Additively manufactured CuCrZr alloy: improvement of mechanical properties by heat treatment

Cortis, Daniele; Mancini, Edoardo; Orlandi, D.; Pilone, D.; Sasso, M.

doi:10.1016/j.prostr.2023.07.021

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 3,4 ] Given the extensive industrial applications of H13 steel, the application of these technologies on high‐performance H13 steel has become a widely researched topic. The unique opportunities provided by SLM and EBM, such as localized melting and rapid solidification (with cooling rates reaching 10 6 –10 8 K s −1 ), [ 5 ] offer distinct advantages for tailored microstructural designs. SLMed‐H13 tool steel exhibits a microstructure consisting of fine martensite and residual austenite, while EBMed‐H13 tool steel is primarily composed of ferrite and bainite structures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Mechanical Behavior in H13 Tool Steel Synthesized through Electron Beam Melting and Selective Laser Melting Techniques

Han,

Wang,

Zhang

et al. 2024

steel research int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates H13 tool steel's microstructure and mechanical properties using selective laser melting (SLM) and electron beam melting (EBM). SLMed‐H13 steel has fine martensite, residual austenite, dense low‐angle grain boundaries (LAGBs), and nanoscale carbides, whereas EBMed‐H13 predominantly shows lamellar ferrite–bainite, needle‐like lower bainite (Blower), and spongy upper bainite (Bupper), with fewer LAGBs and larger carbides. SLMed‐H13 exhibits higher hardness (617.4 HV0.5) than EBM (532.17 HV0.5), with a yield strength (YS) of 1241.1 MPa, ultimate tensile strength (UTS) of 1412.2 MPa, and elongation (El) of 5.36%, versus EBM's 765.8 MPa YS, 1252.7 MPa UTS, and 6.89% El. SLM shows superior mechanical performance and wear resistance, with a coefficient of friction (COF) of 0.81, wear depth of 0.86 μm, wear track of 448.4 μm, and wear rate of 5.5 × 10−6 mm3 N−1 m−1, compared to EBM's 0.68 COF, 2.2 μm wear depth, 508 μm wear track, and wear rate of 6.5 × 10−6 mm3 N−1 m−1. Confocal microscopy highlights SLM's uniform wear tracks versus EBM's distinct microcutting, illustrating the impact of manufacturing techniques on material properties and wear performance.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%