Size Effect of High‐Cycle Fatigue Performance in Additively Manufactured Ti‐6Al‐4V Alloy
Source abstract
Abstract
ABSTRACT As AM engineering components often possess complex structures and varying cross‐sectional dimensions, they frequently exhibit unstable service performance due to the print dimension size effect. This variability in performance is one of the most typical problems in AM components. This study investigates the size effect on the high‐cycle fatigue performance of the widely used AM alloy, Ti‐6Al‐4V. The influence of sample size on fatigue performance is explored through fatigue source analysis, fatigue life analysis, and defect statistics. A new statistical model is proposed to predict the theoretical largest defect in samples with small dimensions, based on observations of relatively large regions. This model is particularly suitable for the commonly thin‐walled AM components. The corresponding fatigue life prediction is then achieved by integrating the microstructure void coupling (MVC) model.
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
Shenyang National Laboratory for Materials Science Institute of Metal Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences Shenyang China
Department of Materials Science and Engineering University of Science and Technology of China Shenyang China
School of Materials Science and Engineering Shenyang University of Technology Shenyang China
Funding
Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences · Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (53)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1126/science.109899310.1126/science.1098993 ↗
2. 10.1126/science.112388910.1126/science.1123889 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.05.03110.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.05.031 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2013.04.00910.1016/j.scriptamat.2013.04.009 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.msea.2017.07.02610.1016/j.msea.2017.07.026 ↗
6. Murakami Y. · 2002
7. 10.1007/s00170-015-7973-610.1007/s00170-015-7973-6 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.10535810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.105358 ↗
9. 10.1017/CBO978051180657510.1017/CBO9780511806575 ↗
10. 10.1046/j.1460-2695.2000.00302.x10.1046/j.1460-2695.2000.00302.x ↗
11. 10.1111/ffe.1319510.1111/ffe.13195 ↗
12. 10.1016/0020-7403(78)90082-610.1016/0020-7403(78)90082-6 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.10101110.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.101011 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.06.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.06.001 ↗
15. Stephens R. · 2000
16. 10.1016/S0022-3115(00)00141-010.1016/S0022-3115(00)00141-0 ↗
17. 10.1016/S0022-3115(98)00306-710.1016/S0022-3115(98)00306-7 ↗
18. Recent Advances on Size Effect in Metal Fatigue Under Defects: A Review
19. 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.10156710.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101567 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.04.01410.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.04.014 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.10740810.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.107408 ↗
22. 10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00041-710.1016/S1359-6454(03)00041-7 ↗
23. 10.1179/03019230067765110.1179/030192300677651 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.jmst.2023.02.00610.1016/j.jmst.2023.02.006 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2021.11423210.1016/j.scriptamat.2021.114232 ↗
26. 10.6028/jres.099.03210.6028/jres.099.032 ↗
27. 10.1016/S0079-6425(02)00014-210.1016/S0079-6425(02)00014-2 ↗
28. Estimation of Maximum Inclusion Size and Fatigure Strength in High Strength Steel
29. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.10640710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106407 ↗
30. 10.1111/ffe.1405610.1111/ffe.14056 ↗
31. 10.1520/MPC2022008810.1520/MPC20220088 ↗
32. 10.1126/science.abj377010.1126/science.abj3770 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.actamat.2016.12.02710.1016/j.actamat.2016.12.027 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.14710.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.147 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.11.26310.1016/j.jallcom.2017.11.263 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.matdes.2018.10755210.1016/j.matdes.2018.107552 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.msea.2011.08.06110.1016/j.msea.2011.08.061 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.addma.2022.10309210.1016/j.addma.2022.103092 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.addma.2023.10360310.1016/j.addma.2023.103603 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.addma.2022.10335510.1016/j.addma.2022.103355 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.10631710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106317 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.10072410.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100724 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10579510.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105795 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.02010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.020 ↗
45. 10.1016/0142-1123(89)90054-610.1016/0142-1123(89)90054-6 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10587010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105870 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10610010.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106100 ↗
48. Gumbel E. J. · 1957
49. 10.1080/01621459.1993.1047637210.1080/01621459.1993.10476372 ↗
50. 10.1080/0094965090353074510.1080/00949650903530745 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.12.00210.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.12.002 ↗
52. 10.1016/S0142-1123(98)00058-910.1016/S0142-1123(98)00058-9 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.jmst.2020.08.03710.1016/j.jmst.2020.08.037 ↗