Next Article in Journal
High-Performance Multi-Level Inverter with Symmetry and Simplification
Previous Article in Journal
An Experimental Study of a Composite Wick Structure for Ultra-Thin Flattened Heat Pipes
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of the Surface Integrity and Recast Layer in Electrical Discharge Turning of WC-Co Composites
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Mechanical Properties and Interfacial Characterization of Additive-Manufactured CuZrCr/CoCrMo Multi-Metals Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Using Pulsed Wave Laser

1
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798, Singapore
2
Institute of Materials Modification and Modelling, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
3
School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, China
4
Zhengzhou Research Institute, Harbin Institute of Technology, Zhengzhou 450002, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Micromachines 2024, 15(6), 765; https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15060765
Submission received: 2 May 2024 / Revised: 3 June 2024 / Accepted: 4 June 2024 / Published: 7 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Future Prospects of Additive Manufacturing)

Abstract

:
In this study, CoCrMo cuboid samples were deposited on a CuZrCr substrate using laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF) technology to investigate the influence of process parameters and laser remelting strategies on the mechanical properties and interface characteristics of multi-metals. This study found that process parameters and laser scanning strategies had a significant influence on the mechanical properties and interface characteristics. Samples fabricated with an E V ≤ 20 J/mm3 showed little tensile ductility. As the volumetric energy density ( E V ) increased to a range between 40 J/mm3 and 100 J/mm3, the samples achieved the desired mechanical properties, with a strong interface combining the alloys. However, an excessive energy density could result in cracks due to thermal stress. Laser remelting significantly improved the interface properties, especially when the E V was below 40 J/mm3. Variances in the E V showed little influence on the hardness at the CuZrCr end, while the hardness at the interface and the CoCrMo end showed an increasing and decreasing trend with an increase in the E V , respectively. Interface characterization showed that when the E V was greater than 43 J/mm3, the main defects in the L-PBF CoCrMo samples were thermal cracks, which gradually changed to pores with a lack of fusion when the E V decreased. This study provides theoretical and technical support for the manufacturing of multi-metal parts using L-PBF technology.

1. Introduction

In recent years, additive manufacturing (AM) has emerged as a revolutionary technology, transforming traditional manufacturing processes across industries. Unlike conventional manufacturing methods, AM allows for the precise deposition of multiple materials, enabling the direct fabrication of complex structures with unique properties [1].
However, there has been a lack of focus on using the L-PBF technique to manufacture multi-metal parts [2]. Utilizing multi-metals in a single component can integrate the advantages of each material while avoiding their deficiencies. Combining copper alloys and cobalt alloys can achieve a synergistic enhancement in material properties, leveraging the excellent thermal conductivity of copper alloys with the high-temperature mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of cobalt alloys. This unique combination of properties makes the dissimilar alloy highly suitable for a wide range of advanced applications. For example, in the aerospace industry, this dissimilar alloy can be used in the construction of engine components and other critical parts that must withstand extreme temperatures and corrosive environments. In the nuclear industry, the superior thermal conductivity and corrosion resistance are crucial for the reliability and safety of nuclear reactors. Additionally, Cu/Co multi-alloy parts can be used in thermal management systems where both high thermal conductivity and mechanical robustness are essential [3,4,5].
Multi-metal parts were conventionally fabricated by joining processes such as welding [6,7,8,9]. However, these joining technologies were mainly applied when fabricating large components with a multi-metal interface and simple geometry. When encountering small-size parts or intricate components with considerably more complex interface shapes, welding technology may have limited efficacy. For example, a rocket engine thrust chamber featuring complex internal flow passages requires an inner part of high thermal conductivity Cu and an outer part of an Ni-based alloy with high-temperature strength, which can be only manufactured by AM technology.
Despite its wide range of industrial applications, there is still inadequate research on the AM of multi-metals. One of the key issues is creating strong metallurgical bonds between different metals because of variations in their thermal, physical, and chemical properties. Weak metallurgical bonds can result in weak interfaces and deteriorating mechanical properties and reliability. This problem can be exacerbated by the high thermal stress induced by the rapid melting and solidification intrinsic to the L-PBF process [10]. Additionally, incomplete solubility between different metals at the interface forms brittle intermetallic compounds or amorphous structures [11,12], which result in a decline in plasticity. Hendrik Hotz et al. [13] investigated the local chemical composition, microstructure, and mechanical properties in the interfacial region of Ti/Al structures manufactured using laser-based direct energy deposition (L-DED). Functionally graded structures with step transitions from an AlMg3 substrate to Ti6Al4V and graded transitions with AlSi10Mg transition layers were both manufactured and characterized. The results showed that macroscopic cracks were found in the graded transition samples, which developed in the AlSi10Mg–TiAl6V4 layer and extended across the entire width of the structure. This was attributed to the large amounts of intermetallic phases formed in the transition layers. For the graded transition samples, a layer of IMPs consisting of needle-like Ti5Si3 and two types of titanium aluminide were formed in the AlSi10Mg–Ti6Al4V transition region.
Designing manufacturing strategies [14,15,16,17], creating interlocked interface structures [18,19,20,21], conducting heat treatments in post-processing [22,23,24,25], and introducing transition layers [4,26,27,28] are the main methods that have been proposed to improve the interface properties in additive-manufactured multi-metals. Up to now, various manufacturing strategies such as process parameter optimization, laser remelting, substrate preheating, and developing functionally graded structures have been proposed to be applied to improve the interface properties. Li et al. [29] conducted a 673 K preheating of a substrate to manufacture Ti6Al4V/NiTi functionally graded samples using L-DED technology. Crack-free samples were successfully fabricated and exceptional tensile properties with a 202.4 MPa ultimate tensile strength and a fracture elongation of 6.71% were achieved. Liu et al. [16] investigated functional graded structures on the interfacial bonding characteristics of CuSn10/316 SS multi-metals. The results showed that a compositional gradient between the two materials could lead to a smooth transition of both the microstructure and hardness at the interface, relieving the stress concentration and reducing crack occurrence. However, excess compositional gradient layers could potentially lead to the penetration of Cu into Fe grains, which could induce Cu-penetration cracks in the interdiffusion zone.
In this study, CoCrMo and CuZrCr were selected to investigate the impact of a remelting strategy on the interface morphology and mechanical properties of additive-manufactured multi-metals. The influence of process parameters on the interface characteristics and mechanical properties of the CuZrCr/CoCrMo multi-metal samples were investigated in detail, providing a reference and guidance for the development and application of multi-material parts manufactured using L-PBF technology.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. L-PBF Process Parameters

In this study, a Renishaw AM400 L-PBF device (Renishaw, Tokyo, Japan) was used to manufacture CoCrMo blocks on the CuZrCr substrate. The specific experimental steps were as follows: A CuZrCr substrate with dimensions of 120 mm × 120 mm × 8 mm was first placed on the building platform of the L-PBF machine and then CoCrMo metal powder with a size range of 10–45 µm was deposited on the substrate and flattened by a roller. A laser was then focused on the powder layer to melt the CoCrMo powder to a desired shape. Subsequently, a new layer of CoCrMo powder was deposited and flattened on the build-chamber platform. The new layer was again selectively melted by the laser. This process continued repeatedly until the required shape was obtained. A total of 53 CoCrMo cuboid samples with dimensions of 8 mm × 4 mm × 10 mm were manufactured on the CuZrCr substrate to investigate the influence of process parameters on the mechanical properties of the dissimilar alloys.
The AM400 used a fiber laser with a wavelength of 1070 nm and a laser diameter of 70 μm, which operated in a power-modulated PW mode. The working principle of the pulsed wave laser is illustrated in Figure 1. A total of 27 process parameter combinations were used in this experiment (Table 1). The scan velocity ( V ) was the ratio of the point distance ( D p ) to the exposure time ( E t ). The laser scan direction was rotated by 90° after each layer of powder was fabricated. In this study, the layer thickness ( T ) and the hatch spacing ( H s ) were set to be 60 µm and 80 µm, respectively.
For pulsed laser transmitters, Equation (1) needs to be modified to Equation (2) to quantify the parameter combinations. Our results are shown in Table 1.
E V = P / T × H s × V
E V = P × δ / T × H s × V
where P denotes the laser power, H s is the hatch spacing, V is the scan velocity, D p is the point distance, and E t is the exposure time. The duty cycles ( δ ) were added to Equation (2) and ranged from 0.0 to 1.0, and served as a multiplier to account for the PW exposure parameter. According to a comparative study between continuous wave and pulse wave emissions in L-PBF [30], the duty cycles ( δ ) for exposure times ( E t ) of 50 µs, 75 µs, and 100 µs are 0.54 s, 0.73 s, and 0.86 s, respectively. Comparatively, this would indicate that the δ for the E t selected in our print parameters of 50 µs, 80 µs, and 110 µs would be 0.54 s, 0.75 s, and 0.90 s, respectively, based on a simple factor of the ratio. The E V was calculated using Equation (2) and is listed in Table 1.
Two manufacturing strategies were investigated using the same process parameters during L-PBF manufacturing. The first manufacturing strategy did not involve laser remelting, while the second printing strategy involved laser remelting thrice within the fabrication of the first three layers.

2.2. Mechanical Properties: Tests

Mechanical tests were performed on a total of 54 samples fabricated using 27 combinations of different process parameters and two scanning strategies. Flat dog-bone samples for tensile tests with gauge section dimensions of 8 mm × 1 mm × 2 mm were extracted from the printed cuboid samples using wire cutting methods. To enhance the surface quality and eliminate visible surface cracks, all samples were polished using #220, #500, and #1200 SiC grit papers before the tensile test. The tensile properties of the samples were analyzed using a Shimadzu Autograph AG-X Plus 10kn (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). A non-contact digital video extensometer (TRViewX, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) was employed to measure the elongation. Fractures could either occur towards the CuZrCr or CoCrMo ends of the sample or at the interface, and the location for each specimen was recorded. Each sample was tested once.
Samples for the hardness test were mounted with phenolic resin using a Schneider Electric PRESSLAM 1.1. FutureTech (Taipei City, Taiwan). A FM-300e microhardness tester was used to analyze the hardness of the multi-metal samples with a specific load of 300 gf. All samples were successively ground using #220, #500, #1200, #2000, and #4000 SiC grit papers before the hardness test.

2.3. Interface Characterization

The samples for the interface characterization were mounted with phenolic resin using a Schneider Electric PRESSLAM 1.1. The mounted samples were then ground and polished according to standard procedures. Additionally, a non-dry OPU colloidal silica suspension (SiO2) was utilized for the final polishing of the samples before the microstructure characterization. The interface characterization was conducted using an Olympus LEXT OLS4100 (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) 3D measuring laser microscope.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Tensile Properties

The optimization of processing parameters is significant to ensure the fabrication of multi-metal parts with desired properties. Tensile tests were conducted to investigate the influence of process parameters on the mechanical properties of the samples. The results of the tensile tests of all samples are recorded in Table 2. The strength and stress of the samples that suffered failures before the tensile test were recorded as 0.
Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the stress–strain curves of samples under different process parameters. Figure 5 shows the effect of the volumetric energy density on stress and strain.
In Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4, (a) represents the samples with no laser remelting, while (b) represents the samples with the first three layers remelted thrice. By comparing (a) and (b) in Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4, it can be observed that a particular pattern was followed by the stress–strain curves irrespective of the remelting strategies. The volumetric energy density had a significant influence on the tensile properties of the samples. Samples fabricated with an E V ≤ 20 J/mm3 suffered from poor metallurgical bonding at the interface. Most fractured under a considerably small strain. Tensile plasticity generally occurred in the samples with an E V ≥ 40 J/mm3 and remarkable tensile properties were achieved when the E V ranged from 40 J/mm3 to 100 J/mm3. Additionally, remelting strategies played an important role in the tensile properties of the samples. By improving the interface quality, the remelting strategies mitigated the formation of macroscopic cracks, thereby endowing the samples with excellent mechanical properties, especially for those with an E V ≤ 40 J/mm3.
The fracture locations of the tensile specimens were recorded and are shown in Figure 5. Only the sample fabricated using the remelting strategy with a volumetric energy density of 180.47 J/mm3 fractured at the CoCrMo end, which could be attributed to thermal stress-induced cracks. An excessive laser energy input may generate large thermal stress and form keyhole pores, deteriorating the mechanical properties. The volumetric energy density also played a crucial role in the interface properties. Interface fractures occurred in samples with a low E V (≤ 50 J/mm3), indicating that the energy density was required to exceed 50 J/mm3 to ensure the formation of strong and robust metallurgical bonding between CoCrMo and CuZrCr.

3.2. Hardness Test

Hardness tests were performed at the CuZrCr end, CoCrMo end, and at the interface. The results are listed in Table 3. The hardness value was recorded as 0 for samples that failed before testing.
Variations in the hardness values from different volumetric energy densities were analyzed and are shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6 shows that the hardness of the CuZrCr end exhibited slight variations with changes to the E V and laser scanning strategy. At the interface, the hardness slightly increased with an increase in the E V . As the energy density rose, the laser energy input increased, leading to a more thorough mixing of the elements at the interface. This potentially facilitated the formation of a higher content of hard and brittle intermetallic compounds, resulting in an increased interface hardness. Conversely, the hardness of the CoCrMo end slightly decreased with an increase in the energy density. The increased laser energy input led to an increase in the size of the melt pool and the temperature of the molten metal, which may have caused grain coarsening during the cooling process, consequently resulting in a decreased hardness.

3.3. Interface Characterization

An optical microscope (OM) was used to characterize the interface of the multi-metal parts. As shown in Figure 7, for samples without laser remelting, microcracks developed near the interface region when the energy density was above 43 J/mm3, which could be attributed to the thermal stress induced during rapid cooling. These cracks typically propagated along the building direction, explicable by the temperature gradient that occurred during the L-PBF process. The CuZrCr substrate, characterized by high thermal conductivity, resulted in a temperature gradient that closely aligned with the building direction. The non-uniform thermal expansion induced by the temperature gradient generated localized residual stress within the deposited CoCrMo, leading to the emergence of cracks. When the energy density decreased below 43 J/mm3, the number of cracks significantly decreased and pores were observed, indicating a lack of fusion during the L-PBF process. When the energy density was low, the liquid metal may have had poor flowability or there was insufficient liquid metal to completely backfill the volume shrinkage during the solidification process, resulting in pores and cracks. When the energy density further decreased to 20 J/mm3, continuous cracks propagated along the interface between the CuZrCr end and CoCrMo end, which was attributed to incomplete fusion on the interface during the initial few layers of deposition. As Cu-based alloys have high thermal conductivity and reflectivity to infrared light, a low laser energy input resulted in poor metallurgical bonding at the interfacial region, making it more susceptible to thermal stress during the subsequently cooling, which corresponded well with the results obtained from the tensile tests.
In the samples subjected to laser remelting within the initial three deposition layers, notable disparities were discernible in the OM image. By enhancing the thermal energy input during the manufacturing process, the laser remelting strategy could increase the fusion zone of the CuZrCr substrate and facilitate a more thorough diffusion between the CuZrCr and CoCrMo alloys. For samples fabricated with a volumetric energy density of 108 J/mm3, the depth of the fusion zone increased from 81 μm to 107 μm. Additionally, both the density number and size of defects near the interface were significantly reduced. Lastly, laser remelting markedly improved the interfacial properties of samples, especially those fabricated at low volumetric energy densities. By increasing the laser energy input, thereby increasing the amount of remelted copper, more robust metallurgical bonding occurred at the interface, consequently leading to crack propagation along the interface.

4. Conclusions

In this study, optimized process parameters to deposit CoCrMo onto a CuZrCr substrate via L-PBF and the influence of laser remelting were investigated. A total of 27 printing parameters and 2 strategies were compared. Detailed analyses on the relationship between the E V and mechanical properties, including tensile properties and hardness, were conducted.
The results showed that the process parameters and laser scanning strategies had a significant influence on the mechanical properties and interface characteristics. Samples fabricated with an E V ≤ 20 J/mm3 had large pores and interfacial cracks attributed to a lack of fusion, thereby showing slight tensile ductility. As the E V increased to a range between 40 J/mm3 and 100 J/mm3, the samples obtained the desired mechanical properties, with a strong interface combining the alloys. However, an excessive E V resulted in cracks due to the large thermal stress, deteriorating the strength. A comparison between samples fabricated using different laser scanning strategies indicated that laser remelting significantly improved the interface properties, especially when the E V was below 40 J/mm3, endowing samples with better mechanical properties. Hardness tests showed that with an increase in E V , there was no significant change in the hardness at the CuZrCr end. However, the hardness at the interface and the CoCrMo end showed an increasing and decreasing trend with an increase in E V , respectively. Interface characterization was performed using an optical microscope. The results showed that when the E V was above 43 J/mm3, the main defects in the L-PBF CoCrMo samples were thermal cracks, which gradually changed to pores with a lack of fusion when the E V decreased. Cracks propagated along the interface of samples fabricated using an E V ≤ 20 J/mm3 due to weak interface bonding. The observations and conclusions summarized in this study can effectively be used to fabricate CuZrCr–CoCrMo dissimilar alloy parts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.Y. and Z.X.; Data Curation, H.Z. and X.J.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, H.Z.; Writing—Review and Editing, H.Z., Z.X., and L.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Singapore Centre for 3D Printing (SC3DP) [001163-00010], the State Key Laboratory of Robotics and Systems (HIT) [SKLRS-2023-KF-24], the International Scientific and Technological Cooperation project [GUIQ0700500523], and the China Scholarship Council [202306230376].

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for the helpful advice and comments provided.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Gu, D.; Shi, X.; Poprawe, R.; Bourell, D.L.; Setchi, R.; Zhu, J. Material-structure-performance integrated laser-metal additive manufacturing. Science 2021, 372, eabg1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bai, Y.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, C.; Li, C.; Wang, H. Dual interfacial characterization and property in multi-material selective laser melting of 316L stainless steel and C52400 copper alloy. Mater. Charact. 2020, 167, 110489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Prajapati, M.; Kumar, A.; Lin, S.; Jeng, J. Multi-material additive manufacturing with lightweight closed-cell foam-filled lattice structures for enhanced mechanical and functional properties. Addit. Manuf. 2022, 54, 102766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, J.; Wang, X.; Gao, J.; Zhang, L.; Song, B.; Zhang, L.; Yao, Y.; Lu, J.; Shi, Y. Additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V/Al–Cu–Mg multi-material structures with a Cu interlayer. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2023, 256, 108477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, X.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Q.; Guan, Y.; Zhou, W. Interface analyses and mechanical properties of stainless steel/nickel alloy induced by multi-metal laser additive manufacturing. J. Manuf. Process. 2023, 91, 53–60. [Google Scholar]
  6. Verma, S.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, R.; Sidhu, R. Exploring the application domain of friction stir welding in aluminum and other alloys. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 50, 1032–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Salih, O.; Ou, H.; Sun, W. Heat generation, plastic deformation and residual stresses in friction stir welding of aluminium alloy. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2023, 238, 107827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, D.; Jiang, C.; Zhao, K. Ultrasonic welding of AZ31B magnesium alloy and pure copper: Microstructure, mechanical properties and finite element analysis. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 23, 1273–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Noga, P.; Skrzekut, T.; Wędrychowicz, M.; Węglowski, M.; Węglowska, A. Research of friction stir welding (FSW) and electron beam welding (EBW) process for 6082-T6 aluminum alloy. Materials 2023, 16, 4937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yang, Y.; Jamshidinia, M.; Boulware, P.; Kelly, S. Prediction of microstructure, residual stress, and deformation in laser powder bed fusion process. Comput. Mech. 2018, 61, 599–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shang, C.; Wang, C.; Xu, G.; Li, C.; You, J. Laser additive manufacturing of TA15-Inconel 718 bimetallic structure via Nb/Cu multi-interlayer. Vacuum 2019, 169, 108888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sing, S.; Lam, L.; Zhang, D.; Liu, Z.; Chua, C. Interfacial characterization of SLM parts in multi-material processing: Intermetallic phase formation between AlSi10Mg and C18400 copper alloy. Mater. Charact. 2015, 107, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hotz, H.; Zimmermann, M.; Greco, S.; Kirsch, B.; Aurich, J. Additive manufacturing of functionally graded Ti-Al structures by laser-based direct energy deposition. J. Manuf. Process. 2021, 68, 1524–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yao, L.; Ramesh, A.; Fan, Z.; Xiao, Z.; Li, G.; Zhuang, Q.; Qiao, J. Interface Analysis between Inconel 625 and Cobalt-Chromium Alloy Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Using Pulsed Wave Laser. Materials 2023, 16, 6456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Meyer, I.; Oel, M.; Ehlers, T.; Lachmayer, R. Additive manufacturing of multi-material parts–Design guidelines for manufacturing of 316L/CuCrZr in laser powder bed fusion. Heliyon 2023, 9, e18301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Liu, L.; Wang, D.; Han, C.; Li, Y.; Wang, T.; Wei, Y.; Zhou, W.; Yan, M.; Liu, Y.; Wei, S. Additive manufacturing of multi-materials with interfacial component gradient by in-situ powder mixing and laser powder bed fusion. J. Alloys Compd. 2024, 978, 173508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mohan Kumar, S.; Rajesh Kannan, A.; Pravin Kumar, N.; Pramod, R.; Siva Shanmugam, N.; Vishnu, A.; Channabasavanna, S. Microstructural features and mechanical integrity of wire arc additive manufactured SS321/Inconel 625 functionally gradient material. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2021, 30, 5692–5703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. He, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, Z.; Xu, S.; Xia, M.; Zhang, C.; Hu, Y. Wire-feed laser additive manufacturing of dissimilar metals via dual molten pool interface interlocking mechanism. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2023, 66, 976–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wei, C.; Li, L.; Zhang, X.; Chueh, Y. 3D printing of multiple metallic materials via modified selective laser melting. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 67, 245–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, X.; Jiang, P.; Nie, M.; Liu, Z.; Liu, M.; Qiu, Y.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, Z. Enhanced strength-ductility synergy of laser additive manufactured stainless steel/Ni-based superalloy dissimilar materials characterized by bionic mechanical interlocking structures. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 26, 4770–4783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jin, Q.; Nam, H.; Jo, H.; Park, J.; Kang, H.; Kim, D.; Lee, W. Design of dissimilar material joint for defect-free multi-material additive manufacturing via laser-directed energy deposition. Heliyon 2024, 10, e29666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Li, Y.; Koukolíková, M.; Džugan, J.; Brázda, M. High temperature fracture behavior of 316L stainless steel-Inconel 718 functionally graded materials manufactured by directed energy deposition: Role of interface orientation and heat treatment. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2024, 898, 146389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Li, K.; Zhan, J.; Zhang, M.; Ma, R.; Tang, Q.; Zhang, D.; Murr, L.; Cao, H. A functionally graded material design from stainless steel to Ni-based superalloy by laser metal deposition coupled with thermodynamic prediction. Mater. Des. 2022, 217, 110612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ji, C.; Li, K.; Zhan, J.; Bai, S.; Jiang, B.; Murr, L. The effects and utility of homogenization and thermodynamic modeling on microstructure and mechanical properties of SS316/IN718 functionally graded materials fabricated by laser-based directed energy deposition. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2023, 319, 118084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lu, J.; Li, W. Improvement of tensile properties of laser directed energy deposited IN718/316L functionally graded material via different heat treatments. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2023, 866, 144694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wang, B.; Zhang, H.; Yu, J.; Du, R.; Fan, Y. Interface microstructure and mechanical properties of copper/304 stainless steel dissimilar joint assisted by Ni transition layer using ultrasonic additive manufacturing (UAM). Mater. Lett. 2023, 335, 133552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mishra, A.; Paul, A.; Mukherjee, M.; Singh, R. Bimetallic Structure of Ti6Al4V/IN718 with CuSi Interlayer for Wire-Arc Directed Energy Deposition Process. Met Mater Int. 2023, 29, 2331–2344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhu, G.; Wang, L.; Wang, B.; Li, B.; Zhao, J.; Ding, B.; Cui, R.; Jiang, B.; Zhao, C.; Su, B. Multi-materials additive manufacturing of Ti64/Cu/316L by electron beam freeform fabrication. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 26, 8388–8405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Li, X.; Jiang, P.; Nie, M.; Li, Q.; Shan, Z.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, Z. Crack-Free Ti6al4v/Niti Functionally Graded Material Produced by Laser Directed Energy Deposition and Substrate Preheating. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4501286 (accessed on 18 April 2024).
  30. Caprio, L.; Demir, A.; Previtali, B. Comparative study between CW and PW emissions in selective laser melting. J. Laser Appl. 2018, 30, 032305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Working principle of pulsed wave laser.
Figure 1. Working principle of pulsed wave laser.
Micromachines 15 00765 g001
Figure 2. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 350 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Figure 2. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 350 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Micromachines 15 00765 g002
Figure 3. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 275 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Figure 3. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 275 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Micromachines 15 00765 g003
Figure 4. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 200 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Figure 4. Stress–strain curves of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with laser power of 200 W. (a) No remelting; (b) laser remelting of the first three layers of powder thrice.
Micromachines 15 00765 g004
Figure 5. Variations in tensile strength of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with different volumetric energy densities (Ev).
Figure 5. Variations in tensile strength of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with different volumetric energy densities (Ev).
Micromachines 15 00765 g005
Figure 6. Variations in hardness at (a) CuZrCr end and CoCrMo end and (b) interface of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with different volumetric energy densities (Ev).
Figure 6. Variations in hardness at (a) CuZrCr end and CoCrMo end and (b) interface of CuZrCr/CoCrMo samples with different volumetric energy densities (Ev).
Micromachines 15 00765 g006
Figure 7. Optical microscope images of the interfacial region of samples with different volumetric energy densities without laser remelting (a) and with laser remelting (b).
Figure 7. Optical microscope images of the interfacial region of samples with different volumetric energy densities without laser remelting (a) and with laser remelting (b).
Micromachines 15 00765 g007
Table 1. L-PBF process parameters and volumetric energy density of all samples.
Table 1. L-PBF process parameters and volumetric energy density of all samples.
Process Parameter No. P (W) D p (μm) E t (μs) V (mm/s) E v (J/mm3)
135010011091072.19
280125043.33
350200019.79
470110640103.13
58088061.90
650140028.27
740110360180.47
880500108.33
95080049.48
1027510011091057.29
1180125034.17
1250200015.63
137011064081.85
148088048.81
1550140022.32
1640110360143.23
178050085.42
185080039.06
1920010011091041.25
2080125025.00
2150200011.46
227011064058.93
238088035.71
2450140016.37
2540110360103.13
268050062.50
275080028.65
Table 2. Tensile properties of all samples.
Table 2. Tensile properties of all samples.
Process Parameter No.Strength (MPa)Strain (%)Fracture Location
RemeltingNo RemeltingRemeltingNo RemeltingRemeltingNo Remelting
126735911.3913.12CuZrCrCuZrCr
23633511.682.21InterfaceInterface
327500.410InterfaceFailure
40294012.64FailureCuZrCr
513700.740CuZrCrFailure
61133541.0010.57CuZrCrCuZrCr
71223580.3012.72InterfaceCuZrCr
835735110.9910.33CuZrCrCuZrCr
9358012.700CuZrCrFailure
1036222512.840.64CuZrCrCuZrCr
113618912.941.05CuZrCrInterface
126700.500InterfaceFailure
1336335812.7911.78CuZrCrCuZrCr
14270490.760.81CuZrCrInterface
1535733512.561.71CuZrCrInterface
16359012.700CuZrCrFailure
173628212.580.44CuZrCrCoCrMo
1835034311.507.91CuZrCrCuZrCr
1929001.020InterfaceFailure
2013000.140InterfaceFailure
210000FailureFailure
2231109.600CuZrCrFailure
23351012.300CuZrCrFailure
240000FailureFailure
2536836313.1812.77CuZrCrCuZrCr
2637136313.3414.26CuZrCrCuZrCr
272741501.420.81InterfaceInterface
Average257163.96.644.21//
Standard Deviation131.2164.35.985.59//
Table 3. Hardness of all samples.
Table 3. Hardness of all samples.
Hardness (HV)InterfaceCoCrMoCuZrCr
Process Parameter No.RemeltingNo RemeltingRemeltingNo RemeltingRemeltingNo Remelting
1188207347404144136
2186170409435143132
3184165425456131136
4257226419410134132
5217219432417135130
6213042101350
7254202388409133131
8259221405407139133
9232159429388141125
10128117495451148138
11136135498477142137
12139131507481143145
13167135446453146152
14142134493485142131
15147135506492136139
16138136432417138139
17145139498439148141
18143138502447139153
19196179461438139133
20210046901340
21143044001370
22193187409434128124
23154203430428137130
24164043101360
25164189413409134125
26181194395417130134
27150187450434137131
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, H.; Jin, X.; Xiao, Z.; Yao, L. Mechanical Properties and Interfacial Characterization of Additive-Manufactured CuZrCr/CoCrMo Multi-Metals Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Using Pulsed Wave Laser. Micromachines 2024, 15, 765. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15060765

AMA Style

Zhang H, Jin X, Xiao Z, Yao L. Mechanical Properties and Interfacial Characterization of Additive-Manufactured CuZrCr/CoCrMo Multi-Metals Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Using Pulsed Wave Laser. Micromachines. 2024; 15(6):765. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15060765

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Hao, Xiang Jin, Zhongmin Xiao, and Liming Yao. 2024. "Mechanical Properties and Interfacial Characterization of Additive-Manufactured CuZrCr/CoCrMo Multi-Metals Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Using Pulsed Wave Laser" Micromachines 15, no. 6: 765. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15060765

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop