Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Elastic Residual Strain and Stress Measurements and Corresponding Part Deflections of 3D Additive Manufacturing Builds of IN625 AM-Bench Artifacts Using Neutron Diffraction, Synchrotron X-Ray Diffraction, and Contour Method

  • Thematic Section: Additive Manufacturing Benchmarks 2018
  • Published:
Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the primary barriers for adoption of additive manufacturing (AM) has been the uncertainty in the performance of AM parts due to residual stresses/strains. The rapid heating and cooling rates from the thermal history of the laser melting process result in high residual stresses/strains that produce significant part distortion. Efforts to mitigate residual stresses using post-process heat treatments can significantly impact the microstructures of the AM part which may lead to further issues. Therefore, the ability to accurately predict the residual stresses in as-built AM parts is crucial, and rigorous benchmark measurements are needed to validate such predictions. To fill this need, the AM-Bench aims to provide high-fidelity residual stress and strain benchmark measurements in well-characterized AM bridge-shaped parts. The measurements reported here are part of the residual elastic strain benchmark challenge CHAL-AMB2018-01-RS. Residual strains and stresses in this work were measured using neutron diffraction, synchrotron X-ray diffraction, and the contour method. Part deflection measurements were performed using a coordinate measurement machine after the part was partially separated from the build plate. These independently measured results show a high degree of agreement between the different techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Mention of commercial products does not imply endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor does it imply that such products or services are necessarily the best available for the purpose.

References

  1. Li C et al (2018) Residual stress in metal additive manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 71:348–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nadammal N et al (2017) Effect of hatch length on the development of microstructure, texture and residual stresses in selective laser melted superalloy Inconel 718. Mater Des 134:139–150

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Robinson J et al (2018) Determination of the effect of scan strategy on residual stress in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 23:13–24

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Robinson JH et al (2018) The effect of hatch angle rotation on parts manufactured using selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J 25:289–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Strantza M et al (2019) Directional and oscillating residual stress on the mesoscale in additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4 V. Acta Materialia 168:299–308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Levine LE et al (2019) Outcome and conclusions from the 2018 AM-bench measurements, challenge problems, modeling submissions, and conference. Integr Mater Manuf Innov (topical collection from the AM-bench 2018 test series)

  7. Lass EA et al (2017) Formation of the Ni3Nb δ-phase in stress-relieved inconel 625 produced via laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing. Metall Mater Trans 48(11):5547–5558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gnäupel-Herold T, Slotwinski J, Moylan S (2014) Neutron measurements of stresses in a test artifact produced by laser-based additive manufacturing. AIP Conf Proc 1581(1):1205–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang Z et al (2016) Diffraction and single-crystal elastic constants of Inconel 625 at room and elevated temperatures determined by neutron diffraction. Mater Sci Eng A 674:406–412

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gnäupel-Herold T (2012) ISODEC: software for calculating diffraction elastic constants. J Appl Crystallogr 45(3):573–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Croft M et al (2002) Strain field and scattered intensity profiling with energy dispersive x-ray scattering. J Appl Phys 92(1):578–586

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Croft M et al (2005) Strain profiling of fatigue crack overload effects using energy dispersive X-ray diffraction. Int J Fatigue 27(10):1408–1419

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tsakalakos T et al (2006) Measurement of residual stress distributions by energy dispersive X-ray diffraction synchrotron radiation. In: The sixteenth international offshore and polar engineering conference. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, San Francisco, California, USA, p. 8

  14. Strantza M et al (2018) Coupled experimental and computational study of residual stresses in additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4 V components. Mater Lett 231:221–224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. High-density tungsten based metals—Mi-Tech metals. Available from: https://www.mttm.com/tungsten-alloys. Accessed 15 Apr 2019

  16. Clausen B (2014) SMARTSware manual. Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, LA-UR 04-6581

  17. Larson AC, Dreele RBV (1986) GSAS manual. Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, LA-UR 86-748

  18. Holden TM, Suzuki H, Carr DG (2006) Macroscopic stress measurements by neutron diffraction and the part played by the “stress-free” reference. ISIJ Int 46(7):959–965

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Prime MB, DeWald AT (2013) The contour method. In: Schajer GS (ed) Practical residual stress measurement methods. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 109–138

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. INCONEL alloy 625—special metals. Available from http://www.specialmetals.com/assets/smc/documents/alloys/inconel/inconel-alloy-625.pdf. Accessed 15 Apr 2019

  21. Mahmoudi AH, Saei A (2015) Influence of asymmetrical cuts in measuring residual stresses using contour method. Int J Press Vessels Pip 134:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Olson MD, DeWald AT, Hill MR (2018) Validation of a contour method single-measurement uncertainty estimator. Exp Mech 58(5):767–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Part of this research was supported by the Exascale Computing Project (17-SC-20-SC), a collaborative effort of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science and the National Nuclear Security Administration. Part of this work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Los Alamos National Laboratory, United States under Contract DE-AC52-06NA25396. Part of this work is based upon research conducted at the Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source (CHESS) which is supported by the National Science Foundation under Award DMR-1332208. University of California, Davis, was supported by the Campus Executive program of Sandia National Laboratories.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, USA

    Thien Q. Phan & Jarred Heigel

  2. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 87545, USA

    Maria Strantza, Bjorn Clausen & Donald W. Brown

  3. Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA, 95616, USA

    Michael R. Hill & Christopher R. D’Elia

  4. NIST Center for Neutron Research, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, USA

    Thomas H. Gnaupel-Herold

  5. Hill Engineering, LLC, Rancho Cordova, CA, 95670, USA

    Adrian T. DeWald

  6. Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Darren C. Pagan & J. Y. Peter Ko

  7. Materials Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, USA

    Lyle E. Levine

Authors
  1. Thien Q. Phan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Strantza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael R. Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas H. Gnaupel-Herold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jarred Heigel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christopher R. D’Elia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Adrian T. DeWald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Bjorn Clausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Darren C. Pagan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. J. Y. Peter Ko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Donald W. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Lyle E. Levine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thien Q. Phan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Phan, T.Q., Strantza, M., Hill, M.R. et al. Elastic Residual Strain and Stress Measurements and Corresponding Part Deflections of 3D Additive Manufacturing Builds of IN625 AM-Bench Artifacts Using Neutron Diffraction, Synchrotron X-Ray Diffraction, and Contour Method. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 8, 318–334 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-019-00149-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-019-00149-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation