Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of topology on the quasi-static and dynamic behaviour of SLM AlSi10Mg lattice structures

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Additive manufacturing (AM) techniques such as selective laser melting (SLM) enable the fabrication of complex metallic lattice structures. By tuning geometric and topological parameters, these structures can be manufactured to exhibit a range of useful properties, including excellent strength-to-weight ratios and energy absorption capabilities. While the effects of these parameters on various aspects of AM lattice performance have been previously studied, such as the effects of manufacturability, material selection and geometric parameters on the quasi-static performance of AM lattice structures, the effect of topology on the dynamic behaviour of SLM AlSi10Mg lattice structures remains relatively unexplored. Lattice structure specimens with five different topologies were manufactured using SLM AlSi10Mg and tested under quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions. The tested topologies were body-centred cubic with (BCCZ) and without (BCC) z-struts; face-centred cubic with (FCCZ) and without (FCC) z-struts; and body and face-centred cubic with z-struts (FBCCZ). A numerical model was developed to investigate failure modes and collapse mechanisms. Specimens were found to fail by the emergence of diagonal shear planes, and the orientation of which was dependent on topology, due to the uneven concentration of stress in struts across the structure. No significant rate sensitivity was identified for any of the tested topologies in the range of tested strain rates. The FCCZ topology was demonstrated to provide the greatest efficiency in terms of both strength-to-weight and stiffness-to-weight ratios. These results assist in the characterisation of the dynamic behaviour of SLM AlSi10Mg lattice structures and contribute to their further commercialisation.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings cannot be shared at this time as the data also forms part of an ongoing study.

Code availability

The code required to reproduce these findings cannot be shared at this time as the data also forms part of an ongoing study.

References

  1. Ahuja B, Karg M, Schmidt M (2015) Additive manufacturing in production: challenges and opportunities. International Society for Optics and Photonics

    Google Scholar 

  2. Yan C et al (2014) Evaluation of light-weight AlSi10Mg periodic cellular lattice structures fabricated via direct metal laser sintering. J Mater Process Technol 214(4):856–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gibson LJ, Ashby MF (1997) Cellular solids: structure and properties. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Murr LE et al (1917) Next-generation biomedical implants using additive manufacturing of complex, cellular and functional mesh arrays. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 2010(368):1999–2032

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hao Z et al (2018) Lightweight structure of a phase-change thermal controller based on lattice cells manufactured by SLM. Chin J Aeronaut

  6. Wang Y et al (2018) Design of graded lattice structure with optimized mesostructures for additive manufacturing. Mater Des 142:114–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yavari SA et al (2015) Relationship between unit cell type and porosity and the fatigue behavior of selective laser melted meta-biomaterials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 43:91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Leary M et al (2018) Inconel 625 lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM): mechanical properties, deformation and failure modes. Mater Des 157:179–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Xiong J et al (2015) Advanced micro-lattice materials. Adv Eng Mater 17(9):1253–1264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mazur M et al (2017) 5 - Mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V and AlSi12Mg lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM). In: Brandt M (ed) Laser Additive Manufacturing. Woodhead Publishing, pp 119–161

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Schaedler TA et al (2011) Ultralight metallic microlattices. Science 334(6058):962–965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hao L et al. Design and additive manufacturing of cellular lattice structures

  13. Liu C et al (2017) Additive manufacturing-oriented design of graded lattice structures through explicit topology optimization. J Appl Mech 84(8):081008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ashby MF, Medalist RM (1983) The mechanical properties of cellular solids. 14(9):1755–1769

