepanning and coring.
With strain sensors judiciously placed before dissecting
the part, the sensors respond to the deformation produced
by relaxation of the stress with material removal. The
initial residual stress can then be inferred from the
measured strains by elasticity considerations. Most of
these techniques are limited to laboratory applications on
at or cylindrical specimens, and are not readily adaptable
to real test objects of arbitrary size and shape.
X-ray di ffraction strai n measurement, which does
not require stress relaxation, offers a nondestructive
alternative to the foregoing methods, but has its own severe
limitations. Aside from the usual bulk and complexity of
the equipment, which can preclude eld application, the
technique is limited to strain measurements in only very
shallow surface layers. Although other nondestructive
techniques (e.g., ultrasonic, electromagnetic) have been
developed for the same purposes, these have yet to achieve
wide acceptance as standardized methods of residual
stress analysis.
The Hole-Drilling Method
The most widely used modern technique for measuring
residual stress is the hole-drilling strain-gage method of
stress relaxation, illustrated in Figure 1.
Briey summarized, the measurement procedure involves
six basic steps:
A special three- (or six-) element strain gage rosette is
installed on the test part at the point where residual
stresses are to be determined.
The gage grids are wired and connected to a multi-
channel static strain indicator, such as the Vishay
Micro-Measurements Model P3 (three-element gage),
or System 5000 (six-element gage).
Figure 1. Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
Strain Gage
Rosette
Drilled Hole
* Drilling implies all methods of introducing the hole (i.e., drilling,
milling, air abrasion, etc).




El proceso antes mencionado es relativamente
simple, y ha sido estandarizado en el ASTM Standard
test Method E 837. Usando equipo y suplementos
comercialmente disponibles, y siguiendo las
recomendaciones del ASTM standard, el mtodo
Hole-Drilling puede ser aplicado rutinariamente por
cualquier tcnico calificado en anlisis de tensin, ya
que no es necesario un experto especializado para
realizar las mediciones. El mtodo es muy verstil, y
puede ser aplicado en cualquier laboratorio o campo,
sobre cualquier objeto de cualquier forma y tamao, a
veces es referido como una tcnica
semidestructora, ya que el pequeo agujero no
cambiar la integridad estructural del material de la
parte examinada ( el agujero mide aproximadamente
desde .8 a 4.8 mm. en dimetro y profundidad). En
objetos grandes, el agujero dejado es fcilmente
removible luego de terminar las pruebas, esto se
puede hacer lijando la superficie. Claro, esto deber
ser muy cuidadosamente, para no dejar estras en la
superficie durante el proceso de rebajado.
Nota 1:en su presente estado de desarrollo, el
mtodo de hole-drilling esta principalmente orientado
a aplicaciones donde las estras son uniformes en el
agujero. Mientras la reduccin y adquisicin de datos
en tales casos esta bien establecida, el juicio de la
ingeniera es generalmente requerido para verificar la
uniformidad de la tensin y otros criterios para la
validacin de la tensin calculada. Esta nota tcnica
contiene informacin bsica para el entendimiento en
de cmo opera el mtodo.
Nota 2: el calculo manual de las tensiones residuales
desde las mediciones puede ser burda, pero existe
un software especializado, el H-DRILL, que elimina
completamente la labor.


II. Principios y Teora del mtodo Hole-Drilling
Strain Gage.
La creacin de un agujero ( aunque sea muy
pequeo de dimetro) dentro de un cuerpo con
tensiones residuales, relaja las tensiones en ese
lugar. Esto ocurre porque cada perpendicular a la
superficie libre ( en este caso la superficie del
agujero) es necesariamente un eje principal en el cual
el rompimiento y la tensin normal son cero. La
eliminacin de estas tensiones en la superficie del
agujero cambian la tensin en la superficie que rodea
al agujero causando que las tensiones locales del
objeto de prueba cambien correspondientemente.
Este principio es el fundamento del mtodo hole-
drlling par mediciones de tensiones residuales, el cual
fue primeramente propuesto por Mathar.
En aplicaciones mas practicas del mtodo, el agujero
taladrado es blind, con una profundidad la cual es:
(a) casi igual al dimetro, y (b) pequea comparada
con el grosor del objeto examinado.
Desafortunadamente, la geometra del blind-hole


Anlisis a travs del agujero.

Dibujado en la figura 2 (mas adelante) esta el rea
local de un plato delgado el cual esta sujeto a
tensiones residuales uniformes,

. El estado de
tensin inicial en cualquier punto P (R , ) puede ser
expresado con coordenadas polares por:



La figura 2b la misma rea del plato del plato
despus de haber taladrado el agujero a travs de l.
Las tensiones en las cercanas del agujero son ahora
un poco diferentes, desde r y r
deben ser cero en
cualquier parte de la superficie del agujero. Una
solucin para este caso fue obtenido por G. Kirsch en
1898, y propuso las siguientes expresiones para las
tensiones en el punto P(R , ):
V I S HAY MI CRO- ME A S URE ME NT S
Measurement of Residual Stresses
by the Hole-Drilling* Strain Gage Method
Tech Note TN-503 Strain Gages and Instruments
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
www.vishaymg.com
19
Revision 15-Aug-07
I. Residual Stresses and Their Measurement
Residual (locked-in) stresses in a structural material
or component are those stresses that exist in the object
without (and usually prior to) the application of any
service or other external loads. Manufacturing processes
are the most common causes of residual stress. Virtually
all manufacturing and fabricating processes casting,
welding, machining, molding, heat treatment, etc.
introduce residual stresses into the manufactured object.
Another common cause of residual stress is in-service
repair or modication. In some instances, stress may also
be induced later in the life of the structure by installation
or assembly procedures, by occasional overloads, by
ground settlement effects on underground structures, or
by dead loads which may ultimately become an integral
part of the structure.
The effects of residual stress may be either beneficial
or detrimental, depending upon the magnitude, sign,
and distribution of the stress with respect to the load-
induced stresses. Very commonly, the residual stresses are
detrimental, and there are many documented cases in which
these stresses were the predominant factor contributing
to fatigue and other structural failures when the service
stresses were superimposed on the already present residual
stresses. The particularly insidious aspect of residual stress
is that its presence generally goes unrecognized until after
malfunction or failure occurs.
Measurement of residual stress i n opaque objects
cannot be accomplished by conventional procedures for
experimental stress analysis, since the strain sensor (strain
gage, photoelastic coating, etc.) is totally insensitive to
the history of the part, and measures only changes in
strain after installation of the sensor. In order to measure
residual stress with these standard sensors, the locked-in
stress must be relieved in some fashion (with the sensor
present) so that the sensor can register the change in
strain caused by removal of the stress. This was usually
done destructively in the past by cutting and sectioning
the part, by removal of successive surface layers, or by
trepanning and coring.
With strain sensors judiciously placed before dissecting
the part, the sensors respond to the deformation produced
by relaxation of the stress with material removal. The
initial residual stress can then be inferred from the
measured strains by elasticity considerations. Most of
these techniques are limited to laboratory applications on
at or cylindrical specimens, and are not readily adaptable
to real test objects of arbitrary size and shape.
X-ray di ffraction strai n measurement, which does
not require stress relaxation, offers a nondestructive
alternative to the foregoing methods, but has its own severe
limitations. Aside from the usual bulk and complexity of
the equipment, which can preclude eld application, the
technique is limited to strain measurements in only very
shallow surface layers. Although other nondestructive
techniques (e.g., ultrasonic, electromagnetic) have been
developed for the same purposes, these have yet to achieve
wide acceptance as standardized methods of residual
stress analysis.
The Hole-Drilling Method
The most widely used modern technique for measuring
residual stress is the hole-drilling strain-gage method of
stress relaxation, illustrated in Figure 1.
Briey summarized, the measurement procedure involves
six basic steps:
A special three- (or six-) element strain gage rosette is
installed on the test part at the point where residual
stresses are to be determined.
The gage grids are wired and connected to a multi-
channel static strain indicator, such as the Vishay
Micro-Measurements Model P3 (three-element gage),
or System 5000 (six-element gage).
Figure 1. Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
Strain Gage
Rosette
Drilled Hole
* Drilling implies all methods of introducing the hole (i.e., drilling,
milling, air abrasion, etc).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
20
A precision milling guide (Model RS-200, shown in
Figure 1) is attached to the test part and accurately
centered over a drilling target on the rosette.
After zero-balancing the gage circuits, a small, shallow
hole is drilled through the geometric center of the
rosette.
Readings are made of the relaxed strains, corresponding
to the initial residual stress.
Usi ng special data-reduction relationships, the
principal residual stresses and their angular orientation
are calculated from the measured strains.
The foregoing procedure is relatively simple, and has been
standardized in ASTM Standard Test Method E 837.
1

Using commercially available equipment and supplies, and
adhering to the recommendations in the ASTM standard,
the hole-drilling method can be applied routinely by
any qualied stress analysis technician, since no special
expertise is required for making the measurements. The
method is also very versatile, and can be performed in
either the laboratory or the eld, on test objects ranging
widely in size and shape. It is often referred to as a semi-
destructive technique, since the small hole will not, in
many cases, signicantly impair the structural integrity of
the part being tested (the hole is typically
1
32 to
3
16 in [0.8 to
4.8 mm] in both diameter and depth). With large test
objects, it is sometimes feasible to remove the hole after
testing is completed, by gently blending and smoothing the
surface with a small hand-held grinder. This must be done
very carefully, of course, to avoid introducing residual
stresses in the process of grinding.
NOTE 1: In its current state of development, the hole-
drilling method is intended primarily for applications in
which the residual stresses are uniform throughout the
drilling depth, or essentially so. While the procedures
for data acquisition and reduction in such cases are well-
established and straightforward, seasoned engineering
judgment is generally required to verify stress uniformity
and other criteria for the validity of the calculated
stresses. This Tech Note contains the basic information
for understanding how the method operates, but cannot,
of course, encompass the full background needed for
its proper application in all cases. An extensive list of
technical references is provided in the Bibliography as a
further aid to users of the method.
NOTE 2: Manual calculation of residual stresses from
the measured relaxed strains can be quite burdensome,
but there is available a specialized computer program,
H-DRILL, that completely eliminates the computational
labor.
II. Principle and Theory of the
Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
The introduction of a hole (even of very small diameter)
into a residually stressed body relaxes the stresses at that
location. This occurs because every perpendicular to a
free surface (the hole surface, in this case) is necessarily
a principal axis on which the shear and normal stresses
are zero. The elimination of these stresses on the hole
surface changes the stress in the immediately surrounding
region, causing the local strains on the surface of the test
object to change correspondingly. This principle is the
foundation for the hole-drilling method of residual stress
measurement, rst proposed by Mathar.
2
In most practical applications of the method, the drilled
hole is blind, with a depth which is: (a) about equal to
its diameter, and (b) small compared to the thickness of
the test object. Unfortunately, the blind-hole geometry
is sufficiently complex that no closed-form solution is
available from the theory of elasticity for direct calculation
of the residual stresses from the measured strains
except by the introduction of empirical coefcients. A
solution can be obtained, however, for the simpler case
of a hole drilled completely through a thin plate in which
the residual stress is uniformly distributed through the
plate thickness. Because of this, the theoretical basis for
the hole-drilling method will rst be developed for the
through-hole geometry, and subsequently extended for
application to blind holes.
Through-Hole Analysis
Depicted in Figure 2a (following) is a local area within
a thin plate which is subject to a uniform residual stress,

x
. The initial stress state at any point P (R, ) can be
expressed in polar coordinates by:


+ ( )
( )

X
X
G
X
X
G
Z
X
G
N
N
r
x
x
r
x
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
2
cos
cos
sin

Figure 2b represents the same area of the plate after a
small hole has been drilled through it. The stresses in the
vicinity of the hole are now quite different, since
r
and
r

must be zero everywhere on the hole surface. A solution
for this case was obtained by G. Kirsch in 1898, and yields
the following expressions for the stresses at the point
P (R, ):
3


j
(
\
,
+ +
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
X
X X
G
X
X X
G
N
r
x x
x x
r r r
r r
2
1
1
2
1
3 4
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2 4 2
2 4
cos
cos


+
j
(
\
,
Z
X
G
N r
x
r r 2
1
3 2
2
4 2
sin
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(2a)
(2b)
(2c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
20
A precision milling guide (Model RS-200, shown in
Figure 1) is attached to the test part and accurately
centered over a drilling target on the rosette.
After zero-balancing the gage circuits, a small, shallow
hole is drilled through the geometric center of the
rosette.
Readings are made of the relaxed strains, corresponding
to the initial residual stress.
Usi ng special data-reduction relationships, the
principal residual stresses and their angular orientation
are calculated from the measured strains.
The foregoing procedure is relatively simple, and has been
standardized in ASTM Standard Test Method E 837.
1

Using commercially available equipment and supplies, and
adhering to the recommendations in the ASTM standard,
the hole-drilling method can be applied routinely by
any qualied stress analysis technician, since no special
expertise is required for making the measurements. The
method is also very versatile, and can be performed in
either the laboratory or the eld, on test objects ranging
widely in size and shape. It is often referred to as a semi-
destructive technique, since the small hole will not, in
many cases, signicantly impair the structural integrity of
the part being tested (the hole is typically
1
32 to
3
16 in [0.8 to
4.8 mm] in both diameter and depth). With large test
objects, it is sometimes feasible to remove the hole after
testing is completed, by gently blending and smoothing the
surface with a small hand-held grinder. This must be done
very carefully, of course, to avoid introducing residual
stresses in the process of grinding.
NOTE 1: In its current state of development, the hole-
drilling method is intended primarily for applications in
which the residual stresses are uniform throughout the
drilling depth, or essentially so. While the procedures
for data acquisition and reduction in such cases are well-
established and straightforward, seasoned engineering
judgment is generally required to verify stress uniformity
and other criteria for the validity of the calculated
stresses. This Tech Note contains the basic information
for understanding how the method operates, but cannot,
of course, encompass the full background needed for
its proper application in all cases. An extensive list of
technical references is provided in the Bibliography as a
further aid to users of the method.
NOTE 2: Manual calculation of residual stresses from
the measured relaxed strains can be quite burdensome,
but there is available a specialized computer program,
H-DRILL, that completely eliminates the computational
labor.
II. Principle and Theory of the
Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
The introduction of a hole (even of very small diameter)
into a residually stressed body relaxes the stresses at that
location. This occurs because every perpendicular to a
free surface (the hole surface, in this case) is necessarily
a principal axis on which the shear and normal stresses
are zero. The elimination of these stresses on the hole
surface changes the stress in the immediately surrounding
region, causing the local strains on the surface of the test
object to change correspondingly. This principle is the
foundation for the hole-drilling method of residual stress
measurement, rst proposed by Mathar.
2
In most practical applications of the method, the drilled
hole is blind, with a depth which is: (a) about equal to
its diameter, and (b) small compared to the thickness of
the test object. Unfortunately, the blind-hole geometry
is sufficiently complex that no closed-form solution is
available from the theory of elasticity for direct calculation
of the residual stresses from the measured strains
except by the introduction of empirical coefcients. A
solution can be obtained, however, for the simpler case
of a hole drilled completely through a thin plate in which
the residual stress is uniformly distributed through the
plate thickness. Because of this, the theoretical basis for
the hole-drilling method will rst be developed for the
through-hole geometry, and subsequently extended for
application to blind holes.
Through-Hole Analysis
Depicted in Figure 2a (following) is a local area within
a thin plate which is subject to a uniform residual stress,

x
. The initial stress state at any point P (R, ) can be
expressed in polar coordinates by:


