A Defect Size Distribution Model for Durability Analysis of Selective‐Laser‐Melted Alloys
Source abstract
Abstract
The selective laser melting (SLM) technology finds increasing application in the manufacturing of complex engineering components. The micropore defects formed during the SLM process have significant negative effects on fatigue performance of SLM alloys. This paper presents a probabilistic model of defect size distribution established based on the formation of laser melting defects and their evolution process. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and computed tomography (CT) scanning were employed to observe and measure the microstructures of totally 33 SLM‐manufactured TiB 2 ‐Al reinforced specimens, yielding data on 9,226 micropore defects. The results show that the goodness‐of‐fit () for the TiB 2 ‐Al alloy, Ti 6 Al 4 V alloy, and AlSi 10 Mg alloy samples is consistently around 0.95, validating the effectiveness and rationality of the proposed model.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · High Entropy Alloys Studies · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control for Aerospace Structures Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics Nanjing China
Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Aerospace Power System Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics Nanjing China
Zhejiang‐Italy Joint Lab for Smart Materials and Advanced Structures, School of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics Ningbo University Ningbo China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1108/aa.2012.03332baa.01010.1108/aa.2012.03332baa.010 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.06.01310.1016/j.compositesb.2015.06.013 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.06.02010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.06.020 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.msea.2013.11.03810.1016/j.msea.2013.11.038 ↗
5. 10.1016/S0022‐5096(02)00022‐410.1016/S0022‐5096(02)00022‐4 ↗
6. 10.1016/0022‐5096(90)90022‐V10.1016/0022‐5096(90)90022‐V ↗
7. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10558410.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105584 ↗
8. 10.1111/ffe.1408210.1111/ffe.14082 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.10853410.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.108534 ↗
10. 10.1111/ffe.1356710.1111/ffe.13567 ↗
11. Murakami Y. · 2002
12. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.10924410.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.109244 ↗
13. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891‐892.151910.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891‐892.1519 ↗
14. 10.1108/IJSI‐01‐2024‐000110.1108/IJSI‐01‐2024‐0001 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2023.10789410.1016/j.ijfatigue.2023.107894 ↗
16. 10.3390/app1307429410.3390/app13074294 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.05.01810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.05.018 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.10782610.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107826 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.10697510.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106975 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.10820610.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.108206 ↗
21. 10.1111/ffe.1312310.1111/ffe.13123 ↗
22. 10.1111/ffe.1283010.1111/ffe.12830 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.matchar.2009.01.02410.1016/j.matchar.2009.01.024 ↗
24. 10.1016/S0921‐5093(01)01225‐410.1016/S0921‐5093(01)01225‐4 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.msea.2004.12.04210.1016/j.msea.2004.12.042 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.01.00610.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.01.006 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.06.02010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.06.020 ↗
28. 10.3139/146.11092410.3139/146.110924 ↗
29. Three‐Dimensional Imaging of Gas Pores in Fusion Welded Al Alloys by Synchrotron Radiation X‐Ray Microtomography
30. The Influence of Metallurgical Pores on Fatigue Behaviors of Fusion Welded AA7020 Joints
31. 10.1016/j.jmst.2023.07.04110.1016/j.jmst.2023.07.041 ↗
32. 10.1007/s00170‐023‐11281‐910.1007/s00170‐023‐11281‐9 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.msea.2006.07.00310.1016/j.msea.2006.07.003 ↗
34. 10.1007/s11661-006-9070-910.1007/s11661-006-9070-9 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.actamat.2009.04.00810.1016/j.actamat.2009.04.008 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.03.01810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.03.018 ↗
37. Progress of Microporosity Characteristics in Casting and Their Effects on Fatigue Life
38. 10.1016/j.msea.2006.03.00510.1016/j.msea.2006.03.005 ↗
39. 10.1016/S0142‐1123(02)00054‐310.1016/S0142‐1123(02)00054‐3 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.02.00210.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.02.002 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.01.00610.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.01.006 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.10735210.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.107352 ↗
43. 10.1016/S1003‐6326(20)65403‐610.1016/S1003‐6326(20)65403‐6 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.matchar.2015.12.00110.1016/j.matchar.2015.12.001 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2017.03.01510.1016/j.engfailanal.2017.03.015 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.msea.2018.08.03710.1016/j.msea.2018.08.037 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.jmst.2020.03.07010.1016/j.jmst.2020.03.070 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.01410.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.014 ↗
49. 10.1002/adem.20190018510.1002/adem.201900185 ↗
50. 10.1103/PhysRevX.9.02105210.1103/PhysRevX.9.021052 ↗
51. 10.1038/nature2389410.1038/nature23894 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.001 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10565410.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105654 ↗
54. 10.1007/s40571‐025‐01043‐710.1007/s40571‐025‐01043‐7 ↗
55. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2024.11056510.1016/j.optlastec.2024.110565 ↗
56. 10.1007/s00170‐016‐9596‐y10.1007/s00170‐016‐9596‐y ↗
57. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10600810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106008 ↗
58. 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.13510.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.135 ↗
59. 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.04.05210.1016/j.measurement.2019.04.052 ↗
60. 10.1016/j.matchar.2021.11151410.1016/j.matchar.2021.111514 ↗
61. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.02.04010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.02.040 ↗
62. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.10670010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106700 ↗