Advertisement

Synchrotron Capabilities to Understand Microstructure of Additively Manufactured Materials: Challenges and Opportunities for Modeling and Simulations

  • Anthony D. Rollett
Living reference work entry

Abstract

From the perspective of modeling and simulation, additive manufacturing is an unambiguously multiscale problem. Regardless of whether the 3D printing is accomplished via melting, or polymerization, or with binders, the scale of the process is submillimeter, which means that dozens to thousands of layers are accumulated while making a part. Variations in geometry mean that the path followed by the light or electron beam (except in the case of whole layer-based illumination) results in highly variable time intervals between successive overlapping heat inputs. Particularly in the case of processes that melt powders, this can result in deviations from the expected heat input that lead to defects. Taking microstructure to be the totality of the structure of crystal(s) and defects, this means that using simulation to predict microstructure requires calculations at multiple scales: it is not feasible to simulate microstructure development at the submillimeter scale with, e.g., grains, orientations, and pores, when the part extends to centimeters in all dimensions. Synchrotron radiation is well suited to probing the unit processes involved in additive manufacturing, and so a focus on the submillimeter scale of materials processing provides a useful framework for evaluating needs and prospects for modeling and simulation.

References

  1. Bernier JV, Barton NR, Lienert U, Miller MP (2011) Far-field high-energy diffraction microscopy: a tool for intergranular orientation and strain analysis. J Strain Anal Eng Des 46:527–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309324711405761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beuth J, Klingbeil N (2001) The role of process variables in laser-based direct metal solid freeform fabrication. JOM 53:36–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-001-0067-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bormann T, de Wild M, Beckmann F, Mueller B (2013) Assessing the morphology of selective laser melted NiTi-scaffolds for a three-dimensional quantification of the one-way shape memory effect. In: Goulbourne NC, Naguib HE (eds) Behavior and mechanics of multifunctional materials and composites. SPIE, Bellingham, p 868914Google Scholar
  4. Brun F, Intranuovo F, Mohammadi S, Domingos M, Favia P, Tromba G (2013) A comparison of 3D poly(epsilon-caprolactone) tissue engineering scaffolds produced with conventional and additive manufacturing techniques by means of quantitative analysis of SR mu-CT images. J Instrum 8:C07001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/8/07/C07001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cakmak E, Kirka MM, Watkins TR, Cooper RC, An K, Choo H, Wu W, Dehoff RR, Babu SS (2016) Microstructural and micromechanical characterization of IN718 theta shaped specimens built with electron beam melting. Acta Mater 108:161–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calignano F (2014) Design optimization of supports for overhanging structures in aluminum and titanium alloys by selective laser melting. Mater Des 64:203–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.07.043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cao J, Gharghouri MA, Nash P (2016) Finite-element analysis and experimental validation of thermal residual stress and distortion in electron beam additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V build plates. J Mater Process Technol 237:409–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlton HD, Haboub A, Gallegos GF, Parkinson DY, MacDowell AA (2016) Damage evolution and failure mechanisms in additively manufactured stainless steel. Mater Sci Eng A 651:406–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2015.10.073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cunningham R, Narra SP, Montgomery C, Beuth J, Rollett A (2017a) Synchrotron-based x-ray microtomography characterization of the effect of processing variables on porosity formation in laser power-bed additive manufacturing of Ti-6Al-4V. JOM 69:479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-2234-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cunningham R, Nicolas A, Madsen J, Fodran E, Anagnostou E, Sangid MD, Rollett AD (2017b) Analyzing the effects of powder and post-processing on porosity and properties of electron beam melted Ti-6Al-4V. Mater Res Lett 5:516–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/21663831.2017.1340911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dunbar AJ, Denlinger ER, Heigel J, Michaleris P, Guerrier P, Martukanitz R, Simpson TW (2016) Development of experimental method for in situ distortion and temperature measurements during the laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing process. Addit Manuf 12:25–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eylon D, Strope B (1979) Fatigue crack initiation in Ti-6 wt% Al-4 wt% V castings. J Mater Sci 14:345–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00589825ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Furumoto T, Ueda T, Alkahari MR, Hosokawa A (2013) Investigation of laser consolidation process for metal powder by two-color pyrometer and high-speed video camera. CIRP Ann 62:223–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2013.03.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson I, Rosen DW, Stucker B (eds) (2010) Additive manufacturing technologies: 3D printing, rapid prototyping, and direct digital manufacturing, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Gratzke U, Kapadia P, Dowden J, Kroos J, Simon G (1992) Theoretical approach to the humping phenomenon in welding processes. J Phys D 25:1640. https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/25/11/012ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Groeber M, Schwalbach E, Donegan S, Chaput K, Butler T, Miller J (2017) Application of characterization, modelling, and analytics towards understanding process-structure linkages in metallic 3D printing. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 219:012002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gürsoy D, De Carlo F, Xiao X, Jacobsen C (2014) TomoPy: a framework for the analysis of synchrotron tomographic data. J Synch Radiat 21:1188–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heigel JC, Michaleris P, Reutzel EW (2015) Thermo-mechanical model development and validation of directed energy deposition additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V. Addit Manuf 5:9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2014.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hudák R, Zivák J, Tóth T, Majerník J, Lisý M (2016) Usage of industrial computed tomography for evaluation of custom-made implants. In: Bris R, Majernik J, Pancerz K, Zaitseva E (eds) Applications of computational intelligence in biomedical technology. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 29–45Google Scholar
  20. Idell Y, Campbell C, Levine L, Zhang F, Olson G, Snyder D (2015) Characterization of nickel based superalloys processed through direct metal laser sintering technique of additive manufacturing. Microsc Microanal 21:465. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927615003128ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Idell Y, Levine LE, Allen AJ, Zhang F, Campbell CE, Olson G, Gong J, Snyder D, Deutchman H (2016) Unexpected delta-phase formation in additive-manufactured Ni-based superalloy. JOM 68:950–959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-015-1772-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kantzos CA, Cunningham RW, Tari V, Rollett AD (2018) Characterization of metal additive manufacturing surfaces using synchrotron x-ray CT and micromechanical modeling. Comput Mech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1531-zADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kenel C, Grolimund D, Fife JL, Samson VA, Van Petegem S, Van Swygenhoven H, Leinenbach C (2016a) Combined in situ synchrotron micro x-ray diffraction and high-speed imaging on rapidly heated and solidified Ti-48Al under additive manufacturing conditions. Scr Mater 114:117–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2015.12.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kenel C, Schloth P, Van Petegem S, Fife JL, Grolimund D, Menzel A, Van Swygenhoven H, Leinenbach C (2016b) In situ synchrotron x-ray diffraction and small angle x-ray scattering studies on rapidly heated and cooled Ti-Al and Al-Cu-Mg alloys using laser-based heating. JOM 68:978–984. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-015-1774-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kenel C, Grolimund D, Li X, Panepucci E, Samson VA, Sanchez DF, Marone F, Leinenbach C (2017) In situ investigation of phase transformations in Ti-6Al-4V under additive manufacturing conditions combining laser melting and high-speed micro-x-ray diffraction. Sci Rep 7:16358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-16760-0ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khairallah SA, Anderson AT, Rubenchik A, King WE (2016) Laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing: physics of complex melt flow and formation mechanisms of pores, spatter, and denudation zones. Acta Mater 108:36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lass EA, Stoudt MR, Williams ME, Katz MB, Levine LE, Phan TQ, Gnaeupel-Herold TH, Ng DS (2017) Formation of the Ni3Nb delta-phase in stress-relieved inconel 625 produced via laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing. Metall Mater Trans A 48:5547–5558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-017-4304-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leuders S, Vollmer M, Brenne F, Tröster T, Niendorf T (2015) Fatigue strength prediction for titanium alloy TiAl6V4 manufactured by selective laser melting. Metall Mater Trans A 46:3816–3823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li SF, Suter RM (2013) Adaptive reconstruction method for three-dimensional orientation imaging. J Appl Crystallogr 46:512–524. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0021889813005268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lienert U, Li SF, Hefferan CM, Lind J, Suter RM, Bernier JV, Barton NR, Brandes MC, Mills MJ, Miller MP, Jakobsen B, Pantleon W (2011) High-energy diffraction microscopy at the advanced photon source. JOM 63:70–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lindgren L, Lundbäck A, Fisk M, Pederson R, Andersson J (2016) Simulation of additive manufacturing using coupled constitutive and microstructure models. Addit Manuf 12:144–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lundbäck A, Pederson R, Colliander MH, Brice C, Steuwer A, Heralic A, Buslaps T, Lindgren L (2016) Modeling and experimental measurement with synchrotron radiation of residual stresses in laser metal deposited Ti-6Al-4V. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on titanium. pp 1279–1282Google Scholar
  33. Mach JC, Budrow CJ, Pagan DC, Ruff JPC, Park J, Okasinski J, Beaudoin AJ, Miller MP (2017) Validating a model for welding induced residual stress using high-energy x-ray diffraction. JOM 69:893–899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-017-2298-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mishurova T, Cabeza S, Artzt K, Haubrich J, Klaus M, Genzel C, Requena G, Bruno G (2017) An assessment of subsurface residual stress analysis in SLM Ti-6Al-4V. Materials 10:348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10040348ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Montgomery C, Beuth J, Sheridan L, Klingbeil N (2015) Process mapping of inconel 625 in laser powder bed additive manufacturing. In: Bourell D (ed) Solid freeform fabrication symposium. Austin, TX, pp 1195–1204Google Scholar
  36. Mukherjee T, Zuback J, De A, DebRoy T (2016) Printability of alloys for additive manufacturing. Sci Rep 6:19717. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep19717ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Muon Tomography (2017) Available via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_tomography. Accessed Feb 2018
  38. Murr LE, Johnson WL (2017) 3D metal droplet printing development and advanced materials additive manufacturing. J Mater Res Technol 6:77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2016.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oddershede J, Schmidt S, Poulsen HF, Sorensen HO, Wright J, Reimers W (2010) Determining grain resolved stresses in polycrystalline materials using three-dimensional x-ray diffraction. J Appl Crystallogr 43:539–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parab ND, Zhao C, Cunningham RW, Escano LI, Fezzaa K, Everhart W, Rollett AD, Chen L, Sun T (2018) Ultrafast x-ray imaging of laser metal additive manufacturing processes. SubmittedGoogle Scholar
  41. Park J, Okasinski J (2017) Non-destructive internal lattice strain measurement using high energy synchrotron radiation. In: Quinn S, Balandraud X (eds) Residual stress, thermomechanics and infrared imaging, hybrid techniques and inverse problems, vol 9. Springer Nature, Switzerland, pp 121–126Google Scholar
  42. Pokharel R, Lebensohn RA (2017) Instantiation of crystal plasticity simulations for micromechanical modelling with direct input from microstructural data collected at light sources. Scr Mater 132:73–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2017.01.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Promoppatum P, Yao S, Pistorius PC, Rollett AD (2017) A comprehensive comparison of the analytical and numerical prediction of the thermal history and solidification microstructure of inconel 718 products made by laser powder-bed fusion. Engineering 3:685–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2017.05.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Promoppatum P, Yao S, Pistorius PC, Rollett AD, Coutts PJ, Lia F, Martukanitz R (2018) Numerical modeling and experimental validation of thermal history and microstructure for additive manufacturing of an inconel 718 product. Prog Addit Manuf 3:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-018-0039-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ren YQ, King PC, Yang YS, Xiao TQ, Chu C, Gulizia S, Murphy AB (2017) Characterization of heat treatment-induced pore structure changes in cold-sprayed titanium. Mater Charact 132:69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2017.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rollett AD, Barmak K (2015) Orientation mapping. In: Laughlin DE, Hono K (eds) Physical metallurgy, 5th edn. Elsevier, London, pp 1113–1142Google Scholar
  47. Rosenthal D (1941) Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and cutting. Weld J 20:220s–234sGoogle Scholar
  48. Salvati E, Lunt AJG, Ying S, Sui T, Zhang HJ, Heason C, Baxter G, Korsunsky AM (2017) Eigenstrain reconstruction of residual strains in an additively manufactured and shot peened nickel superalloy compressor blade. Comp Methods Appl Mech Eng 320:335–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.03.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sandgren HR, Zhai Y, Lados DA, Shade PA, Schuren JC, Groeber MA, Kenesei P, Gavras AG (2016) Characterization of fatigue crack growth behavior in LENS fabricated Ti-6Al-4V using high-energy synchrotron x-ray microtomography. Addit Manuf 12:132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.09.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scarlett NVY, Tyson P, Fraser D, Mayo S, Maksimenko A (2016a) Synchrotron x-ray CT characterization of titanium parts fabricated by additive manufacturing. Part I. Morphology. J Synchrotron Radiat 23:1006–1014. https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600577516007359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Scarlett NVY, Tyson P, Fraser D, Mayo S, Maksimenko A (2016b) Synchrotron x-ray CT characterization of titanium parts fabricated by additive manufacturing. Part II. Defects. J Synchrotron Radiat 23:1015–1023. https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600577516008018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schwartz AJ, Kumar M, Adams BL (eds) (2000) Electron backscatter diffraction in materials science, 2nd edn. Kluwer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Sharma H, Huizenga RM, Offerman SE (2012a) A fast methodology to determine the characteristics of thousands of grains using three-dimensional x-ray diffraction. II. Volume, centre-of-mass position, crystallographic orientation and strain state of grains. J Appl Crystallogr 45:705–718. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0021889812025599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sharma H, Huizenga RM, Offerman SE (2012b) A fast methodology to determine the characteristics of thousands of grains using three-dimensional x-ray diffraction. I. Overlapping diffraction peaks and parameters of the experimental setup. J Appl Crystallogr 45:693–704. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0021889812025563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sun T, Fezzaa K (2016) HiSPoD: a program for high-speed polychromatic x-ray diffraction experiments and data analysis on polycrystalline samples. J Synchrotron Radiat 23:1046–1053. https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600577516005804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Szost BA, Terzi S, Martina F, Boisselier D, Prytuliak A, Pirling T, Hofmann M, Jarvis DJ (2016) A comparative study of additive manufacturing techniques: residual stress and microstructural analysis of CLAD and WAAM printed Ti–6Al–4V components. Mater Des 89:559–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.09.115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tan W, Shin YC (2015) Multi-scale modeling of solidification and microstructure development in laser keyhole welding process for austenitic stainless steel. Comp Mater Sci 98:446–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.10.063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tang M, Pistorius PC, Beuth JL (2017) Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 14:39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Trapp J, Rubenchik AM, Guss G, Matthews MJ (2017) In situ absorptivity measurements of metallic powders during laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing. Appl Mater Today 9:341–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Turner TJ, Shade PA, Bernier JV, Li SF, Schuren JC, Lind J, Lienert U, Kenesei P, Suter RM, Blank B et al (2016) Combined near-and far-field high-energy diffraction microscopy dataset for Ti-7Al tensile specimen elastically loaded in situ. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 5:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s4019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Turner TJ, Shade PA, Bernier JV, Li SF, Schuren JC, Kenesei P, Suter RM, Almer J (2017) Crystal plasticity model validation using combined high-energy diffraction microscopy data for a Ti-7Al specimen. Metall Mater Trans A 48:627–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-016-3868-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vasinonta A, Griffith M, Beuth JL (2006) Process maps for predicting residual stress and melt pool size in the laser-based fabrication of thin-walled structures. J Manuf Sci Eng 129:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Weibull W (1951) A statistical distribution of wide applicability. ASME J Appl Mech 18:293–297zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. Whitesell R, McKenna A, Wendt S, Gray J (2016) Volumetric measurement of residual stress using high energy x-ray diffraction. In: Chimenti DE, Bond LJ (eds) 42nd annual review of progress in quantitative nondestructive evaluation: incorporating the 6th European-American workshop on reliability of NDE. AIP, College Park, p 110013Google Scholar
  65. Wohlers T (ed) (2017) Wohlers report 2017. Wohlers Associates, Frisco, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  66. Xue J, Zhang A, Li Y, Qian D, Wan J, Qi B, Tamura N, Song Z, Chen K (2015) A synchrotron study of microstructure gradient in laser additively formed epitaxial Ni-based superalloy. Sci Rep 5:14903. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep14903ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zhang F, Levine LE, Allen AJ, Campbell CE, Lass EA, Cheruvathur S, Stoudt MR, Williams ME, Idell Y (2017) Homogenization kinetics of a nickel-based superalloy produced by powder bed fusion laser sintering. Scr Mater 131:98–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2016.12.037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zhao C, Fezzaa K, Cunningham RW, Wen H, Carlo F, Chen L, Rollett AD, Sun T (2017) Real-time monitoring of laser powder bed fusion process using high-speed x-ray imaging and diffraction. Sci Rep 7:3602. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03761-2ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials Science & EngineeringCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • John Sarrao
    • 1
  • Marius Stan
  1. 1.Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos AlamosUSA

Personalised recommendations