ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHOD AND POWDER
20180010221 · 2018-01-11
Assignee
Inventors
- Ravi Guttamindapalli ASWATHANARAYANASWAMY (Stone, GB)
- Hossein SHEYKH-POOR (Manchester, GB)
- Peter George Eveleigh JERRARD (Stoke-on-Trent, GB)
Cpc classification
B22F10/32
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B33Y10/00
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B22F2009/0824
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B33Y70/00
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B23K26/144
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
C22C38/002
CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
B22F10/28
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B22F10/366
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B22F10/34
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B22F12/41
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
Y02P10/25
GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
B22F2009/0848
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
International classification
B22F9/08
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
B23K26/144
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
Abstract
A method of manufacturing a part including selective laser melting of a powder including a steel alloy containing, by weight, 16% to 19% chromium and 12.2% to 13.5% nickel, wherein the powder is substantially non-magnetic.
Claims
1. A method of manufacturing a part comprising selective laser melting of a powder comprising a steel alloy containing, by weight, 16% to 19% chromium and 12.2% to 13.5% nickel, wherein the powder is substantially non-magnetic.
2. A method according to claim 1, wherein less than 2% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase.
3. A method according to claim 2, wherein less than 1.5% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase.
4. A method according to claim 3, wherein less than 1% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase.
5. A method according to claim 4, wherein less than 0.5% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase.
6. A method according to claim 4, wherein substantially 0% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase.
7. A method according to claim 1, wherein the powder has a hall flow of less than 23 s/50 g.
8. A method according to claim 7, wherein the powder has a hall flow of less than 22 s/50 g.
9. A method according to claim 1, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, 12.2% to 13.2% nickel.
10. A method according to claim 9, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, 12.5% to 12.9% nickel.
11. A method according to claim 1, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, less than 1% manganese.
12. A method according to claim 11, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, less than 0.7% manganese.
13. A method according to claim 12, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, less than 0.5% manganese.
14. A method according to claim 11, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, less than 0.01% sulphur.
15. A method according to claim 1, wherein the alloy contains, by weight, 0.05% to 0.4% copper.
16. A method according to claim 1, wherein at least 98% by volume of the alloy is in the austenite phase.
17. A method according to claim 1, wherein the powder has been formed by nitrogen gas atomisation.
18. A method according to claim 1, wherein the powder is atomised from an ingot produced by vacuum arc remelting (VAR).
19. A method according to claim 1, wherein the powder contains at least 90% by weight particles having a size, as measured by a laser diffraction particle size analyser, below 45 μm.
20. A method according to claim 19, wherein the powder contains at least 94% by weight particles having a size, as measured by the laser diffraction particle size analyser, below 45 μm.
21. A method according to claim 20, wherein the powder contains at least 96% by weight particles having a size, as measured by the laser diffraction particle size analyser, below 45 μm.
22. A method according to claim 1, wherein the powder contains less than 2% by weight particles having a size, as measured by a laser diffraction particle size analyser, below 15 μm.
23. A method according to claim 22, wherein the powder contains less than 1% by weight particles having a size, as measured by the laser diffraction particle size analyser, below 15 μm.
24. A powder container arranged to be attached to an additive manufacturing machine, the powder container containing powder comprising a steel alloy containing, by weight, 16% to 19% chromium and 12.2% to 13.5% nickel, wherein the powder is substantially non-magnetic.
25. A method of manufacturing powder for use in additive manufacturing apparatus comprising atomising a molten steel alloy containing, by weight, 16% to 19% chromium and 12.2% to 13.5% nickel such that less than 2% by volume of the steel alloy is in the ferrite phase and filling a container arranged to be attached to an additive manufacturing machine with the powder.
26. A method according to claim 25, comprising nitrogen atomising the molten steel alloy.
27. A method according to claim 25, comprising carrying out vacuum arc remelting (VAR) on the steel alloy before atomisation.
Description
DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0021]
[0022]
[0023]
[0024]
[0025]
[0026]
[0027]
[0028]
[0029]
[0030]
[0031]
DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS
[0032]
[0033] In use, powder layers are uniformly spread on a substrate provided on the base plate 4 using the powder deposition mechanism 7. Each layer is scanned with the ytterbium fibre laser beam 3 (wavelength (λ)=1.06 μm, beam spot diameter=75+/−5 μm) according to CAD data. The melt powder particles fuse together (a solidified portion is indicated at 8), forming a layer of the article or part, and the process is repeated until the top layer. The article or part is then removed from the substrate and any unfused powder can be reused for the next build. The process is performed under an inert environment, which is normally argon, while the oxygen level is typically 0.1-0.2 volume %. During the SLM process, the chamber atmosphere, which is kept at an overpressure of 10-12 mbar, is continuously recirculated and filtered.
[0034] The input data for making a part comprise geometrical data stored as a CAD file and the laser scanning process parameters. The main process parameters which may affect the density of aluminium SLM parts include: laser power; the laser scanning speed which depends on the exposure time on each of the laser spots that constitute the scanned path, and the distance between them (point distance); and the distance between the laser hatches.
[0035]
Example 1
[0036] 316L stainless steel powder in the range 15 to 45 μm was supplied by Sandvik Osprey Ltd, with a dispatch number 14D0097. The powder batch was 10 kg in weight and contained a test certificate. Details from the test certificate are shown in table 1
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Powder Powder Size Distribution Tests Element Wt (%) (μm) (μm) Cr 17.1 +45 = 1.0% d10 = 19.8 Ni 10.8 Mo 2.6 −45 to +15 = 97.9% d50 = 31.3 Mn 1.07 C 0.02 −15 = 1.1% d90 = 49.9 P 0.02 S 0.01 Fe Balance
[0037] The composition of the powder was checked by chemical analysis using energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). EDS was carried out on three different powder particles. The results are shown in table 2.
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Elements (wt %) Fe Si Cr Ni Mo 1 67.52 0.66 18.29 10.24 3.29 2 66.97 0.57 18.25 11.04 3.18 3 67.72 0.67 18.04 10.83 2.75 Average 67.40 0.63 18.19 10.70 3.07
[0038] A hall flow for the powder was measured to be 20.1 sec/50 g.
[0039] A set of 34 samples were manufactured in a Renishaw AM250 selective laser melting machine using the 316L powder. The laser process parameters were varied, with two samples built for each laser parameter set listed in table 3.
TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Process POINT EXPOSURE HATCH Param- POWER DISTANCE TIME SPACE ENERGY eter (P) (PD) (Exp) (HS) DENSITY Set W μm μSec μm (J/mm.sup.2) 1 200 110 60 50 2.18 2 100 50 120 50 4.80 3 100 110 120 50 2.18 4 100 50 60 110 1.09 5 100 110 60 50 1.09 6 200 110 120 50 4.36 7 100 50 120 110 2.18 8 200 50 60 110 2.18 9 200 110 60 110 0.99 10 100 50 60 50 2.40 11 200 50 120 50 9.60 12 100 110 60 110 0.50 13 100 110 120 110 0.99 14 200 110 120 110 1.98 15 200 50 60 50 4.80 16 150 80 90 80 2.11 17 200 50 120 110 4.36
[0040] At the end of the laser melting process, the samples were removed from the build chamber and the build substrate and mounted in a 30 mm diameter mould using Buehler cold mount material. The samples were polished to a 50 nm finish and then analysed using an OPG Smartscope QVI instrument.
[0041] From this analysis it was observed that the process parameters used did not produce any samples above the 99.5% threshold at which a part is considered to be acceptably dense.
Example 2
[0042] 316L stainless steel powder supplied by Sandvik Osprey Ltd. was compared to two batches of 316L stainless steel powder supplied by LPW Technology Ltd (LPW 1 and LPW 2). The composition, particle size and Hall flow was determined for each powder. Tables 4 to 6 show the results.
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Composition (wt %) Sample Fe Cr Ni Mo Mn Si C P S LPW A Balance 17.0 11.9 2.28 1.4 0.6 0.018 0.01 0.008 LPW B Balance 17.4 12.2 2.29 1.42 0.65 0.02 0.012 0.009 Osprey Balance 17.1 10.8 2.57 1.07 0.53 0.02 0.016 0.006 14D0097
TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Particle Size (μm) Sample d10 d50 d90 LPW A 18.4 27.41 42.37 LPW B 17.17 25.45 39.23 Osprey 14D0097 19.81 31.28 49.86
TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Sample Hall Flow (s) LPW A 24 LPW B 28 Osprey 14D0097 20.1
[0043] As can be seen the flow characteristics of the Sandvik 316L powder is superior to the flow characteristics of the LPW 316L powders, despite generally similar particle size distributions.
Example 3
[0044] A comparison was made between two different 316L stainless steel powders. Tables 7 and 8 show the composition and particle size data for each powder.
TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Powder 1 Element Actual (wt %) Particle Size Data Cr 17.1 >45 μm = 1.0% Ni 10.8 Mo 2.6 Mn 1.07 Between Si 0.63 45 μm to 15 C 0.02 μm = 97.9% P 0.02 <15 μm = 1.1% S 0.01 Fe BALANCE
TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Powder 2 Element Actual (wt %) Particle Size Data Cr 17.1 >45 μm = 2.0% Ni 12.7 Mo 2.3 Mn 0.45 Between Si 0.38 45 μm to 15 C 0.02 μm = 98.0% P 0.01 <15 μm = 0.0% S 0.01 Fe BALANCE
[0045] The main changes between powder 1 and powder 2 was an increase in nickel content and a reduction in manganese content. Hall flow tests were carried out on the two powders and Powder 1 was measured to have a Hall flow of 20.13 sec/50 g and Powder 2 was measured to have a Hall flow of 20.5 sec/50 g. Samples were built in a Renishaw AM250 selective laser melting machine using the Powder 1 and Powder 2. The laser process parameters were varied in accordance with the parameter sets listed in table 3. Tables 9 and 10 show the parameters sets that achieved the best densities for Powder 1 and Powder 2. As can be seen, the best density that was achieved for Powder 1 is 98.5% whereas a density greater than 99.5% is achieved for Powder 2.
TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Powder 1 Density Target P P D Exp H S Achieved Density (W) (μm) (μm) (μm) (%) (%) 200 110 120 110 98.5 ≧99.5
TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Powder 2 Density Target P P D Exp H S Achieved Density (W) (μm) (μm) (μm) (%) (%) 200 40 90 100 99.94 ≧99.5 200 50 110 100 99.91 ≧99.5
Example 4
[0046] Four 316L powders supplied by LPW Technologies Ltd (LPW) were compared to a 316L powder supplied by Sandvik Osprey Ltd. (SO). Table 11 shows the chemical composition of each powder. Nitrogen, oxygen and copper were not reported for 316L-SV.
TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 316L-1 316L-6 316L-7 316L-8 316L-SV Elements (LPW) (LPW) (LPW) (LPW) (SO) Fe 64.813 63.366 68.107 64.7355 68.28 Cr 17.9 18.10 16.94 17.8 16.8 Ni 12.6 14.08 12.24 12.6 10.7 Mo 2.34 2.85 2.39 2.33 2.2 Mn 1.4 1.01 1.03 1.47 1.35 Si 0.59 0.49 0.46 0.66 0.62 P 0.017 0.025 0.005 0.021 0.023 S 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.005 0.01 C 0.02 0.01 0.008 0.026 0.017 N 0.1 0.02 0 0.1 N/R O 0.025 0.029 0.04 0.0125 N/R Cu 0.19 0.01 0.01 0.24 N/R
[0047] The powders were placed in a dish and a magnet brought into close proximity to the powder. The observation showed that 316L-7 responded most strongly to the magnet, forming a hair like structure, as one would expect to see for a ferritic powder. 316L-1 and 316L-8 showed significant deformation when brought into proximity with the magnet and 316L-6 moved with the movement of the magnet. 316L-SV responded weakly to the magnet, with very slight variation in the appearance of the powder.
[0048] A sample of each powder was etched using 10% Oxalic acid for 30 seconds. The etched sample was mounted on a conductive resin under an optical microscope.
[0049]
[0050] The samples were then colour etched. The particles that failed to etch using the oxalic acid also failed to etch using the colour etching. This provides further indication that the particles that failed to etch have a different crystalline structure to those that did etch.
[0051] X-Ray spectroscopy was carried out on particles of the sample for 316L-6 that did and did not etch to determine if there was any difference in the composition of the particles.
[0052] The above tests indicate that, with the exception of 316L-SV, a significant proportion of the powders are not austenitic in structure. It is worth noting that
Example 5
[0053] XRD pattern analysis was carried out on the powders to determine a percentage by volume of the austenite phase and ferrite phase in the powders. The results are shown in table 12.
TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Austenite Volume Ferrite Volume Powder Fraction (%) Fraction (%) 316L - 1 96.2 3.8 316L - 6 96.0 4.0 316L - 7 93.8 6.2 316L - 8 97.6 2.4 316L - Phase 1 100 0.0 (or below instrument detectable limit 0.5 wt %)
Example 6
[0054] Tests were performed on the Sandvik 316L powders, phase 2 and phase 3, and 316L-8 powder supplied by LPW using a magnet. A sheet of paper was mounted to a plastic lid by pins and 100 mm lines drawn from a start point to an end point. 1+/−0.05 grams of each powder was deposited at the start point of each line using a Carney funnel centred at the start point. A N42 grade, NiCuNi plated magnet supplied by eMagents, UK having a 15 mm diameter, 4 mm thickness and a pull of 3.3 kg was placed beneath the plastic lid at the start point. In a first experiment the magnet was moved by hand at a constant speed in a straight line from the start point to the end point.
Example 7
[0055]
TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 316L-1 Weight Percentage Elements (wt %) Fe Balance C 0.020 Si 0.59 Mn 1.40 P 0.017 S 0.005 Cr 17.9 Ni 12.6 Mo 2.34 N 0.1 Cu 0.19 O 0.025
TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 316L-6 Weight Percentage Elements (wt %) Fe Balance C <0.01 Si 0.49 Mn 1.01 P 0.01 S <0.01 Cr 18.1 Ni 14.1 Mo 2.85 N 0.02 Cu 0.01 O 0.03
TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 15 316L - Off the shelf Sandvik Weight Percentage Elements (wt %) Fe Balance C 0.02 Si 0.6 Mn 1.1 P 0.02 S 0.01 Cr 17.1 Ni 10.8 Mo 2.6 N 0.17 O 0.04
TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 16 316L - Renishaw Sandvik Weight Percentage Elements (wt %) Fe Balance C 0.02 Si 0.4 Mn 0.5 P 0.01 S 0.01 Cr 17.1 Ni 12.7 Mo 2.3 N 0.09 O 0.05
[0056] As can be seen from
[0057] In conclusion, the powders supplied by LPW Technologies Ltd have been found to be more magnetic than the powders supplied by Sandvik Osprey Ltd. There is evidence to suggest that this is because of a larger number of ferritic particles in the LPW powder compared to the Sandvik powder. The poorer flow characteristics of the LPW powder may be due to the stronger magnetic properties of this powder.
[0058] Furthermore, the Sandvik powder fails to produce a fully dense part under parameter sets that can be selected in the Renishaw 250AM machine. It has been found that a powder in which the nickel content has been increased and the manganese content reduced can produce a fully dense part.
[0059] A suitable powder 316L composition for additive manufacturing that has suitable flow characteristics and can be used to produce a fully dense part (greater than 99.5% theoretical density) is:
TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 17 Element wt % Cr 17 ± 0.2 Ni 12.5 ± 0.2 Mo 2.3 ± 0.2 Mn 0.45 ± 0.2 Si 0.4 ± 0.1 Cu 0.2 ± 0.2 C 0.02 P 0.01 S 0.01 Fe BALANCE
with less than 0.5% by volume of the alloy in the ferritic phase and a particle size distribution, wherein d10=20 to 27 μm, d50=32 to 39 μm and d90=50 to 55 μm. The powder may be manufactured by nitrogen atomisation of the molten steel alloy. An amount of oxygen in the melt chamber and the atomising chamber may be reduced to less than 500 parts per million.
[0060] In a further embodiment, a small proportion of oxygen may be introduced into the atomising stream. For example, the atomising stream may be about 99.4% nitrogen and about 0.5% oxygen. Containers arranged to be connected to an additive manufacturing machine may be filled with the powder.
[0061] Modifications and variations to the above described embodiment may be made without departing from the invention as defined herein. For example, a powder composition having a nickel and/or manganese content outside of the ranges specified in table 12 may still be used to produce a fully dense part. The alloy, before being melted for atomisation, may be subjected to a vacuum arc remelting process to reduce the amount of oxygen present in the atomised steel.
[0062] Other non-trace elements, such as niobium, nitrogen and titanium, may be included in addition to the elements listed above.