+ ( )
( )

X
X
G
X
X
G
Z
X
G
N
N
r
x
x
r
x
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
2
cos
cos
sin

Figure 2b represents the same area of the plate after a
small hole has been drilled through it. The stresses in the
vicinity of the hole are now quite different, since
r
and
r

must be zero everywhere on the hole surface. A solution
for this case was obtained by G. Kirsch in 1898, and yields
the following expressions for the stresses at the point
P (R, ):
3


j
(
\
,
+ +
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
X
X X
G
X
X X
G
N
r
x x
x x
r r r
r r
2
1
1
2
1
3 4
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2 4 2
2 4
cos
cos


+
j
(
\
,
Z
X
G
N r
x
r r 2
1
3 2
2
4 2
sin
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(2a)
(2b)
(2c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
20
A precision milling guide (Model RS-200, shown in
Figure 1) is attached to the test part and accurately
centered over a drilling target on the rosette.
After zero-balancing the gage circuits, a small, shallow
hole is drilled through the geometric center of the
rosette.
Readings are made of the relaxed strains, corresponding
to the initial residual stress.
Usi ng special data-reduction relationships, the
principal residual stresses and their angular orientation
are calculated from the measured strains.
The foregoing procedure is relatively simple, and has been
standardized in ASTM Standard Test Method E 837.
1

Using commercially available equipment and supplies, and
adhering to the recommendations in the ASTM standard,
the hole-drilling method can be applied routinely by
any qualied stress analysis technician, since no special
expertise is required for making the measurements. The
method is also very versatile, and can be performed in
either the laboratory or the eld, on test objects ranging
widely in size and shape. It is often referred to as a semi-
destructive technique, since the small hole will not, in
many cases, signicantly impair the structural integrity of
the part being tested (the hole is typically
1
32 to
3
16 in [0.8 to
4.8 mm] in both diameter and depth). With large test
objects, it is sometimes feasible to remove the hole after
testing is completed, by gently blending and smoothing the
surface with a small hand-held grinder. This must be done
very carefully, of course, to avoid introducing residual
stresses in the process of grinding.
NOTE 1: In its current state of development, the hole-
drilling method is intended primarily for applications in
which the residual stresses are uniform throughout the
drilling depth, or essentially so. While the procedures
for data acquisition and reduction in such cases are well-
established and straightforward, seasoned engineering
judgment is generally required to verify stress uniformity
and other criteria for the validity of the calculated
stresses. This Tech Note contains the basic information
for understanding how the method operates, but cannot,
of course, encompass the full background needed for
its proper application in all cases. An extensive list of
technical references is provided in the Bibliography as a
further aid to users of the method.
NOTE 2: Manual calculation of residual stresses from
the measured relaxed strains can be quite burdensome,
but there is available a specialized computer program,
H-DRILL, that completely eliminates the computational
labor.
II. Principle and Theory of the
Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
The introduction of a hole (even of very small diameter)
into a residually stressed body relaxes the stresses at that
location. This occurs because every perpendicular to a
free surface (the hole surface, in this case) is necessarily
a principal axis on which the shear and normal stresses
are zero. The elimination of these stresses on the hole
surface changes the stress in the immediately surrounding
region, causing the local strains on the surface of the test
object to change correspondingly. This principle is the
foundation for the hole-drilling method of residual stress
measurement, rst proposed by Mathar.
2
In most practical applications of the method, the drilled
hole is blind, with a depth which is: (a) about equal to
its diameter, and (b) small compared to the thickness of
the test object. Unfortunately, the blind-hole geometry
is sufficiently complex that no closed-form solution is
available from the theory of elasticity for direct calculation
of the residual stresses from the measured strains
except by the introduction of empirical coefcients. A
solution can be obtained, however, for the simpler case
of a hole drilled completely through a thin plate in which
the residual stress is uniformly distributed through the
plate thickness. Because of this, the theoretical basis for
the hole-drilling method will rst be developed for the
through-hole geometry, and subsequently extended for
application to blind holes.
Through-Hole Analysis
Depicted in Figure 2a (following) is a local area within
a thin plate which is subject to a uniform residual stress,

x
. The initial stress state at any point P (R, ) can be
expressed in polar coordinates by:


+ ( )
( )

X
X
G
X
X
G
Z
X
G
N
N
r
x
x
r
x
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
2
cos
cos
sin

Figure 2b represents the same area of the plate after a
small hole has been drilled through it. The stresses in the
vicinity of the hole are now quite different, since
r
and
r

must be zero everywhere on the hole surface. A solution
for this case was obtained by G. Kirsch in 1898, and yields
the following expressions for the stresses at the point
P (R, ):
3


j
(
\
,
+ +
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
X
X X
G
X
X X
G
N
r
x x
x x
r r r
r r
2
1
1
2
1
3 4
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2 4 2
2 4
cos
cos


+
j
(
\
,
Z
X
G
N r
x
r r 2
1
3 2
2
4 2
sin
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(2a)
(2b)
(2c)










Donde:



R0=radio del agujero.
R=radio arbitrario desde el centro del
agujero.

Sustrayendo la tensin inicial de la final (despus de
perforar) obtenemos un cambio de tensin o
relajacin de tensin en el punto P(R , ) debida a la
taladrada del agujero. Eso es:

sustituyendo las ecuaciones (1) y (2) en las
ecuaciones (3) obtenemos las expresiones completas
para la relajacin de la tensin. Si el material del plato
es homogneo e isotrpico en sus propiedades
mecnicas, y una elasticidad linear en su
comportamiento de tensin/estriacin, estas
ecuaciones pueden se sustituidas dentro de la ley
biaxial de Hooke para resolver estras normales en el
punto P(R , ). las expresiones resultantes son las
siguientes:



Las ecuaciones anteriores pueden ser escritas de
una forma mas simple, demostrando que en cualquier
circulo R (R R0) las estras radiales y tangenciales
varia de una forma senoidal:





La comparacin de las ecuaciones (5) con las
ecuaciones (4) demuestra que lo coeficientes A, B y
C tienen las siguientes definiciones:



Como resultado, las estras del relieve varan, de una
manera compleja con la distancia desde la superficie
del agujero. Las variaciones son ilustradas en la
Figura 3 (siguiente pgina), donde las estras son
marcadas a lo largo de los principales ejes, en los
puntos =0

y =90
o
. Como lo muestra la figura, las
estras del relieve disminuyen mientras el agujero
aumenta. Debido a esto es necesario medir las
estras lo mas cerca posible al borde del agujero para
maximizar la seal de salida del strain gage. Por otro
lado, los efectos parasiticos tambin incrementan en
las cercanas del agujero. Estas consideraciones
junto con los aspectos prcticos del diseo y
aplicacin del strain gage son un resultado de las
seleccin del radio ptimo (R) para la locacin del
gage. Estudios analticos y experimentales han
establecido un rango practico de 0.3 < r < 0.45 donde
r=R0/R y R es el radio al centro longitudinal del gage.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
20
A precision milling guide (Model RS-200, shown in
Figure 1) is attached to the test part and accurately
centered over a drilling target on the rosette.
After zero-balancing the gage circuits, a small, shallow
hole is drilled through the geometric center of the
rosette.
Readings are made of the relaxed strains, corresponding
to the initial residual stress.
Usi ng special data-reduction relationships, the
principal residual stresses and their angular orientation
are calculated from the measured strains.
The foregoing procedure is relatively simple, and has been
standardized in ASTM Standard Test Method E 837.
1

Using commercially available equipment and supplies, and
adhering to the recommendations in the ASTM standard,
the hole-drilling method can be applied routinely by
any qualied stress analysis technician, since no special
expertise is required for making the measurements. The
method is also very versatile, and can be performed in
either the laboratory or the eld, on test objects ranging
widely in size and shape. It is often referred to as a semi-
destructive technique, since the small hole will not, in
many cases, signicantly impair the structural integrity of
the part being tested (the hole is typically
1
32 to
3
16 in [0.8 to
4.8 mm] in both diameter and depth). With large test
objects, it is sometimes feasible to remove the hole after
testing is completed, by gently blending and smoothing the
surface with a small hand-held grinder. This must be done
very carefully, of course, to avoid introducing residual
stresses in the process of grinding.
NOTE 1: In its current state of development, the hole-
drilling method is intended primarily for applications in
which the residual stresses are uniform throughout the
drilling depth, or essentially so. While the procedures
for data acquisition and reduction in such cases are well-
established and straightforward, seasoned engineering
judgment is generally required to verify stress uniformity
and other criteria for the validity of the calculated
stresses. This Tech Note contains the basic information
for understanding how the method operates, but cannot,
of course, encompass the full background needed for
its proper application in all cases. An extensive list of
technical references is provided in the Bibliography as a
further aid to users of the method.
NOTE 2: Manual calculation of residual stresses from
the measured relaxed strains can be quite burdensome,
but there is available a specialized computer program,
H-DRILL, that completely eliminates the computational
labor.
II. Principle and Theory of the
Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
The introduction of a hole (even of very small diameter)
into a residually stressed body relaxes the stresses at that
location. This occurs because every perpendicular to a
free surface (the hole surface, in this case) is necessarily
a principal axis on which the shear and normal stresses
are zero. The elimination of these stresses on the hole
surface changes the stress in the immediately surrounding
region, causing the local strains on the surface of the test
object to change correspondingly. This principle is the
foundation for the hole-drilling method of residual stress
measurement, rst proposed by Mathar.
2
In most practical applications of the method, the drilled
hole is blind, with a depth which is: (a) about equal to
its diameter, and (b) small compared to the thickness of
the test object. Unfortunately, the blind-hole geometry
is sufficiently complex that no closed-form solution is
available from the theory of elasticity for direct calculation
of the residual stresses from the measured strains
except by the introduction of empirical coefcients. A
solution can be obtained, however, for the simpler case
of a hole drilled completely through a thin plate in which
the residual stress is uniformly distributed through the
plate thickness. Because of this, the theoretical basis for
the hole-drilling method will rst be developed for the
through-hole geometry, and subsequently extended for
application to blind holes.
Through-Hole Analysis
Depicted in Figure 2a (following) is a local area within
a thin plate which is subject to a uniform residual stress,

x
. The initial stress state at any point P (R, ) can be
expressed in polar coordinates by:


+ ( )
( )

X
X
G
X
X
G
Z
X
G
N
N
r
x
x
r
x
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
2
cos
cos
sin

Figure 2b represents the same area of the plate after a
small hole has been drilled through it. The stresses in the
vicinity of the hole are now quite different, since
r
and
r

must be zero everywhere on the hole surface. A solution
for this case was obtained by G. Kirsch in 1898, and yields
the following expressions for the stresses at the point
P (R, ):
3


j
(
\
,
+ +
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
+
j
(
\
,
X
X X
G
X
X X
G
N
r
x x
x x
r r r
r r
2
1
1
2
1
3 4
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2 4 2
2 4
cos
cos


+
j
(
\
,
Z
X
G
N r
x
r r 2
1
3 2
2
4 2
sin
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(2a)
(2b)
(2c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+
j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
21
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method

where:

( ) >

o
o
o
r
R
R
R R
R
R

hole radius
arbitrary radius from hole center arbitrary radius from hole center


Subtracting the initial stresses from the nal (after drilling)
stresses gives the change in stress, or stress relaxation at
point P (R, ) due to drilling the hole. That is:

1
1
1
X X X
X X X
Z Z Z
N N N
N N N
r r r
r r r







Substituting Equations (1) and (2) into Equations (3) yields
the full expressions for the relaxed (or relieved) stresses. If
the material of the plate is homogeneous and isotropic in its
mechanical properties, and linear-elastic in its stress/strain
behavior, these equations can then be substituted into
the biaxial Hookes law to solve for the relieved normal
strains at the point P (R, ). The resulting expressions are
as follows:
r
o v
o
v
o
r
x
E r r r

+
+
+ ( )
,

,
( ) 1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2
2 4 2
cos cos
]]
]
]

+
+
+ ( )
( )
r
o v
o
v
v

x
E r r r
1
2
1 3
2
4
1
2 4 2
cos cos s2o
,

,
]
]
]
The preceding equations can be written in a simpler
form, demonstrating that along a circle at any radius
R (R R
o
) the relieved radial and tangential strains vary in
a sinusoidal manner:
Compari son of Equations (5) with Equations (4)
demonstrates that coefficients A, B, and C have the
following denitions:

Thus, the relieved strains also vary, in a complex way, with
distance from the hole surface. This variation is illustrated in
Figure 3 on page 22, where the strains are plotted along
the principal axes, at = 0 and = 90. As shown by the
gure, the relieved strains generally decrease as distance
from the hole increases. Because of this, it is desirable to
measure the strains close to the edge of the hole in order
to maximize the strain gage output signal. On the other
hand, parasitic effects also increase in the immediate
vicinity of the hole. These considerations, along with
practical aspects of strain gage design and application,
necessitate a compromise in selecting the optimum radius
(R) for gage location. Analytical and experimental studies
have established a practical range of 0.3 < r < 0.45 where
r = R
o
/R and R is the radius to the longitudinal center of
the gage.
It can be noticed from Figure 3 that for = 0 (along the axis
of the major principal stress) the relieved radial strain,
r
,
is considerably greater than the tangential strain,

, in the
specied region of measurement. As a result, commercial
strain gage rosettes for residual stress analysis are normally
designed with radially oriented grids to measure the
relieved radial strain,
r
. This being the case, only Equation
(5a) is directly relevant for further consideration in this
summary. It is also evident from the gure that the relieved
radial strain along the major principal axis is opposite in
sign to the initial residual stress. This occurs because the
Z
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
r
X
N
X
r
R
P(R, G)
Y
X
x
X
x

X
R
o
X
N
X
(a)
(b)
Figure 2. Stress states at P (R, a),
before and after the introduction of a hole.
(3a)
(3b)
(3c)
(4a)
(4b)
r o o
r o o

r x
x
A B
A C
+ ( )
+ ( )
cos
cos
2
2
(5a)
(5b)
A
E r
B
E r r

+ j
(
,
\
,
(

+
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
,
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1 3
2
2 4
v
v
v

,
]
]
]

+

+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
,

,
]
]
]
C
E r r
1
2
4
1
1 3
2 4
v v
v
(6a)
(6b)
(6c)
Estado de tensin en el punto P (R , a),
antes y despus de la perforacin.
Podemos notar en la figura 3 que para =0

( a lo
largo del eje principal de la tensin principal) la estra
radial,
r
, es considerablemente que la estra
tangencial,

, en la regin especificada para la


medicin. Como resultado, las rosetas strain gage
comerciales para el anlisis de tensiones residuales
normalmente son diseadas con mallas orientadas
Radialmente la estra radial, r. Siendo este el caso,
solo la ecuacin (5a) es directamente relevante para
consideraciones mas adelante en este resumen.
Tambin es evidente que la relieved radial strain a lo
largo del eje mayor es opuesta en signo a la tensin
residual inicial. Esto ocurre porque los coeficientes A
y B en la ecuacin (5a) son siempre negativos, y
( para = 0

)cos 2+1.










