The sharp growth that additive manufacturing has been showing recently has broadened its application field and resulted in more varied demand of high-volume parts as well as a general increase in part series. The current focus on productivity enhancement of additive manufacturing has imposed the implementation of multiple-laser systems with larger scan fields. Its usage, combined with adequate layer thickness and laser power selection, makes high-volume parts less challenging to obtain. This paper focuses on understanding the influence of using multiple-scan fields for the fabrication of large components, especially on the parts region corresponding to scan field interface. The microstructure as well as mechanical behaviour of the multi-field manufactured samples are compared with parts fabricated using a single-field, for distinct processing parameters. Moreover, given the unreliability of additive manufacturing regarding dimensional and geometrical tolerances with increasing build rates, post-processing metal-cutting operations were studied towards additive manufacturing process hybridization. Despite the typical additive manufacturing process variability, a set of parameters, within testing conditions, could be identified as the most appropriate solution towards mechanical strength enhancement. Nonetheless, porosity levels can significantly impact the ductility of parts, which may be additionally compromised by its occurrence in the scan-field interface region.
CampbellIDiegelOKowenJ, et al. Wohlers report 2018: 3D printing and additive manufacturing state of the industry. Annual Worldwide Progress Report. Fort Collins, CO: Wohlers Associates, 2018.
2.
KumarLJNairCGK.Current trends of additive manufacturing in the aerospace industry. In: DWimpennyPPandeyLKumar (eds) Advances in 3D printing and additive manufacturing technologies.
Singapore:
Springer, 2017, pp.39–54.
3.
Meng L, Zhang W, Quan D, et al. From topology optimization design to additive manufacturing: Today's success and tomorrow's roadmap. Arch Comput Methods Eng 2020; 27: 805--830.
4.
KruthJPVandenbrouckeBVan VaerenberghJ, et al. Rapid manufacturing of dental prostheses by means of selective laser sintering/melting. Proc AFPR S2005; 4: 176–186.
5.
MüllerBHundRMalekR, et al. Laser beam melting for tooling applications – new perspectives for resource-efficient metal forming and die casting processes. In: GLKovácsDKochan (eds) Digital product and process development systems. NEW PROLAMAT 2013. IFIP advances in information and communication technology. vol.
411.
Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer, 2013.
6.
MasoomiMThompsonSMShamsaeiN.Quality part production via multi-laser additive manufacturing. Manuf Lett2017;
13: 15–20.
7.
KarpJOstroverkhovVBogdanD, et al. Area melting with multi-laser arrays to increase build rate for metal powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. In: Laser 3D manufacturing VI. vol. 10909. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2019, p.1090909.
8.
KopfRGottwaldJJacobA, et al.
Cost-oriented planning of equipment for selective laser melting (SLM) in production lines. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol2018;
67: 471–474.
9.
WhitfieldS.Additive manufacturing makes waves in industry. J Pet Technol2018;
70: 39–41.
10.
FlynnJMShokraniANewmanST, et al.
Hybrid additive and subtractive machine tools – research and industrial developments. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2016;
101: 79–101.
11.
KaynakYKitayO.The effect of post-processing operations on surface characteristics of 316L stainless steel produced by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf2019;
26: 84–93.
12.
RännarLEGladAGustafsonCG.Efficient cooling with tool inserts manufactured by electron beam melting. Rapid Prototyp J2007;
13: 128–135.
13.
MontevecchiFGrossiNTakagiH, et al.
Cutting forces analysis in additive manufactured AISI H13 alloy. Proc CIRP2016;
46: 476–479.
14.
StruzikiewiczGZebalaWMatrasA, et al.
Turning research of additive laser molten stainless steel 316L obtained by 3D printing. Materials2019;
12: 182.
15.
ClaytonJ.Optimising metal powders for additive manufacturing. Met Powder Rep2014;
69: 14–17.
16.
TangHPQianMLiuN, et al.
Effect of powder reuse times on additive manufacturing of Ti-6Al-4V by selective electron beam melting. JOM2015;
67: 555–563.
17.
SamesWJListFAPannalaS, et al.
The metallurgy and processing science of metal additive manufacturing. Int Mater Rev2016;
61: 315–360.
18.
GioiaA. Intrinsic flowability: a new technology for powder flowability classification. Pharm Technol1980; 1980: 65--69.
19.
LouXSongMEmighPW, et al.
On the stress corrosion crack growth behaviour in high temperature water of 316L stainless steel made by laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Corros Sci2017;
128: 140–153.
20.
ChenXLiJChengX, et al.
Effect of heat treatment on microstructure, mechanical and corrosion properties of austenitic stainless steel 316L using arc additive manufacturing. Mater Sci Eng A2018;
715: 307–314.
21.
ISO 6892-1. Tensile testing of metallic materials at room temperature. International Standard Organization 2009, 2019.
22.
SpieringsABLevyG. Comparison of density of stainless steel 316L parts produced with selective laser melting using different powder grades. In: Proceedings of the annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium, Austin, TX, 2009, pp.342–353.
23.
BertoliUSWolferAJMatthewsMJ, et al.
On the limitations of volumetric energy density as a design parameter for selective laser melting. Mater Des2017;
113: 331–340.
24.
MaMWangZZengX.A comparison on metallurgical behaviors of 316L stainless steel by selective laser melting and laser cladding deposition. Mater Sci Eng A2017;
685: 265–273.
ChoiJPShinGHLeeHS, et al.
Evaluation of powder layer density for the selective laser melting (SLM) process. Mater Trans2017;
58: 294–297.
27.
CoeHGPasebaniS.Use of bimodal particle size distribution in selective laser melting of 316L stainless steel. Mater Manuf Process2020;
4: 8.
28.
VieiraMTMartinsAGBarreirosFM, et al.
Surface modification of stainless steel powders for microfabrication. J Mater Process Technol2008;
201: 651–656.
29.
DongZLiuYWenW, et al.
Effect of hatch spacing on melt pool and as-built quality during selective laser melting of stainless steel: modeling and experimental approaches. Materials2019;
12: 50.
30.
MalisanoJLKumarSLuiCMA, et al. X-ray computed tomography versus metallography for porosity analysis in aluminium RPT castings. In: 6th decennial international conference on solidification processing, Beaumont Estate, Old Windsor, 25–28 July 2017.
31.
SlotwinskiJAGarbocziEJHebenstreitKM.Porosity measurements and analysis for metal additive manufacturing process control. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol2014;
119: 494.
32.
ZiólkowskiGChlebusESzymczykP, et al.
Application of X-ray CT method for discontinuity and porosity detection in 316L stainless steel parts produced with SLM technology. Arch Civ Mech Eng2014;
14: 608–614.
33.
ASTM A276/A276M-17. Standard specification for stainless steel bars for shapes. ASTM International, 2017.
34.
DebRoyTWeiHLZubackJS, et al.
Additive manufacturing of metallic components – process, structure and properties. Prog Mater Sci2018;
92: 112–224.
35.
ASTM F3184-16. Standard specification for for additive manufacturing stainless steel alloy (UNS S31603) with powder bed fusion. ASTMInternational, 2016.
36.
TangjitsitcharoenS.In-process monitoring and detection of chip formation and chatter for CNC turning. J Mater Process Technol2009;
209: 4682–4688.
37.
DimlaDE.Sensor signals for tool-wear monitoring in metal cutting operations – a review of methods. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2000;
40: 1073–1098.
38.
GrooverMP.Fundamentals of modern manufacturing: materials, processes, and systems. 5th ed.
Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley, 2012.
39.
ISO 3685. Tool-life testing with single-point turning tools,
International Standard Organization, 1993.
