Characterization of Defect Distribution in an Additively Manufactured AlSi10Mg as a Function of Processing Parameters and Correlations with Extreme Value Statistics
Source abstract
Abstract
Fatigue failure in additively manufactured components commonly initiates at critical defects that combine large size with proximity to the surface. Therefore, understanding the relation of extreme large sized defects with process parameters is essential for structural integrity. This study explores the correlation between the process parameters and statistically derived extreme defect sizes in Selective Laser Melting using Extreme Value Theory (EVT). AlSi10Mg samples are fabricated with varying bulk process parameters, while maintaining constant contouring conditions to generate different defect distributions and are characterized using computed tomography. Defect size is quantified via along the bearing plane for analysis. EVT is applied using the block maxima approach and modeled using the Gumbel distribution to estimate the 99th percentile maximum defect sizes (x 0.99 ) representing the statistical extremes. Correlations between x 0.99 and process parameter indicators such as modified volume energy density and melt pool width are established using quadratic regression and Gaussian process regression. Although based on a limited dataset, the results demonstrate a viable framework for linking process parameters to statistically derived extreme defect sizes in additively manufactured components.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering Istanbul Technical University 34469 Istanbul Türkiye
Additive Manufacturing Technologies Application and Research Center‐EKTAM Gazi University 06560 Ankara Türkiye
Department of Mechanical Engineering Gazi University 06570 Ankara Türkiye
Polytechnic Department of Engineering and Architecture (DPIA) University of Udine Via delle Scienze 206 33100 Udine Italy
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Aboulkhair N. T. · Addit. Manufact. · 2014 · 1 · 7710.1016/j.addma.2014.08.001 ↗
2. Spierings A. B. · Addit. Manufact. · 2018 · 20 · 17310.1016/j.addma.2017.12.011 ↗
3. I.Campbell O.Diegel J.Kowen T.Wohlers report 2018: 3D printing and additive manufacturing state of the industry: annual worldwide progress report.2018.
4. Wei P. · Appl. Surf. Sci. · 2017 · 408 · 3810.1016/j.apsusc.2017.02.215 ↗
5. Wu J. · Acta Materialia. · 2016 · 117 · 31110.1016/j.actamat.2016.07.012 ↗
6. N. W.Hrabe N.Barbosa S.Daniewicz N.Shamsaei Findings from the NIST/ASTM workshop on mechanical behavior of additive manufacturing components2016.10.6028/NIST.AMS.100-4 ↗
7. Butt M. M. · Prog. Addit. Manufact. · 2024 · 10 · 1
8. Jiang Z. · Phys. Mesomechanics. · 2023 · 26 · 36710.1134/S102995992304001X ↗
9. Salvati E. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2024 · 10848710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2024.108487 ↗
10. Galy C. · Addit. Manufact. · 2018 · 22 · 16510.1016/j.addma.2018.05.005 ↗
11. Brennan M. · J. Mater. Eng. Perform. · 2021 · 30 · 480810.1007/s11665-021-05919-6 ↗
12. Sheridan L. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2021 · 143 · 10603310.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106033 ↗
13. Salvati E. · Mater. Design. · 2022 · 222 · 11108910.1016/j.matdes.2022.111089 ↗
14. Beretta S. · Convegno IGF XVII Bol. · 2004 · 2008
15. Qvale P. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2017 · 100 · 7810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.03.010 ↗
16. Siddique S. · Mater. Design. · 2015 · 83 · 66110.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.063 ↗
17. Dan C. · Nature Mater. · 2023 · 22 · 118210.1038/s41563-023-01651-9 ↗
18. Tenkamp J. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2018 · 108 · 2510.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.11.003 ↗
19. Peng X. · Int. J. Mech. Sci. · 2022 · 221 · 10718510.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107185 ↗
20. Qian G. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2020 · 136 · 10562810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105628 ↗
21. Li J. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2022 · 158 · 10676410.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.106764 ↗
22. Tammas‐Williams S. · Scientific Rep. · 2017 · 7 · 730810.1038/s41598-017-06504-5 ↗
23. Liu Y. · Eng. Fract. Mech. · 2025 · 314 · 11067610.1016/j.engfracmech.2024.110676 ↗
24. Deng K. · J. Mater. Proc. Technol. · 2022 · 299 · 11738910.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117389 ↗
25. Hu Y. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2020 · 136 · 10558410.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105584 ↗
26. Beretta S. · Int. J. Fatigue · 2021 · 151 · 10640710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106407 ↗
27. Romano S. · Mater. Design. · 2017 · 131 · 3210.1016/j.matdes.2017.05.091 ↗
28. Nikfar M. · Prog. Addit. Manufact. · 2025 · 10 · 110.1007/s40964-024-00597-x ↗
29. Muhammad M. · Theoret. Appl. Fract. Mechan. · 2025 · 10498110.1016/j.tafmec.2025.104981 ↗
30. Sanaei N. · Mater. Sci. Eng.: A. · 2020 · 785 · 13938510.1016/j.msea.2020.139385 ↗
31. Romano S. · Addit. Manufact. · 2019 · 28 · 39410.1016/j.addma.2019.05.017 ↗
32. Shahabi M. · Mater. Charact. · 2022 · 190 · 11202710.1016/j.matchar.2022.112027 ↗
33. Niu X. · Eng. Fract. Mechan. · 2023 · 277 · 10900010.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.109000 ↗
34. Kousoulas P. · Manufact. Lett. · 2023 · 35 · 8010.1016/j.mfglet.2023.08.059 ↗
35. Sandell V. · Materials · 2021 · 14 · 64010.3390/ma14030640 ↗
36. Jing C. · Chin. J. Aeronaut. · 2020 · 33 · 204310.1016/j.cja.2019.08.017 ↗
37. Agrawal A. K. · Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. · 2022 · 26 · 10102410.1016/j.cossms.2022.101024 ↗
38. Read N. · Mater. Design. · 2015 · 65 · 41710.1016/j.matdes.2014.09.044 ↗
39. Kitano H. · Crystals. · 2021 · 11 · 57810.3390/cryst11060578 ↗
40. Gordon J. V. · Additive Manufacturing. · 2020 · 36 · 10155210.1016/j.addma.2020.101552 ↗
41. Ansari P. · J. Alloys Comp. · 2022 · 890 · 16187310.1016/j.jallcom.2021.161873 ↗
42. Luo Q. · Addit. Manufact. · 2023 · 77 · 10380410.1016/j.addma.2023.103804 ↗
43. Giovagnoli M. · Mater. Sci. Eng.: A. · 2021 · 802 · 14061310.1016/j.msea.2020.140613 ↗
44. Wischeropp T. M. · 202110.1007/978-3-662-64585-7 ↗
45. ASTM International:Standard practice for conducting force controlled constant amplitude axial fatigue tests of metallic materials.Technical Report E466‐21 (2021).https://www.astm.org/Standards/E466.htm.
46. Smith R. L. · Handbook Appl. Mathematics. · 1990 · 7 · 18
47. Massey F. J. · J. Am. Statistic. Assoc. · 1951 · 46 · 6810.1080/01621459.1951.10500769 ↗
48. Scholz F. W. · J. Am. Statist. Assoc. · 1987 · 82 · 918
49. Friedl H. · Encyclopedia of Environmet. · 2002 · 2 · 1089
50. Samuels T. · Anaesthesia. · 2017 · 72 · 27110.1111/anae.13795 ↗
51. De Winter J. C. · Psychol. Methods. · 2016 · 21 · 27310.1037/met0000079 ↗
52. Kim T. K. · Korean J. Anesthesiol. · 2015 · 68 · 54010.4097/kjae.2015.68.6.540 ↗
53. Schulz E. · J. Mathemat. Psychol. · 2018 · 85 · 110.1016/j.jmp.2018.03.001 ↗
54. Wong T.‐T. · Pattern Recogn. · 2015 · 48 · 283910.1016/j.patcog.2015.03.009 ↗
55. Rubenchik A. M. · J. Mater. Proc. Technol. · 2018 · 257 · 23410.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.02.034 ↗