Accès libre

Investigation of additive manufactured micro-lattice structures for defence applications

Ameer Malik Shaik
Ameer Malik Shaik
, 
Bobbili Veera Siva Reddy
Bobbili Veera Siva Reddy
, 
C. Chandrasekhara Sastry
C. Chandrasekhara Sastry
, 
J. Krishnaiah
J. Krishnaiah
 et 
B. Ramakrishna
B. Ramakrishna
   | 29 nov. 2023
Materials Science-Poland's Cover Image
À propos de cet article
Article précédent
Article suivant
Citez
Publié en ligne: 29 nov. 2023
Pages: 383 - 400
Reçu: 04 août 2023
Accepté: 13 sept. 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/msp-2023-0023
Mots clés
© 2023 Ameer Malik Shaik et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Fig. 1.

Micro-lattice structure design: (a) honeycomb and (b) gyroid
Micro-lattice structure design: (a) honeycomb and (b) gyroid

Fig. 2.

(a) Laser powder bed fusion process for printing of micro-lattice specimens: EOS M290; (b) micro-lattice specimens honeycomb and gyroid; (c) w-EDM machine; (d) Micro Vickers hardness machine; (e) surface roughness measurement device
(a) Laser powder bed fusion process for printing of micro-lattice specimens: EOS M290; (b) micro-lattice specimens honeycomb and gyroid; (c) w-EDM machine; (d) Micro Vickers hardness machine; (e) surface roughness measurement device

Fig. 3.

Coupon preparation for morphological tests
Coupon preparation for morphological tests

Fig. 4.

LPBF A286 powder: (a) EDS analysis, (b) elemental distribution and (c, d) SEM images of A286 powder
LPBF A286 powder: (a) EDS analysis, (b) elemental distribution and (c, d) SEM images of A286 powder

Fig. 5.

OM and SEM images for (a-d) RHA (e-h) MHA (i-l) HNS
OM and SEM images for (a-d) RHA (e-h) MHA (i-l) HNS

Fig. 6.

OM and SEM images for honeycomb lattice structures: (a–d) as printed; (e–h) stress relieved; (i–l) heat treated
OM and SEM images for honeycomb lattice structures: (a–d) as printed; (e–h) stress relieved; (i–l) heat treated

Fig. 7.

OM and SEM images for gyroid lattice structures: (–d) as printed. (e–h) stress relieved, (i–l) heat treated
OM and SEM images for gyroid lattice structures: (–d) as printed. (e–h) stress relieved, (i–l) heat treated

Fig. 8.

Micro-lattice A286 test specimens placed in salt spray test chamber
Micro-lattice A286 test specimens placed in salt spray test chamber

Fig. 9.

X-ray diffraction plot (a) RHA, MHA, HNS; (b) honeycomb and gyroid micro-lattice structures
X-ray diffraction plot (a) RHA, MHA, HNS; (b) honeycomb and gyroid micro-lattice structures

Response variables, surface roughness, and micro-Vickers hardness for the honeycomb micro-lattice structure

Non-stress relived (as printed)
Surface roughness (Ra) Micro-Vickers Hardness (HV)
S.No. Lattice Design Non-stress relieved Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Honeycomb Design 1 2A 11.29 11.64 10.54 219HV1 225 213
2 Honeycomb Design 2 3A 9.94 11.84 9.36 220HV1 227 215
3 Honeycomb Design 3 4A 11.18 11.18 9.87 230HV1 242 218
4 Honeycomb Design 4 5A 8.91 12.6 8.54 213HV1 218 207
5 Honeycomb Design 5 6A 11.69 12.34 9.03 194HV1 201 190
Stress relieved
S.No. Lattice Design Stress relieved Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Honeycomb Design 1 2B 14.58 24.26 9.23 233HV1 239 228
2 Honeycomb Design 2 3B 14.79 17.12 10.48 214HV1 220 209
3 Honeycomb Design 3 4B 13.76 15.91 12.11 193HV1 197 190
4 Honeycomb Design 4 5B 12.26 13.66 11.43 222HV1 226 218
5 Honeycomb Design 5 6B 20.24 24.23 17.19 220HV1 226 216
Heat treated (Final specimens)
S. No. Lattice Design Heat treated Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Honeycomb Design 1 2C,2D,2E 11.59 15.2 9.12 460HV1 475 451
2 Honeycomb Design 2 3C,3D.3E 7.77 7.94 7.65 418HV1 425 412
3 Honeycomb Design 3 4C,4D,4E 7.67 8.46 6.63 423HV1 426 420
4 Honeycomb Design 4 5C,5D,5E 8.82 8.87 8.77 460HV1 470 451
5 Honeycomb Design 5 6C.6D,6E 11.92 12.81 10.41 455HV1 461 450

