Progress in additive manufacturing, additive repair and fatigue evaluation of aviation titanium alloy blades

Figures & data

Figure 1. FOD failure of aero-engine fan blades.

Figure 2. Comparison of three AM processes used for metal manufacturing [50–52].

Table 1. Comparison of three AM processes used for TC4 titanium alloy [48].

	Parameter
Process	Equipment	Energy	Power / W	Scan rate / (mm s^-1)	Spot diameter / µm	Layer thickness / µm	Powder diameter / µm
LMD	Trumpf-DLD	Laser	1200–1600	120–1560	4000	500–1000	50–150
SLM	EOS-M270	Laser	40–160	8.3–15.3	50–100	30–70	0–45
SEBM	Arcam-A2	Electron beam	210–630	300–900	100–500	70–100	45–105

Figure 3. Maintenance specifications on aero-engine blades. (a) CFM-LEAP-1A engine fan rotor blade maintenance [56]; (b) CFM56-3 engine fan rotor blade maintenance [57]; (c) CFM56-7 engine fan rotor blade maintenance [58].

Figure 4. LMD repair technology used for aero-engine blades. (a) Titanium alloy blisk blade repaired by LENS process of Optomec Design Company; (b) Nickel-base turbine blade knife-edges repaired by Fraunhofer Laser Technology Association; (c) Titanium alloy blisk blades repaired by Northwestern Polytechnic University.

Table 2. Effect of microstructure on HCF strength of AM manufactured titanium alloy.

Material	Progress	Post processing	Microstructure	Test status	Cycles	σe/MPa	Refs.
TC4	SLM, Z	AN, 650°/3 h	Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 140 µm, fine needle HCP α/α’ lath	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	340	[97]
			Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 120 µm, fine needle α/α’ lath			453
	SLM, Z	/	Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 140 µm, fine needle HCP α/α’ lath	Rotating bending, R = −1	10^7	340	[98]
		/	Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 120 µm, fine needle α/α’ lath			453–475
		DAN (920°/0.5 h FC, 700°/2 h AC), M&P	Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 140 µm, fine needle HCP α/α’ lath			375–400
		DAN (920°/0.5 h FC, 700°/2 h AC), M&P	Columnar PBGs in Z, grain size 120 µm, fine needle α/α’ lath			453–475
	LMD, X/Y	/	Columnar PBGs, ultra-thin layer with a width of 200-800 nm α+β structure, needle α’ lath	Tension, R = 0.1	10^6	500	[99]
	LENS, Z	AN, 600°/1 h	Column and basket α+β grain in Z, needle α’ lath	Tension, R = 0.01	10^6	482	[100]
	EPBF, Z	HIP, 920°C/103 MPa/2 h	α+β phase	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	155	[101]
	LPBF, Z	AN, 730°/2 h	α+β phase, needle α’ phase			265
	SLM, Z	AN, 500°/2 h	A mixture of β and fine needle α	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	430	[102]
	SLM, Z	/	α+β phase, needle α’ phase	Tension, R = −1	10^7	290	[103]
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h	α+β phase, needle α’ phase			370
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h, SMAT	Lamellar α+β phase			580
	SLM, Z	/	Columnar PBGs in Z with α colonies	Tension, R = 0.2	2×10^5	100	[104]
	LPBF, 45° to Z	AN, 700°/1 h	Interrupted columnar PBGs, result in stray grains, needle α’ phase	Tension, R = −1	10^7	75–100	[105]
	SLM, Z	AN, 800°/2 h	Hexagonal α phase and minor amounts of β phase	Tension, R = −1	10^7	250	[106]
	SLM, Z	HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	Hexagonal α phase and less amounts of β phase			420
	EBM, Z	/	Hexagonal α lamellae			410
	SLM, Z	AN, 700°/1 h, HIP, 900°C/100 MPa/2 h	Elongated α grains embedded in α/β-phase grain boundaries with a column size of up to 3 µm width	Tension, R = −1	10^7	200	[107]
		AN, 700°/1 h, HIP, 900°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	Elongated α grains embedded in α/β-phase grain boundaries with a column size of up to 3 µm width			350
	SLM, Z	/	Fine needle α/α’ phase	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	100	[108]
	EBM, Z	/	Lamellar α+β phase			60
	SLM, Z	AN, 670°/5 h	Fine needle α’ martensitic	Tension, R = −1	3×10^7	221	[109]
		DAN (670°/5 h, 920°/2 h)	α-platelets interspersed in the β matrix			191
		AN, 670°/5 h, HIP, 920°C/200 MPa/2 h	α-platelets interspersed in the β matrix			369
	SLM, Z	/	Complete martensitic α’ in PBGs	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	550	[110]
	EBM, Z	/	Lamellae α phase and a small amount of β within PBGs			300–340
	SLM, X/Y	/	α’ martensitic	Tension, R = 0.1	4×10^4	400	[111]
		AN, 400°/2 h	Ultra-fine lamella α+β phase		3×10^6
	DMLS, Z	AN, 710°/2 h	Columnar PBGs perpendicular to Z, fine needle α/α’ phase	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	500	[112]
	EBM, Z		Columnar PBGs perpendicular to Z, needle α/α’ phase		10^7	280
	DMD-L, Z		Columnar PBGs perpendicular to Z, needle α/α’ phase		10^7	580
	DMD-P, Z		Columnar PBGs perpendicular to Z, lamella α phase		3×10^7	500
	EBM, Z	/	Needle α+β phase with α lath thickness of 0.7µm	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	200	[113]
		AN, 650°/5 h	Needle α+β phase with α lath thickness of 0.6µm			250
		HIP, 900°C/100 MPa/2 h	Thick lath α+β phase with α lath thickness of 1.6µm			540
	DMLS, X/Y	AN, 650°/2 h	Laminar α+β colonies distributed in equiaxed α grains	Rotating bending, R = −1	10^5	60	[114]
		HIP, 900°C/102 MPa/2 h, M&P	Laminar α+β colonies distributed in equiaxed α grains, with thick α lath		10^7	405
	DMLS, Z	AN, 650°/2 h, M&P	Laminar α+β colonies distributed in equiaxed α grains		2×10^4	60
		HIP, 900°C/102 MPa/2 h, M&P	Laminar α+β colonies distributed in equiaxed α grains, with thick α lath		10^7	400
TC17	DED, X/Y	/	Ultra-fine α basketweave structure in columnar β grains	Tension, R = 0.1	2×10^5	365	[29]
TA15	DED, Z	DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	Columnar PBGs in Z, needle α grains dominated	Tension, R = 0.06	1.6×10^5	720	[115]

