Abstract
In additive manufacturing (AM), internal flaws that form during processing can have a detrimental impact on the resulting fatigue behavior of the component. Nondestructive x-ray computed tomography (XCT) has been routinely used to inspect AM components. This technique, however, is limited by what is resolvable as well as the automated procedures available to analyze the data. In this study, we compared XCT scans and automated flaw recognition analysis of the corresponding data to results obtained from an automated mechanical polishing-based serial sectioning system. Although internal porosity and surface roughness were easily observed by serial sectioning with bright-field optical microscopy, the same level of information could not be obtained from the XCT data. For the acquisition parameters used, XCT had only a 15.7% detection rate compared to that of serial sectioning. The results point to the need to recognize the limitations of XCT and for supplementary XCT scan quality metrics in addition to the voxel size.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
