Statistical and optimize of lattice structures with selective laser melting (SLM) of Ti6AL4V material

  • K. Kadirgama
  • W. S. W. Harun
  • F. Tarlochan
  • M. Samykano
  • D. Ramasamy
  • Mohd Zaidi Azir
  • H. Mehboob
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

This paper investigates the properties of titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) lattice structures fabricated via selective laser melting (SLM). Response surface method (RSM) was used to design the experiments. Four factors were selected to determine its influence on the Young’s modulus and compressive strength. Detailed characterizations such as dimensional accuracy, surface roughness, microstructure analysis, and compression test were conducted and reported. The built structures have a Young’s modulus ranging between 0.01 and 1.84 GPa. The statistical method was used to find the relationship between factors and Young’s modulus and compressive strength. Porosity was comprehended to play a significant role in determining the Young’s modulus and compressive strength. The error of the developed model was in the range of 0.5 to 1.3% compared with experimental results. Meanwhile, all the four factors found not to affect the surface roughness significantly. The statistical method recognizes the trends of the factor effect on the Young’s modulus, yield stress, and surface roughness.

Keywords

Addictive manufacturing SLM Lattice structure Ti6AL4V Young’s modulus 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper was made possible by NPRP grant# NPRP 8-876-2-375 from the Qatar National Research Fund (a member of Qatar Foundation). The findings achieved herein are solely the responsibility of the authors.

