Comparison of Laser-Engraved Hole Properties between Cold-Rolled and Laser Additive Manufactured Stainless Steel Sheets

Laser drilling and laser engraving are common manufacturing processes that are found in many applications. With the continuous progress of additive manufacturing (3D printing), these processes can now be applied to the materials used in 3D printing. However, there is a lack of knowledge about how th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inApplied sciences Vol. 7; no. 9; p. 913
Main Authors Manninen, Matti, Hirvimäki, Marika, Matilainen, Ville-Pekka, Salminen, Antti
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Basel MDPI AG 06.09.2017
Subjects
3-D printers
3D printing
additive manufacturing
Cold rolling
Defects
Drilling
Engraving
Laser drilling
laser engraving
Laser processing
Lasers
Manufacturing
Manufacturing industry
Metal sheets
Powder
powder bed fusion
Printing
Recesses
Stainless steel
Tool steels
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Laser drilling and laser engraving are common manufacturing processes that are found in many applications. With the continuous progress of additive manufacturing (3D printing), these processes can now be applied to the materials used in 3D printing. However, there is a lack of knowledge about how these new materials behave when processed or machined. In this study, sheets of 316L stainless steel produced by both the traditional cold rolling method and by powder bed fusion (PBF) were laser drilled by a nanosecond pulsed fiber laser. Results were then analyzed to find out whether there are measurable differences in laser processing parts that are produced by either PBF (3D printing) or traditional steel parts. Hole diameters, the widths of burn effects, material removal rates, and hole tapers were measured and compared. Additionally, differences in microstructures of the samples were also analyzed and compared. Results show negligible differences in terms of material processing efficiency. The only significant differences were that the PBF sample had a wider burn effect, and had some defects in the microstructure that were more closely analyzed. The defects were found to be shallow recesses in the material. Some of the defects were deep within the material, at the end and start points of the laser lines, and some were close to the surfaces of the sample.
ISSN:2076-3417
2076-3417
DOI:10.3390/app7090913