Notes: σ_e – the fatigue limit, Z – the load direction is parallel to the deposition direction, X/Y – the load direction is perpendicular to the deposition direction, R – the stress ratio, FC – Furnace cooling, EPBF – Electron beam powder bed fusion, SMAT – Surface mechanical attrition treatment, DMLS – Direct Metal Laser Sintering, DMD-L – Direct metal deposition by laser, DMD-P – Direct metal deposition by plasma arc.

Table 3. Effect of manufacturing defects on HCF strength of AM processed titanium alloy.

Material	Progress	Post processing	Defects	Test status	Cycles	σe/MPa	Refs.
TC4	SLM, Z	/	√area = 68.6–71.3 µm	Rotating bending, R = −1	10^7	340	[98]
		/	√area = 36.4–43.1 µm			453–475
		DAN (920°/0.5 h FC, 700°/2 h AC), M&P	√area = 68.6–71.3 µm			375–400
		DAN (920°/0.5 h FC, 700°/2 h AC), M&P	√area = 36.4–43.1 µm			453–475
	LMD, X/Y	/	√area = 126 µm	Tension, R = 0.1	2×10^5	500	[99]
		/	√area = 63 µm		10^6
	EBM, X/Y	/	Diameter  = 328 µm	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	150	[116]
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	Diameter  = 328 µm			140
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	/			650
	LPBF, X/Y	AN, 710°/2 h	Diameter = 44 µm			200
		AN, 710°/2 h, HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	Diameter = 44 µm			185
		AN, 710°/2 h, HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	/			650
	SLM, Z	AN, 500°/2 h	Diameter = 30 µm	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	430	[102]
	SLM, Z	/	Diameter = 34 µm	Tension, R = −1	10^7	290	[103]
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h	/			370
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h, SMAT	/			580
	EBM, Z	HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	Diameter = 50–120 µm	Rotating bending, R = −1	10^7	590	[117]
	DMLS, Z	HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	Diameter = 30–50 µm			610
	SLM, 45°to Z	AN, 650°/3 h	Diameter = 30–80 µm	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	210	[118]
		AN, 650°/3 h, M&P				510
	SLM, Z	/	Porosity = 1%	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	100	[108]
		/	Porosity = 5%			280
		/	Porosity = 1%			400
	EBM, Z	/	Porosity = 5%			60
		/	Porosity = 1%			450
		/	Porosity = 0			500
	SLM, Z	AN, 670°/5 h	Porosity<0.05%	Tension, R = −1	3×10^7	221	[109]
		DAN (670°/5 h, 920°/2 h)				191
		AN, 670°/5 h, HIP, 920°C/200 MPa/2 h				369
TA15	LDED, Z	DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 78 µm	Tension, R = 0.06	1.6×10^5	720	[115]
		DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 8 µm		15.5×10^5	720
		DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 132 µm		0.5×10^5	760
		DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 22 µm		6.5×10^5	760
		DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 116 µm		0.3×10^5	800
		DAN (950°/2 h FC, 600°/4 h AC)	√area = 22 µm		5.4×10^5	800

Table 4. Effect of surface roughness on HCF strength of AM processed titanium alloy.

