Abstract
Current percent-porosity based quantification of pores in additively manufactured parts does not provide information about the size, shape, and distribution of pores throughout a build. Such information is necessary to understand the conditions under which the part was printed as well as its mechanical reliability. This research, through a combination of fatigue testing and microstructural characterization demonstrates a method by which the internal porosity can be characterized and using the knowledge of the pores differing formation mechanisms to inform future design and build strategies. Though the test bars were printed under nominally identical conditions, ignoring lack-of-fusion, batch 1 had 34 pct fewer lenticular pores and 147 pct more spherical pores than batch 2 which shows that the actual print conditions of these parts varied substantially as would their as-printed mechanical reliability. To quantify this difference extensive optical, SEM, and EBSD metallographic studies were conducted on several samples from these bars as well as the fracture surfaces to gain an understanding of the porosity’s shape, size, and location. The comparison of these datasets along with knowledge of the pore’s evolution allows for the optimization of future build strategies and the more accurate prediction of the resulting as-built mechanical properties.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Shunyu Liu and Yung C. Shin, Materials & Design 2019, vol. 164, pp. 107552–75.
2. Joakim Karlsson, Anders Snis, Håkan Engqvist and Jukka Lausmaa, Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 2013, vol. 213, pp. 2109-2118.
3. Magnus Neikter, Fredrik Forsberg, Robert Pederson, Marta-Lena Antti, Pia Åkerfeldt, Simon Larsson, Pär Jonsén and Geraldine Puyoo, Aeronautics And Aerospace Open Access Journal 2018, vol. 2, pp. 139-145.
4. S. Al-Bermani, M. Blackmore, W. Zhang and I. Todd, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 2010, vol. 41, pp. 3422-3434.
P. K. Gokuldoss, S. Kolla and J. Eckert, Materials 2017, vol. 10, pp. 672–84.
6. T. DebRoy, H. L. Wei, J. S. Zuback, T. Mukherjee, J. W. Elmer, J. O. Milewski, A. M. Beese, A. Wilson-Heid, A. De and W. Zhang, Prog. Mater. Sci. 2018, vol. 92, pp. 112-224.
7. Nikolas Hrabe, Thomas Gnäupel-Herold and Timothy Quinn, International Journal of Fatigue 2017, vol. 94, pp. 202-210.
M.R. Kabir and H. Richter, Materials (Basel Switzerland) 2017, vol. 10, pp. 145–60.
P. Promoppatum and S.-C. Yao, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2019, 103, pp. 1185–1198
10. Nikolay K. Tolochko, Sergei E. Mozzharov, Igor A. Yadroitsev, Tahar Laoui, Ludo Froyen, Victor I. Titov and Michail B. Ignatiev, Rapid Prototyping Journal 2004, vol. 10, pp. 78-87.
11. T. Ahmed and H. J. Rack, Mater. Sci. Eng. A-Struct. Mater. Prop. Microstruct. Process. 1998, vol. 243, pp. 206-211.
12. Yang Jingjing, Yu Hanchen, Yin Jie, Gao Ming, Wang Zemin and Zeng Xiaoyan, Materials & Design 2016, vol. 108, pp. 308-318.
13. J. W. Pegues, S. Shao, N. Shamsaei, N. Sanaei, A. Fatemi, D. H. Warner, P. Li and N. Phan, International Journal of Fatigue 2020, vol. 132, pp. 105358–76.
14. Donghua Dai and Dongdong Gu, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 2016, vol. 100, pp. 14-24.
Meurig Thomas, Gavin J. Baxter and Iain Todd, Acta Materialia 2016, 40, 26-35.
16. J. Günther, D. Krewerth, T. Lippmann, S. Leuders, T. Tröster, A. Weidner, H. Biermann and T. Niendorf, International Journal of Fatigue 2017, vol. 94, pp. 236-245.
U. Ackelid and M. Svensson: Materials Science & Technology 2009 Conference and Exhibition, Pittsburgh, PA, 2009, pp. 2711–19.
18. H. Shipley, D. McDonnell, M. Culleton, R. Coull, R. Lupoi, G. O’Donnell and D. Trimble, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2018, vol. 128, pp. 1-20.
19. G. Kasperovich and J. Hausmann, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2015, vol. 220, pp. 202-214.
20. Shubin Ren, Yuhong Chen, Tingting Liu and Xuanhui Qu, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 2019, vol. 50, pp. 4388-4409.
21. G. Nicoletto, R. Konečná, M. Frkáň and E. Riva, International Journal of Fatigue 2018, vol. 116, pp. 140-148.
22. J. Stef, A. Poulon-Quintin, A. Redjaimia, J. Ghanbaja, O. Ferry, M. De Sousa and M. Goune, Materials & Design 2018, vol. 156, pp. 480-493.
23. M. Kahlin, H. Ansell and J.J. Moverare, International Journal of Fatigue 2017, vol. 101, pp. 51-60.
Y. Murakami: Metal Fatigue: Effects of Small Defects and Nonmetallic Inclusions. (Elsevier, New York, 2002).
S. Leuders, M. Vollmer, F. Brenne, T. Troster and T. Niendorf, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2015, vol. 46A, pp. 3816-3823
G. Kasperovich, J. Haubrich, J. Gussone and G. Requena, Mater. Des. 2016, 105, 160–170.
27. T. Zhai, Y. G. Xu, J. W. Martin, A. J. Wilkinson and G. A. D. Briggs, International Journal of Fatigue 1999, vol. 21, pp. 889-894.
28. A. H. Chern, P. Nandwana, R. McDaniels, R. R. Dehoff, P. K. Liaw, R. Tryon and C. E. Duty, Mater. Sci. Eng. A-Struct. Mater. Prop. Microstruct. Process. 2020, vol. 772, p. 13.
S. Leuders, T. Lieneke, S. Lammers, T. Troster and T. Niendorf, J. Mater. Res. 2014, vol. 29, pp. 1911–19.
P. Li, D.H. Warner, A. Fatemi and N. Phan, In 57th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (San Deigo, 2016).
31. Mohsen Seifi, Ayman Salem, Daniel Satko, Joshua Shaffer and John J. Lewandowski, International Journal of Fatigue 2017, vol. 94, pp. 263-287.
32. Kwai Chan, Marie Koike, Robert Mason and Toru Okabe, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 2013, vol. 44, pp. 1010-1022.
33. Mujian Xia, Dongdong Gu, Guanqun Yu, Donghua Dai, Hongyu Chen and Qimin Shi, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 2016, vol. 109, pp. 147-157.
34. H. E. Sabzi, Mater. Sci. Technol. 2019, vol. 35, pp. 875-890.
35. A. A. Antonysamy, J. Meyer and P. B. Prangnell, Materials Characterization 2013, vol. 84, pp. 153-168.
36. Charlotte De Formanoir, Alice Brulard, Solange Vivès, Guilhem Martin, Frédéric Prima, Sébastien Michotte, Edouard Rivière, Adrien Dolimont and Stéphane Godet, Materials Research Letters 2017, vol. 5, pp. 201-208.
37. A. K. Syed, M. Awd, F. Walther and X. Zhang, Mater. Sci. Technol. 2019, vol. 35, pp. 653-660.
S. Tammas-Williams, H. Zhao, F. Leonard, F. Derguti, I. Todd and P.B. Prangnell, Materials Characterization 2015, vol. 102, pp. 47-61.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the manufacturing and machining assistance provided by GE Additive along with their helpful guidance and discussions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Manuscript submitted August 21, 2020; accepted February 8, 2021.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Varney, T.C., Quammen, R.N., Telesz, N. et al. Effects of Pore Geometry on the Fatigue Properties of Electron Beam Melted Titanium-6Al-4V. Metall Mater Trans A 52, 1836–1849 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-021-06194-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-021-06194-9