  15. Yan C et al (2012) Evaluations of cellular lattice structures manufactured using selective laser melting. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 62:32–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Leary M et al (2016) Selective laser melting (SLM) of AlSi12Mg lattice structures. Mater Des 98:344–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Koehnen P et al (2018) Mechanical properties and deformation behavior of additively manufactured lattice structures of stainless steel. Mater Des 145:205–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yavari SA et al (2013) Fatigue behavior of porous biomaterials manufactured using selective laser melting. Mater Sci Eng C 33(8):4849–4858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Harris JA, Winter RE, McShane GJ (2017) Impact response of additively manufactured metallic hybrid lattice materials. Int J Impact Eng 104:177–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith M et al (2010) The quasi-static and blast response of steel lattice structures. J Sandwich Struct Mater 13(4):479–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McKown S et al (2008) The quasi-static and blast loading response of lattice structures. Int J Impact Eng 35(8):795–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tancogne-Dejean T, Spierings AB, Mohr D (2016) Additively-manufactured metallic micro-lattice materials for high specific energy absorption under static and dynamic loading. Acta Mater 116:14–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ruan D et al (2002) Compressive behaviour of aluminium foams at low and medium strain rates. Compos Struct 57(1):331–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maconachie T et al (2019) SLM lattice structures: properties, performance, applications and challenges. Mater Des 108137

  25. Ashby M (1838) The properties of foams and lattices. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 2005(364):15–30

    Google Scholar 

  26. Deshpande VS, Ashby MF, Fleck NA (2001) Foam topology: bending versus stretching dominated architectures. Acta Mater 49(6):1035–1040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ashby MF (2005) Hybrids to fill holes in material property space. Phil Mag 85(26–27):3235–3257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brandt M (2016) Laser additive manufacturing: materials, design, technologies, and applications. Woodhead Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chen W et al (2019) Stiff isotropic lattices beyond the Maxwell criterion. Science Adv 5(9):eaaw1937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mazur M et al (2016) Deformation and failure behaviour of Ti-6Al-4V lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM). Int J Adv Manuf Technol 84(5):1391–1411

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gusarov AV, Kruth JP (2005) Modelling of radiation transfer in metallic powders at laser treatment. Int J Heat Mass Transf 48(16):3423–3434

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Maconachie T et al (2020) Effect of build orientation on the quasi-static and dynamic response of SLM AlSi10Mg. Mater Sci Eng A 788:139445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Leary M et al (2019) Mechanical and thermal characterisation of AlSi10Mg SLM block support structures. Mater Des 183:108138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ashby MF et al (2000) Metal foams: a design guide. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  35. Luxner MH, Stampfl J, Pettermann HE (2005) Finite element modeling concepts and linear analyses of 3D regular open cell structures. J Mater Sci 40(22):5859–5866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Smith M, Guan Z, Cantwell W (2013) Finite element modelling of the compressive response of lattice structures manufactured using the selective laser melting technique. Int J Mech Sci 67:28–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Labeas GN, Sunaric MM (2010) Investigation on the static response and failure process of metallic open lattice cellular structures. Strain 46(2):195–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lei H et al (2019) Evaluation of compressive properties of SLM-fabricated multi-layer lattice structures by experimental test and μ-CT-based finite element analysis. Mater Des 169:107685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Guo H et al (2020) Finite element simulation of the compressive response of additively manufactured lattice structures with large diameters. Comput Mater Sci 175:109610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. de Galarreta SR, Jeffers JR, Ghouse S (2020) A validated finite element analysis procedure for porous structures. Mater Des 189:108546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cao X et al (2020) Compression experiment and numerical evaluation on mechanical responses of the lattice structures with stochastic geometric defects originated from additive-manufacturing. Compos B Eng 194:108030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Rosenthal I, Stern A, Frage N (2017) Strain rate sensitivity and fracture mechanism of AlSi10Mg parts produced by selective laser melting. Mater Sci Eng A 682:509–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Nurel B et al (2018) Split Hopkinson pressure bar tests for investigating dynamic properties of additively manufactured AlSi10Mg alloy by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf 22:823–833

    Google Scholar 

  44. Al-Rubaie KS et al (2020) Machinability of SLM-produced Ti6Al4V titanium alloy parts. J Manuf Process 57:768–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Uzan NE et al (2018) On the effect of shot-peening on fatigue resistance of AlSi10Mg specimens fabricated by additive manufacturing using selective laser melting (AM-SLM). Addit Manuf 21:458–464

    Google Scholar 

  46. Aboulkhair NT et al (2014) Reducing porosity in AlSi10Mg parts processed by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf 1–4:77–86

    Google Scholar 

  47. Li W et al (2016) Effect of heat treatment on AlSi10Mg alloy fabricated by selective laser melting: microstructure evolution, mechanical properties and fracture mechanism. Mater Sci Eng A 663:116–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Aboulkhair NT et al (2016) The microstructure and mechanical properties of selectively laser melted AlSi10Mg: the effect of a conventional T6-like heat treatment. Mater Sci Eng A 667:139–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Maconachie T et al (2020) Effect of build orientation on the quasi-static and dynamic response of SLM AlSi10Mg. Mater Sci Eng A 139445

  50. Giovagnoli M et al (2021) Effect of different heat-treatment routes on the impact properties of an additively manufactured AlSi10Mg alloy. Mater Sci Eng A 802:140671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tridello A et al (2019) VHCF response of Gaussian SLM AlSi10Mg specimens: effect of a stress relief heat treatment. Int J Fatigue 124:435–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Sufiiarov V et al (2020) Investigation of accuracy, microstructure and properties of additive manufactured lattice structures. Mater Today Proc 30:572–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hazeli K et al (2019) Microstructure-topology relationship effects on the quasi-static and dynamic behavior of additively manufactured lattice structures. Mater Des 176:107826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Jin Y, Qin SJ, Huang Q (2015) Out-of-plane geometric error prediction for additive manufacturing. in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE). IEEE

  55. Leary M (2017) Surface roughness optimisation for selective laser melting (SLM): accommodating relevant and irrelevant surfaces. Laser additive manufacturing. Elsevier, pp 99–118

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  56. Alghamdi A et al (2020) Effect of additive manufactured lattice defects on mechanical properties: an automated method for the enhancement of lattice geometry. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 108:957–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Alghamdi A et al (2021) Buckling phenomena in am lattice strut elements: a design tool applied to Ti-6AL4V Lb-Pbf. Mater Des 109892

  58. Yang L (2015) Experimental-assisted design development for an octahedral cellular structure using additive manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J

  59. Leary M et al (2021) 7 - Surface roughness. In: Yadroitsev I et al (eds) fundamentals of laser powder bed fusion of metals. Elsevier, pp 179–213

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  60. Lu G, Yu TX (2003) Energy absorption of structures and materials. Elsevier

    Book  Google Scholar 

  61. Deshpande VS, Fleck NA (2000) High strain rate compressive behaviour of aluminium alloy foams. Int J Impact Eng 24(3):277–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from the members of the ARC Training Centre for Lightweight Automotive Structures and from the Australian Research Council (Grant Reference IC160100032), the scientific and technical assistance of the Swinburne University of Technology Impact Engineering Laboratory and the scientific and technical assistance of the RMIT Advanced Manufacturing Precinct.

Funding

Funding for this project was provided by the ARC Training Centre for Lightweight Automotive Structures (ATLAS), Australian Research Council Grant IC160100032.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RMIT Centre for Additive Manufacture, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

    Tobias Maconachie, Martin Leary, Phuong Tran & Milan Brandt

  2. ARC Training Centre for Lightweight Automotive Structures (ATLAS), Melbourne, Australia

    Tobias Maconachie & Martin Leary

  3. nTopology, New York, NY, USA

    Jonathan Harris

  4. Ford Motor Company, Research Innovation Centre (RIC), Dearborn, MI, USA

    Qiang Liu & Omar Faruque

  5. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

    Guoxing Lu & Dong Ruan

Authors
  1. Tobias Maconachie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Leary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Phuong Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jonathan Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qiang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Guoxing Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dong Ruan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Omar Faruque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Milan Brandt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Tobias Maconachie: conceptualization; methodology; software; formal analysis; investigation; data curation; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing; visualisation.

Martin Leary: conceptualization; methodology; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing; supervision; project administration; funding acquisition.

Phuong Tran: writing—review and editing; supervision.

Jonathan Harris: writing—review and editing; supervision.

Qiang Liu: writing—review and editing.

Guoxing Lu: resources, project administration, funding acquisition.

Dong Ruan: resources; writing—review and editing; supervision.

Omar Faruque: resources, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition.

Milan Brandt: resources, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Maconachie.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

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

Maconachie, T., Leary, M., Tran, P. et al. The effect of topology on the quasi-static and dynamic behaviour of SLM AlSi10Mg lattice structures. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 118, 4085–4104 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-08203-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-08203-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation