Research on the microstructural organization and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc additive manufacturing under low heat input conditions

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5159639/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Research on the microstructural organization and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc additive manufacturing under low heat input conditions

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5159639/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

To address the issue of excessive heat input during arc additive manufacturing of aluminum alloys, which leads to difficulties in forming and reduced dimensional accuracy, this paper investigates the microstructure and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy under low heat input conditions (30A, 40A, 50A, and 60A). The forming dimensions of multilayer single-pass straight-walled specimens under varying low-current conditions were analyzed, along with comprehensive tests on their mechanical properties, including microstructure, microhardness, and tensile strength. The results indicate that specimens can be successfully formed under different low-current conditions. Notably, at 40A, the front and upper surfaces of the specimens exhibit a smooth and flat appearance, contributing to an aesthetically superior outcome. The microstructure of the straight-walled specimen is predominantly composed of an α(Al) matrix and skeletal β(Al3Mg2). As the current increases, the distribution density of β(Al3Mg2) decreases, accompanied by a reduction in number and an increase in size. With increasing current, the microhardness initially rises, followed by a subsequent decline. Additionally, the microhardness shows a gradual increase from the bottom to the top of the specimen. As current increases, both the tensile strength and elongation of horizontal and vertical specimens first increase and then decrease. It is observed that the tensile strength and elongation of horizontal specimens are slightly higher than those of vertical specimens. This study lays a theoretical foundation for the application of arc additive manufacturing technology in processing 5356 aluminum alloys.

heat input

5356 aluminium alloy

arc additive manufacturing

microstructural organization

mechanical properties

Aluminium alloys are metallic materials that incorporate various alloying elements into aluminium, making them widely utilized in aerospace, automotive manufacturing, shipbuilding, electronics, and packaging industries. These alloys are favored for their low density, high strength, excellent castability, plasticity, electrical conductivity, and corrosion resistance [1, 2]. However, with the advancement of modern industry, traditional methods of aluminum alloy fabrication, including casting, forging, and machining, are becoming inadequate due to prolonged production times and higher associated costs [3–5]. Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) is an advanced metal 3D printing technique that employs an electric arc as a heat source, enabling the production of complex metal components through the continuous deposition of metal wire into a molten pool for layer-by-layer construction. This method features a high production rate, simplified equipment, and efficient material utilization, making it well-suited for the fabrication of medium to large structural components. Consequently, arc additive manufacturing using aluminum alloy as a filler material has garnered significant attention in recent years [6–9]. Nonetheless, the continuous and excessive heat input during the WAAM process, combined with heat accumulation, often results in poor dimensional accuracy and surface roughness in the fabricated specimens. Furthermore, excessive heat input extends the time available for the formation, aggregation, and growth of porosity defects, increasing the likelihood of cracking in the specimens [10].

To address these challenges, researchers globally have investigated two primary aspects: controlling the specimen’s molding morphology and optimizing performance characteristics. In controlling the specimen’s molding morphology, research primarily focuses on the effects of process parameters such as current mode, welding speed, and torch angle on specimen size and molding characteristics [11–13]. Regarding performance control, research has mainly explored optimizing the microstructure and mechanical properties through auxiliary measures or heat treatment [14, 15]. Derekar et al. [16] investigated the influence of interlayer temperature on the porosity and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy. They found that in samples with higher interlayer temperatures, microporosity accounted for 81.47% of the total porosity, whereas in those with lower interlayer temperatures, it accounted for 67.92%. Additionally, the tensile properties of the high-interlayer-temperature samples were relatively superior to those of the low-interlayer-temperature samples. Ahsan et al. [17] observed that both low and high heat input deposits exhibited similar yield and tensile strengths. However, the ductility of high heat input deposits was approximately 10% higher than that of low heat input deposits, while the hardness was slightly lower. Wang et al. [18] examined the effect of heat input on the microstructure and properties of WAAM Al-Cu-Sn alloy. Their findings revealed that as heat input increased, both the size and number of pores also increased. Furthermore, the grain size of the sediment and the precipitate phase increased, while the incomplete dissolution of the θ phase during solid solution treatment resulted in a marked decline in the mechanical properties of the specimens. Zhou et al. [19] investigated the effect of arc speed on the macromorphology, microstructure, and mechanical properties of 2219 aluminum alloy. Their study revealed that as traveling speed increased, the solidification rate accelerated, reducing the solidification time and consequently decreasing the equiaxed grain size and volume fraction. Wang et al. [20] utilized Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) to fabricate 4043 aluminum alloy and observed that lower arc current produced lower heat input, resulting in faster cooling and nucleation rates, and finer grains with near-equiaxed morphology. As arc current increased, grains thickened, transitioning from short columnar to long columnar crystals, which led to a reduction in tensile strength from 146.5 MPa to 110.5 MPa.

Although previous studies have analyzed the microstructure and mechanical properties of aluminum alloys under low heat input, the arc currents utilized in these investigations exceed 70A, resulting in relatively high heat input. However, there is a lack of research on the microstructure and mechanical properties of aluminum alloys processed at lower currents of 60A and below. Hence, this study investigates the microstructure and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc additive manufacturing under low heat input conditions (30A, 40A, 50A, and 60A), providing a theoretical foundation and data support for the engineering application of WAAM technology using 5356 aluminum alloy.

In this experiment, 5356 welding wire with a diameter of 1.2 mm was selected as the cladding material. The substrate utilized was a 5087 aluminum alloy rolled plate with dimensions of 150 mm × 40 mm × 6 mm. The chemical compositions of the welding wire and substrate are detailed in Table 1. The WAAM experimental setup comprised an OTC 6-axis robot, a MIG welder, a shielding gas device, an automatic wire feeder, and a substrate preheating device, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The OTC robot used was the FD-V8L model, and the MIG welding machine was the DP400 model, which is compatible with the robot and provides high arc stability during low-current and high-speed welding. The shielding gas employed was 99.99% pure argon, the automatic wire feeder was the AF-4012-C model, and the substrate preheating device was an Ouli cast aluminum heating plate. The elongation of the welding wire was set to 8 mm, with a gap of approximately 2 mm between the wire end and the 5087 aluminum plate. The welding gun was raised by 1.5 mm after each layer, with a total of 44 layers deposited. The cladding path followed a reciprocating material addition process, as depicted in Fig. 2(a). Prior to the experiment, an angle grinder was employed to polish the substrate, removing the oxide film from its surface. Acetone was then applied to clean off any surface oil stains.

Table 1

Chemical composition of 5356 welding wire and 5087 substrate (mass fractions, %)
material	Si	Mn	Cu	Ti	Fe	Mg	Zn	Cr	Zr	Al
5356	0.05	0.14	0.01	0.07	0.12	5	0.01	0.07	-	margin
5087	0.25	0.7–1.1	0.05	0.15	0.40	4.5–5.2	0.25	0.05–0.25	0.1–0.2	margin

In this experiment, the welding machine operates in a unified mode, where the wire feeding speed and voltage automatically adjust according to the welding current. Specifically, as the current increases, the wire feeding speed and voltage also increase, and decrease when the current is reduced. As indicated by heat input formula (1), the heat input is directly proportional to the current and voltage, and inversely proportional to the welding speed. This study investigates the microstructure and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc additive manufacturing under low heat input conditions, while maintaining additive efficiency with a welding speed of 35 cm/min. The experiment was conducted under low current settings of 30A, 40A, 50A, and 60A, respectively. Additionally, due to the low heat input at lower currents, an intermittent weld bead phenomenon was observed. To address this, the substrate was preheated to 90℃, and the molding effect with and without preheating at the same current is depicted in Fig. 2(b). The interlayer waiting time was set to 30 seconds, and the detailed welding process parameters are listed in Table 2.

$$\:L=\eta\:UI/V$$

Where L represents the heat input, U denotes the welding voltage, I is the welding current, V is the welding speed, and η refers to the welding thermal efficiency.

Table 2

Experimental parameters for varying welding currents
Number	Welding current /A	Welding speed cm/min	Interlayer waiting time/s	Preheating temperature/℃	Gas flow L/min
1	30	35	30	90	15
2	40	35	30	90	15
3	50	35	30	90	15
4	60	35	30	90	15