En el caso anterior solo se considero el caso mas
simple, tensin residual en un eje. En practica, como
sea, las tensiones residuales son mas comnmente
en dos ejes, con dos tensiones principales diferentes
de cero. Esta condicin puede ser incorporada en el
anlisis mediante el empleo de la superposicin
principal, la cual es aplicable al comportamiento
linear-elstico del material. Refirindose de nuevo a
la figura 2, es aparente que tenia la tensin residual
de un eje estando a lo largo solamente del eje y en
lugar del x, las ecuaciones (1) y (2) todava se
pueden aplicar, con cos 2. Dando como resultado,
the relieved strain en el punto P (R, ), debido a que
la tensin residual de un eje esta solamente en la
direccin y puede ser escrita como:



Y empleando la notacin correspondiente, la
ecuacin (5a) se convierte:


Cuando ambas tensiones residuales esta presentes
simultneamente, la superposicin principal permite
la suma algebraica de las ecuaciones (7) y (8),
entonces la expresin general para la relieved radial
strain en el estado de tensin residual en dos ejes es:



O de una horma un poco diferente:



Las ecuaciones (9) representan la relacin del
mtodo de hole-drilling de anlisis de tensiones
residuales. Esta relacin debe ser invertida, por
supuesto, en resolver las dos principales tensiones y
el ngulo en trminos de las estras medidas que
acompaan a la relajacin de la tensin. Desde que
hay tres cantidades desconocidas, se necesitan tres
mediciones de radial strain para una solucin
completa. Estas tres mediciones pueden ser
sustituidas sucesivamente en las ecuaciones (9a) y
(9b) para completar tres ecuaciones las cuales son
resueltas simultneamente por las magnitudes y
direcciones de las tensiones principales.
El procedimiento comn para medir las relieved
Straits es montar 3 resistance strain gages en la
forma de un roseta alrededor del sitio en donde se
taladrar el agujero. Esta roseta esta ilustrada
esquemticamente en la figura 4, en donde 3 strain
gages orientados Radialmente son colocados con sus
centros en el radio R desde el centro del sitio del
agujero. Adems los ngulos entre los gages pueden
ser arbitrarios (pero deben conocerse), un incremento
angular cause que las expresiones analticas se
vuelvan mas simples, y eso ha provocado la
estandarizacin de las rosetas comerciales para
tensiones residuales. Como esta indicado en la figura
4,
1
es un ngulo agudo formado desde el eje
principal ms cercano al gage no. 1, mientras

2
=
1
+45

y
3
=
1
+90

, con ngulos positivos


medidos en la direccin de la numeracin del gage.
Debe notarse que la direccin de la numeracin del
gage para el tipo roseta dibujado en la figura 4 esta
en direccin de las manecillas del reloj, desde el gage
no. 2, adems fsicamente en la posicin 2, es
efectivamente la posicin 2b para propsitos de
numeracin de gage. Ecuaciones (9) pueden ser
usadas para verificar que ambas locaciones para el
gage no. 2 producen el mismo resultado proveyendo
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
Figura 3. La variacin de las estras del
relieve radiales y tangenciales con la
distancia ( a lo largo de los principales
ejes) desde el centro del agujero
perforado- tensin residual en un eje.
que la tensin residual es uniforme en toda el rea
que luego es ocupada por el agujero.







Para propsitos de aplicaciones generales, la
locacin 2a es usualmente preferida, porque minimiza
los posibles errores causados por cualquier
excentricidad del agujero taladrado. Cuando el
espacio para el gage es reducido, como en la
medicin de tensiones residuales cerca de
soldaduras o soportes, la locacin 2b permite
posicionarse mas cerca del rea de inters del
agujero.
Ecuacin (9b) puede ser ahora escrita 3 veces, una
para cada gage de la roseta:



cuando las ecuaciones (10) son resueltas
simultneamente para las tensiones principales y sus
direcciones, los resultados pueden ser expresados
como:



donde es el ngulo desde el eje principal mas
cercano al gage no. 1 ( in la direccin de la
numeracin del gage, si es positiva; u opuesta, si es
negativa).
Revirtiendo el sentido de para definir
convenientemente el ngulo desde el gage no. 1 al
eje mas cercano, mientras se retienen la conversin
de signos omitida,



Los siguientes comentarios importantes sobre las
ecuaciones (11) deben ser cuidadosamente
anotados. Estas ecuaciones son muy similares en
apariencia a las relaciones de reduccin de datos
para una roseta strain gage convencional, pero las
diferencia son significativas. Los coeficientes A y B no
solo incorporan las propiedades de elasticidad del
material de prueba, sino tambin reflejan la severa
atenuacin de las relieved Straits en relacin con las
tensiones relajadas. Puede observarse, en adicin,
que los signos entre los trminos de las ecuaciones
(11a) y (11b) son opuestos a esas ecuaciones
convencionales de las rosetas. Esto ocurre porque A
y B son siempre negativos; y en consecuencia, desde
que la ecuacin (11a) es algebraicamente mejor que
la ecuacin (11b), la primera debe representar la
mxima tensin principal.
La ecuacin (11c) es idntica para la roseta
rectangular de tres elementos, pero debe ser
interpretada diferente para determinar cual tensin
principal hace referencia al gage no. 1. Las siguientes
reglas pueden ser usadas para este propsito:



Una consideracin cuidadosa debe ser dada para
determinar los valores apropiados para los
coeficientes de A y B. Como esta definido
algebraicamente en las ecuaciones (6), estos aplican
solo cuando las condiciones impuestas por la
solucin de Kirsch son conocidas. Esta solucin da
las distribucin de las tensiones en los puntos con
coordenadas (r , )alrededor del agujero circular a
travs de un plato delgado y amplio que este sujeto a
tensiones uniformes. Como sea, la comparacin de
las figuras 3 y 4 ilustran que, a partir de que las strain
gage grids de la roseta tienen reas definidas, estas
sienten las variaciones de la distribucin de las strain
como esta ilustrado en la figura 3. Por lo tanto, la
salida de cada gage tiende a representar la strain
promedio sobre el arreadle la malla. Adems, debido
a que las mallas son normalmente compuestas por
barras paralelas, estas barras las cuales no estn
directamente en la lnea central de una malla
radialmente orientada no son radiales. Por esta
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
22
coefcients A and B in Equation (5a) are always negative,
and (for = 0) cos 2 = +1.
The preceding treatment considered only the simplest
case, uniaxial residual stress. In practice, however, residual
stresses are more often biaxial, with two nonzero principal
stresses. This condition can readily be incorporated in the
analysis by employing the superposition principle, which
is applicable to linear-elastic material behavior. Referring
to Figure 2 again, it is apparent that had the uniaxial
residual stress been along only the Y axis instead of the X
axis, Equations (1) and (2) would still apply, with cos 2
replaced by cos 2( + 90), or by the equivalent, cos 2.
Thus, the relieved radial strain at the point P(R, ) due
to uniaxial residual stress in only the Y direction can be
written as:
And, employing the corresponding notation, Equation (5a)
becomes:
When both residual stresses are present simultaneously,
the superposition principle permits algebraic addition of
Equations (7) and (8), so that the general expression for the
relieved radial strain due to a plane biaxial residual stress
state is:
Or, in a slightly different form,
Equations (9) represent the basic relationship underlying
the hole-drilling method of residual stress analysis. This
relationship must be inverted, of course, to solve for the two
principal stresses and the angle a in terms of the measured
strains that accompany stress relaxation. Since there are
three unknown quantities, three independent measurements
of the radial strain are required for a complete solution.
These three measurements can be substituted successively
into Equation (9a) or Equation (9b) to yield three equations
which are then solved simultaneously for the magnitudes
and directions of the principal stresses.
The common procedure for measuring the relieved strains
is to mount three resistance strain gages in the form
of a rosette around the site of the hole before drilling.
Such a rosette is shown schematically in Figure 4, where
three radially oriented strain gages are located with their
centers at the radius R from the center of the hole site.
Although the angles between gages can be arbitrary (but
must be known), a 45-degree angular increment leads to
the simplest analytical expressions, and thus has become
the standard for commercial residual stress rosettes.
As indicated in Figure 4,
1
is the acute angle from the
nearer principal axis to gage no. 1, while
2
=
1
+45 and

3
=
1
+ 90, with positive angles measured in the direction
of gage numbering. It should be noted that the direction of
gage numbering for the rosette type sketched in Figure
4 is clockwise, since gage no. 2, although physically at
position 2a, is effectively at position 2b for gage numbering
purposes. Equations (9) can be used to verify that both
Figure 3. Variation of relieved radial and tangential
strains with distance (along the principal axes) from the
center of the drilled hole uniaxial residual stress.
R
o
c
r
X
G
1 2 3 4 5
Gx= 0
Gx= 90
R
/
R
o
c
r
c
N
c
N
5

4
3
2
1
+1 0 1
R /R
o
+1
0
1
E S A
r
y
y
A B cos2 (7)
(8) c X G
r
x
x
A B cos2
E S A S A
r x y
A B A B cos cos 2 2 (9a)
E S S S
r x y x
A B



S A
y
cos2
(9b)
X
x
X
Y
G +G
G
1
R
45
R
o
1
2b
2a
3
45
Figure 4. Strain gage rosette arrangement
for determining residual stress.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
Figura 4. Arreglo de la roseta strain gage
para determinar la tensin residual
razn, los gages son ligeramente sensibles a la strain
tangencial, as como a la strain radial. Como
resultado, pueden ser obtenidos valores mas
acertados para los coeficientes con la integracin de
las ecuaciones (4) sobre las reas de sus respetivas
gage grids. Por lo tanto los coeficientes
determinados, los cuales son para el rea definida de
la strain gage, son designados aqu por y
para distinguirlos de los valores en los puntos
definidos en las ecuaciones (6).un mtodo alternativo
para lo obtencin de y es medirlos por
calibracin experimental. El procedimiento para
hacerlo esta descrio en la Seccin III, Determinando
Coeficientes y . Cuando se hace de manera
correcta, este procedimiento es potencialmente el
mas acerado para propsitos de evaluacin de
coeficientes.
Cuando se emplean rosetas strain gage para anlisis
experimentales de tensin, es usualmente
recomendado que la medicin de la strain sean
correctos para la sensibilidad a travs de los gages.
Relaciones correctas para este propsito son dadas
en la Tech Note TN-509. Estas relaciones no son
directamente aplicables, en comparacin con las
mediciones de relieved strain usando una roseta de
tensin residual por el mtodo de hole-drilling.
En el caso de tensin residual, los gages individuales
en la roseta son efectivos en diferentes locaciones de
un campo strain espacialmente variable. Como
resultado, el relieved axial y las strain transversas
aplicadas a cada gage no estn relacionadas de la
misma forma como lo estn en un campo uniforme
strain.
Una rigurosa correccin se requerira para la
evaluacin del coeficiente C[ de hecho, su parte
integrada o contraparte, - revisa ecuaciones (6)],
para ambas geometras, la trough-hole y la blind-hole.
Debido a lo mencionado anteriormente, y el hecho
de que las visibilidades transversas de las rosetas
para tensin residual de Vishay Micro-Measurements
son muy bajas ( aproximadamente del 1%), no es
considerado necesario corregir la sensibilidad
transversal. Kabiri, por ejemplo, ha mostrado que el
error debido a la ignorancia de la sensibilidad
transversa ( en el caso de tensin residual en un solo
eje) es insignificante comparada con las
incertidumbres en los procedimientos de medicin y
de reduccin de datos.

Anlisis Blind-Hole.

El sustento terica para el mtodo hole-drilling fue
desarrollado completamente sobre las bases del
pequeo agujero taladrado a travs de un plato
delgado, amplio y plano sujeto a tensin uniforme. Tal
configuracin esta alejada del los objetos de prueba
tpicos, en contraste con las partes ordinarias de una
maquina y los miembros estructurales requiriendo de
anlisis de tensin residual tal ves en cualquier
tamao y forma. Debido a esto, un agujero ciego de
poca profundidad es usado en la mayora de las
aplicaciones del mtodo de hole-drilling.
La introduccin de un agujero ciego en un camp[o de
tensin plana produce un estado muy complejo de
tensin local, para el cual todava no existe una
solucin disponible en la teora de la elasticidad.
Afortunadamente, en contraste, ha sido demostrado
por Rendler y Vigness que este caso es
cercanamente paralelo a la condicin trough-hole en
la naturaleza general de la distribucin de tensin.
Por lo tanto, las relieved Straits debidas a la
taladracion de un agujero ciego se mantiene senoidal
a lo largo del circulo concntrico con el agujero, de la
forma descrita por las ecuaciones (9). It follows

ya que los coeficientes nos pueden ser calculados
directamente con consideraciones tericas, entonces
deben ser obtenidos por mtodos empricos; esto es,
por calibraciones experimentales o por
procedimientos numricos tales como anlisis
elementos finitos.
Varios investigadores diferentes [ejemplos dados,
(20-(23)] han publicado estudios de elementos finitos
de anlisis de blind-hole de tensin residual. Los
coeficientes mas recientes desarrollados por Schajer
son incorporados en el estndar ASTM E 837, y son
mostrados grficamente para este caso de tensin
uniforme en la figura 8 de esta nota tcnica. El
programa H-Drill usa estos coeficientes.
Comparado con el procedimiento trough-hole, el
anlisis blind-hole involucra una variable
independiente adicional; nombrad, the dimensionless
hole depth, Z/D (vea figura 5). Por lo tanto, en un
forma funcional general, los coeficientes pueden ser
expresados como:



para cualquier estado inicial de tensin dado, y un
diestro del agujero establecido, las relieved strains
generalmente aumentan ( de forma decreciente)
mientras la profundidad del agujero es incrementada.
Por esta razn, en orden para maximizar las seales
de Straits, el agujero normalmente es taladrado hasta
una profundidad de al menos Z/D = 0.4 (ASTM E 837
especifica Z/D = 0.4 como la mxima profundidad del
agujero).

