Differences in defect distribution across scan strategies in electron beam AM Ti-6Al-4V

Simple item page
dc.contributor.author Quintana, Maria
dc.contributor.author O'Donnell, Katie
dc.contributor.author Kenney, Matthew
dc.contributor.author Collins, Peter
dc.contributor.department Ames Laboratory
dc.contributor.department Materials Science and Engineering
dc.date 2021-08-20T19:36:45.000
dc.date.accessioned 2021-09-09T20:23:27Z
dc.date.available 2021-09-09T20:23:27Z
dc.date.copyright Fri Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2021
dc.date.issued 2021-07-01
dc.description.abstract <p>In recent years, additive manufacturing (AM) has begun to displace traditional manufacturing techniques for specific applications. Notable benefits of AM include reduced times from design to product, an improved buy-to-fly ratio, lower waste, and the ability to produce complex geometries<sup>[1,2]</sup>. An additional benefit of additive manufacturing is the variety of manufacturing processes that span across heat source (e.g., laser, electron beam, plasma), input material type (e.g., powder, wire), atmosphere, and the number of axes of control among others<sup>[2-4]</sup>. This variability in processing route means that a process can be identified and optimized for a class of products or parts. Despite these various advantages, one of the primary drawbacks of AM processes is porosity within builds, which ultimately reduces the ability of a part to withstand tensile stresses</p>
dc.description.comments <p>This article is published as Quintana, Maria J., Katie O'Donnell, Matthew J. Kenney, and Peter Collins. "Differences in defect distribution across scan strategies in electron beam AM Ti-6Al-4V." <em>Advanced Materials and Processes</em> (July/August 2021): 20-23. https://static.asminternational.org/amp/202105/24/.</p> This article is made available as an electronic reprint with the permission of ASM International for the Iowa State University Institutional Repository. Reproduction, distribution to multiple locations via electronic or other means, duplication of any material in this article for a fee or for commercial purposes, or modification of the content of this article is prohibited.
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.identifier archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/mse_pubs/415/
dc.identifier.articleid 1419
dc.identifier.contextkey 24407086
dc.identifier.s3bucket isulib-bepress-aws-west
dc.identifier.submissionpath mse_pubs/415
dc.identifier.uri https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/handle/20.500.12876/Dw88lV2w
dc.language.iso en
dc.source.bitstream archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/mse_pubs/415/0-2021_CollinsPeter_PermGrant_ASM.pdf|||Sat Jan 15 00:11:05 UTC 2022
dc.source.bitstream archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/mse_pubs/415/2021_CollinsPeter_DifferencesDefect.pdf|||Sat Jan 15 00:11:07 UTC 2022
dc.subject.disciplines Manufacturing
dc.subject.disciplines Materials Science and Engineering
dc.subject.disciplines Metallurgy
dc.title Differences in defect distribution across scan strategies in electron beam AM Ti-6Al-4V
dc.type article
dc.type.genre article
dspace.entity.type Publication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 25913818-6714-4be5-89a6-f70c8facdf7e
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication bf9f7e3e-25bd-44d3-b49c-ed98372dee5e
File
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Name:
2021_CollinsPeter_DifferencesDefect.pdf
Size:
584.91 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Name:
0-2021_CollinsPeter_PermGrant_ASM.pdf
Size:
154.54 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Publications