After the experiment, tensile specimens, metallographic samples, hardness samples, and XRD specimens were extracted from the thin-walled sections using an EDM wire-cutting machine, as illustrated in Fig. 3(a). Three tensile specimens were taken from the upper, middle, and lower sections in the horizontal direction, and one tensile specimen was extracted in the vertical direction. The dimensions of the tensile specimens are depicted in Fig. 3(b). Tensile testing was performed using a universal testing machine at a loading rate of 2 mm/min. Following fracture, the fracture morphology was examined using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The metallographic, hardness, and XRD samples were polished using 600#, 800#, 1000#, 1500#, 2000#, and 3000# sandpaper, followed by mechanical polishing with W1.5 and W0.5 diamond polishing solutions on silk fabrics and polishing cloths. After polishing, the samples were cleaned with alcohol and air-dried using cold air. Metallographic samples were extracted from the upper, middle, and lower sections of the thin-walled components. Prior to microstructural examination, the samples were etched for 30 seconds using Keller’s reagent (2 mL HF, 3 mL HCl, 5 mL HNO₃, and 190 mL H₂O), and the microstructure was examined using an optical microscope. Microhardness was assessed using a Vickers microhardness tester, with measurements taken every 1 mm from the substrate bottom to the top of the thin-walled part. The applied load was 200 g, with a dwell time of 10 seconds. Additionally, phase analysis was performed using a D8 AdvanceX X-ray diffractometer (XRD) from Bruker, Germany. The scanning range was 5º to 90º, with a step size of 0.02º and a step speed of 0.2 seconds per step.

3.1 WAAM sample forming analysis

The actual forming effect of the multi-layer, single-pass straight-wall specimen under varying welding currents is depicted in Fig. 4. As shown in the figure, when the current is 30A, a small amount of weld tumor forms on the front surface of the specimen, leading to poor surface flatness. This may primarily be attributed to two factors: first, the current is too low, causing arc instability; second, the low current results in inadequate heat input, leading to incomplete melting of the welding wire. At 40A, the front and upper surfaces of the specimen are smooth and flat, resulting in a more aesthetically pleasing appearance. As the current increases to 50A, a significant number of weld tumor form on the front surface of the specimen. The formation of these weld tumor can be attributed to the excessive current, which increases the heat input. As a result, liquid metal from the molten pool flows onto the specimen surface under the influence of gravity and surface tension, forming weld tumor after cooling. These weld tumor result in an uneven surface, which may adversely affect the mechanical properties of the specimen, such as stress concentration and fatigue life. The upper surface of the specimen also becomes uneven, leading to height variations. This occurs because, in areas where a large number of weld tumor form, excess liquid metal flows to the surface, lowering the specimen’s height in those regions. Conversely, in areas without weld tumor, the specimen height remains higher. At 60A, the heat input further increases, exacerbating the defects on both the front and upper surfaces of the specimen.

To further investigate the dimensional characteristics of multi-layer, single-pass forming under different welding currents, the width of the straight-wall specimen and the height of each single layer were measured. To ensure the representativeness of the data, measurements were taken from five randomly selected positions on the specimen, and their average values were calculated. The height of each single layer was determined by dividing the total height of the specimen by the number of layers. Figure 5 illustrates the variation in the width and single-layer height of the straight-wall specimen under different welding currents, while other process parameters remained constant. As indicated in the figure, as the welding current gradually increases from 30A to 60A, both the width of the straight-wall specimen and the height of each single layer exhibit an upward trend. The width of the straight-wall specimen increased progressively from 5.22 mm at 30A to 8.87 mm at 60A, an increase of 3.65 mm, indicating a significant change. The height of each single layer increased slightly from 1.38 mm at 30A to 1.56 mm at 60A, an increase of 0.16 mm, with a less pronounced change. This indicates that the welding current has a greater influence on the width of the straight-wall specimen than on the height of each single layer.

3.2 XRD analysis

Figure 6 presents the X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimen. The XRD pattern reveals that the internal structure of the 5356 aluminum alloy specimen predominantly consists of the α(Al) phase, which serves as the primary crystal structure. Additionally, the diffraction pattern indicates the presence of a small amount of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase, suggesting that the alloy contains a certain proportion of aluminum-magnesium compounds. Furthermore, due to the incorporation of a certain amount of Fe into the alloy, the diffraction pattern exhibits weak peaks corresponding to the Al₃Fe phase, which may indicate the formation of aluminum-iron compounds.

3.3 Microstructure analysis

Figure 7 presents the microstructural morphology of the straight-walled specimen at different positions of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimen. Figure 7(a) illustrates the top metallographic structure of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimen. It is observed that uniformly distributed bone-like structures are present on the α(Al) matrix. These structures are densely packed and exhibit a lighter color, which is presumed to be β(Al₃Mg₂) based on their morphology. Black dendritic-reticular Mg₂Si structures are distributed around the β-phase, which serves as the reinforcing phase of Al-Mg alloys, enhancing the mechanical properties of the matrix. Figure 7(b) depicts the middle metallographic structure of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimen, which differs significantly from the top structure. The distribution density of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase is lower, with fewer and larger particles, likely due to the repeated heating of the middle section during the arc additive manufacturing process. Compared to the top structure, the middle section experiences higher heat input, leading to partial dissolution of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase into the α(Al) matrix, while the remaining β(Al₃Mg₂) particles grow in size. Figure 7(c) illustrates the microstructure at the bottom of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimen, which resembles the top structure. There is no significant dissolution of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase, and the particles are densely packed with uniform distribution across the α(Al) matrix. This is because the bottom structure is also exposed to repeated heating, but the heat transfer decreases from the middle to the bottom, minimizing its effect on the microstructure. As a result, there is no significant change in the morphology or distribution of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase.