For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
23
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
locations for gage no. 2 produce the same result providing
the residual stress is uniform over the area later occupied
by the hole. For general-purpose applications, location
2a is usually preferred, because it minimizes the possible
errors caused by any eccentricity of the drilled hole. When
space for the gage is limited, as in measuring residual
stresses near a weld or abutment, location 2b permits
positioning the hole closest to the area of interest.
Equation (9b) can now be written three times, once for
each gage in the rosette:

1
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2 (10a)

2
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 45) (10b)

3
= A(
x
+
y
) + (
x

y
) cos 2(+ 90) (10c)

When Equations (10) are solved simultaneously for the
principal stresses and their direction, the results can be
expressed as:
where is the angle from the nearer principal axis to gage
no. 1 (in the direction of gage numbering, if positive; or
opposite, if negative).
Reversing the sense of to more conveniently dene the
angle from gage no. 1 to the nearer axis, while retaining the
foregoing sign convention,
(11c)
The following important comments about Equations (11)
should be carefully noted. These equations are very similar
in appearance to the data-reduction relationships for
conventional strain gage rosettes, but the differences are
signicant. The coefcients A and B not only incorporate
the elastic properties of the test material, but also reect
the severe attenuation of the relieved strains relative to
the relaxed stress. It can be observed, in addition, that
the signs between terms in Equations (11a) and (11b) are
opposite to those in the conventional rosette equations.
This occurs because A and B are always negative; and thus,
since Equation (11a) is algebraically greater than Equation
(11b), the former must represent the maximum principal
stress.
Equation (11c) is identical to that for a conventional
three-element rectangular rosette, but must be interpreted
differently to determine which principal stress is referred
to gage no. 1. The following rules can be used for this
purpose:

3
>
1
: refers to
max

3
<
1
: refers to
min

3
=
1
: = 45

2
<
1
:
max
at +45

2
>
1
:
max
at 45
Careful consideration must also be given to determining
the appropriate values for coefcients A and B. As dened
algebraically in Equations (6), they apply only when
the conditions imposed by the Kirsch solution are met.
This solution gives the stress distribution at points with
coordinates (r, ) around a circular hole through a thin,
wide plate subjected to uniform plane stress. However,
comparison of Figures 3 and 4 illustrates that, since the
strain gage grids in the rosette have nite areas, they sense
varying strain distributions such as those plotted in Figure
3. Thus, the output of each gage tends to represent the
average strain over the area of the grid. Moreover, because
the grids are usually composed of parallel lines, those
lines which are not directly on the centerline of a radially
oriented grid are not radial. Therefore, the gages are slightly
sensitive to the tangential strain, as well as the radial strain.
As a result, more accurate values for the coefcients can be
obtained by integrating Equations (4) over the areas of the
respective gage grids. The coefcients thus determined,
which account for the nite strain gage area, are designated
here by A and B to distinguish them from the values at a
point as dened by Equations (6). An alternative method
for obtaining A and B is to measure them by experimental
calibration. The procedure for doing so is described in
Section III, Determining Coefcients A and B. When
performed correctly, this procedure is potentially the most
accurate means for evaluating the coefcients.
When employing conventional strain gage rosettes for
experimental stress analysis, it is usually recommended
that the strai n measurements be corrected for the
transverse sensitivity of the gages. Correction relationships
for this purpose are given in Tech Note TN-509. These
relationships are not directly applicable, however, to the
relieved strains measured with a residual stress rosette by
the hole-drilling method.
In the residual stress case, the individual gages in the
rosette are effectively at different locations in a spatially
varying strain eld. As a result, the relieved axial and
transverse strains applied to each gage are not related in the
same manner as they are in a uniform strain eld. Rigorous
correction would require evaluation of the coefcient C
[actually, its integrated or calibrated counterpart, C see
Equations (6)], for both the through-hole and blind-hole
geometries. Because of the foregoing, and the fact that the
transverse sensitivities of Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are characteristically very low
(approximately 1%), it is not considered necessary to correct
for transverse sensitivity. Kabiri
4
, for example, has shown
that the error due to ignoring transverse sensitivity (in the
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
1 3
2
S
E E
E E E E E
S
E
max
min
A B

1 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2
11 3
3 1
2
3 1 2
2
4
1
4
2


E
E E E E E
A B

(11a)
(11b)
tan2A
E E E
E E

1 2 3
3 1
2
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N








La variacin general de relieved strain con
profundidad esta ilustrada en la figura 5, donde las
strains han sido normalizadas, en este caso, al 100%
en Z/D = 0.4. los datos incluyen resultados
experimentales de dos diferentes investigadores
demostrando la manera en la cual la funcin relieved-
strain es afectada por la relacin del dimetro del
agujero y dimetro del gage circle (D0/D).ambos
casos involucran tensin uniforme en un solo eje, en
especmenes que son anchos en comparacin con la
mxima profundidad el agujero. Las curvas sealadas
en la figura estn consideradas una representacin
de la reaccin esperada cuando la tensin residual es
uniforme a lo largo de la profundidad del agujero.
Una importante contribucin de parte del trabajo de
Rendler y Vigness es la demostracin que, para
cualquier grupo propiedades de un material, E y v, los
coeficientes y son simplemente funciones
geomtricas, y por lo tanto constantes para todo caso
geomtricamente similar. Esto significa que para una
vez que los coeficientes hayan sido determinados
para una configuracin particular de la roseta, el
tamao de la roseta puede ser escalonado hacia
arriba o hacia abajo y los mismos coeficientes siguen
aplicando cuando el dimetro del agujero y su
profundidad sean escalonadas similarmente
(asumiendo, por supuesto, que sea el mismo
material). Muchas aproximaciones han sido tomadas
en intentos para remover la dependencia del material
de y , dejando solamente la dependencia
geomtrica. Uno de estos, propuesto por Schajer, 7
es adoptado en esta nota tcnica. Schafer introdujo
dos nuevos coeficientes, denotados aqu como y
, y definidos como:


por la comparacin con las ecuaciones (6), puede
verse que para atravesar el agujero, por lo menos
es materialmente independiente, y solo depende
levemente de Possions ratio. Schafer ha
determinado por los clculos de elementos finitos que
para agujeros ciegos, y varia menos del 2%
para el rango de Possions ratio desde 0.25 a 0.35.

III. Determinando coeficientes y .

Si la aplicacin del anlisis de tensin residual
involucra la perforacin de trough-hole o blind-hole,
los coeficientes y ( o y ) deben ser
determinados para calcular las tensiones de relieved
strains. En el caso del trough hole, valores
razonablemente acertados pueden ser obtenidos
para cualquier caso en particular por mtodos
analticos, si se desea. Esto es hecho mediante la
integracin, sobre el rea del gage grid, del
componente de strain parallel to the primary strain-
sensing axis of the gage. Dando los detalles de la
geometra de la malla ( anchura de las lneas y
espaciamiento, numero de lneas, etc.), una mejor
precisin puede ser obtenida por la integracin de las
lneas individuales. Este mtodo ni puede ser
aplicado al anlisis blind-hole porque las expresiones
closed-form relacionadas con las relieved strains para
tensin residual, en trminos de profundidad del
agujero no estn disponibles.

Calibracin experimental

La necesidad de coeficientes ya sea para el anlisis
trough-hole o el blind hole siempre son determinados
por calibracin experimental. Este procedimiento es
particularmente atractivo ya que es registrado
automticamente por las propiedades mecnicas del
material de prueba, la geometra de la roseta strain
gage, la profundidad del agujero y su dimetro, y el
efecto de strain-averaging de la strain gage grid.
Cuando es realizado correctamente, con suficiente
atencin a los detalles, es potencialmente el medio
mas exacto para determinar los coeficientes. Su
principal desventaja es que la calibracin debe ser
repetida cada vez que un grupo de parmetro
diferentes es involucrado.
La calibracin para y es alcanzada instalando
una roseta de tensin residual strain gage en un
espcimen que se tensione en un solo eje hecho del
mismo material que el objeto de prueba. La roseta
debe ser orientada para alinear la malla no. 1
paralelamente con la direccin de la carga, colocando
a la malla no. 3 a lo largo del eje transversal del
espcimen. Debe tenerse en mente de que la tensin
que dobla al material sea imperceptible. Para
minimizar los efectos en la orilla, el espcimen debe
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
Figura 5. Relieved strain vs. Ratio of hole
depth to gage circle diameter ( Straits
normalizad to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
tener una anchura de por lo menos 10 veces el
dimetro del agujero, y el largo entre los seguros de
al menos 5 veces el ancho. Cuando se determinan
y para aplicaciones blind-hole, una altura de 5
o mas veces el dimetro es recomendada. Para
calibracin trough-hole, la altura de la calibracin del
espcimen es preferiblemente la misma que la de la
parte de prueba. Tambin es importante que la 1tensin
mxima aplicada durante la calibracin no exceda la
mitad del limite de tensin proporcional para el
material de prueba. En cualquier caso, la tensin
aplicada mas la tensin residual inicial debe ser lo
suficiente baja para evitar el riego de suavidad local
debida el efecto de sobre concentracin de tensin
del agujero.
Bsicamente, el procedimiento de calibracin
involucra la medicin de strains de la roseta bajo la
misma carga aplicada o tensin de calibracin,
c
,
ambas antes y despus de taladrar el agujero. Tal
procedimiento es necesario para eliminar el efecto de
la strain relief que pueda ocurrir debido a la relajacin
de cualquier tensin residual inicial en el espcimen
de calibracin. Con esta tcnica, la diferencia strain
observada ( antes de y despus de la perforacin del
agujero) es causada solamente por la tensin de
calibracin aplicada, y es nicamente relacionada con
esa tensin. Los pasos en el procedimiento de
calibracin pueden ser resumidos brevemente como
se muestra, nada mas que la strain en la malla no. 1
y la malla no. 3 necesita ser medida, ya que estas
mallas son conocidas por estar alineadas con los ejes
principales del espcimen.

1.- Pon en cero los circuitos del strain gage.
2.- Aplica una carga, P, al espcimen para tener la
tensin de calibracin deseada,
c
.
3.- Mide las strains
1
y
3
(antes de taladrar).
4.- Quita la carga del espcimen, y remuvelo de la
maquina de prueba.
5.- Taladra el agujero, como se describe en la
seccin V, Tcnicas Experimentales.
6.- Remplaza el espcimen en la maquina de prueba,
reinicia los circuitos del strain gage, y luego aplica
exactamente la misma carga, P.
7.- Mide las strains
1
y
3
(luego de taladrar).

Las strain calibradas correspondientes a la carga, P,
y a la tensin,
c
, son:



la confiabilidad de la calibracin puede ser mejorada
incrementando la carga del espcimen y haciendo
mediciones de strain en cada nivel de carga, ambas
antes y despus de taladrar el agujero. Esto permitir
la elaboracin de una grafica de
c
contra
c1
y
c3
,
por lo que es la mejor forma de construir lneas rectas
a travs de puntos de datos para minimizar los
efectos de errores al azar. Tambin ayuda a
identificar la presencia de suavidad, si es que ocurre.
La relacin resultante entre la tensin aplicada y la
relieved strain es usualmente representativa que la
obtenida por determinacin de un solo punto.
Ya que la calibracin es realizada con solamente una
tensin principal diferente de cero, la ecuacin (5a)
puede ser usada para desarrollar expresiones para
los valores calibrados de y . Sustituyendo
sucesivamente = 0

( para malla no. 1) y = 90

(
para malla no. 3) en la ecuacin (5a):



Resolviendo para y ,



el procedimiento descrito aqu fue aplicado a un
espcimen trough-hole hecho de hacer inoxidable
tipo 304, y los datos de calibracin estn sealados
en la figura 6. Puede verse en la figura que para esta
geometra (D0/D = 0.35) y material,
c1
y
c3
son
-90 y +39, respectivamente, cuando
c
es 10000
psi [69MPa]. Sustituyendo en las ecuaciones (14),



aunque el ejemplo numrico anterior referido a los
coeficientes de trough-hole, el mismo procedimiento
es seguido en la calibracin de lo coeficientes para
full-depth blind-hole una vez que y son
obtenidos de esta manera, los coeficientes
correspondientes al material independiente, y ,
pueden ser calculados desde las ecuaciones (13) si
el valor absoluto de la elasticidad y el Possions ratio
del material de prueba son conocidos. Si se desea, el
procedimiento puede ser repetido sobre un rango
practico de D0/D para permitir dibujar curvas de y
para todos los casos de inters.
Debe notarse que los valores para los coeficientes
bsicos y obtenidos de una prueba de
calibracin en particular son estrictamente aplicables
solo para condiciones de medicin de tensin
residual exactamente iguales a las condiciones de
calibracin:

Material con las mismas propiedades
elsticas;
Misma geometra de la roseta ( pero la
orientacin de la roseta es arbitraria);
Misma medida del agujero;
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
25
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
By comparison with Equations (6), it can be seen that
for the through hole, at least a is material-independent,
and b depends only weakly on Poissons ratio. Schajer
has determined from nite-element calculations that for
blind holes, a and b vary by less than 2% for the range of
Poissons ratio from 0.25 to 0.35.
III. Determining Coefcients A and B
Whether the residual stress analysis application involves
through-hole or blind-hole drilling, the coefficients A
and B (or a and b ) must be determined to calculate the
stresses from the relieved strains. In the case of the through
hole, reasonably accurate values of the coefcients can
be obtained for any particular case by analytical means,
if desired. This is done by integrating, over the area of
the gage grid, the component of strain parallel to the
primary strain-sensing axis of the gage. Given the details
of the grid geometry (line width and spacing, number of
lines, etc.), Slightly greater accuracy may be obtained by
integrating along the individual grid lines. This method
cannot be applied to blind-hole analysis because closed-
form expressions relating the relieved strains to the residual
stress, in terms of hole depth, are not available.
Experimental Calibration
The needed coefcients for either through-hole or blind-
hole analysis can always be determined by experimental
calibration. This procedure is particularly attractive since
it automatically accounts for the mechanical properties
of the test material, strain gage rosette geometry, hole
depth and diameter, and the strain-averaging effect of the
strain gage grid. When performed correctly, with sufcient
attention to detail, it is potentially the most accurate means
for determining the coefcients. Its principal disadvantage
is that the calibration must be repeated each time a different
set of geometric parameters is involved.
Calibration for A and B is accomplished by installing a
residual stress strain gage rosette on a uniaxially stressed
tensile specimen made from the same material as the test
part. The rosette should be oriented to align grid no. 1
parallel to the loading direction, placing grid no. 3 along
the transverse axis of the specimen. Care must be taken
that the tensile stress is uniform over the cross section of
the test specimen; i.e., that bending stress is negligible.
To minimize edge and end effects, the specimen width
should be at least ten times the hole diameter, and the
length between machine grips, at least ve times the width.
When determining A and B for blind-hole applications, a
specimen thickness of ve or more times the hole diameter is
recommended. For through-hole calibration, the thickness
of the calibration specimen is preferably the same as that
of the test part. It is also important that the maximum
applied stress during calibration not exceed one-half of the
proportional limit stress for the test material. In any case,
the applied stress plus the initial residual stress must be low
enough to avoid the risk of local yielding due to the stress-
concentrating effect of the hole.
Basically, the calibration procedure involves measuring the
rosette strains under the same applied load or calibration
stress, T
c
, both before and after drilling the hole. Such a
procedure is necessary in order to eliminate the effect of
the strain relief that may occur due to the relaxation of
any initial residual stress in the calibration specimen. With
this technique, the observed strain difference (before and
after hole drilling) is caused only by the applied calibration
stress, and is uniquely related to that stress. The steps in
the calibration procedure can be summarized briey as
follows, noting that the strains in only grid no. 1 and grid
no. 3 need to be measured, since these grids are known to
be aligned with the principal axes of the specimen.
1. Zero-balance the strain gage circuits.
2. Apply a load, P, to the specimen to develop the desired
calibration stress,
c
.
3. Measure strains
1
and
3
(before drilling).
4. Unload the specimen, and remove it from the testing
machine.
5. Drill the hole, as described in Section V, Experimental
Techniques.
6. Replace the specimen in the testing machine, re-zero
the strain gage circuits, and then reapply exactly the
same load, P.
7. Measure strains
1
and
3
(after drilling).
The calibration strains corresponding to the load, P, and
the stress, T
c
, are then:

