2020
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-36296-6_42
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the Size Effects in Additively Manufactured Titanium and the Implications in AM Components

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The apparent elastic modulus of the volumetric model is higher than the experimental ones (∼10% higher) while the beam models present a substantially lower elastic modulus than the experiments (∼30% lower for Model A and ∼20% lower for Model B). Regarding the higher rigidity of the volumetry model when compared to the experiments, it is known that AM lattice present defects, especially for self-supported lattices like the ones in this work [11]. These defects can reduce rigidity of the lattice and might partially explain the small increase in the elastic modulus, which are not taking into account in the models.…”
Section: Experimental Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The apparent elastic modulus of the volumetric model is higher than the experimental ones (∼10% higher) while the beam models present a substantially lower elastic modulus than the experiments (∼30% lower for Model A and ∼20% lower for Model B). Regarding the higher rigidity of the volumetry model when compared to the experiments, it is known that AM lattice present defects, especially for self-supported lattices like the ones in this work [11]. These defects can reduce rigidity of the lattice and might partially explain the small increase in the elastic modulus, which are not taking into account in the models.…”
Section: Experimental Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…These defects can reduce rigidity of the lattice and might partially explain the small increase in the elastic modulus, which are not taking into account in the models. Another reason might be small deviations in the printed geometries from the ideal simulated ones [11]. In terms of the yield stress, all the models present lower values than the experimental ones.…”
Section: Experimental Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 83%