Response variables, surface roughness, and micro-Vickers hardness for the gyroid micro-lattice structure

Non-stress relived (as printed)
Surface roughness (Ra) Micro-Vickers hardness (HV)
S. No. Lattice Design Non-Stress Relieved Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Gyroid Design 1 1A 10.5 12.86 8.11 215HV1 220 211
Stress relieved
S. No. Lattice Design Stress relieved Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Gyroid Design 1 1B 11.85 13.46 10.83 226HV1 229 222
Heat treated (final specimens)
S. No. Lattice Design Heat treated Average (Ra) Max Min Average Max Min
1 Gyroid Design 1 1C,1D,1E 3.56 3.74 3.37 418HV1 425 411

Particle size distribution – sieve analysis

Particle size (μm) Sieve number % by mass
<45 −325 78.28
>45 +325 17.28
>53 +270 3.78
>63 +230 0.65

Corrosion rate for RHA, MHA, HNS, honeycomb, and gyroid micro-lattice structures

Case Specimen Initial weight (g) Final weight (g) Total weight loss (g) Corrosion rate (mm/ year)
Existing materials RHA 12.4093 12.4029 0.0064 2.847817577
MHA 11.8837 11.8795 0.0042 1.868880285
HNS 13.6118 13.6066 0.0052 2.313851781
Honeycomb lattice 5D (ideal) 77.6933 77.3803 0.313 1.218227858
structure 6D (non-ideal) 80.6307 80.3128 0.3179 1.237299156
Gyroid 1D 40.0436 39.9027 0.1409 1.671511872

Flow rate, apparent, and tap density test results

Test Test method Results
Flow rate ASTM B213 18s/50g
Apparent density ASTM B212 3.98g/cm3
Tap density ASTM B527 4.65g/cm3

Compressive residual stress for RHA, MHA, HNS, honeycomb and gyroid micro-lattice structures

Material Compressive residual stress values (MPa)
Existing Materials
RHA 306.627
MHA 348.454
HNS 432.367
Micro-metallic lattice structures
Honeycomb 581.907
Gyroid 483.679

Corrosion resistance (in %) of micro-metallic lattice structures: honeycomb and gyroid vs. RHA, MHA, and HNS

Before compression
Comparison of corrosion rate Percentage difference Comparison of corrosion rate Percentage difference
Honeycomb vs. RHA 57.23% Gyroid vs. RHA 41.31%
Honeycomb vs. MHA 34.83% Gyroid vs. MHA 10.6%
Honeycomb vs. HNS 47.36 % Gyroid vs. HNS 27.75%
After compression tests
Honeycomb vs. RHA 37.61% Gyroid vs. RHA 17.88%
Honeycomb vs. MHA 4.92% Gyroid vs. MHA 25.16%
Honeycomb vs. HNS 23.21% Gyroid vs. HNS 1.08%
Micro-metallic lattice structures
Honeycomb vs. gyroid (before compression) 27.11%
Honeycomb vs. gyroid (after compression) 24.03%

Micro-lattice structure design variations

Gyroid Design 1
Dimensions (L × W × H) (mm) 24 × 20 × 30
Honeycomb Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 Design 5
Dimensions (L × W × H) (mm) 24 × 20 × 30
Wall thickness (mm) 2 2 2 2 2
Detail size (mm) 1 1 1 1 1
Hole diameter (mm) 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.5
Infill thickness (mm) 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.5

Corrosion rate for honeycomb and gyroid micro-lattice structures after compression test

Case Specimen Initial weight (g) Final weight (g) Total weight loss (g) Corrosion rate (mm/year)
Honeycomb lattice 5C (ideal) 82.129 81.6725 0.4565 1.776744463
structure 6C (non-ideal) 78.4252 77.9683 0.4569 1.778301304
Gyroid 1C 32.1465 31.9494 0.1971 2.338218523

Compressive residual stress comparison of micro metallic lattice structures honeycomb and gyroid vs. RHA, MHA, and HNS

Comparison of residual stress values % Increase in residual stress Comparison of residual stress values % Increase in residual stress
Honeycomb vs. RHA 47.30% Gyroid vs. RHA 36.6%
Honeycomb vs. MHA 40.12% Gyroid vs. MHA 27.96%
Honeycomb vs. HNS 25.70% Gyroid vs. HNS 10.61%
Micro-metallic lattice structures
Honeycomb vs. Gyroid 16.88%

TOPSIS analysis for honeycomb micro-lattice structure for LPBF-generated specimens

Non-stress-relieved condition
Normalized residual matrix Weighted residual matrix Distance to ideal
Coupon no. NRa NVHN WRa WVHN Si+ Si- Ci Rank
2A 0.369 0.419 0.185 0.209 0.039 0.007 0.154 4
3A 0.325 0.421 0.163 0.210 0.017 0.029 0.633 2
4A 0.365 0.440 0.183 0.220 0.037 0.010 0.204 3
5A 0.291 0.408 0.146 0.204 0.000 0.046 0.994 1
6A 0.382 0.371 0.191 0.186 0.047 0.001 0.002 5
Stress-relieved condition
Normalized residual matrix Weighted residual matrix Distance to ideal
Coupon no. NRa NVHN WRa WVHN Si+ Si- Ci Rank
2B 0.477 0.446 0.239 0.223 0.038 0.094 0.713 3
3B 0.484 0.409 0.242 0.205 0.042 0.090 0.682 4
4B 0.450 0.369 0.225 0.185 0.026 0.106 0.803 2
5B 0.401 0.425 0.201 0.212 0.000 0.131 0.999 1
6B 0.662 0.421 0.331 0.210 0.131 0.001 0.005 5
Heat-treated condition
Normalized residual matrix Weighted residual matrix Distance to ideal
Coupon no. NRa NVHN WRa WVHN Si+ Si- Ci Rank
2C,2D,2E 0.379 0.880 0.190 0.440 0.064 0.007 0.099 4
3C,3D.3E 0.254 0.800 0.127 0.400 0.003 0.068 0.954 2
4C,4D,4E 0.251 0.809 0.125 0.405 0.001 0.070 0.982 1
5C,5D,5E 0.289 0.880 0.144 0.440 0.019 0.052 0.736 3
6C.6D,6E 0.390 0.871 0.195 0.435 0.070 0.001 0.018 5

Physical properties of A286 steel

Property Value
Ultimate tensile strength 620 MPa
Yield strength 275 MPa
Elongation at break 40%
Modulus of elasticity 201 GPa
Poisson’s ratio 0.3
Shear modulus 77 GPa
Reduction of area 20%
Chemical composition (% weight factor) of A286 steel
Element C Mn Si P S Ni Cr Mo V Al Ti Cu Fe
Weight (%) 0.034 0.126 0.236 0.012 0.006 25.62 15.40 1.331 0.196 0.209 2.054 0.014 Bal.
eISSN:
2083-134X
Langue:
Anglais
Périodicité:
4 fois par an
Sujets de la revue:
Materials Sciences, other, Nanomaterials, Functional and Smart Materials, Materials Characterization and Properties
RSS Feed de la revue