c1
=
1

1

c3
=
3

3

Calibration reliability can ordinarily be improved by
loading the specimen incrementally and making strain
measurements at each load level, both before and after
drilling the hole. This permits plotting a graph of
c

versus
c1
and
c3
, so that best-fit straight lines can be
constructed through the data points to minimize the effect
of random errors. It will also help identify the presence of
yielding, if that should occur. The resulting relationship
between the applied stress and the relieved strain is usually
more representative than that obtained by a single-point
determination.
Since the calibration is performed with only one nonzero
principal stress, Equation (5a) can be used to develop
expressions for the calibrated values of A and B. Successively
substituting = 0 (for grid no. 1) and = 90 (for grid no.
3) into Equation (5a):

c1
=
c
[A + B cos (0)] =
c
(A + B)

c3
=
c
[A + B cos (2 x 90)] =
c
(A B)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
25
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
By comparison with Equations (6), it can be seen that
for the through hole, at least a is material-independent,
and b depends only weakly on Poissons ratio. Schajer
has determined from nite-element calculations that for
blind holes, a and b vary by less than 2% for the range of
Poissons ratio from 0.25 to 0.35.
III. Determining Coefcients A and B
Whether the residual stress analysis application involves
through-hole or blind-hole drilling, the coefficients A
and B (or a and b ) must be determined to calculate the
stresses from the relieved strains. In the case of the through
hole, reasonably accurate values of the coefcients can
be obtained for any particular case by analytical means,
if desired. This is done by integrating, over the area of
the gage grid, the component of strain parallel to the
primary strain-sensing axis of the gage. Given the details
of the grid geometry (line width and spacing, number of
lines, etc.), Slightly greater accuracy may be obtained by
integrating along the individual grid lines. This method
cannot be applied to blind-hole analysis because closed-
form expressions relating the relieved strains to the residual
stress, in terms of hole depth, are not available.
Experimental Calibration
The needed coefcients for either through-hole or blind-
hole analysis can always be determined by experimental
calibration. This procedure is particularly attractive since
it automatically accounts for the mechanical properties
of the test material, strain gage rosette geometry, hole
depth and diameter, and the strain-averaging effect of the
strain gage grid. When performed correctly, with sufcient
attention to detail, it is potentially the most accurate means
for determining the coefcients. Its principal disadvantage
is that the calibration must be repeated each time a different
set of geometric parameters is involved.
Calibration for A and B is accomplished by installing a
residual stress strain gage rosette on a uniaxially stressed
tensile specimen made from the same material as the test
part. The rosette should be oriented to align grid no. 1
parallel to the loading direction, placing grid no. 3 along
the transverse axis of the specimen. Care must be taken
that the tensile stress is uniform over the cross section of
the test specimen; i.e., that bending stress is negligible.
To minimize edge and end effects, the specimen width
should be at least ten times the hole diameter, and the
length between machine grips, at least ve times the width.
When determining A and B for blind-hole applications, a
specimen thickness of ve or more times the hole diameter is
recommended. For through-hole calibration, the thickness
of the calibration specimen is preferably the same as that
of the test part. It is also important that the maximum
applied stress during calibration not exceed one-half of the
proportional limit stress for the test material. In any case,
the applied stress plus the initial residual stress must be low
enough to avoid the risk of local yielding due to the stress-
concentrating effect of the hole.
Basically, the calibration procedure involves measuring the
rosette strains under the same applied load or calibration
stress, T
c
, both before and after drilling the hole. Such a
procedure is necessary in order to eliminate the effect of
the strain relief that may occur due to the relaxation of
any initial residual stress in the calibration specimen. With
this technique, the observed strain difference (before and
after hole drilling) is caused only by the applied calibration
stress, and is uniquely related to that stress. The steps in
the calibration procedure can be summarized briey as
follows, noting that the strains in only grid no. 1 and grid
no. 3 need to be measured, since these grids are known to
be aligned with the principal axes of the specimen.
1. Zero-balance the strain gage circuits.
2. Apply a load, P, to the specimen to develop the desired
calibration stress,
c
.
3. Measure strains
1
and
3
(before drilling).
4. Unload the specimen, and remove it from the testing
machine.
5. Drill the hole, as described in Section V, Experimental
Techniques.
6. Replace the specimen in the testing machine, re-zero
the strain gage circuits, and then reapply exactly the
same load, P.
7. Measure strains
1
and
3
(after drilling).
The calibration strains corresponding to the load, P, and
the stress, T
c
, are then:

c1
=
1

1

c3
=
3

3

Calibration reliability can ordinarily be improved by
loading the specimen incrementally and making strain
measurements at each load level, both before and after
drilling the hole. This permits plotting a graph of
c

versus
c1
and
c3
, so that best-fit straight lines can be
constructed through the data points to minimize the effect
of random errors. It will also help identify the presence of
yielding, if that should occur. The resulting relationship
between the applied stress and the relieved strain is usually
more representative than that obtained by a single-point
determination.
Since the calibration is performed with only one nonzero
principal stress, Equation (5a) can be used to develop
expressions for the calibrated values of A and B. Successively
substituting = 0 (for grid no. 1) and = 90 (for grid no.
3) into Equation (5a):

c1
=
c
[A + B cos (0)] =
c
(A + B)

c3
=
c
[A + B cos (2 x 90)] =
c
(A B)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
26
Solving for A and B,
(14a)


(14b)
The procedure described here was applied to a through-
hole specimen made from Type 304 stainless steel, and the
calibration data are plotted in Figure 6. It can be seen from the
gure that for this geometry (D
o
/D = 0.35) and material,
c1

and
c3
are 90 and +39, respectively, when
c
is 10 000 psi
[69 MPa]. Substituting into Equations (14),
A = 0.25 10
8
psi
1
[0.36 10
12
Pa
1
]
B = 0.65 10
8
psi
1
[0.94 10
12
Pa
1
]
Although the preceding numerical example referred to the
through-hole coefcients, the same procedure is followed
in calibrating for full-depth blind-hole coefficients.
Once A and B have been obtained in this manner, the
corresponding material-independent coefcients, a and
b, can be calculated from Equations (13) if the elastic
modulus and Poissons ratio of the test material are known.
If desired, the procedure can then be repeated over the
practical range of D
o
/D to permit plotting curves of a and
b for all cases of interest.
It should be noted that the values for the basic coefcients
A and B obtained from a particular calibration test are
strictly applicable only for residual-stress measurement
conditions that exactly match the calibration conditions:
material with the same elastic properties;
same rosette geometry (but rosette orientation is
arbitrary);
same hole size;
same hole form (through hole or full-depth blind hole);
uniform stress with depth;
nominally uniform in-plane stress at the hole.
Coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
Residual Stress Rosettes
Vishay Micro-Measurements supplies special strain
gage rosettes for residual stress analysis in four basic
configurations, illustrated and described in Figure 7.
Among other features, these rosette designs incorporate
centering patterns for positioning the boring tool precisely
at the center of the gage circle. All RE and UL designs have
A
B
c c
c
c c
c


E E
S
E E
S
1 3
1 3
2
2
Figure 6. Stress versus relieved strain for calibration of
coefcients A and B on 304 Stainless Steel (through-hole).
X
c
= 10 000 psi
S
T
R
E
S
S

[
M
P
a
]
c
c
1

=

9
0
R
c
c
c
3

=

+
3
9
R
c
CALIBRATION MICROSTRAIN (c
c
)
S
T
R
E
S
S

(
1
0
0
0

p
s
i
)
GAGE #1 GAGE #3
100
80
60
40
20
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40
10



5
1
3
2
EA-XX-062RE-120
This geometry conforms to the early Rendler
and Vigness design
5
and has been used in
most reported technical articles (see refer-
ences). It is available in a range of sizes to
accommodate applications requiring different
hole diameters or depths.
CEA-XX-062UL-120
This rugged, encapsulated design incorpo-
rates all practical advantages of the CEA
strain gage series (integral copper solder-
ing tabs, conformability, etc.). Installation
time and expense are greatly reduced, and
all solder tabs are on one side of the gage to simplify leadwire
routing from the gage site. It is compatible with all methods of
introducing the hole, and the strain gage grid geometry is identi-
cal to the 062RE pattern.
CEA-XX-062UM-120
Another CEA-Series strain gage, the
062UM grid widths have been reduced
to facilitate positioning all three grids on
one side of the measurement point as
shown. With this geometry, and appropri-
ate trimming, it is possible to position the
hole closer to welds and other irregularities. The user should
be reminded, however, that the data reduction equations are
theoretically valid only when the holes are well removed from
free boundaries, discontinuities, abrupt geometric changes, etc.
The UM design is compatible with all methods of introducing
the hole.
N2K-XX-030RR-350/DP
The K-alloy grids of this open-faced six-
element rosette are mounted on a thin,
high-performance laminated polyimide
film backing. Solder tabs are duplex
copper plated for ease in making solder
joints for lead attachment. Diametrically
opposed circumferential and radial grids
are to be wired in half-bridge congurations.
Figure 7. Residual stress strain gage
rosettes (shown approximately 2X).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
26
Solving for A and B,
(14a)


(14b)
The procedure described here was applied to a through-
hole specimen made from Type 304 stainless steel, and the
calibration data are plotted in Figure 6. It can be seen from the
gure that for this geometry (D
o
/D = 0.35) and material,
c1

and
c3
are 90 and +39, respectively, when
c
is 10 000 psi
[69 MPa]. Substituting into Equations (14),
A = 0.25 10
8
psi
1
[0.36 10
12
Pa
1
]
B = 0.65 10
8
psi
1
[0.94 10
12
Pa
1
]
Although the preceding numerical example referred to the
through-hole coefcients, the same procedure is followed
in calibrating for full-depth blind-hole coefficients.
Once A and B have been obtained in this manner, the
corresponding material-independent coefcients, a and
b, can be calculated from Equations (13) if the elastic
modulus and Poissons ratio of the test material are known.
If desired, the procedure can then be repeated over the
practical range of D
o
/D to permit plotting curves of a and
b for all cases of interest.
It should be noted that the values for the basic coefcients
A and B obtained from a particular calibration test are
strictly applicable only for residual-stress measurement
conditions that exactly match the calibration conditions:
material with the same elastic properties;
same rosette geometry (but rosette orientation is
arbitrary);
same hole size;
same hole form (through hole or full-depth blind hole);
uniform stress with depth;
nominally uniform in-plane stress at the hole.
Coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
Residual Stress Rosettes
Vishay Micro-Measurements supplies special strain
gage rosettes for residual stress analysis in four basic
configurations, illustrated and described in Figure 7.
Among other features, these rosette designs incorporate
centering patterns for positioning the boring tool precisely
at the center of the gage circle. All RE and UL designs have
A
B
c c
c
c c
c


E E
S
E E
S
1 3
1 3
2
2
Figure 6. Stress versus relieved strain for calibration of
coefcients A and B on 304 Stainless Steel (through-hole).
X
c
= 10 000 psi
S
T
R
E
S
S

[
M
P
a
]
c
c
1

=

9
0
R
c
c
c
3

=

+
3
9
R
c
CALIBRATION MICROSTRAIN (c
c
)
S
T
R
E
S
S

(
1
0
0
0

p
s
i
)
GAGE #1 GAGE #3
100
80
60
40
20
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40
10



5
1
3
2
EA-XX-062RE-120
This geometry conforms to the early Rendler
and Vigness design
5
and has been used in
most reported technical articles (see refer-
ences). It is available in a range of sizes to
accommodate applications requiring different
hole diameters or depths.
CEA-XX-062UL-120
This rugged, encapsulated design incorpo-
rates all practical advantages of the CEA
strain gage series (integral copper solder-
ing tabs, conformability, etc.). Installation
time and expense are greatly reduced, and
all solder tabs are on one side of the gage to simplify leadwire
routing from the gage site. It is compatible with all methods of
introducing the hole, and the strain gage grid geometry is identi-
cal to the 062RE pattern.
CEA-XX-062UM-120
Another CEA-Series strain gage, the
062UM grid widths have been reduced
to facilitate positioning all three grids on
one side of the measurement point as
shown. With this geometry, and appropri-
ate trimming, it is possible to position the
hole closer to welds and other irregularities. The user should
be reminded, however, that the data reduction equations are
theoretically valid only when the holes are well removed from
free boundaries, discontinuities, abrupt geometric changes, etc.
The UM design is compatible with all methods of introducing
the hole.
N2K-XX-030RR-350/DP
The K-alloy grids of this open-faced six-
element rosette are mounted on a thin,
high-performance laminated polyimide
film backing. Solder tabs are duplex
copper plated for ease in making solder
joints for lead attachment. Diametrically
opposed circumferential and radial grids
are to be wired in half-bridge congurations.
Figure 7. Residual stress strain gage
rosettes (shown approximately 2X).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
Misma forma del agujero ( trough hole o full-
depth blind-hole);
tensin uniforme con profundidad;
tensin normalmente uniforme en el agujero.









Coeficientes para roseta de tensin residual de
Vishay Micro-Measurements

Vishay Micro-Measurements tiene special strain gage
rosettes para anlisis de tensin residual en 4
configuraciones bsicas, ilustradas y descritas n la
figura 7. En compaa de otros atributos, estos
diseos de rosetas incorporan patrones cntricos
para posicionamiento de la herramienta perforadora
justo en el centro del gage circle.
Todos los diseos RE y UL tienen configuraciones
geomtricas de la malla similares, con el dimetro del
gage igual a 3.25 veces la longitud del gage activo.
La roseta 062RE, por ejemplo, tiene un dimetro del
gage de 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. debido a esta similitud,
los coeficientes y del material independiente aplican
para todos los tamaos de rosetas RE, y para las
rosetas UL, para agujero geomtricamente similares
(en otras palabras, para las mismas relaciones D0/D y
Z/D). La configuran de roseta 062UM tiene la misma
relacin entre el gage circle y la longitud de la malla,
pero las mallas son largadas para permitir agruparse
en un solo lado del agujero. Como resultado, la
sensibilidad del gage en los relieved strains es
ligeramente mejor, y coeficientes especficos para el
062UM son necesarios para reducciones de datos.






La roseta 030RR es fundamentalmente diferente de
las dems ilustradas en la figura 7. Para empezar,
esta roseta incluye mallas orientadas Radialmente y
circunferencialmente las cuales esta conectadas en
pares. La roseta 030RR incorpora un numero de
atributos que la hacen tener una mejor salida y una
mejor exactitud comparada con las rosetas de tres
elementos: (a) las lneas de la malla individuales de
los elementos radiales son puramente radiales, a
diferencia de las otras rosetas que solamente son
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
26
Solving for A and B,
(14a)


(14b)
The procedure described here was applied to a through-
hole specimen made from Type 304 stainless steel, and the
calibration data are plotted in Figure 6. It can be seen from the
gure that for this geometry (D
o
/D = 0.35) and material,
c1

and
c3
are 90 and +39, respectively, when
c
is 10 000 psi
[69 MPa]. Substituting into Equations (14),
A = 0.25 10
8
psi
1
[0.36 10
12
Pa
1
]
B = 0.65 10
8
psi
1
[0.94 10
12
Pa
1
]
Although the preceding numerical example referred to the
through-hole coefcients, the same procedure is followed
in calibrating for full-depth blind-hole coefficients.
Once A and B have been obtained in this manner, the
corresponding material-independent coefcients, a and
b, can be calculated from Equations (13) if the elastic
modulus and Poissons ratio of the test material are known.
If desired, the procedure can then be repeated over the
practical range of D
o
/D to permit plotting curves of a and
b for all cases of interest.
It should be noted that the values for the basic coefcients
A and B obtained from a particular calibration test are
strictly applicable only for residual-stress measurement
conditions that exactly match the calibration conditions:
material with the same elastic properties;
same rosette geometry (but rosette orientation is
arbitrary);
same hole size;
same hole form (through hole or full-depth blind hole);
uniform stress with depth;
nominally uniform in-plane stress at the hole.
Coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
Residual Stress Rosettes
Vishay Micro-Measurements supplies special strain
gage rosettes for residual stress analysis in four basic
configurations, illustrated and described in Figure 7.
Among other features, these rosette designs incorporate
centering patterns for positioning the boring tool precisely
at the center of the gage circle. All RE and UL designs have
A
B
c c
c
c c
c


E E
S
E E
S
1 3
1 3
2
2
Figure 6. Stress versus relieved strain for calibration of
coefcients A and B on 304 Stainless Steel (through-hole).
X
c
= 10 000 psi
S
T
R
E
S
S

[
M
P
a
]
c
c
1

=

9
0
R
c
c
c
3

=

+
3
9
R
c
CALIBRATION MICROSTRAIN (c
c
)
S
T
R
E
S
S

(
1
0
0
0

p
s
i
)
GAGE #1 GAGE #3
100
80
60
40
20
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40
10



5
1
3
2
EA-XX-062RE-120
This geometry conforms to the early Rendler
and Vigness design
5
and has been used in
most reported technical articles (see refer-
ences). It is available in a range of sizes to
accommodate applications requiring different
hole diameters or depths.
CEA-XX-062UL-120
This rugged, encapsulated design incorpo-
rates all practical advantages of the CEA
strain gage series (integral copper solder-
ing tabs, conformability, etc.). Installation
time and expense are greatly reduced, and
all solder tabs are on one side of the gage to simplify leadwire
routing from the gage site. It is compatible with all methods of
introducing the hole, and the strain gage grid geometry is identi-
cal to the 062RE pattern.
CEA-XX-062UM-120
Another CEA-Series strain gage, the
062UM grid widths have been reduced
to facilitate positioning all three grids on
one side of the measurement point as
shown. With this geometry, and appropri-
ate trimming, it is possible to position the
hole closer to welds and other irregularities. The user should
be reminded, however, that the data reduction equations are
theoretically valid only when the holes are well removed from
free boundaries, discontinuities, abrupt geometric changes, etc.
The UM design is compatible with all methods of introducing
the hole.
N2K-XX-030RR-350/DP
The K-alloy grids of this open-faced six-
element rosette are mounted on a thin,
high-performance laminated polyimide
film backing. Solder tabs are duplex
copper plated for ease in making solder
joints for lead attachment. Diametrically
opposed circumferential and radial grids
are to be wired in half-bridge congurations.
Figure 7. Residual stress strain gage
rosettes (shown approximately 2X).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
26
Solving for A and B,
(14a)


(14b)
The procedure described here was applied to a through-
hole specimen made from Type 304 stainless steel, and the
calibration data are plotted in Figure 6. It can be seen from the
gure that for this geometry (D
o
/D = 0.35) and material,
c1

and
c3
are 90 and +39, respectively, when
c
is 10 000 psi
[69 MPa]. Substituting into Equations (14),
A = 0.25 10
8
psi
1
[0.36 10
12
Pa
1
]
B = 0.65 10
8
psi
1
[0.94 10
12
Pa
1
]
Although the preceding numerical example referred to the
through-hole coefcients, the same procedure is followed
in calibrating for full-depth blind-hole coefficients.
Once A and B have been obtained in this manner, the
corresponding material-independent coefcients, a and
b, can be calculated from Equations (13) if the elastic
modulus and Poissons ratio of the test material are known.
If desired, the procedure can then be repeated over the
practical range of D
o
/D to permit plotting curves of a and
b for all cases of interest.
It should be noted that the values for the basic coefcients
A and B obtained from a particular calibration test are
strictly applicable only for residual-stress measurement
conditions that exactly match the calibration conditions:
material with the same elastic properties;
same rosette geometry (but rosette orientation is
arbitrary);
same hole size;
same hole form (through hole or full-depth blind hole);
uniform stress with depth;
nominally uniform in-plane stress at the hole.
Coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
Residual Stress Rosettes
Vishay Micro-Measurements supplies special strain
gage rosettes for residual stress analysis in four basic
configurations, illustrated and described in Figure 7.
Among other features, these rosette designs incorporate
centering patterns for positioning the boring tool precisely
at the center of the gage circle. All RE and UL designs have
A
B
c c
c
c c
c


E E
S
E E
S
1 3
1 3
2
2
Figure 6. Stress versus relieved strain for calibration of
coefcients A and B on 304 Stainless Steel (through-hole).
X
c
= 10 000 psi
S
T
R
E
S
S

[
M
P
a
]
c
c
1

=

9
0
R
c
c
c
3

=

+
3
9
R
c
CALIBRATION MICROSTRAIN (c
c
)
S
T
R
E
S
S

(
1
0
0
0

p
s
i
)
GAGE #1 GAGE #3
100
80
60
40
20
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40
10



5
1
3
2
EA-XX-062RE-120
This geometry conforms to the early Rendler
and Vigness design
5
and has been used in
most reported technical articles (see refer-
ences). It is available in a range of sizes to
accommodate applications requiring different
hole diameters or depths.
CEA-XX-062UL-120
This rugged, encapsulated design incorpo-
rates all practical advantages of the CEA
strain gage series (integral copper solder-
ing tabs, conformability, etc.). Installation
time and expense are greatly reduced, and
all solder tabs are on one side of the gage to simplify leadwire
routing from the gage site. It is compatible with all methods of
introducing the hole, and the strain gage grid geometry is identi-
cal to the 062RE pattern.
CEA-XX-062UM-120
Another CEA-Series strain gage, the
062UM grid widths have been reduced
to facilitate positioning all three grids on
one side of the measurement point as
shown. With this geometry, and appropri-
ate trimming, it is possible to position the
hole closer to welds and other irregularities. The user should
be reminded, however, that the data reduction equations are
theoretically valid only when the holes are well removed from
free boundaries, discontinuities, abrupt geometric changes, etc.
The UM design is compatible with all methods of introducing
the hole.
N2K-XX-030RR-350/DP
The K-alloy grids of this open-faced six-
element rosette are mounted on a thin,
high-performance laminated polyimide
film backing. Solder tabs are duplex
copper plated for ease in making solder
joints for lead attachment. Diametrically
opposed circumferential and radial grids
are to be wired in half-bridge congurations.
Figure 7. Residual stress strain gage
rosettes (shown approximately 2X).
Figura 6. tensin vs. relieved strain para
calibracin de coeficientes y en acero
inoxidable 304.
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
24
case of uniaxial residual stress) is negligible compared to
the remaining uncertainties in the measurement and data-
reduction procedures.
Blind-Hole Analysis
The theoretical background for the hole-drilling method
was developed in the preceding treatment on the basis of a
small hole drilled completely through a thin, wide, at plate
subjected to uniform plane stress. Such a conguration is
far from typical of practical test objects, however, since
ordinary machine parts and structural members requiring
residual stress analysis may be of any size or shape, and are
rarely thin or at. Because of this, a shallow blind hole is
used in most applications of the hole-drilling method.
The introduction of a blind hole into a eld of plane stress
produces a very complex local stress state, for which no exact
solution is yet available from the theory of elasticity. Fortu-
nately, however, it has been demonstrated by Rendler and
Vigness
5
that this case closely parallels the through-hole
condition in the general nature of the stress distribution.
Thus, the relieved strains due to drilling the blind hole
still vary sinusoidally along a circle concentric with the
hole, in the manner described by Equations (9). It follows,
then, that these equations, as well as the data-reduction
relationships in Equations (11), are equally applicable
to the blind-hole implementation of the method when
appropriate blind-hole coefcients A and B are employed.
Since these coefficients cannot be calculated directly
from theoretical considerations, they must be obtained by
empirical means; that is, by experimental calibration or by
numerical procedures such as nite-element analysis.
Several di fferent i nvestigators [e.g., (20)(23)] have
published finite-element studies of blind-hole residual
stress analysis. The most recently developed coefcients by
Schajer are incorporated in ASTM standard E 837, and are
shown graphically for the case of uniform stress in Figure
8 of this Tech Note. The computer program H-DRILL uses
these coefcients.
Compared to the through-hole procedure, blind-hole
analysis involves one additional independent variable;
namely, the dimensionless hole depth, Z/D (see Figure 5).
Thus, in a generalized functional form, the coefcients can
be expressed as:
A = f
A
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12a)
B = f
B
(E, O, r, Z/D) (12b)
For any given initial state of residual stress, and a xed
hole diameter, the relieved strains generally increase (at
a decreasing rate) as the hole depth is increased. Therefore,
in order to maximize the strain signals, the hole is normally
drilled to a depth corresponding to at least Z/D = 0.4
(ASTM E 837 species Z/D = 0.4 for the maximum hole
depth).
The general variation of relieved strain with depth is
illustrated in Figure 5, where the strains have been
normalized, in this case, to 100% at Z/D = 0.4. The
data include experimental results from two different
investigators demonstrating the manner in which the
relieved-strain function is affected by the ratio of hole
diameter to gage circle diameter (D
o
/D). Both cases involve
uniform uniaxial (plane) stress, in specimens that are
thick compared to the maximum hole depth. The curves
plotted in the gure are considered representative of the
response to be expected when the residual stress is uniform
throughout the hole depth.
An important contribution of the Rendler and Vigness
work is the demonstration that, for any given set of
material properties, E and , coefcients A and B are
simply geometric functions, and thus constants for all
geometrically similar cases. This means that once the
coefcients have been determined for a particular rosette
conguration, the rosette size can be scaled upward or
downward and the same coefcients will still apply when
the hole diameter and depth are similarly scaled (assuming,
of course, the same material). Several different approaches
have been taken in attempting to remove the material
dependency from A and B, leaving only the geometric
dependence. One of these, proposed by Schajer,7 is adopted
in this Tech Note. Schajer introduced two new coefcients,
denoted here as a and b, and dened as follows:

(13a)
(13b)
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
GAGE #1
D
o
/D
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

S
T
R
A
I
N

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D
120
0
.
4
0
K
e
l
s
e
y
(
R
e
f
.
6
)
0
.
2
9
R
e
n
d
l
e
r
&
V
i
g
n
e
s
s
(
R
e
f
.
5
)
D
o
Gage
Z
D
3
1
2
Figure 5. Relieved strain versus ratio of hole depth to gage circle
diameter (strains normalized to 100% at Z/D = 0.4).
a
EA
b EB


2
1
2
N
Figura 7. Rosetas strain gage para tensin
residual ( mostradas aproximadamente 2X).
paralelas a las lneas de las mallas.; (b) para el
mximo dimetro del agujero, los puntos mas
alejados del radio en las mallas es
considerablemente menor que el de las rosetas
convencionales, y por lo tanto las malla sienten
ligeramente mejor las released strains.; y (c) desde
las mallas radiales y circunferenciales estn
conectadas en una configuracin de medio puente, el
puente de salida aumenta correspondientemente, y el
circuito compensa su temperatura intrnsecamente.
Como resultado de estos atributos, la roseta 030RR
da aproximadamente el doble de la salida de las
rosetas de tres elementos para una tensin residual
dada, mientras muestra mejor estabilidad y exactitud.
Ya que el signo de la tensin residual es de vital
importancia en la determinacin de los efectos en la
integridad estructural de cualquier componente
mecnico, el usuario de una roseta de seis elementos
(030RR) tiene que tener cuidado en la conexin de
las mallas en el Wheatstone bridge circuits. Para
obtener el signo correcto en el instrumento de salida,
las mallas Radialmente orientadas siempre deben
estar conectadas entre la excitacin positiva y las
terminales de seal negativa, mientras que las mallas
tangencialmente orientadas deben estar conectadas
entre la seal negativa y las terminales de excitacin
negativa.
Los coeficientes y para las rosetas de tensin
residual de Vishay Micro-Measurements son
provistos grficamente n la figura 8 en la pagina
siguiente, donde las lneas slidas aplican para full-
depth blind holes y las lneas horizontales a travs del
agujero asumen, en ambos casos, que la tensin
residual inicial es uniforme con la profundidad. Ambos
coeficientes dibujados en la grafica (trough-hole y full-
depth blind-hole) fueron obtenidos por la combinacin
del anlisis de elementos finitos y la verificacin
experimental. Estos coeficientes tambin son
provistos numricamente en forma tabular en ASTM
E 837-99, donde las rosetas RE/UL son diseadas
como tipo A, UM como rosetas tipo B, y RR como
rosetas tipo C,. Para los coeficientes blind-hole en la
ASTM estndar, full-depth corresponde a un valor
de 0.40 para la profundidad to rosette-mean-
diameter-ratio, Z/D.

IV. Medicin de tensin residual no uniforme

Los coeficientes dados en esta nota tcnica y en el
ASTM E 837-99 son estrictamente aplicables solo a
situaciones en las cuales la tensin residual no varia
en magnitud o direccin con la profundidad de la
superficie de la parte de prueba. En realidad, en
cualquier caso, la tensin residual seguido puede
variar significantemente con la profundidad, debido,
por ejemplo, a los diferentes procesos de
manufacturacin, tales como moldear, forjar,
tratamiento con calor, acuar, partir, etc.
Numerosos estudios de elementos finitos han sido
hechos con la intencin de arreglar esta situacin [ve
por ejemplo, referencia de la 20 a la 23]. Los
resultados de el trabajo de elementos finito hecho por
Schajer ha sido incorporado en un programa de
computadora, H-DRILL, para manejo de variacin de
tensin con la profundidad. Cuando las estras
medidas de la perforacin del agujero no concuerdan
con las curvas en la figura 10, o cuando hay otra
razn para sospechar de irregularidad significante, el
programa H-DRILL o cualquier otro programa basado
en elementos finitos es necesario para determinar
con exactitud la tensin de las estras medidas.

V. Tcnicas experimentales

Como todos los mtodo experimentales, los
materiales apropiados, los mtodos de aplicacin, y
la instrumentacin son esenciales para obtener
resultados exactos. La exactitud del mtodo hole-
drilling depende principalmente de los siguientes
factores relacionados con la tcnica:

Instalacin y seleccin de strain gage.
Alineacin y perforacin del agujero.
Instrumentacin strain-indicating.
Entendimiento de las propiedades
mecnicas del material de prueba.

Seleccin e instalacin del strain gage

Instalando 3 strain gages individualmente,
perfectamente espaciadas y orientadas en un
pequeo circulo, no es ni fcil de hacer ni de advertir,
ya que un pequeo error en la locacin u orientacin
de la gage puede producir enormes errores en la
calculacin de la tensin residual. Las
configuraciones de la roseta mostradas en la figura 7
han sido diseadas y desarrolladas por Vishay Micro-
Measurements especficamente para medicin de
tensin residual. Los diseos de las rosetas
incorporan marcas de centrado para la alineacin
precisa en el centro de la herramienta de perforacin
en el gage circle, ya que esto es fundamental para la
exactitud del mtodo.
Todas la configuraciones estn disponibles en un
rango de temperatura de compensacin para su uso
en estructuras comunes de metal. Pero, solamente el
diseo RE es ofrecido en diferentes medidas (031RE,
062RE, y 125RE), donde los tres dgitos del prefijo
representan la longitud del gage en la milsima parte
de una pulgada (0.001 in [0.0254mm]). El diseo RE
esta disponible en open-faced o con Option SE
(puntos de soldadura y encapsulacin).
Las configuraciones UL y UM son provistas de una
longitud de gage de 1/16 in [1.6mm], y ambos tipos
son totalmente encapsulados. Ambas configuraciones
tienen los puntos de soldadura cubiertos, y ofrecen
todas las ventajas de la popular C-Feature strain
gage series. Estas rosetas de tensin residual son
construidas con self-temperature-compensated foil,
motadas en un soporte flexible de polmero. Gage
resistance es 120 ohms +/-0.4%.la roseta de seis
elementos 030RR incorpora self-temperature-
compensated K-alloy (modified Karma)
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).


For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
28
C O E F F I C I E N T S A N D
1
.
2
1
.
1
1
.
0
0
.
9
0
.
8
0
.
7
0
.
5
0
.
4
0
.
3
0
.
4
0
0
.
4
5
0
.
5
0
0
.
5
5
0
.
6
0
(
c
)

R
R

R
O
S
E
T
T
E
D
o
/
D
x
a
x b x a
0
.
6
b
l
i
n
d

h
o
l
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h

h
o
l
e
1
.
3
S
U
G
G
E
S
T
E
D

L
I
M
I
T
S
x
b
D
0
.
4
D
D
o
S
U
G
G
E
S
T
E
D

L
I
M
I
T
S
C O E F F I C I E N T S A N D
0
.
8
0
.
7
0
.
6
0
.
5
0
.
4
0
.
3
0
.
2
0
.
1 0
0
.
3
0
0
.
3
5
0
.
4
0
0
.
4
5
0
.
5
0
(
a
)

R
E

A
N
D

U
L

R
O
S
E
T
T
E
S
D
o
/
D
b
l
i
n
d

h
o
l
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h

h
o
l
e
1 1
1
D
D
o
2
0
.
4
D
3
x
b x
a
x b x a
0
.
8
0
.
7
0
.
6
0
.
5
0
.
4
0
.
3
0
.
2
0
.
1
0
0
.
3
0
0
.
3
5
0
.
4
0
0
.
4
5
0
.
5
0
(
b
)

U
M

R
O
S
E
T
T
E
D
o
/
D
1 1
x
b
x
a
C O E F F I C I E N T S A N D x b x a
b
l
i
n
d

h
o
l
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h

h
o
l
e
S
U
G
G
E
S
T
E
D

L
I
M
I
T
S
1
D
D
o
2
0
.
4
D
3
F
i
g
u
r
e

8
.

F
u
l
l
-
d
e
p
t
h

d
a
t
a
-
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

c
o
e
f

c
i
e
n
t
s


a


a
n
d


b


v
e
r
s
u
s

d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

h
o
l
e

d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
t
y
p
i
c
a
l
)

f
o
r


V
i
s
h
a
y

M
i
c
r
o
-
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
s

r
e
s
i
d
u
a
l

s
t
r
e
s
s

r
o
s
e
t
t
e
s
,

i
n

a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e

w
i
t
h

A
S
T
M

E

8
3
7
.

foil on a laminated polymide film backing. Los puntos
de soldadura son de laminas dobles de cobre para
hacer mas fcil las conexiones. La gage resistance es
de 350 ohms +/-0.4%.
la preparacin de la superficie para la instalacin de
las rosetas es bsicamente estndar, como esta
descrita en la nota de aplicacin B-129. Pero
contrario a lo anterior, se debe tener precaucin
cuando se le lija la superficie del objeto de prueba, ya
que la abrasin puede alterar la tensin residual
inicial. En general, es importante que la preparacin
de la superficie y la instalacin del gage sean de las
mas alta calidad, para permitir la medicin exacta de
pequeas estras tpicamente registradas con el
mtodo hole-drilling. Como es evidenciado en los
datos de calibracin en la figura 6, las relieved strains
correspondientes a la magnitud de la tensin residual
dada son considerablemente mas bajas que aquellas
obtenidas en una pruebe mecnica convencional
para el mismo nivel de tensin. Debido a las
pequeas estras medidas, cualquier desviacin o
inexactitud en la salida gage indicada, ya sea
provocada por una mala instalacin del gage,
instrumentos inestables, o lo que sea, puede afectar
seriamente la tensin residual calculada.

Instrumentos de medicin Strain

Las rosetas de tensin residual descritas en la figura
7 no imponen requerimientos de instrumentos
especiales. Cuando las mediciones van a ser en el
campo, una batera operada por un strain indicador
portable, suplementada con una unidad de switch y
balance , es el instrumento mas efectivo y
conveniente. El Indicador y Grabador Strain Modelo
P3 es ideal para este tipo de aplicacin. En el
laboratorio puede ser mas conveniente usar un
sistema automtico computarizado de datos como el
System 5000, el cual rpidamente grabar los datos
de una forma fcilmente accesible. Un programa
especial H-DRILL offline basado en Windows
tambin esta disponible para hacer clculos y
determinar la tensin residual de acuerdo con el
ASTM E 837. La base de datos del programa incluye
los valores de los coeficientes y para agujero
ciegos, y cubre todo el rango recomendado de
dimensiones del agujero aplicables para todas las
rosetas de tensin residual hechas por Vishay Micro-
Measurements.

Alineacin

Rendler y Vigness observaron que la exactitud del
mtodo hole-drilling para aplicaciones de campo
estar directamente relacionada con la habilidad del
operador para posicionar el cortador precisamente en
el centro de la roseta strain gage. Estudios mas
recientes han cuantificado el error en la tensin
calculada debida a la excentricidad del agujero. Por
ejemplo, para un agujero que esta 0.001 in
[0.025mm] fuera del centro de la roseta 062RE o
062UL, el error en la tensin calculada no excede el
3% ( para un estado de tensin en un solo eje). En la
practica, la precisin requerida para alinear dentro del
rango de 0.001 in [0.025mm] es alcanzada usando la
Gua de Corte RS-200 mostrada en la figura 9. La
gua de corte es normalmente asegurada al objeto de
prueba mediante la unin de sus tres patas con un
adhesivo de rpida fijacin. Luego es instalado un
microscopio es instalado en la unidad y la alineacin
el alcanzada con la ayuda de 4 tronillos en X-Y en el
exterior de la gua.

Perforacin

Numerosos estudios de los efectos de los
procedimientos de maquinacin, dar forma y medir un
agujero han sido publicados. Rendler y Vigness
specifed a specially dressed end mill el cual es
compatible con las rosetas de tensin residual de la
figura 7. The end mill is ground to remove the side
cuttings edges, and then relieved inmediately behind
the cutting face to avoid rubbing on the hole surface.
Es imperativo que el cortador sea firmemente guiado
durante el proceso de perforacin para que el
progreso del cortador sea una lnea recta, sin presin
lateral en al agujero, o friccin en una orilla que no se
vaya a cortar.
These end mills generate the desired flat-bottomed
and square-cornered hole shape at initial surface
contact, and maintain the appropriate shape until the
hole is completed. In doing so, they fulfill the
incremental drilling requirements as stipulated in
ASTM E 837. Specially dressed end mills offer a
direct and simple approach when measuring residual
stresses on readily machinable materials such as mild
steel an some aluminum alloys. The end mill is driven
through the universal Joint at the top of the assembly,
by either a hand drill or variable-speed electric drill.
En 1982, Flaman reporto excelentes resultados para
medicin de tensin residual usando una turbina de
aire de alta velocidad (arriba de 400000 rpm) y
cortadores de carburo. Esta tcnica mantiene todas
las ventajas (buena forma del agujero, adaptabilidad
a incrementar la taladracin, etc.) de la specially
dressed end mill mientras provee de una operacin
mas fcil y resultados mas consistentes. Adems, la
turbina de aire es altamente recomendada para usar
con materiales que son difciles de maquinar, como el
acero inoxidable tipo 304. Cortadores de carburo no
son efectivos en la penetracin de cristal, de la
mayora de las cermicas, metales muy duros, etc.;
pero cortadores de diamante han mostrado ser
prometedores en este tipo de materiales de prueba.
La figura 9c muestra el ensamble turbina de
aire/cortador de carburo instalado la misma RS-200
Milling Guide.
Bush y Kromer reportaron, en 1972, que los agujeros
libres de tensin son alcanzados usando abrasive jet
machining (AJM). Las modificaciones hechas al AJM
fueron hechas por Procter y Beaney, y por Bynum.
Wnuk experimento bueno resultados mediante la
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
adaptacin del aparato AJM para usar en la RS-200
Milling Guide.



mecnica del aparto AJM para usar en la RS-200
Milling Guide. La principal ventaja del AJM su
habilidad para generar agujeros libres de tensin
virtualmente en todos los materiales. Sus limitaciones
mas importantes se centran en los cambios
considerables en la forma del agujero como funcin
de la profundidad del agujero. La forma inicial es
saucer-like, y la final es cilndrica con esquinas
ligeramente redondeadas. Durante la perforacin
tambin hay incertidumbre de la profundidad actual
del agujero en cualquier etapa. Estos factores hacen
que el AJM sea una tcnica menos practica para
determinar la variacin de relieved strain con la
profundidad del agujero, como se recomienda en el
ASTM E 837.

Propiedades mecnicas

Como en cualquier forma de anlisis de tensin
residual, la exactitud de en la medicin de tensin
residual esta limitada por las aproximaciones por las
cuales el valor absoluto elstico y Possions ratio son
conocidos. Pero incertidumbres tpicas en las
propiedades mecnicas de aleaciones comunes de
acero y aluminio estn en las cercanas de 1 a 3% y ,
como tales, son contribuidores menores para el
potencial de errores en el anlisis de tensin residual.
Errores mas grandes pueden ser introducidos por
desviaciones de las asunciones involucradas en la
teora bsica como se describe en la Seccin II. Una
asuncin clave, es el comportamiento elstico linear.
Si la relacin tensin/estriacin para el material de
prueba no es linear (como lo es el caso de moldear el
hierro),debido al doblamiento u otras causas, la
tensin residual calculada ser un error.
Cuando la tensin residual esta cerca de la fuerza de
doblamiento del material de prueba, la concentracin
de tensin causada por la presencia del agujero
puede inducir el doblamiento localizado. Por esa
razn es necesario establecer un nivel de iniciose
tensin residual mas bajo en el cual el doblamiento
sea imperceptible. Este problemas ha sido estudiado
analtica y experimentalmente, y hay un acuerdo
sustancial de las diferentes investigaciones. Este es,
los errores son imperceptibles cuando la tensin
residual es menor que el 70% del limite proporcional
del material de prueba - para los blind holes y los
through holes. Por otro lado, cuando la tensin
residual es igual que el limite proporcional, errores del
10 al 30% (y mayores) han sido observados. La
magnitud del error obviamente depende de la
pendiente del diagrama de tensin/estriacin en la
regin de doblamiento marcada; y tiende a
incrementarse cuando la curva se vuelve mas plana,
aproximando al comportamiento plstico perfecto.

VI. Reduccin e interpretacin de datos
blind hole

Como est recomendado en el ASTM E 837, siempre
es preferible taladrar el agujero en pequeos
incrementos de profundidad, registrando las estras
observadas y las mediciones de profundidad del
agujero en cada incremento. Esto es hecho para
obtener los datos para decidir si la tensin residual es
uniforme con la profundidad, as validamos el uso de
los standard full-depth coefficients y para
calcular las magnitudes de tensin si los incrementos
en la medicin no son tomados, no hay medios para
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
www.vishaymg.com
30
cations and improvements were made to AJM by Procter
and Beaney,
10
and by Bynum.
15
Wnuk
16
experienced good
results by mechanically adapting AJM apparatus for use
in the RS-200 Milling Guide. The principal advantage of
AJM is its reported ability to generate stress-free holes in
virtually all materials. Its chief limitations center about
the considerable changes in hole shape as a function of
hole depth. The initial shape is saucer-like, and the nal is
cylindrical with slightly rounded corners. During drilling
there is also uncertainty as to the actual hole depth at any
stage. These factors make AJM a less practical technique
for determining the variation of relieved strain with hole
depth, as recommended in ASTM E 837.
Mechanical Properties
As in any form of experimental stress analysis, the
accuracy of residual stress measurement is limited by the
accuracies to which the elastic modulus and Poissons ratio
are known. But typical uncertainties in the mechanical
properties of common steel and aluminum alloys are
in the neighborhood of 1 to 3% and, as such, are minor
contributors to potential errors in residual stress analysis.
Much larger errors can be introduced by deviations
from the assumptions involved in the basic theory,
as described in Section II. A key assumption, for instance,
is linear-elastic material behavior. If the stress/strain
relationship for the test material is nonlinear (as is the case
for cast iron), due to yielding or other causes, the calculated
residual stresses will be in error.
When the initial residual stress is close to the yield strength
of the test material, the stress concentration caused by the
presence of the hole may induce localized yielding. It is
therefore necessary to establish a threshold level of residual
stress below which yielding is negligible. This problem
has been studied both experimentally and analytically,
and there is substantial agreement among the different
investigations.
10,17,18
That is, errors are negligible when the
residual stress is less than 70% of the proportional limit
of the test material for both blind holes and through
holes. On the other hand, when the initial residual stress
is equal to the proportional limit, errors of 10 to 30%
(and greater) have been observed. The error magnitude
obviously depends on the slope of the stress/strain diagram
in the post-yield region; and tends to increase as the curve
becomes atter, approaching the idealized perfectly plastic
behavior.
18
VI. Data Reduction and
Interpretation Blind Hole
As recommended in ASTM E 837, it is always preferable
to drill the hole in small increments of depth, recording
the observed strains and measured hole depth at each
increment. This is done to obtain data for judging whether
the residual stress is essentially uniform with depth, thus
validating the use of the standard full-depth coefcients a
and b for calculating the stress magnitudes. If incremental
measurements are not taken, there is no means for making
Figure 9. RS-200 Milling Guide, used for
machining a precisely located at-bottomed hole.
(a) Alignment Setup
(b) End-Mill Drilling Setup
(c) Hi-Speed Drilling Setup
Eyepiece
Microscope
Tube
Locking
Collar
Illuminator
X-Y
Adjustments
(4)
Vertical Height
Adjustments
(3)
Locking
Nuts
Cap
Pad
Milling Bar with
Universal Joint
Attached
Micrometer
Adjustment
Locking
Collar
Micrometer
Lock
Micrometer
End Mill
To Air Supply
Air Turbine
Assembly Spring
Assembly
Grooved Nylon
Collar
Anti-Rotation
Ring Adapter
Basic RS-200
Milling Guide
Carbide Cutter
Mount
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
hacer inferencias sobre tensin uniforme, y la tensin
residual calculada puede ser tomada como errnea.
En tales casos, cuando la tensin varia con la
profundidad, debe darse cuenta que la tensin
calculada es siempre mas baja que el mximo actual.
No hay algn criterio absoluto pata verificar la
uniformidad de la tensin en la superficie de la pieza
de prueba desde el fono de un full-depth hole.
Contrario a lo anterior, los datos incrementales,
consisten en relieved strain contra hole depth,
pueden ser usados de dos formas para ayudar en la
deteccin de la distribucin no uniforme de la tensin.
La primera es calcular, para cada incremento de
profundidad, las sumas y diferencias de los datos de
las estras,
3
+
1
y
3

1
respectivamente. Expresar
cada grupo de datos como fracciones de sus valores
cuando las profundidad del agujero sea igual a 0.4
veces el dimetro principal del circulo strain gage.
Dibuja estas percent strains versus normalizad hole
depth. Estas graficas deben producir puntos muy
cercanos a las curvas mostradas en la figura 10. Los
puntos que son removidos de as curvas de la figura
10 indican tensin sustancial no uniforme o errores
de medicin de estras. En cualquier caso, los datos
medidos no son aceptables para clculos de tensin
residual usando los coeficientes full-depth y .
Cuando la direccin de la tensin residual principal es
mas cercana al eje de direccin del gage no. 2 en la
figura 4 que los nos. 1 o 3, la suma strain ,

3
+
1
2
2
ser mas grande numricamente que

3

1
. En tal caso, la percent strain data check debe
hacerse usando
3
+
1
2
2
en lugar
3

1
.
NOTA: esta prueba grafica no es un indicador
sensible de uniformidad de tensin de campo.
Especimenes con campos significativos de tensin
no uniforme pueden producir percentage relieved
strain curves sustancialmente similares a las
mostradas en la figura 10. El propsito principal de la
prueba es identificar a grandes rasgos los campos de
tensin no uniforme. Adems, para la prueba de
comparacin grafica usar
3
+
1
2
2
o
3

1
, por
ejemplo, se vuelve inefectivo cuando el campo de
tensin residuales aproxima a la tensin o
compresin en dos ejes (
1

2

3
)como se
espera en surface blasting y procesos de tratamiento
de calor. La comparacin del dibujo de
3
+
1
es
inefectivo cuando
3
=
1
(pura shear); como sea,
esta condicin no es relativamente comn en el
campo practico industrial.

Limitaciones y precauciones

Estudios de los elementos finitos en el mtodo hole-
drilling por Schajer y por investigadores
subsecuentes han mostrado que el cambio en strains
producido por la perforacin a travs de cualquier
cambio de profundidad ( mas all del primero) es
causado parcialmente solo por la tensin residual en
ese incremento. Lo restante del incremento de
relieved strain es generado por la tensin residual en
los siguientes incrementos, debida al incremento del









For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
27
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
geometrically similar grid congurations, with the gage-
circle diameter equal to 3.25 times the active gage length.
The 062RE rosette, for example, has a gage-circle diameter
of 0.202 in [5.13 mm]. Because of this similitude, the same
material-independent coefcients a and b apply to all sizes
of the RE rosette, and to the UL rosette, for geometrically
similar holes (i.e., for the same Do/D and Z/D ratios). The
062UM rosette conguration has the same ratio of gage
circle to grid length, but the grids are narrower to permit
their close grouping on one side of the hole. As a result,
the sensitivity of the gage to the relieved strains is slightly
greater, and coefcients specic to the 062UM are required
for data reduction.
The 030RR rosette is fundamentally different from the other
rosettes illustrated in Figure 7. To begin with, this rosette
includes both radially and circumferentially oriented grids
which are to be connected as half-bridge pairs. The 030RR
rosette incorporates a number of features that contribute
to its greater output and higher accuracy compared to
conventional three-element rosettes: (a) the individual
gridlines in the radial elements are purely radial, instead
of being simply parallel to the central gridline as in the
other rosettes; (b) for a given maximum hole diameter, the
outermost radius of the grids is considerably less than for
the corresponding conventional rosettes, and thus the grids
sense slightly greater average released strains; and (c) since
the radial and circumferential grids get connected in a
half-bridge conguration, the bridge output is augmented
correspondingly, and the circuit is intrinsically self-
temperature compensating. As a result of these features,
the 030RR rosette yields about twice the output of the
three-element rosettes for a given state of residual stress,
while displaying better stability and accuracy.
Since the sign of the residual stress is of primary importance
in determining its effect on the structural integrity of any
mechanical component, the user of the six-element rosette
(030RR) must exercise care in connecting the rosette grids
into Wheatstone bridge circuits. To obtain the correct sign
in the instrument output signal, the radially oriented grids
should always be connected between the positive excitation
and the negative signal terminals, while the tangentially
oriented grids are to be connected between the negative
signal and negative excitation terminals.
The a and b coefcients for Vishay Micro-Measurements
residual stress rosettes are provided graphically in Figure
8 on page 28, where the solid lines apply to full-depth blind
holes and the dashed lines to through holes assuming, in
both cases, that the initial residual stress is uniform with
depth. Both the through-hole and full-depth blind-hole
coefficients plotted in Figure 8 were determined by a
combination of nite-element analysis and experimental
verication. These coefcients are also supplied numerically
in tabular form in ASTM E 837-99, where RE/UL rosettes
are designated as Type A, UM rosettes as Type B, and RR
rosettes as Type C. For the blind-hole coefcients in the
ASTM standard, full depth corresponds to a value of
0.40 for the depth to rosette-mean-diameter-ratio, Z/D.
IV. Measuring Nonuniform Residual Stresses
The coefcients given in this Tech Note and in ASTM
E 837-99 are strictly applicable only to situations in which
the residual stresses do not vary in magnitude or direction
with depth from the test-part surface. In reality, however,
residual stresses may often vary signicantly with depth,
due, for example, to different manufacturing processes
such as casting, forging, heat treatment, shot peening,
grinding, etc.
Numerous finite-element studies have been made in
attempts to treat this situation [see, for instance, references
(20) through (23)]. The results of the nite element work by
Schajer have been incorporated in a computer program,
H-DRILL, for handling stress variation with depth. When
the measured strains from hole drilling do not fit the
reference curves in Figure 10, or when there is any other
basis for suspecting signicant nonuniformity, the program
H-DRILL or some other nite-element-based program is
necessary to accurately determine the stresses from the
measured relaxed strains.
V. Experimental Techniques
As i n al l experi mental methods, proper materials,
application procedures, and instrumentation are essential
if accurate results are to be obtained. The accuracy of
the hole-drilling method is dependent chiey upon the
following technique-related factors:
strain gage selection and installation.
hole alignment and boring.
strain-indicating instrumentation.
understanding the mechanical properties of the test
material.
Strain Gage Selection and Installation
Installing three individual strain gages, accurately spaced
and oriented on a small circle, is neither easy to do nor
advisable, since small errors in gage location or orientation
can produce large errors in calculated residual stresses.
The rosette congurations shown in Figure 7 have been
designed and developed by Vishay Micro-Measurements
specically for residual stress measurement. The rosette
designs incorporate centering marks for aligning the
boring tool precisely at the center of the gage circle, since
this is critical to the accuracy of the method.
9,10,11
All
configurations are available in a range of temperature
compensations for use on common structural metals.
However, only the RE design is offered in different sizes
(031RE, 062RE, and 125RE), where the three-digit prex
represents the gage length in mils (0.001 in [0.0254 mm]).
The RE design is available either open-faced or with
Option SE (solder dots and encapsulation).
For technical support, contact
micro-measurements@vishay.com
T
E
C
H

N
O
T
E
Tech Note TN-503-6
Vishay Micro-Measurements
www.vishaymg.com
31
Document Number: 11053
Revision 15-Aug-07
Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method
inferences about stress uniformity, and the calculated
residual stress may be considerably in error. In such cases,
when the stress varies with depth, it should be realized
that the calculated stress is always lower than the actual
maximum.
There is currently no absolute criterion for verifying
stress uniformity from the surface of the test piece to the
bottom of a full-depth hole. However, the incremental
data, consisting of relieved strain versus hole depth, can be
used in two different ways to aid in detecting a nonuniform
stress distribution. The rst of these is to calculate, for each
depth increment, the sums and differences of the measured
strain data,
3
+
1
and
3

1
respectively.
1
Express each
set of data as fractions of their values when the hole depth
equals 0.4 times the mean diameter of the strain gage circle.
Plot these percent strains versus normalized hole depth.
These graphs should yield data points very close to the
curves shown in Figure 10. Data points which are removed
from the curves in Figure 10 indicate either substantial
stress nonuniformity or strain measurement errors. In
either case, the measured data are not acceptable for
residual stress calculations using the full-depth coefcients
a and b.
When a principal residual stress direction is closer to the
axial direction of gage no. 2 in Figure 4 than to either gage
nos. 1 or 3, the strain sum
3
+
1
2
2
will be numerically
larger than
3

1
. In such a case, the percent strain data
check should be done using
3
+
1
2
2
instead of
3

1
.
NOTE: This graphical test is not a sensitive indicator
of stress field uniformity. Specimens with significantly
nonuniform stress elds can yield percentage relieved strain
curves substantially similar to those shown in Figure 10. The
main purpose of the test is to identify grossly nonuniform
stress elds. Further, the graphical comparison test using

3

1
or
3
+
1
2
2
, for example, becomes ineffective when
the residual stress eld approaches equal biaxial tension or
compression (
1

2

3
) as expected in surface blasting
and heat treating procedures. Comparison to the
3
+
1

plot is ineffective when
3
=
1
(pure shear); however, this
condition is relatively uncommon in the practical industrial
setting.
Limitations and Cautions
Finite-element studies of the hole-drilling method by
Schajer and by subsequent investigators
20,21,22,23
have
shown that the change in strain produced in drilling
through any depth increment (beyond the rst) is caused
only partly by the residual stress in that increment. The
remainder of the incremental relieved strain is generated by
the residual stresses in the preceding increments, due to the
increasing compliance of the material, and the changing
stress distribution, as the hole is deepened. Moreover, the
relative contribution of the stress in a particular increment
to the corresponding incremental change in strain decreases
rapidly with distance from the surface. As a result, the
Figure 10. Percent strain versus normalized hole depth
for uniform stress with depth for different rosette
types, after ASTM E 837.1
RE AND UL ROSETTE
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D

S
T
R
A
I
N
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
c
3
+ c
1
c
3
c
1
or
c
3
+ c
1
2c
2
D
o
Z
D
Gage
UM ROSETTE
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D

S
T
R
A
I
N
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
D
o
Z
D
Gage
c
3
+ c
1
c
3
c
1
or
c
3
+ c
1
2c
2
RR ROSETTE
P
E
R
C
E
N
T

R
E
L
I
E
V
E
D

S
T
R
A
I
N
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Z/D
100
80
60
40
20
0
D
o
Z
D
Gage
c
3
+ c
1
c
3
c
1
or
c
3
+ c
1
2c
2
Figura 10. Percent strain versus normalizad
hole depth for uniform stress with depth for
diferent rosette types, alter ASTM E 837.1
volumen del material, y la cambiante distribucin de
la tensin, mientras el agujero se vuelve mas
profundo. Adems, la relativa contribucin de la
tensin en un incremento particular al cambio de
incremento correspondiente in strain decreases
rapidily with distance from the surface. Como
resultado, the total relieved strain ay full hole depth es
predominantemente influenciada por las tensiones en
las capas del material mas cercanas al superficie
dcese de las que estn mas arriba de la tercera, por l
menos de la mitad, de la profundidad del agujero. En
la profundidad del agujero correspondiente a Z/D >
0.2, las tensiones en estos incrementos tienen un
muy pequeo efecto en las Straits observadas. Esta
comportamiento esta confirmado (para tensin
uniforme) por la forma de la grfica strain
normalizada en la figura 5, donde cerca del 80% de
la strain relief total normalmente ocurre en la primera
mitad de la profundidad del agujero. Debido a estas
caractersticas, pocas, si es que ninguna,
interpretacin cuantitativa puede ser hecha de
manera segura de la incremental strain data para
incrementos mas all de Z/D = 0.2, sin tomar en
cuenta el mtodo analtico de reduccin de datos.
Para resumir, la aplicacin ideal del mtodo hole-
drilling es una en la cual la tensin es esencialmente
uniforme con la profundidad. Para este caso, los
coeficientes de reduccin de datos estn bien
establecidos, y las tensiones calculadas
suficientemente exactas para la mayora de los
propsitos de ingeniera asumiendo libertad de
errores experimentales significantes. La perforacin
incremental y los anlisis de datos siempre deben ser
hechos, en cualquier caso, para verificar la
uniformidad de la tensin. Si la grafica de la percent-
strain-relieved contra Z/D (vea figura 10) sugiere que
la tensin no es uniforme con la profundidad del
agujero, entonces el procedimiento especificado por
el ASTM E 837 no es aplicable, y un programa como
el H-DRILL debe ser usado para calcular las
tensiones.
El error y la incertidumbre siempre estn presentes,
en diferentes grados, en todas las mediciones de
variables fsicas. Y, por regla, sus magnitudes
dependen fuertemente de la calidad de la tcnica
experimental as como tambin de los parmetros
involucrados. Ya que la determinacin de la tensin
residual por el mtodo hole-drilling involucra un
mayor numero y variedad de tcnicas y parmetros
que el anlisis rutinario de tensiones, el potencial
para errores es tambin mayor. Debido a esto, y a
otras consideraciones brevemente fuera de lo que
sigue, las tensiones residuales usualmente no
pueden ser determinadas con la misma precisin
como las tensiones producidas por cargas estticas
aplicadas externamente.
La introduccin de un pequeo agujero dentro del
espcimen de prueba es una de las operaciones mas
criticas del procedimiento. El manual de instrucciones
para la RS-200 Milling Guide contiene direcciones
detalladas para hacer el agujero; y estas deben ser
seguidas rigurosamente para obtener la mxima
precisin. El agujero debe ser concntrico con el
blanco de perforacin en la roseta especial strain
gage. tambin debe tener la forma prescrita en
trminos de cilindricidad, fondo plano, y puntas
afiladas en la superficie. Esta particularidad es
necesaria para que los requerimientos en la
configuracin del agujero sean satisfacas al hacer la
perforacin incremental para examinar la variacin de
la tensin con la profundidad. Debido a limitaciones
practicas en la medicin de profundidades del
agujero, el primer incremento en la profundidad debe
ser de al menos 0.005 in [0.13mm]. mediciones
precisas del dimetro del agujero tambin son
necesarias. Finalmente, es imperativo que el agujero
sea taladrado son introducir tensiones residuales
adicionales. A tal grado de que no se falle en llegar a
ninguna de los requerimientos, la precisin es
sacrificada.
Strains relieved por la perforacin del agujero son
medidas convenientemente, con instrumentos static
strain. Las strains indicadas con caractersticamente
mucho mas pequeas, que las que se podran
producir para el mismo estado de tensin en una
parte externamente cargada. Como resultado, la
necesidad de una medicin de strain precisa y
estable es mayor que la usual.

También podría gustarte