2017 2nd International Conference on Test, Measurement and Computational Method (TMCM 2017)

ISBN: 978-1-60595-465-3

Hardness and Surface Roughness Study of Steel Part

Produced by Additive Technology

Katarina MONKOVA1,*, Peter MONKA1,2 and Dusan MANDULAK3

1
Technical University of Kosice, Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies with the Seat in Presov,
Presov, Slovakia
2
University of West Bohemia, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Pilsen, Czech Republic
3
Presovska nastrojaren, Ltd., Lubochnianska 2407/2, 080 06 Presov
*Corresponding author

Keywords: Complex part, Additive manufacturing, Measures, Hardness, Surface roughness.

Abstract. 3D printing is currently growing very rapidly and it allows to produce structurally complex
elements consisting of one or more parts. 3D printing technique delivers some problems which are
necessary to solve. The article deals with the hardness and surface roughness investigation of a
component produced by direct metal laser sintering technology. The goal of the research was to study
the influence of a surface orientation on observed parameters mentioned above. The tested sample
was designed as a complex part that includes many geometrical features, which can also influence
properties of a product. The part was produced from maraging steel 1.2709. Executed preliminary
tests have shown that the obtained values differ, what indicates that there are effects of manufacturing
conditions on the product quality. Next experiments will be performed to specify the impact degree of
individual factors.

Introduction
The world develops permanently. In recent years, two new fields which change approach to the
manufacture and metrology might be observed. In the area of manufacturing, there are additive
manufacturing techniques which develop fast. A few years ago, these techniques allowed only to
execute elements only for spatial visualizations of designed parts. Currently, we can print 3D
elements made of different types of plastics or metals. Additive printing technologies allow
production of elements which have hitherto been considered as the non-technological and not
possible to made from the point of view of production technology, capacity and cost-effectiveness.
Today additive technologies have their place in process of making new parts, from idea to final
product. During production, within additive process, an object is created by laying down successive
layers of material until the entire object is created. Each of these layers can be seen as a thinly sliced
horizontal cross-section of the eventual object [1, 2, 3].
Some of common advantages of existing additive manufacturing techniques are: speed (model
building in one day); manufacturing flexibility (almost any geometry can be replicated); high degree
of control over part microstructure; wide variety of engineering materials (plastic, metals, and
ceramics). They also have some common shortcomings such as: lack of required mechanical
properties depending on material combination; lower accuracy (can be improved by additional
machining); high computational demands and limited bio-compatibility (important in manufacturing
of medical products). Yet, most of listed shortcomings can be successfully avoided in particular case
with proper selection of techniques and materials [4,5].
To be 3D printing technology included in the industrial production of the actual component is
required to achieve high mechanical properties of produced parts. The final properties of produced
parts are strongly dependent on each individual laser produced track and layer.

355
Tested Part
To investigate the qualitative parameters of the part produced by 3D metal printing technology, the
special component with many problematic and specific features (holes, ribs, tapered surfaces,
grooves, shaped cuts …) was designed. Designed part is thin-walled cubic with sizes 70x70x70 mm
and thickness of 2 mm. Its top shape includes two types of ribs (wavy and beveled) with height of 5
mm, width in range from 0.15 to 0.8 mm and angles from 37° to 60°. Dominant feature of inner
surface of the cube is sphere with diameter of 44 mm. Orientation of designed virtual model and its
cross sections is shown in Fig. 1. [6]

Figure 1. Orientation of designed virtual model and its cross sections [6].
The ribs were designed due to the confirmation a theory according to which it is not possible to
build a wall up to angle 40° without supports. The designed part also includes many holes in various
axis directions with diameters from 1 to 10 mm, conical holes and various types of grooves (triangle,
trapezoidal and with radius). There are also holes with various thickness of the wall and acicular juts
in various axis and slant. The produced part with supports and is cross section is shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. The cross section of part produced by DMLS technology.