Material	Progress	Post processing	Ra/µm	Test status	Cycles	σe/MPa	Refs.
TC4	LENS, Z	AN, 600°/1 h	0.25	Tension, R = 0.01	10^6	482	[100]
	EPBF, Z	HIP, 920°C/103 MPa/2 h	20	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	155	[101]
	LPBF, Z	AN, 730°/2 h	14			265
	EBM, Z	/	32	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	160	[119]
		HIP	32			180
		HIP, M&P	1.6			800
	LS, Z	AN, 650°/3 h	15			250
		AN, 650°/3 h, HIP	15			320
		AN, 650°/3 h, HIP, M&P	1.6			550
	EBM, X/Y	/	27	Tension, R = 0.1	5×10^6	150	[116]
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	27			140
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	1.6			650
	LPBF, X/Y	AN, 710°/2 h	13			200
		AN, 710°/2 h, HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	1.6			185
		AN, 710°/2 h, HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	2			650
	SLM, Z	/	/	Tension, R = −1	10^7	290	[103]
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h	/			370
		HIP, 900°C/120 MPa/2 h, SMAT	1.07±0.53			580
	EBM, Z	/	32–42	Rotating bending, R = −1	10^7	140	[117]
		M&P	/			240–260
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	30–41			195
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	/			590
	DMLS, Z	/	10–13			155
		M&P	/			370
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	12–13			195–220
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h, M&P	/			610
	SLM, Z	/	39	Tension, R = 0.2	2×10^5	100	[104]
	SLM, X/Y	/	30			140
	LPBF, 45°to Z	AN, 700°/1 h	8–24	Tension, R = −1	10^7	75–100	[105]
	SLM, 45°to Z	AN, 650°/3 h	13	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	210	[118]
		AN, 650°/3 h, M&P	0.5			510
	LAM, Z	AN, 650°/3 h	12	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	210	[95]
		AN, 650°/3 h, M&P	/			490
	LAM, 45°to Z	AN, 650°/3 h	12			200–210
		AN, 650°/3 h, M&P	/			420–500
	LPBF, Z	AN, 540°/4 h, HIP, 810°C/200 MPa/2 h	17.9±2	Tension, R = 0.1	3×10^7	300	[120]
		AN, 540°/4 h, HIP, 810°C/200 MPa/2 h, milled	0.3±0.1			600
		AN, 540°/4 h, HIP, 810°C/200 MPa/2 h, blasted	10.1±0.2			500
		AN, 540°/4 h, HIP, 810°C/200 MPa/2 h, vibratory ground	0.9±0.7			400
		AN, 540°/4 h, HIP, 810°C/200 MPa/2 h, M&P	0.4±0.3			500
	SLM, Z	AN, 670°/5 h	6.83	Tension, R = −1	3×10^7	221	[109]
		AN, 670°/5 h, electropolishing	0.54			242
		DA (670°/5 h, 920°/2 h)	6.83			191
		AN, 670°/5 h, HIP, 920°C/200 MPa/2 h	5.07			369
	DMLS, X/Y	AN, 710°/2 h	13.0±0.7	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	200	[121]
	EBM, X/Y	AN, 710°/2 h	27.1±0.91			150
TC17	LDED, X/Y	/	0.419	Tension, R = 0.1	2×10^5	365	[29]

Note: LS – laser sintering.

Table 5. Effect of residual stress on HCF strength of AM processed titanium alloy.

Material	Progress	Post processing	Residual stress/MPa	Test status	Cycles	σe/MPa	Refs.
TC4	LMD, X/Y	/	+180 to +250	Tension, R = 0.1	2×10^5	500	[99]
		/	/		10^6
	SLM, Z	/	+75	Tension, R = 0.2	2×10^5	100	[104]
	SLM, X/Y	/	+60			140
	SLM, Z	AN, 800°/2 h	/	Tension, R = −1	10^7	250	[106]
		HIP, 920°C/100 MPa/2 h	/			420
	EBM, Z	/	+35			410
	SLM, Z	AN, 670°/5 h	−100	Tension, R = −1	3×10^7	221	[109]
		AN, 670°/5 h, electropolishing	−420			242
		DA (670°/5 h, 920°/2 h)	−100			191
		AN, 670°/5 h, HIP, 920°C/200 MPa/2 h	−420			369
	EBM, Z	/	+17	Tension, R = 0.1	10^7	200	[113]
		AN, 650°/5 h	+3			250
		HIP, 900°C/100 MPa/2 h	−16			540
TC17	LDED, X/Y	/	+150	Tension, R = 0.1	2×10^5	365	[29]

Figure 5. Influencing factors of AM on fatigue properties of titanium alloy. Notes: LOF – Lack of fusion, EVS – Extreme Value Statistics, PD – Probabilistic distribution, DAN – Double Annealing.

Figure 6. Defects on LAM processed TC17 samples. (a) and (b) Pores and LOFs observed by CT and OM; (c) Fatigue fracture of tensile specimen caused by pores; (d) Fatigue fracture of blade leading edge caused by LOF.

Figure 7. HCF fracture behavior of titanium alloy.

Figure 8. Development of mechanical models for fatigue properties evaluation of AM processed titanium alloy [95,117,149,183,184].

Figure 9. Estimation method of effective area of irregular defects and surface defects. Reprinted with permission from Masuo et al. [117] (Copyright (2018) Elsevier).

Figure 10. Interaction of AM defects under fatigue loading. Reprinted with permission from Wu et al. [201] (Copyright (2017) Elsevier).

Figure 11. K–T diagram with El Haddad and Topper corrections (a) Schematic diagram; (b) Experimental data and simulation results. Reprinted with permission from Wycisk et al. [95]. (Copyright (2014) Elsevier).

Figure 12. Summary of the application of applying ML strategy in predicting the fatigue properties of AM materials (Artificial neural network as an example) [222].

Figure 13. The fatigue life prediction of AM Ti-6Al-4V alloys with the CDM-ANN/RF method. (a) Computational flowchart; (b) Variation of the predicted fatigue life against experimental data by ML. Reprinted with permission from Zhan et al. [223] (Copyright (2021) Elsevier).

Figure 14. The fatigue life prediction of LMD TA2-TA15 and TC4-TC11 titanium alloys with the CDM-RF method. (a) CDM-RF strategy; (b) Smooth specimen; (c) Notched specimen; (d) Prediction results for AM TA2-TA15; (e) Prediction results for AM TC4-TC11. Reprinted with permission from Zhan et al. [224] (Copyright (2021) Elsevier).

Figure 15. The internal defects and fatigue life prediction of LPBF Ti-6Al-4V alloys with the CNN method. (a) Architecture for defect classification; (b) Fatigue life and XCT results for four fatigue parts from the training and testing data sets. Reprinted with permission from Snow et al. [225] (Copyright (2021) Elsevier).

Figure 16. The fatigue life prediction of SLM Ti-6Al-4V alloys with the PPgNN method. (a) Architecture for fatigue analysis considering missing data; (b) Prediction comparison between model trained with missing data and model trained with complete data; (c) Sensitivity indicators for process parameters. Reprinted with permission from Chen et al. [226] (Copyright (2021) Elsevier).

Zhao XH, Zuo ZB, Han ZY, et al. A review on powder titanium alloy 3D printing technology. Mater Rep. 2016;30(12):120–126. (in Chinese)

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

LEAP-1A-72-21-20-01A-655B-C fan blades (R001) blending (metal leading edge). CFM International; 2019. p. 13.

 Google Scholar

Boeing 737-300/400/500 aircraft maintenance manual chapter 72 enging CFM56-3. The Boeing Company; 2005. p. 379.

 Google Scholar

Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 aircraft maintenance manual chapter 72 enging CFM56-7. The Boeing Company; 2005. p. 298.

 Google Scholar

Kumar P, Prakash O, Ramamurty U. Micro-and meso-structures and their influence on mechanical properties of selectively laser melted Ti-6Al-4V. Acta Mater. 2018;154:246–260. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2018.05.044

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kumar P, Ramamurty U. High cycle fatigue in selective laser melted Ti-6Al-4V. Acta Mater. 2020;194:305–320. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2020.05.041

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Choi YR, Sun SD, Liu Q, et al. Influence of deposition strategy on the microstructure and fatigue properties of laser metal deposited Ti-6Al-4V powder on Ti-6Al-4V substrate. Int J Fatig. 2020;130:105236. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.105236

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Razavi SMJ, Berto F. Directed energy deposition versus wrought Ti-6Al-4V: a comparison of microstructure, fatigue behavior, and notch sensitivity. Adv Eng Mater. 2019;21(8):1900220. doi:10.1002/adem.201900220