Figure 8 presents the microstructural morphology of WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimens at various welding currents. At 30A, the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase is uniformly distributed across the α(Al) matrix, with smaller phase sizes and a higher distribution density. At 40A, the distribution density of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase decreases, with fewer and larger particles. This is due to the increased heat input at higher currents, allowing the β-phase to reach solid solution conditions. A portion of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase begins to dissolve into the α(Al) matrix, while the remaining β-phase grows coarser. At 50A, there is a notable reduction in the amount of skeletal-like β(Al₃Mg₂) structures on the α(Al) matrix. This suggests that the higher heat input accelerates the solid solution process of the β-phase, causing a significant decrease in the amount of β(Al₃Mg₂) phase as most of it dissolves at elevated temperatures. At 60A, the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase remains similar to that observed at 50A, but its size increases significantly. The elevated temperature due to the high current causes the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase to reach solid solution conditions. However, once the α(Al) matrix becomes saturated with dissolved β-phase, further dissolution is inhibited, even at 60A. The excessive heat allows the remaining β-phase to coarsen, forming larger granular shapes.

3.4 EDS analysis

Figure 9 presents the EDS point and line scans of the WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy. As shown in Fig. 9(a), the 5356 aluminum alloy specimen primarily consists of Al and Mg, accounting for 94.94% and 4.72%, respectively. Elements such as Mn, Fe, and Si were not detected, likely due to their low concentrations in the welding wire. As illustrated in Fig. 9(b), the smooth fluctuations in the line scan curves for Al and Mg suggest a uniform distribution of elements within the 5356 aluminum alloy specimen. The absence of significant segregation indicates better material quality.

3.5 Microhardness analysis

Figure 10 presents the microhardness of WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimens. As shown in the figure, the microhardness at the bottom and middle sections of the 5356 aluminum alloy specimens are similar, while the top section exhibits higher hardness. This is primarily due to the top being in contact with the air, resulting in enhanced heat dissipation and faster cooling, which promotes rapid solidification and the formation of fine grains, leading to increased hardness. The significant fluctuations in the data may be attributed to two factors: first, the rapid cooling at the interlayer bond, which prevents gas from escaping efficiently, leading to porosity defects. Second, repeated heating at the interlayer bond causes grain coarsening in the α(Al) matrix, resulting in reduced hardness values at these regions. The data also reveals that hardness increases steadily from 30A to 50A, then decreases at 60A. The average hardness rises from 69.40 HV at 30A to 77.89 HV at 50A, before dropping to 73.56 HV at 60A. This is attributed to the lower heat input and faster cooling rate at lower currents, leading to a higher degree of supercooling, which facilitates the formation of a fine and homogeneous grain structure, thus increasing hardness. Conversely, excessively high currents result in greater heat input and slower cooling, promoting grain growth, which consequently reduces the hardness of the material.

3.6 Tensile properties and fracture morphology

Figure 11 presents the tensile properties of WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimens at different positions. The figure reveals variations in tensile properties across different positions, indicating the presence of anisotropy. Studies [21–24] indicate that interlayer pore aggregation and microstructural inhomogeneity are the primary causes of anisotropy. The tensile strength and elongation of horizontally oriented specimens are slightly higher than those of vertically oriented specimens. This is likely due to the presence of a multilayer interlayer bonding area in the vertically oriented specimens, where defects such as porosity reduce the effective load-bearing area, resulting in diminished mechanical properties. The mechanical properties of the upper and middle sections of the specimen are comparable, while the lower section exhibits significantly lower tensile strength compared to the rest of the specimen. This discrepancy may be attributed to the slower cooling rate or repeated thermal cycles experienced by the lower section, leading to the formation of larger grain structures and consequently lower tensile strength.

Figure 12 presents the mechanical properties of WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy specimens at different currents. The figure shows that as the current increases, both the tensile strength and elongation of horizontal and vertical specimens initially increase and then decrease. This trend can be attributed to lower currents providing smaller heat input and faster cooling rates, resulting in a greater degree of supercooling. This promotes the formation of a fine and homogeneous grain structure, leading to higher tensile strength. Conversely, higher currents result in excessive heat input and slower cooling rates, promoting grain growth, which subsequently reduces the tensile strength. As observed earlier, the tensile strength and elongation of horizontally oriented specimens were slightly higher than those of vertically oriented specimens.

Figure 13 presents the tensile fracture morphology of 5356 aluminum alloy specimens at different positions. As illustrated in the figure, the fracture morphology of the 5356 aluminum alloy specimens at different positions remains consistent. Both transverse and longitudinal tensile fractures exhibit numerous dense dimples, a characteristic feature of ductile fracture, indicating that the thin-walled sections of WAAM 5356 aluminum alloy experience ductile failure under both orientations. Additionally, granular second-phase particles are visible at the bottom of the dimples. These particles contribute to the formation of microscopic voids, which ultimately result in fracture and the characteristic dimpled fracture morphology, manifesting as a perforation fracture pattern.

In this study, the microstructure and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc MIG additive manufacturing were examined, utilizing 5087 aluminum alloy as the substrate and ER5356 welding wire at low heat inputs (currents of 30A, 40A, 50A, and 60A). The following conclusions were drawn:

(1) At 40A, the front and upper surfaces of the specimen are smooth and flat, resulting in a more aesthetically refined appearance. As the current increases, both the width of the straight-walled specimen and the height of each individual layer increase gradually; however, the current has a more pronounced effect on the width than on the height of the single layer.

(2) The microstructure of the straight-walled specimen primarily comprises an α(Al) matrix and skeleton-like β(Al₃Mg₂) phases. As the current and heat input increase, portions of the β(Al₃Mg₂) phase begin to dissolve into the α(Al) matrix, resulting in a lower distribution density, fewer β-phase particles, and larger particle size.

(3) With increasing current, the microhardness initially rises before declining, while a gradual increase in microhardness is observed from the bottom to the top of the specimen.

(4) As the current increases, both the tensile strength and elongation of horizontal and vertical specimens initially increase and then decrease, with the tensile strength and elongation of horizontal specimens being slightly higher than those of vertical specimens. Both transverse and longitudinal tensile fractures exhibit numerous dense dimples, a characteristic of ductile fracture.

Funding

The Sponsored by National Natural Science Foundation of China (52465055) and Natural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (2023D01C189) served as the sources for this study.

Data availability

All data that support the findings of this study are included within this article.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Pan JG, Yuan B, Ge JG, Ren Y, Chen HJ, Zhang L, Lu H (2022 ) Influence of arc mode on the microstructure and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy fabricated by wire arc additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 20:1893-1907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.08.005.
Gungor B, Kaluc E, Taban E, Aydin SIK (2014 ) Mechanical and microstructural properties of robotic Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) welded 5083-H111 and 6082-T651 aluminum alloysMaterials Design 54:207-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.08.018.
Tao Y, Ren XL, Chen SJ, Jiang XQ (2022 ) Grain refinement and property improvements of Al–Zn–Mg–Cu alloy by heterogeneous particle addition during wire and arc additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 16:824-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.12.049.
Karayel E, Bozkurt Y (2020 ) Additive manufacturing method and different welding applications. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 9(5):11424-11438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.08.039.
Chen SJ, Xu M, Yuan T, Jiang XQ, Zhang HD, Zheng X (2022 ) Thermal–microstructural analysis of the mechanism of liquation cracks in wire-arc additive manufacturing of Al–Zn–Mg–Cu alloy. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 16:1260-1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.12.016.
Wu BT, Pan ZX, Ding DH, Cuiuri D, Li HJ (2018 ) Effects of heat accumulation on microstructure and mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V alloy deposited by wire arc additive manufacturing. Additive Manufacturing 23:151-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.08.004.
Ding DH, Pan ZX, Van Duin S, Li HJ, Shen C (2016 ) Fabricating superior NiAl bronze components through wire arc additive manufacturing. Materials 9(8):652. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9080652.
Shen C, Pan ZX, Cuiuri D, Dong BS, Li HJ (2016 ) In-depth study of the mechanical properties for Fe3Al based iron aluminide fabricated using the wire-arc additive manufacturing process. Materials Science and Engineering: A 669:118-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.05.047.
Xu XF, Ding JL, Ganguly S, Diao CL, Williams S (2018 ) Oxide accumulation effects on wire+ arc layer-by-layer additive manufacture process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 252:739-750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.10.030.
Gu JL, Bai J, Ding JL, Williams S, Wang LM, Liu K (2018 ) Design and cracking susceptibility of additively manufactured Al-Cu-Mg alloys with tandem wires and pulsed arc. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 262:210-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.06.030.
Aldalur E, Suárez A, Veiga F (2021 ) Metal transfer modes for Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing Al-Mg alloys: Influence of heat input in microstructure and porosity. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 297:117271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117271.
Sahul M, Pavlík M, Sahul M, Kovačócy P, Martinkovič M (2024 ) Effect of travel speed on the properties of 5087 aluminum alloy walls produced by wire and arc additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-024-09166-3.
Wang BQ, Li RH, Zhou XH, Liu FY, Wei LF, Tian L, Song XG Tan CW (2024 ) Insight into Role of Arc Torch Angle on Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing Characteristics of ZL205A Aluminum Alloy. Materials 17(15):3771. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17153771.
Zhang C, Gao M, Zeng XY (2019 ) Workpiece vibration augmented wire arc additive manufacturing of high strength aluminum alloy. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 271:85-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.03.028.
Zhou YH, Lin X, Kang N, Huang WD, Wang ZN (2021 ) Mechanical properties and precipitation behavior of the heat-treated wire+ arc additively manufactured 2219 aluminum alloy. Materials Characterization 171:110735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2020.110735.
Derekar K, Lawrence J, Melton GB, Addison A, Zhang X, Xu L (2019 February ) Influence of interpass temperature on wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) of aluminium alloy componentsIn MATEC Web of Conferences (p5001 ) EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201926905001.
Ahsan MR, Seo GJ, Fan XS, Liaw PK, Motaman S, Haase C, Kim DB (2021 ) Effects of process parameters on bead shape microstructure and mechanical properties in wire+ arc additive manufacturing of Al01CoCrFeNi high-entropy alloy. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 68:1314-1327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.06.047.
Wang S, Gu HM, Wang W, Li CD, Ren LL, Wang ZB, Zhai YC, Ma P (2020 ) The influence of heat input on the microstructure and properties of wire-arc-additive-manufactured Al-Cu-Sn alloy deposits. Metals 10(1):79. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10010079.
Zhou YH, Lin X, Kang N, Huang WD, Wang J, Wang ZN (2020 ) Influence of travel speed on microstructure and mechanical properties of wire+ arc additively manufactured 2219 aluminum alloy. Journal of Materials Science Technology 37:143-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.06.016.
Wang DH, Lu JP, Tang SY, Yu L, Fan HL, Ji L, Liu CM (2018 ) Reducing porosity and refining grains for arc additive manufacturing aluminum alloy by adjusting arc pulse frequency and current. Materials 11(8):1344. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11081344.
Liang Y, Shen JQ, Hu SS, Wang HC, Pang J (2018 ) Effect of TIG current on microstructural and mechanical properties of 6061-T6 aluminium alloy joints by TIG–CMT hybrid welding. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 255:161-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.12.006.
Bai JY, Yang CL, Lin SB, Dong BL, Fan CL (2016 ) Mechanical properties of 2219-Al components produced by additive manufacturing with TIG. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 86:479-485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-8168-x.
Liu PW, Wang Z, Xiao YH, Horstemeyer MF, Cui XY, Chen L (2019 ) Insight into the mechanisms ofcolumnar to equiaxed grain transition during metallic additive manufacturingAdditive Manufacturing 26:22-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.019.
Bermingham MJ, StJohn DH, Krynen J, Tedman-Jones S, Dargusch MS (2019 ) Promoting the columnar to equiaxed transition and grain refinement of titanium alloys during additive manufacturingActa Materialia 168:261-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2019.02.020.

Download PDF

Reviewers agreed at journal
14 Oct, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
14 Oct, 2024
Editor invited by journal
05 Oct, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
27 Sep, 2024
First submitted to journal
26 Sep, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Research on the microstructural organization and mechanical properties of 5356 aluminum alloy arc additive manufacturing under low heat input conditions

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1 Introduction

2 Test materials and methods

3 Results and discussion

3.1 WAAM sample forming analysis

3.2 XRD analysis

3.3 Microstructure analysis

3.4 EDS analysis

3.5 Microhardness analysis

3.6 Tensile properties and fracture morphology

4 Conclusion

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1