Erratum to “Comparison between the improvements made to the fatigue strength of stainless steel by cavitation peening, water jet peening, shot peening and laser peening” (Journal of Materials Processing Tech. (2019) 269 (65–78), (S0924013619300366), (10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.01.030))

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The publisher regrets that incorrect versions of Figs. 4, 6, 16, 18, and 20 were used in this article. The correct figures are reproduced here. [figure-presented] Fig. 4. Dimensions of bending fatigue specimen (Thickness: 2 mm). [figure-presented] Fig. 6. Optimum standoff distances for water jet peening and cavitation peening. [figure-presented] Fig. 16. Surface Vickers hardness as a function of processing time or pulse density. [figure-presented] Fig. 18. Surface residual stress as a function of processing time or pulse density. [figure-presented] Fig. 20. The normalized fatigue life at σa = 400 MPa as a function of the normalized surface Vickers hardness and surface roughness. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)381-382
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of Materials Processing Technology
Volume270
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Aug

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ceramics and Composites
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Metals and Alloys
  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum to “Comparison between the improvements made to the fatigue strength of stainless steel by cavitation peening, water jet peening, shot peening and laser peening” (Journal of Materials Processing Tech. (2019) 269 (65–78), (S0924013619300366), (10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.01.030))'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this