4.5 Article

The effect of hatch angle rotation on parts manufactured using selective laser melting

期刊

RAPID PROTOTYPING JOURNAL
卷 25, 期 2, 页码 289-298

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/RPJ-06-2017-0111

关键词

Surface roughness; Tensile strength; Residual stress; Density; Selective laser melting; Hatch rotation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose This paper aims to present an investigation into the variation of scan vector hatch rotation strategies in selective laser melting (SLM), focussing on how it effects density, surface roughness, tensile strength and residual stress. Design/methodology/approach First the optimum angle of hatch vector rotation is proposed by analysing the effect of different increment angles on distribution of scan vectors. Sectioning methods are then used to determine the effect that the chosen strategies have on the density of the parts. The top surface roughness was analysed using optical metrology, and the tensile properties were determined using uni-axial tensile testing. Finally, a novel multi-support deflection geometry was used to quantify the effects of rotation angles on residual stress. Findings The results of this research showed that the hatch rotation angle had little effect on the density, top surface roughness and strength of the parts. The greatest residual stress deflection was measured parallel to unidirectional scan vectors. The use of hatch rotations other than alternating 90 degrees showed little benefit in lowering the magnitude of residual stresses. However, the use of rotation angles with a good suitability measure distributes stresses in all directions more evenly for certain part geometries. Research limitations/implications - All samples produced in this work were made from commercially pure titanium, therefore care must be taken when applying these results to other materials. Originality/value - This paper serves to increase the understanding of SLM scanning strategies and their effect on the properties of the material.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据