Part Deflection Measurements of AM-Bench IN718 3D Build Artifacts.

One of the primary barriers for adoption of additive manufacturing (AM) had been the uncertainty in the performance of AM parts due to residual stresses/strains. The rapid melting and solidification which occurs during AM processes result in high residual stresses/strains that produce significant part distortion. While efforts to mitigate residual stresses, such as post-process heat treatment, can reduce these effects, they nullify the benefits of the as-built component microstructure. Therefore, the ability to predict as-built component residual stresses and component deflection is crucial. AM-Bench seeks to provide modelers with high-fidelity data in well-characterized AM components to aid in model development and calibration. The measurements reported here are part of the 3D builds of nickel-based superalloy IN718 test objects for the CHAL-AMB2022-01-PD modeling challenges. The part deflection measurements were performed using a coordinate measurement machine after the part was partially separated from the build plate.

The effects of particle size distribution on the rheological properties of the powder and the mechanical properties of additively manufactured 17-4 PH stainless steel.

It is well known that changes in the starting powder can have a significant impact on the laser powder bed fusion process and subsequent part performance. Relationships between the powder particle size distribution and powder performance such as flowability and spreadability are generally known; however, links to part performance are not fully established. This study attempts to more precisely isolate the effect of particle size by using three customized batches of 17-4 PH stainless steel powders with small shifts in particle size distributions having non-intersecting cumulative size distributions, designated as Fine, Medium, and Coarse. It is found that the Fine powder has the worst overall powder performance with poor flow and raking during spreading while the Coarse powder has the best overall flow. Despite these differences in powder performance, the microstructures (i.e., porosity, grain size, phase, and crystallographic texture) of the built parts using the same process parameters are largely the same. Furthermore, the Medium powder produced parts with the highest mechanical properties (i.e., hardness and tensile strength) while the Fine and Coarse powders produced parts with effectively identical mechanical properties. Parts with good static mechanical properties can be produced from powders with a wide range of powder performance.