Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation of the Effect of Artificial Internal Defects on the Tensile Behavior of Laser Powder Bed Fusion 17–4 Stainless Steel Samples: Simultaneous Tensile Testing and X-Ray Computed Tomography

  • Research paper
  • Published:
Experimental Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Insufficient data are available to fully understand the effects of metal additive manufacturing (AM) defects for widespread adoption of the emerging technology. Characterization of failure processes of complex internal geometries and defects in metal AM can significantly enhance this understanding. We aim to demonstrate a complete experimental measurement process and failure analysis method to study the effects of AM defects. We utilized simultaneous implementation of tensile tests with high-resolution X-ray computed tomography (XCT) measurements on 17–4 stainless steel dog-bone samples with an intentional octahedron-shaped internal cavity included in the gauge length and also containing much smaller lack-of-fusion (LOF) defects, all generated by a Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing process. The LOF defects were introduced by intentionally changing the LPBF default processing parameters. XCT image-based linear elastic finite element (FE) simulations were used to interpret the data. The in-situ tensile tests combined with simultaneous XCT measurements revealed the details of the failure process initiated by additively manufactured rough internal surfaces and porous defect structures, which experienced high stress concentrations. Progressive collapse of ligaments leading to larger pores was clearly observed, and the resulting porosity evolution until failure was quantitatively analyzed. The high stress concentrations were also directly confirmed by the FE simulations. The experimental methods described in this paper enable the quantitative study of the complex failure mechanisms of additively manufactured metal parts, and the image-based FE simulation method is effective for identifying and/or confirming possible failure locations and features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Certain commercial equipment, instruments, or materials are identified in this paper in order to specify the experimental procedure adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the materials or equipment identified are necessarily the best available for the purpose.

References

  1. Kruth JP, Leu MC, Nakagawa T (1998) Progress in additive manufacturing and rapid prototyping. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 47:525–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)63240-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Murr LE et al (2012) Metal fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron beam melting technologies. J Mater Sci Technol 28:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1005-0302(12)60016-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vandenbroucke B, Kruth JP (2007) Selective laser melting of biocompatible metals for rapid manufacturing of medical parts. Rapid Prototyp J 13:196–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540710776142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. McMasters MA, Benjamin MA, Mancini A, Lohmueller SJ (2014) Fuel Nozzle. USA Patent,

  5. Ahsan MN, Bradley R, Pinkerton AJ (2011) Microcomputed tomography analysis of intralayer porosity generation in laser direct metal deposition and its causes. J Laser Appl 23:022009. https://doi.org/10.2351/1.3582311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim FH, Moylan SP (2018) Literature review of metal additive manufacturing defects. NIST Advanced Manufacturing Series (NIST AMS) 100-16. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AMS.100-16

  7. Kobryn PA, Moore EH, Semiatin SL (2000) The effect of laser power and traverse speed on microstructure, porosity, and build height in laser-deposited Ti-6Al-4V. Scr Mater 43:299–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6462(00)00408-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ng GKL, Jarfors AEW, Bi G, Zheng HY (2009) Porosity formation and gas bubble retention in laser metal deposition. Appl Phys A 97:641–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-009-5266-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mancisidor AM, Garciandia F, Sebastian MS, Álvarez P, Díaz J, Unanue I (2016) Reduction of the Residual Porosity in Parts Manufactured by Selective Laser Melting Using Skywriting and High Focus Offset Strategies. Phys Procedia 83:864–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2016.08.090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thijs L, Kempen K, Kruth J-P, Van Humbeeck J (2013) Fine-structured aluminium products with controllable texture by selective laser melting of pre-alloyed AlSi10Mg powder. Acta Mater 61:1809–1819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2012.11.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yadollahi A, Shamsaei N (2017) Additive manufacturing of fatigue resistant materials: challenges and opportunities. Int J Fatigue 98:14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim FH, Villarraga-Gómez H, Moylan SP (2016c) Inspection of Embedded Internal Features in Additively Manufactured Metal Parts Using Metrological X-ray Computed Tomography. Paper presented at the ASPE/euspen 2016 summer topical meeting dimensional accuracy and surface finish in additive manufacturing, Raleigh, NC

  13. Hrabe N, Barbosa N, Daniewicz S, Shamsaei N (2016) Findings from the NIST/ASTM workshop on mechanical behavior of additive manufacturing components. NIST Advanced Manufacturing Series (NIST AMS) 100–4. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AMS.100-4

  14. Todorov E, Spencer R, Gleeson S, Jamshidinia M, Kelly SM (2014) AMERICA MAKES: NATIONAL ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING INNOVATION INSTITUTE (NAMII) project 1: nondestructive evaluation (NDE) of complex metallic additive manufactured (AM) structures. AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OH 45433–7750

  15. Kim FH, Moylan SP, Garboczi EJ, Slotwinski JA (2017) Investigation of pore structure in cobalt chrome additively manufactured parts using X-ray computed tomography and three-dimensional image analysis Addit Manuf 17:23–38 doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.06.011

