Evaluation of Select Surface Processing Techniques for In Situ Application During the Additive Manufacturing Build Process
- 643 Downloads
Although additive manufacturing offers numerous performance advantages for different applications, it is not being used for critical applications due to uncertainties in structural integrity as a result of innate process variability and defects. To minimize uncertainty, the current approach relies on the concurrent utilization of process monitoring, post-processing, and non-destructive inspection in addition to an extensive material qualification process. This paper examines an alternative approach by evaluating the application of select surface process techniques, to include sliding severe plastic deformation (SPD) and fine particle shot peening, on direct metal laser sintering-produced AlSi10Mg materials. Each surface processing technique is compared to baseline as-built and post-processed samples as a proof of concept for surface enhancement. Initial results pairing sliding SPD with the manufacture’s recommended thermal stress relief cycle demonstrated uniform recrystallization of the microstructure, resulting in a more homogeneous distribution of strain among the microstructure than as-built or post-processed conditions. This result demonstrates the potential for the in situ application of various surface processing techniques during the layerwise direct metal laser sintering build process.
KeywordsSevere Plastic Deformation Additive Manufacturing Compressive Residual Stress Rake Angle Direct Metal Laser Sinter
TAB acknowledges support from this work under the Army Advance Civil Schooling Program. MDS would like to thank partial support from DARPA, N66001-14-1-4041. We thank Prof. Srinivasan Chandrasekar and Dr. Anirban Mahato of the Center for Materials Processing and Tribology at Purdue University for their advice and assistance. Prof. Steven Heister provided the original set of AlSi10Mg samples and Ms. Hannah Woods assisted with initially characterizing the surface roughness and hardness of the test specimens upon receipt.
- 1.D. Manfredi, F. Calignano, M. Krishnan, R. Canali, E.P. Ambrosio, S. Biamino, D. Ugues, M. Pavese, and P. Fino, Light Metal Alloys Applications, ed. W.A. Monterio (InTech, 2014), pp. 3–34.Google Scholar
- 2.M. Krishnan, E. Atzeni, R. Canali, D. Manfredi, F. Calignano, E.P. Ambrosio, and L. Iuliano, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advanced Research Virtual Rapid Prototyping, vol, 2009, 2013, pp. 243–248.Google Scholar
- 4.Material Datasheet: EOS Aluminium AlSi10Mg. https://scrivito-public-cdn.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/eos/public/8837de942d78d3b3/4e099c3a857fdddca4be9d59fbb1cd74/EOS_Aluminium_AlSi10Mg_en.pdf. Accessed 01 June 2015.
- 9.N.J. Petch, J. Iron Steel Inst. 174, 8 (1953).Google Scholar
- 10.Y. Guo (PhD thesis Purdue University, 2012).Google Scholar
- 11.A. Mahato, Y. Guo, H. Yeung, and S. Chandrasekar, IOP Conf. Ser., 63, 1.Google Scholar
- 12.A. Mahato, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Private Communication, 2015Google Scholar
- 14.J.L. Devore, Probability and Statisitcs for Engineering and the Sciences, 8th ed. (Boston: Brooks/Cole, 2012), pp. 391.Google Scholar
- 18.A.H. Cannon, J.D. Hochhalter, A.W. Mello, G.F. Bomarito, and M.D. Sangid, Microsc. Microanal. 0546–000769, 10 (2015).Google Scholar