Experimental and Numerical Analysis of Titanium 3D Body-Centered Cubic Lattice Structure Additively Manufactured Using Selective Laser Melting
Source abstract
Abstract
This study investigates the mechanical responses in three-point bending and compression of body-centered cubic (BCC) for specific aerospace applications to achieve lightweight and improved mechanical properties. The mechanical characteristics of functionally graded BCC lattice structures were explored, resulting in enhanced mechanical features compared with uniform-graded BCC lattice structures. Due to the gradient lattice structure, the average bending load significantly increased to 62.5%. It was found that the BCC lattice structure only exhibits a dual failure model comprising buckling and fracture, compared with other lattice structures that often offer sole buckling or fracture failure. The buckling of the struts starts from the bottom and ends with a fracture. BCC lattice sandwiches provide an opportunity to balance strength and weight ratio effectively. The experimental findings showed close agreement with finite element results. Numerical modeling illustrates the stress–strain and force–deformation curves, and the failure mechanism is the strut buckling triggered from the plastic hinges with high-stress levels.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Cellular and Composite Structures
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Design and Manufacturing, School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (SMME), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST) Islamabad, Pakistan.
Pakistan Institute of Additive Manufacturing (PIAM3D), NCP, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Pakistan Institute of Engineering & Applied Sciences (PIEAS), Islamabad, Pakistan.
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1007/978-3-030-56127-710.1007/978-3-030-56127-7 ↗
2. 10.1016/B978-0-08-102965-7.00006-010.1016/B978-0-08-102965-7.00006-0 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.matdes.2019.10813710.1016/j.matdes.2019.108137 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.08.18310.1016/j.jallcom.2013.08.183 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.11000810.1016/j.matdes.2021.110008 ↗
6. Kruth J-P Badrossamay M Yasa E et al. Part and material properties in selective laser melting of metals Proccedings of Conference Part and material properties in selective laser melting of metals. 2015; 3–14.
7. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.08.03910.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.08.039 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.01.00910.1016/j.jmapro.2021.01.009 ↗
9. 10.1007/s00170-020-06360-010.1007/s00170-020-06360-0 ↗
10. 10.1007/978-981-10-0812-2_410.1007/978-981-10-0812-2_4 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10604210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106042 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.04.03110.1016/j.jmrt.2021.04.031 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2023.10879510.1016/j.ijmecsci.2023.108795 ↗
14. 10.2514/1.A3374910.2514/1.A33749 ↗
15. 10.1016/B978-0-323-91230-3.00004-410.1016/B978-0-323-91230-3.00004-4 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.matdes.2021.10973010.1016/j.matdes.2021.109730 ↗
17. Anderson E. Additive Manufacturing in China: Aviation and Aerospace Applications (Part 2). Additive Manufacturing in the Aerospace Industry, 2013.
18. 10.3844/jastsp.2017.50.6810.3844/jastsp.2017.50.68 ↗
19. Laser C. A World first: Additively manufactured titanium components now onboard the Airbus A350 XWB. Additive Manufacturing Amazing, 2014.
20. 10.1016/j.mprp.2015.06.00510.1016/j.mprp.2015.06.005 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.02.60410.1016/j.matpr.2022.02.604 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.matdes.2019.10816410.1016/j.matdes.2019.108164 ↗
23. 10.3390/met912128610.3390/met9121286 ↗
24. 10.3390/jmmp303005210.3390/jmmp3030052 ↗
25. 10.35248/2168-9792.19.8.21510.35248/2168-9792.19.8.215 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.cja.2024.02.00510.1016/j.cja.2024.02.005 ↗
27. 10.1089/3dp.2020.018410.1089/3dp.2020.0184 ↗
28. 10.1007/s12008-023-01359-910.1007/s12008-023-01359-9 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.msea.2023.14498610.1016/j.msea.2023.144986 ↗
30. Solidwork 3D CAD software. Available from: https://www.solidworks.com for further details
31. nTopology Design the future with additive manufacturing. Available from: https://www.ntop.com/ for further details
32. Jiang H, , Liu X, , Liu Z, et al. Topology optimization design and mechanical properties of 3D-Printed solid-lattice hybrid structures with variable-density or iso-density. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, 2024.
33. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.02.04110.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.02.041 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11148510.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111485 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.10692210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106922 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.eml.2018.07.00110.1016/j.eml.2018.07.001 ↗
37. Farsoon FS421M. Available from: https://www.farsoon-gl.com for further details
38. HD-B607-S H. Universal Test Equipment Series. Available from: https://www.haidatestequipment.com for further details.
39. ASTM E8/8M. Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials. ASTM International: West Conshohocken; 2016.
40. 10.1016/j.msea.2018.04.00610.1016/j.msea.2018.04.006 ↗
41. ASTM C393. Standard Test Method for Core Shear Properties of Sandwich Constructions by Beam Flexure. Available from: https://www.astm.org/ for further details
42. 10.1016/j.matdes.2018.08.06110.1016/j.matdes.2018.08.061 ↗
43. 10.3389/fmats.2019.0011710.3389/fmats.2019.00117 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2012.12.00410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2012.12.004 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.msea.2016.06.01310.1016/j.msea.2016.06.013 ↗
46. 10.1007/s11661-001-1039-010.1007/s11661-001-1039-0 ↗