  16. Kim FH, Pintar AL, Moylan SP, Garboczi EJ (2019b) The influence of X-Ray computed tomography acquisition parameters on image quality and probability of detection of additive manufacturing defects. J Manuf Sci Eng 141. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4044515

  17. Buffiere J-Y, Maire E, Adrien J, Masse J-P, EJEM B (2010) In situ experiments with X ray tomography: an attractive tool for experimental mechanics. 50:289–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-010-9333-7

  18. Alshibli K, Sture S, Costes N, Frank M, Lankton M, Batiste S, Swanson R (2000) Assessment of localized deformations in sand using X-ray computed tomography. Geotech Test J 23:274–299. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ11051J

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Desrues J, Chambon R, Mokni M, Mazerolle F (1996) Void ratio evolution inside shear bands in triaxial sand specimens studied by computed tomography. Géotechnique 46:529–546. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1996.46.3.529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim FH, Penumadu D, Gregor J, Kardjilov N, Manke I (2013) High-resolution neutron and X-ray imaging of granular materials. J Geotech Geoenviron 139:715–723. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim FH, Penumadu D, Gregor J, Marsh M, Kardjilov N, Manke I (2015) Characterizing partially saturated compacted-sand specimen using 3D image registration of high-resolution neutron and X-ray tomography. J Comput Civ Eng 29:04014096. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim FH, Penumadu D, Kardjilov N, Manke I (2016a) High-resolution X-ray and neutron computed tomography of partially saturated granular materials subjected to projectile penetration. Int J Impact Eng 89:72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2015.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Turner AK, Kim FH, Penumadu D, Herbold EB (2016) Meso-scale framework for modeling granular material using computed tomography. Comput Geotech 76:140–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2016.02.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Babout L, Maire E, Buffière JY, Fougères R (2001) Characterization by X-ray computed tomography of decohesion, porosity growth and coalescence in model metal matrix composites. Acta Mater 49:2055–2063. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(01)00104-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Brault R, Germaneau A, Dupré JC, Doumalin P, Mistou S, MJEM F (2013) In-situ analysis of laminated composite materials by X-ray micro-computed tomography and digital volume correlation. 53:1143–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-013-9730-9

  26. Moffat AJ, Wright P, Buffière JY, Sinclair I, Spearing SM (2008) Micromechanisms of damage in 0° splits in a [90/0]s composite material using synchrotron radiation computed tomography. Scr Mater 59:1043–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.07.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Penumadu D, Kim F, Bunn J (2016) Damage of composite materials subjected to projectile penetration using high resolution X-ray micro computed tomography. Exp Mech 56:607–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-015-0085-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Maire E, Zhou S, Adrien J, Dimichiel M (2011) Damage quantification in aluminium alloys using in situ tensile tests in X-ray tomography. Eng Fract Mech 78:2679–2690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2011.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sham TK, Rivers ML (2002) A brief overview of synchrotron radiation. Rev Mineral Geochem 49:117–147. https://doi.org/10.2138/gsrmg.49.1.11

  30. Burnett TL, McDonald SA, Gholinia A, Geurts R, Janus M, Slater T, Haigh SJ, Ornek C, Almuaili F, Engelberg DL, Thompson GE, Withers PJ (2014) Correlative tomography. Sci Rep 4:4711. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Maire E, Withers PJ (2014) Quantitative X-ray tomography. Int Mater Rev 59:1–43. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743280413Y.0000000023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim FH, Penumadu D, Patel P, Xiao X, Garboczi EJ, Moylan SP, Donmez MA (2016b) Synchrotron 4-dimensional imaging of two-phase flow through porous media. MRS Adv 1:2757–2761. https://doi.org/10.1557/adv.2016.505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Murakami Y, Beretta S (1999) Small defects and Inhomogeneities in fatigue strength: experiments, models and statistical implications. 2:123–147. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009976418553

  34. Beretta S, Romano S (2017) A comparison of fatigue strength sensitivity to defects for materials manufactured by AM or traditional processes. Int J Fatigue 94:178–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.06.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Edwards P, Ramulu M (2014) Fatigue performance evaluation of selective laser melted Ti–6Al–4V. Mater Sci Eng A 598:327–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.01.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. ASTM E8/E8M (2016) Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials. ASTM International

  37. Kim FH, Moylan SP, Garboczi EJ (2019a) Preparation of cylindrical tensile specimens for simultaneous mechanical testing and X-ray computed tomography. NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NIST IR):8234. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8234

  38. EOS GmbH - Electro Optical Systems (2009) EOS StainlessSteel GP1 for EOSINT M 270

  39. Slotwinski JA, Garboczi EJ, Stutzman PE, Ferraris CF, Watson SS, Peltz MA (2014) Characterization of metal powders used for additive manufacturing. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 119:460–493. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.119.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Cheruvathur S, Lass EA, Campbell CE (2016) Additive manufacturing of 17-4 PH stainless steel: post-processing heat treatment to achieve uniform reproducible microstructure. JOM 68:930–942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-015-1754-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Jacob G (2018) Prediction of solidification phases in Cr-Ni stainless steel alloys manufactured by laser based powder bed fusion process. NIST Advanced Manufacturing Series (NIST AMS) 100-14. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AMS.100-14