Authors’ responsibility

The statements made herein are solely the responsibility of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhai Y, Lados DA, LaGoy JL (2014) Additive manufacturing: making imagination the major limitation. JOM 66(5):808–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    I. Gibson, D. W. Rosen, and B. Stucker 2010 Additive manufacturing technologies. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Drizo A, Pegna J (2006) Environmental impacts of rapid prototyping: an overview of research to date. Rapid Prototyp J 12(2):64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooper DE, Stanford M, Kibble KA, Gibbons GJ (2012) Additive manufacturing for product improvement at red bull technology. Mater Des 41:226–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kruth J-P, Froyen L, Van Vaerenbergh J, Mercelis P, Rombouts M, Lauwers B (2004) Selective laser melting of iron-based powder. J Mater Process Technol 149(1):616–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brandt M, Sun SJ, Leary M, Feih S, Elambasseril J, Liu QC (2013) High-value SLM Aerospace components: from design to manufacture. Adv Mater Res 633:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parthasarathy J, Starly B, Raman S (2011) A design for the additive manufacture of functionally graded porous structures with tailored mechanical properties for biomedical applications. J Manuf Process 13(2):160–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper D, Thornby J, Blundell N, Henrys R, Williams M, Gibbons G (2015) Design and manufacture of high performance hollow engine valves by additive layer manufacturing. Mater Des 69:44–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobryn P, Semiatin S (2001) The laser additive manufacture of Ti-6Al-4V. JOM J Miner Met Mater Soc 53(9):40–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sterling AJ, Torries B, Shamsaei N, Thompson SM, Seely DW (2016) Fatigue behavior and failure mechanisms of direct laser deposited Ti–6Al–4V. Mater Sci Eng A 655:100–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu QC, Elambasseril J, Sun SJ, Leary M, Brandt M, Sharp PK (2014) The effect of manufacturing defects on the fatigue behaviour of Ti-6Al-4V specimens fabricated using selective laser melting. Adv Mater Res 891:1519–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bandyopadhyay A, Krishna B, Xue W, Bose S (2009) Application of laser engineered net shaping (LENS) to manufacture porous and functionally graded structures for load bearing implants. J Mater Sci Mater Med 20(1):29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harrysson OL, Cansizoglu O, Marcellin-Little DJ, Cormier DR, West HA (2008) Direct metal fabrication of titanium implants with tailored materials and mechanical properties using electron beam melting technology. Mater Sci Eng C 28(3):366–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hazlehurst KB, Wang CJ, Stanford M (2014) An investigation into the flexural characteristics of functionally graded cobalt chrome femoral stems manufactured using selective laser melting. Mater Des 60:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murr L et al (2010) Next-generation biomedical implants using additive manufacturing of complex, cellular and functional mesh arrays. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 368(1917):1999–2032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leong K, Cheah C, Chua C (2003) Solid freeform fabrication of three-dimensional scaffolds for engineering replacement tissues and organs. Biomaterials 24(13):2363–2378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Min B-M, Lee G, Kim SH, Nam YS, Lee TS, Park WH (2004) Electrospinning of silk fibroin nanofibers and its effect on the adhesion and spreading of normal human keratinocytes and fibroblasts in vitro. Biomaterials 25(7):1289–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spoerke ED, Murray NG, Li H, Brinson LC, Dunand DC, Stupp SI (2005) A bioactive titanium foam scaffold for bone repair. Acta Biomater 1(5):523–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morlock M, Schneider E, Bluhm A, Vollmer M, Bergmann G, Müller V, Honl M (2001) Duration and frequency of every day activities in total hip patients. J Biomech 34(7):873–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ahmadi SM et al (2015) Additively manufactured open-cell porous biomaterials made from six different space-filling unit cells: the mechanical and morphological properties. Materials 8(4):1871–1896MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lütjering G (1998) Influence of processing on microstructure and mechanical properties of (α + β) titanium alloys. Mater Sci Eng A 243(1):32–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hanzl P, Zetek M, Bakša T, Kroupa T (2015) The influence of processing parameters on the mechanical properties of SLM parts. Proc Eng 100:1405–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Santos E, Osakada K, Shiomi M, Kitamura Y, Abe F (2004) Microstructure and mechanical properties of pure titanium models fabricated by selective laser melting. Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci 218(7):711–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kruth J-P, Levy G, Klocke F, Childs T (2007) Consolidation phenomena in laser and powder-bed based layered manufacturing. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 56(2):730–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sercombe T, Jones N, Day R, Kop A (2008) Heat treatment of Ti-6Al-7Nb components produced by selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J 14(5):300–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kruth J-P, Vandenbroucke B, Vaerenbergh J, Naert I (2005) Rapid manufacturing of dental prostheses by means of selective laser sintering/meltingGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cardaropoli F, Alfieri V, Caiazzo F, Sergi V (2012) Manufacturing of porous biomaterials for dental implant applications through selective laser melting. Adv Mater Res 535:1222–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wong M, Eulenberger J, Schenk R, Hunziker E (1995) Effect of surface topology on the osseointegration of implant materials in trabecular bone. J Biomed Mater Res A 29(12):1567–1575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    International Organization for Standardization (1997) ISO 4287: Geometrical product specifications (GPS). Surface texture: profile method. Terms, definitions and surface texture parametersGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nazarian A, Muller J, Zurakowski D, Müller R, Snyder BD (2007) Densitometric, morphometric and mechanical distributions in the human proximal femur. J Biomech 40(11):2573–2579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rohlmann A, Zander T, Schmidt H, Wilke H-J, Bergmann G (2006) Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech 39(13):2484–2490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kooistra GW, Deshpande VS, Wadley HN (2004) Compressive behavior of age hardenable tetrahedral lattice truss structures made from aluminium. Acta Mater 52(14):4229–4237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ashby MF, Evans T, Fleck NA, Hutchinson J, Wadley H, Gibson L (2000) Metal foams: a design guide. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Montgomery DC, Runger GC (2010) Applied statistics and probability for engineers. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Kadirgama
    • 1
  • W. S. W. Harun
    • 1
  • F. Tarlochan
    • 2
  • M. Samykano
    • 1
  • D. Ramasamy
    • 1
  • Mohd Zaidi Azir
    • 1
  • H. Mehboob
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringUniversiti Malaysia PahangGambangMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringQatar UniversityDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations