A comparison of fatigue strength sensitivity to defects for materials manufactured by AM or traditional processes

By Stefano Beretta, S. Romano. 2017

557 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Automotive Engineering, Materials Chemistry, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b47d7f4521f5d0180b11c5cb2ccbfe8b03e68710

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Automotive Engineering

1. Nima Shamsaei
2. Stefano Beretta
3. S. Romano
4. Aref Yadollahi
5. Jialuo Ding
6. Stewart W. Williams
7. A. Brandão
8. J. Gumpinger

In Materials Chemistry

1. Stefano Beretta
2. A. Brandão
3. J. Gumpinger
4. Nima Shamsaei
5. S. Romano
6. Jialuo Ding
7. Stewart W. Williams

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Nima Shamsaei
2. Stefano Beretta
3. S. Romano
4. Jialuo Ding
5. Aref Yadollahi
6. Stewart W. Williams
7. A. Brandão
8. J. Gumpinger

Citations in the corpus

• Qualification of AM parts: Extreme value statistics applied to tomographic measurements (2017, methodology): “However, the fatigue limit reduction for as-built SLM parts with respect to machined ones can be significant, up to 40–50% [14].”
• Mechanism of keyhole pore formation in metal additive manufacturing (2021, background): “The porosity of the as-built part, one kind of defects, decreases the ultimate strength directly and is also a fatal flaw to the fatigue and fracture strength of the part [6, 7, 8].”