The part was produced from steel 1.2709, which is characterized by good usage at higher ambient
temperatures. Maraging Steel 1.2709 is a pre-alloyed ultra-high strength steel in fine powder form. Its
composition corresponds to US classification 18% Ni Maraging 300, European 1.2709 and German
X3NiCoMoTi 18-9-5. Chemical composition steel 1.2709 is presented in Table I. [7]
Table 1. Chemical composition of steel 1.2709 [7].

This type of steel is characterized by having very good mechanical properties, and being easily
heat-treatable using a simple thermal age-hardening process to obtain excellent hardness and strength.
It is ideal for many tooling applications such as tools for injection molding, die casting of light metal
alloys, punching, extrusion, it is also good for high performance industrial and engineering parts, for
example aerospace and motor racing applications. [8] Known mechanical properties of the steel are
listed in Table 2. [9]

356
 Table 2. Mechanical properties of steel 1.2709 [9].

Hardness and Surface Roughness investigation

To verify the hardness given by [9] the measures of hardness according to Rockwell was realized at
the cube produced from steel 1.2709 by DMLS technology. Before measurement it was necessary to
reground the places, where the tests were done. Original printed surface was not perfect completely
and thus the results of measurements would not be possible to accept. In regard to the fact that the part
was designed with thin walls, measured areas have been selected at the margins of the cube, because
there was a danger that the sample will break during the investigation. [10]
Areas selected for hardness measure are presented in Fig. 3.

Figure 3. Selected areas for hardness measure [6].

The measurements were carried out at four different locations and at each location the
measurement was performed at least twice. All of the values were then averaged to obtain a hardness
that approximately characterizes selected area. Average values of hardness measuring are reported in
Table 3.
Table 3. Values of hardness at individual surfaces [6].
Average hardness value [HRC]
Surface XY 38,125
Surface YZ 46
Surface XZ 37,357
Surface XY´ (with supports) 46,5
Surface YZ´(with supports) 45,875
Surface XZ´(with supports) 36,125

It is clear that the values differ, what could be influenced by surface porosity, inaccuracy of the
surface, by measuring next to a pit or by the position of observed area in regard to the sample
orientation, etc.
To obtain next characteristics of surfaces produced by DMLS technology, the surface roughness
was measured. Measuring device MarSurf M 300 was used for surface roughness investigation, which
of measuring range varies up to value 350 µm. The drive unit RD18 with high adjustment can be
connected to the MarSurf M 300. The well-proven PHT-skid probes are implemented in the drive
unit. The measuring equipment with an example of measure record is shown in Fig. 4.

357
 Figure 4. Device MarSurf M300 with drive unit RD18 and an example of measure record.
The measures of surface roughness were done at top planar surfaces of cube (XY, YZ and XZ), while
three of them were produced without support structures and three were produced so that they were
joined to support structures (XY´, YZ´ and XZ´). Surface roughness was measured at angle of 45°
toward to the printing direction, never in the printing direction. Thanks to this fact, the results can be
compared. Following parameters were evaluated: Ra – arithmetical average deviation from a mean
line, Rq – root mean square values in the basic length, Rz – ten-point height of irregularities, Rmax –
maximum height of irregularities, Rt – vertical distance from the highest peak to the deepest groove
roughness profile at the measuring section, RSm – arithmetic mean width of profile elements in the
range of basic length. Obtained values of surface roughness measured in the planes without supports
are inscribed in Table 4.
Table 4. Surface roughness in individual planar surfaces (on top of the sample) [6].
Surface XY [µm] Surface YZ [µm] Surface XZ [µm]
Ra 3,066 3,334 5,478
Rq 3,946 4,665 6,475
Rz 13,52 16,74 21,23
Rmax 15,10 25,58 25,61
Rt 20,33 32,97 26,94
RSm 145 124 145

From Table 3 it is clear that the highest values of surface roughness were measured in XZ plane,
except the value Rt in plane YZ, but it can be said that from the view of surface roughness, the plane
XZ is critical.
Table 5 presents the results of surface roughness measuring realized on bottom planes of the cube,
which were connected with big amount of supports. Bottom planes XY´, YZ´ and XZ´ are parallel with
top planar surfaces XY, YZ and XZ. Also, these measurements confirmed the worse quality of the
surface roughness at the plane XZ´.

Table 5. Surface roughness in individual planar surfaces (on bottom of the sample) [6].
XY´ plane (supported) YZ´ plane (supported) XZ´ plane (supported)
[µm] [µm] [µm]
Ra 6,227 8,955 9,245
Rq 8,525 11,19 11,54
Rz 26,73 40,53 40,80
Rmax 39,67 53,45 55,9
Rt 41,61 60,24 58,97
RSm 294 140 174

Summary
DMLS is the preferred method of 3D rapid prototyping for complex geometries. It is a process of
making three dimensional solid objects from a digital file, where a component is built layer by layer.
As the additive manufacturing process is very complex, logically, there exist some obstacles and
358
problems that prevent the formation of high quality parts. A thermal gradient of the material can cause
an inner stress along with shrinkage which consequently influences precision of the part. The
shrinkage is strongly influenced by technological parameters, building temperature, the temperature
in the working chamber, a cooling rate etc. Crystalline shrinkage which occur during cooling, can be
in different directions very heterogeneous, it can thus occur to a large expansion of shrinkage during
the time course of sintering. [11]
The goal of the research was to study the influence of a surface orientation on hardness and surface
roughness. These parameters were investigated at the surfaces, which were built under the various
angle in regard to the base. Executed preliminary tests have shown that the obtained values differ,
what indicates that there are effects of part orientation along with presence of supports. Next
experiments will be performed in the close future to specify the impact degree of individual factors
and manufacturing conditions on the product quality.

Acknowledgement
Paper originates with the direct support of Ministry of Education of Slovak republic by grants VEGA
1/0614/15 and KEGA 087TUKE-4/2015.

References
[1] Majstorovic, V. et al.: CAI Model for Prismatic Parts in Digital Manufacturing, pp. 27-32,
Procedia CIRP, 25 (2014) pp. 27–32.
[2] Valicek, J. et al.: Mechanism of creating the topography of an abrasive water jet cut surface,
Advanced Structured Materials, 61, (2016) pp. 111-120.
[3] Frank, D. and Fadel, G.: Expert system-based selection of the preferred direction of build for
rapid prototyping processes. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing; 6(5), (1995), pp. 339-345.
[4] Baron, P. et al.: Research and application of methods of technical diagnostics for the verification
of the design node, Measurement: Journal of the International Measurement Confederation, 94,
(2016) pp. 245-253.
[5] Cloots, M, Spierings A, and Wegener, K.: Assessing new support minimizing strategies for the
additive manufacturing technology SLM. Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium (2013).
[6] Capkova, V.: Restictive parameters of 3D printing, Diploma thesis, WBU of Pilsen, Faculty of
mechanical engineerin (2015)
[7] Hanzl, P. et al.: Optimization of the Pressure Porous Sample and Its Manufacturability by
Selective Laser Melting, Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 17, No 1 (2017) pp. 34-38.
[8] Ungureanu, M., Pop, N., Ungureanu, N.: Innovation and Technology Transfer for Business
Development, Procedia Engineering, Volume 149, (2016) pp. 495–500.
[9] Beno, P., Kozak, D., Konjatic, P.: Optimization of thin-walled constructions in CAE system
ANSYS, Tehnicki Vjesnik, Volume 21, Issue 5, 1 (2014), pp. 1051-1055.
[10] Masood, S. H., Rattanawong, W.: Generic Part Orientation System Based on Volumetric Error
in Rapid Prototyping. Int. Journal of Advance Manufacturing Technology, 19, (2002) pp. 209-216.
[11] Dobransky, J. et al.: Document Optimization of the production and logistics processes based on
computer simulation tools, Key Engineering Materials, 669, (2016) pp. 532-540.

359