  42. Luecke WE, Slotwinski JA (2014) Mechanical properties of austenitic stainless steel made by additive manufacturing. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 119:398–418. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.119.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bonse U, Busch F (1996) X-ray computed microtomography (μCT) using synchrotron radiation (SR). Prog Biophys Mol Biol 65:133–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6107(96)00011-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kardjilov N, Dawson M, Hilger A, Manke I, Strobl M, Penumadu D, Kim FH, Garcia-Moreno F, Banhart J (2011) A highly adaptive detector system for high resolution neutron imaging. Nucl Instrum Meth A 651:95–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2011.02.084

  45. ASTM E1441 (2011) Standard guide for computed tomography (CT) Imaging

  46. ASTM E1695 (2013) Standard test method for measurement of computed tomography (CT) system performance

  47. Buzug TM (2008) Computed tomography from photon statistics to modern cone-beam CT. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tobin KW, Bingham PR, Gregor J (2009) Mathematics of neutron imaging. In: Bilheux HZ, McGreevy R, Anderson IS (eds) Neutron imaging and applications: a reference for the imaging community. Springer US, Boston, pp 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78693-3_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  49. Nyquist H (1928) Certain Topics in Telegraph Transmission Theory. Trans Am Inst Electr Eng 47:617–644. https://doi.org/10.1109/T-AIEE.1928.5055024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Feldkamp LA, Davis LC, Kress JW (1984) Practical cone-beam algorithm. J Opt Soc Am A 1:612–619. https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.1.000612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Kak AC, Slaney M (2001) Principles of computerized tomographic imaging. Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Buades A, Coll B, Morel J-M (2011) Non-local means Denoising image processing on line. 1:208–212. https://doi.org/10.5201/ipol.2011.bcm_nlm

  53. Volume Graphics (2018) VG Studio Max 3.1. https://www.volumegraphics.com/

  54. Bernsen J (1986) Dynamic thresholding of grey-level images. Paper presented at the international conference on pattern recognition, Paris, France

  55. Phan TQ, Kim FH, Pagan DC (2018) Micromechanical response quantification using high-energy X-rays during phase transformations in additively manufactured 17-4 stainless steel, under review. Mater Sci Eng A

  56. Garion C (2014) Mechanical properties for reliability analysis of structures in glassy carbon. World J Mech 4:79–89. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjm.2014.43009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bohn RB, Garboczi EJ (2003) User manual for finite element and finite difference programs: a parallel version of NISTIR 6269 and NISTIR 6997. NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR) 6997

  58. Garboczi EJ (1998) Finite element and finite difference programs for computing the linear electric and elastic properties of digital images of random materials. NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR) 6269

  59. Henry BS, Luxmoore AR (1997) The stress triaxiality constraint and the Q-value as a ductile fracture parameter. Eng Fract Mech 57:375–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(97)00031-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Gurson AL (1977) Continuum Theory of Ductile Rupture by Void Nucleation and Growth: Part I—Yield Criteria and Flow Rules for Porous Ductile Media. J Eng Mater Technol 99:2–15. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3443401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Needleman A, Tvergaard V (1984) An analysis of ductile rupture in notched bars. J Mech Phys Solids 32:461–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(84)90031-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank REX Heat Treat company for performing the heat treatment. We would also like to thank Dr. Jarred Heigel (Third Wave Systems), Mr. Mike McGlaughlin (NIST), and Mr. Jared Tarr (NIST) for assistance with the AM process and subsequent post-machining process. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Andrew Holmgren of Ball Aerospace, and Mr. Dash Weeks of NIST for assistance with preparation and carrying out the experiments. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Mark Stoudt and Dr. Lyle Levine of NIST for a useful discussion of the results. The authors thank Dr. Darren Pagan of the Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source (CHESS) for fruitful discussion of the triaxiality factor.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Intelligent Systems Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA

    F. H. Kim, S. P. Moylan & T. Q. Phan

  2. Applied Chemicals and Materials Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, CO, USA

    E. J. Garboczi

Authors
  1. F. H. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. P. Moylan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Q. Phan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. J. Garboczi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Contribution of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, not subject to copyright in the USA.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. H. Kim.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Declarations

This article does not contain any studies involving animals performed by any of the authors. This article does not contain any studies involving human participants performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, F.H., Moylan, S.P., Phan, T.Q. et al. Investigation of the Effect of Artificial Internal Defects on the Tensile Behavior of Laser Powder Bed Fusion 17–4 Stainless Steel Samples: Simultaneous Tensile Testing and X-Ray Computed Tomography. Exp Mech 60, 987–1004 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-020-00604-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-020-00604-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation