Loading Orientation Effects on the Strength Anisotropy of Additively-Manufactured Ti-6Al-4V Alloys under Dynamic Compression

  • R. F. Waymel
  • H. B. Chew
  • J. LambrosEmail author


The microstructure of additively-manufactured metals depends on the direction of build, and is distinctly different from those of conventional metals. This work examines the effect of strain rate, heat treatment, and loading orientation relative to the build direction of Ti-6Al-4V samples that have been additively manufactured by direct metal laser melting to determine how the microstructure affects overall mechanical properties. The effect of rate dependence on additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V was investigated by compressing cylinders of the material both quasi-statically in a screw-driven load frame (10−4 s−1 to 10−1 s−1), and dynamically in a split Hopkinson (Kolsky) pressure bar system (375 s−1 to 6000 s−1). The yield strength of the additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V was observed to monotonically increase with increasing strain rates and the samples failed along a 45° direction through the thickness regardless of loading orientation. As in the case of traditionally forged metals, annealed additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V samples exhibited lower yield strengths than their non-annealed counterparts at similar strain rates. For quasi-static loads, a clear dependence of response on loading orientation angle with respect to the material layering direction was seen, with the yield strength being greatest when loading was applied parallel to the build direction – a notable contrast to what is observed in tensile results in which the yield strength is lowest when tension is applied along the build direction. No clear relationship between the yield strength and loading orientation was observed in the dynamic tests, likely because the differences were within the measurement uncertainty of the method.


Dynamic compression Material anisotropy Annealing Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) pressure bar 



This work was supported by the UIUC Research Board through grant number RB16134. The authors thank Dr. David Farrow for his support with the quasi-static experiments, Raeann Vansickle for help with the EBSD plots, and David Foehring for acquiring the SEM images, carried out in the Frederick Seitz Materials Research Laboratory Central Research Facilities, University of Illinois. The authors also thank Greg Milner, Lee Booher, and Stephen Mathine for preparing the samples.


  1. 1.
    Geetha M, Singh AK, Asokamani R, Gogia AK (2009) Ti based biomaterials, the ultimate choice for Orthopaedic implants – a review. Prog Mater Sci 54(3):397–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Veiga C, Davim JP, Loureiro AJR (2012) Properties and applications of titanium alloys: a brief review. Rev Adv Mater Sci 32(2):133–148Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sing SL, An J, Yeong WY, Wiria FE (2016) Laser and Electron-beam powder-bed additive manufacturing of metallic implants: a review on processes, materials and designs: laser and electron-beam additive manufacturing of metallic implants. J Orthop Res 34(3):369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhou W, Chew KG The Rate Dependent Response of a Titanium Alloy Subjected to Quasi-Static Loading in Ambient Environment, p. 7Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nemat-Nasser S, Guo W-G, Nesterenko VF, Indrakanti SS, Gu Y-B (2001) Dynamic response of conventional and hot Isostatically pressed Ti–6Al–4V alloys: experiments and modeling. Mech Mater 33(8):425–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Follansbee PS, Gray GT An Analysis of the Low Temperature, Low and High Strain-Rate Deformation of Ti-6AI-4V, Metall. Trans. A, p. 12Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yatnalkar RS (2010) Experimental Investigation of Plastic Deformation of Ti-6al-4v under Various Loading Conditions, The Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee WS, Lin MT Deformation Behaviour of Ti-6A1-4V Alloy, p. 12Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wulf GL (1979) High strain rate compression of titanium and some titanium alloys. Int J Mech Sci 21(12):713–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson DD, Rosakis AJ (2006) Dynamic fracture properties of titanium alloys. Exp Mech 46(3):399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mower TM, Long MJ (2016) Mechanical behavior of additive manufactured, powder-bed laser-fused materials. Mater Sci Eng A 651:198–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foehring D, Chew HB, Lambros J (2018) Characterizing the tensile behavior of additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V using multiscale digital image correlation. Mater Sci Eng A 724:536–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DebRoy T, Wei HL, Zuback JS, Mukherjee T, Elmer JW, Milewski JO, Beese AM, Wilson-Heid A, De A, Zhang W (2018) Additive manufacturing of metallic components – process, structure and properties. Prog Mater Sci 92:112–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gorsse S, Hutchinson C, Gouné M, Banerjee R (2017) Additive manufacturing of metals: a brief review of the characteristic microstructures and properties of steels, Ti-6Al-4V and high-entropy alloys. Sci Technol Adv Mater 18(1):584–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lewandowski JJ, Seifi M (2016) Metal additive manufacturing: a review of mechanical properties. Annu Rev Mater Res 46(1):151–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kelly SM, Kampe SL (2004) Microstructural evolution in laser-deposited multilayer Ti-6Al-4V builds: part I. Microstructural characterization. Metall Mater Trans A 35(6):1861–1867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lu J, Chang L, Wang J, Sang L, Wu S, Zhang Y (2018) In-situ investigation of the anisotropic mechanical properties of laser direct metal deposition Ti6Al4V alloy. Mater Sci Eng A 712:199–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carroll BE, Palmer TA, Beese AM (2015) Anisotropic tensile behavior of Ti–6Al–4V components fabricated with directed energy deposition additive manufacturing. Acta Mater 87:309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hrabe N, Quinn T (2013) Effects of processing on microstructure and mechanical properties of a titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4V) fabricated using Electron beam melting (EBM), part 2: energy input, orientation, and location. Mater Sci Eng A 573:271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shunmugavel M, Polishetty A, Littlefair G (2015) Microstructure and mechanical properties of wrought and additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V cylindrical bars. Procedia Technol 20:231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simonelli M, Tse YY, Tuck C (2014) Effect of the build orientation on the mechanical properties and fracture modes of SLM Ti–6Al–4V. Mater Sci Eng A 616:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alsalla HH, Smith C, Hao L (2018) The effect of different build orientations on the consolidation, tensile and fracture toughness properties of direct metal laser sintering Ti-6Al-4V. Rapid Prototyp J 24(2):276–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tong J, Bowen CR, Persson J, Plummer A (2017) Mechanical properties of titanium-based Ti–6Al–4V alloys manufactured by powder bed additive manufacture. Mater Sci Technol 33(2):138–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilson-Heid AE, Wang Z, McCornac B, Beese AM (2017) Quantitative relationship between anisotropic strain to failure and grain morphology in additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V. Mater Sci Eng A 706:287–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang X, Martina F, Ding J, Wang X, Williams S (2017) Fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth rate properties in wire + arc additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V: fatigue crack and fracture properties in WAAM Ti-6Al-4V. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 40(5):790–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cain V, Thijs L, Van Humbeeck J, Van Hooreweder B, Knutsen R (2015) Crack propagation and fracture toughness of Ti6Al4V alloy produced by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf 5:68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bača A, Konečná R, Nicoletto G, Kunz L (2016) Influence of build direction on the fatigue behaviour of Ti6Al4V alloy produced by direct metal laser sintering. Mater Today Proc 3(4):921–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Biswas N, Ding JL, Balla VK, Field DP, Bandyopadhyay A (2012) Deformation and fracture behavior of laser processed dense and porous Ti6Al4V alloy under static and dynamic loading. Mater Sci Eng A 549:213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fadida R, Rittel D, Shirizly A (2015) Dynamic mechanical behavior of additively manufactured Ti6Al4V with controlled voids. J Appl Mech 82(4):041004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mohammadhosseini A, Masood SH, Fraser D, Jahedi M (2015) Dynamic compressive behaviour of Ti-6Al-4V alloy processed by Electron beam melting under high strain rate loading. Adv Manuf 3(3):232–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rodriguez OL, Allison PG, Whittington WR, El Kadiri H, Rivera OG, Barkey ME (2018) Strain rate effect on the tension and compression stress-state asymmetry for Electron beam additive manufactured Ti6Al4V. Mater Sci Eng A 713:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fadida R, Shirizly A, Rittel D (2018) Dynamic tensile response of additively manufactured Ti6Al4V with embedded spherical pores. J Appl Mech 85(4):041004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Li P-H, Guo W-G, Yuan K-B, Su Y, Wang J-J, Lin X, Li Y-P (2018) Effects of processing defects on the dynamic tensile mechanical behavior of laser-solid-formed Ti-6Al-4 V. Mater Charact 140:15–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Xiao L, Song W (2018) Additively-manufactured functionally graded Ti-6Al-4V lattice structures with high strength under static and dynamic loading: experiments. Int J Impact Eng 111:255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jones DR, Fensin SJ, Dippo O, Beal RA, Livescu V, Martinez DT, Trujillo CP, Florando JN, Kumar M, Gray GT (2016) Spall fracture in additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V. J Appl Phys 120(13):135902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    ISO/ASTM 5291 (2013) Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing -- Coordinate Systems and Test MethodologiesGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vrancken B, Thijs L, Kruth J-P, Van Humbeeck J (2012) Heat treatment of Ti6Al4V produced by selective laser melting: microstructure and mechanical properties. J Alloys Compd 541:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Boyer R, Welsch G, Collings EW (1994) Materials Properties Handbook: Titanium Alloys, ASM International, Materials Park, OhioGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chen W, Song B (2011) Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) Bar: design, testing and applications. Springer US, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Subhash G, Ravichandran G (2000) Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Testing of Ceramics, ASM Handbook on Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, ASM International, pp. 497–504Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ahmadi SM, Ashok Kumar Jain RK, Zadpoor AA, Ayas C, Popovich VA (2017) Effects of heat treatment on microstructure and mechanical behaviour of additive manufactured porous Ti6Al4V. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 293:012009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Maiden CJ, Green SJ (1966) Compressive strain-rate tests on six selected materials at strain rates from 10−3 to 104 in/in/sec. J Appl Mech 33(3):496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Thijs L, Verhaeghe F, Craeghs T, Humbeeck JV, Kruth J-P (2010) A study of the microstructural evolution during selective laser melting of Ti–6Al–4V. Acta Mater 58(9):3303–3312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kobryn PA, Semiatin SL (2003) Microstructure and texture evolution during solidification processing of Ti–6Al–4V. J Mater Process Technol 135(2):330–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Moat RJ, Pinkerton AJ, Li L, Withers PJ, Preuss M (2009) Crystallographic texture and microstructure of pulsed diode laser-deposited Waspaloy. Acta Mater 57(4):1220–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Al-Bermani SS, Blackmore ML, Zhang W, Todd I (2010) The origin of microstructural diversity, texture, and mechanical properties in Electron beam melted Ti-6Al-4V. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 41(13):3422–3434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Antonysamy AA, Meyer J, Prangnell PB (2013) Effect of build geometry on the β-grain structure and texture in additive manufacture of Ti6Al4V by selective Electron beam melting. Mater Charact 84:153–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Foehring D (2018) Characterizing the Tensile Behavior of Additively Manufactured Ti-6Al-4V Using Multiscale Digital Image Correlation, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rafi HK, Starr TL, Stucker BE (2013) A comparison of the tensile, fatigue, and fracture behavior of Ti–6Al–4V and 15-5 PH stainless steel parts made by selective laser melting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 69(5–8):1299–1309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wu X, Liang J, Mei J, Mitchell C, Goodwin PS, Voice W (2004) Microstructures of laser-deposited Ti–6Al–4V. Mater Des 25(2):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Banerjee D, Williams JC (2013) Perspectives on titanium science and technology. Acta Mater 61(3):844–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Aerospace EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations