4.6 Article

Study on the Laser Melting Procedure for the Specified Zone of the TC4 Titanium Alloy

期刊

CRYSTALS
卷 13, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cryst13071041

关键词

variable parameter forming; volume energy density; microstructure; Ti-6Al-4V; selective laser melting

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an in-depth study on the variable reference process for improving the organization and properties of selective laser melting TC4 specimens. A relationship equation between body energy density and stratification is proposed. The study investigates the impact of layer and volume energy density on the surface, tensile characteristics, and microstructure of the specimens. The findings demonstrate an increase in specimen densities as the power index decreases, reaching an excellent density of 99.42%. The number of secondary & alpha;' phases decreases with decreasing energy density of the layers. The tensile strength of the specimens reaches 1190.84 MPa, and the yield strength is 1103.87 MPa with the same variable laser power interval. This study provides a new avenue for enhancing the overall performance of SLM specimens.
This paper presents an in-depth study of the variable reference process to improve the organization and properties of selective laser melting TC4 specimens. A relationship equation between body energy density and stratification is proposed. This study aimed to look into how layer and volume energy density affect the surface, tensile characteristics, and microstructure of specimens. The test findings demonstrated that specimen densities rise as the power index falls, with the most excellent density reaching 99.42%. The number of secondary & alpha;' phases declined as the energy density of the laminae slowed down. The tensile strength of these specimens reached 1190.84 MPa, and the yield strength came at 1103.87 MPa with the same interval of variable laser power. This offers a fresh avenue for research into SLM to enhance the specimens' overall performance.

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

4.6
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