journal article·2023-02-01Open access

Failure Behavior of Laser Metal Deposited Additive Manufacturing Ti-6Al-4V: Effects of Stress State and Initial Defects

Chang Peng, Peng-Hui Li, Wei-Guo Guo, Rui-Feng Wang, Yan-Ping Li

Abstract

To investigate the mechanical property and failure behavior of laser metal deposited additive manufacturing Ti-6Al-4V (LMD Ti64) in a wide range of stress states and strain rates, different types of specimens were tested at strain rates of 0.001–5000/s. Numerical simulations were conducted to collect the local fracture strain at the critical position where the failure happened for all specimens. By comparing with Ti64 alloy manufactured by different techniques, the failure behavior of LMD Ti64 alloy shows a stronger sensitivity to Lode angle parameter and strain rate. The role of initial defects in failure was discussed. It is found that high laser power and overlap ratio can improve the failure behavior by reducing the number of initial defects. The initial defects on the fracture surface at much higher strain rates were observed, indicating that the initial crack rather than initial void acts as the crack growth point leading to the final fracture at higher strain rates. The scanning electron microscope observation of the fracture surface shows that the failure mechanism of LMD Ti64 alloy varies from different stress states and strain rates. The failure mechanism is characterized by the shear fracture at the negative stress triaxiality, whereas the void growth fracture plays a dominant role in the failure mechanism of LMD Ti64 alloy at a high stress triaxiality on the quasi-static loading condition.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Titanium Alloys Microstructure and Properties · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, China.

References (37)

Show source-provided references
1. Liu S, , Shin YC. Additive manufacturing of Ti6Al4V alloy: A review. Mater Des 2019;164 ;107552.
2. 10.1179/1743280411Y.000000001410.1179/1743280411Y.0000000014 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.04.02410.1016/j.mechmat.2019.04.024 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.001 ↗
5. Yuan KB, , Guo WG, , Li DW, et al. Influence of heat treatments on plastic flow of laser deposited Inconel 718: Testing and microstructural based constitutive modeling. Int J Plasticity 2020:102865. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.ijplas.2020.102865.
6. 10.1016/j.msea.2018.02.01410.1016/j.msea.2018.02.014 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.msea.2013.04.09910.1016/j.msea.2013.04.099 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.msea.2015.08.04310.1016/j.msea.2015.08.043 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.msea.2015.07.05610.1016/j.msea.2015.07.056 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.06.01510.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.06.015 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.00510.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.005 ↗
12. Aboulkhair NT, , Everitt NM, , Ashcroft I, et al. Reducing porosity in AlSi10Mg parts processed by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf, 2014; 1:77–86.
13. 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.14710.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.147 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.05.00210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.05.002 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.actamat.2012.04.00610.1016/j.actamat.2012.04.006 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.matchar.2018.03.03210.1016/j.matchar.2018.03.032 ↗
17. Galarraga H, , Diana L, , Ryan D, et al. Effects of the microstructure and porosity on properties of Ti-6Al-4V ELI alloy fabricated by electron beam melting (EBM). Addit Manuf, 2016; 10:47–57.
18. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10562910.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105629 ↗
19. 10.1179/1362171815Y.000000005010.1179/1362171815Y.0000000050 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.00610.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.006 ↗
21. 10.1016/S0167-6636(01)00063-110.1016/S0167-6636(01)00063-1 ↗
22. 10.1089/3dp.2017.012910.1089/3dp.2017.0129 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2004.02.00610.1016/j.ijmecsci.2004.02.006 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.12.02310.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.12.023 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2020.10364110.1016/j.mechmat.2020.103641 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.04.01810.1016/j.jcsr.2016.04.018 ↗
27. Li H, , Fu M, , Lu J, et al. Ductile fracture: Experiments and computations. Int J Plast, 27; 2:147.
28. Leblond JB, , Mottet GA. Theoretical approach of strain localization within thin planar bands in porous ductile materials. Comp Rend Mec, 2008; 336:176–189.
29. 10.1016/j.actamat.2018.02.02510.1016/j.actamat.2018.02.025 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.msea.2019.05.09710.1016/j.msea.2019.05.097 ↗
31. ASTM E1695-95. Standard Test Method for Measurement of Computed Tomography (CT) System Performance. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM International 2013.
32. 10.1016/j.matdes.2011.06.06210.1016/j.matdes.2011.06.062 ↗
33. 10.1115/1.307839010.1115/1.3078390 ↗
34. 10.1007/s11340-011-9541-910.1007/s11340-011-9541-9 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2018.07.00810.1016/j.tafmec.2018.07.008 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.ijplas.2013.03.01210.1016/j.ijplas.2013.03.012 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.04.08310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.04.083 ↗