Good Morning
we work on aeronautical parts

I have a doubt, we are going to incorporate a robot arm for manipulation of a single nozzle in the shot peening process AMS 2430. The question is, the test body with almen strips, should it be the same as in an automatic process of multiple nozzles?
The doubt lies in the fact that if it is a unique nozzle the almen test can be done on a single almen strip and verify the speed of advance on that specimen, then transfer that parameter to the entire path of the robot on the real piece. Given the advance and overlap of the hot spot spray, could it be valid?
Thank you,

On a simple part where all surface are peened with line of sight from the nozzle to the part surface this would be acceptable in my opinion. However, if there are any features that require ricochet Peening than a fixture representing that technique would be required.


Definition of where intensity is required to be validated is a huge problem. Typical shot peen operators are unaware of the fatigue critical areas where intensity determination should be performed.
Before you do anything I would get approval from your customer.


Walter Beach
Peening Technologies

thank you very much Walter.

I think the same as you.

Many companies have adopted a robotic deburring process for parts that are consistently the same size and shape. If you are pushing out similarly shaped parts with each round of production, then robotic deburring will help you save time, energy, and manpower.

More info @ https://www.kramerindustriesonline.com/robotics-vs-manual-deburring-process/