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kahlin M, Ansell H, Basu D, et al. Improved fatigue strength of additively manufactured Ti6Al4 V by surface post processing. Int J Fatig. 2020;134:105497. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105497

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hu YN, Wu SC, Wu ZK, et al. A new approach to correlate the defect population with the fatigue life of selective laser melted Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Int J Fatig. 2020;136:105584. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105584

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yan X, Yin S, Chen C, et al. Fatigue strength improvement of selective laser melted Ti6Al4 V using ultrasonic surface mechanical attrition. Mater Res Lett. 2019;7(8):327–333. doi:10.1080/21663831.2019.1609110

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Edwards P, Ramulu M. Fatigue performance evaluation of selective laser melted Ti–6Al–4V. Mater Sci Eng: A. 2014;598:327–337. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2014.01.041

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pegues J, Roach M, Scott Williamson R, et al. Surface roughness effects on the fatigue strength of additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Fatig. 2018;116:543–552. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.013

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Günther J, Krewerth D, Lippmann T, et al. Fatigue life of additively manufactured Ti–6Al–4 V in the very high cycle fatigue regime. Int J Fatig. 2017;94:236–245. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.05.018

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kasperovich G, Hausmann J. Improvement of fatigue resistance and ductility of TiAl6V4 processed by selective laser melting. J Mater Process Technol. 2015;220:202–214. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.01.025

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gong H, Rafi K, Gu H, et al. Influence of defects on mechanical properties of Ti–6Al–4 V components produced by selective laser melting and electron beam melting. Mater Design. 2015;86:545–554. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.147

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Benedetti M, Fontanari V, Bandini M, et al. Low- and high-cycle fatigue resistance of Ti-6Al-4V ELI additively manufactured via selective laser melting: mean stress and defect sensitivity. Int J Fatig. 2018;107:96–109. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.10.021

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rafi HK, Karthik NV, Gong H, et al. Microstructures and mechanical properties of Ti6Al4 V parts fabricated by selective laser melting and electron beam melting. J Mater Eng Perfor. 2013;22(12):3872–3883. doi:10.1007/s11665-013-0658-0

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Xu W, Sun S, Elambasseril J, et al. Ti-6Al-4V additively manufactured by selective laser melting with superior mechanical properties. Mineral Metal Mater Soc. 2015;67(3):668–673. doi:10.1007/s11837-015-1297-8

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Greitemeier D, Dalle Donne C, Schoberth A, et al. Uncertainty of additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V: chemistry, microstructure and mechanical properties. Appl Mech Mater. 2015;807:169–180. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.807.169

 Google Scholar

Hrabe N, Gnäupel-Herold T, Quinn T. Fatigue properties of a titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4 V) fabricated via electron beam melting (EBM): effects of internal defects and residual stress. Int J Fatig. 2017;94:202–210. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.04.022

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mower TM, Long MJ. Mechanical behavior of additive manufactured, powder-bed laser-fused materials. Mater Sci Eng: A. 2016;651:198–213. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2015.10.068

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Luo SH, He WF, Chen K, et al. Regain the fatigue strength of laser additive manufactured Ti alloy via laser shock peening. J Alloys Compound. 2018;750:626–635. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.04.029

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wang X, He X, Wang T, et al. Internal pores in DED Ti-6.5Al-2Zr-Mo-V alloy and their influence on crack initiation and fatigue life in the mid-life regime. Addit Manufact. 2019;28:373–393. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2019.05.007

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Greitemeier D, Palm F, Syassen F, et al. Fatigue performance of additive manufactured TiAl6V4 using electron and laser beam melting. Int J Fatig. 2017;94:211–217. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.05.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Masuo H, Tanaka Y, Morokoshi S, et al. Influence of defects, surface roughness and HIP on the fatigue strength of Ti-6Al-4V manufactured by additive manufacturing. Int J Fatig. 2018;117:163–179. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.020

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wycisk E, Emmelmann C, Siddique S, et al. High cycle fatigue (HCF) performance of Ti-6Al-4V alloy processed by selective laser melting. Adv Mater Res. 2013;816–817:134–139. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.816-817.134

 Google Scholar

Kahlin M, Ansell H, Moverare JJ. Fatigue behaviour of notched additive manufactured Ti6Al4 V with as-built surfaces. Int J Fatig. 2017;101:51–60. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.04.009

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wycisk E, Solbach A, Siddique S, et al. Effects of defects in laser additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V on fatigue properties. Phys Procedia. 2014;56:371–378. doi:10.1016/j.phpro.2014.08.120

 Google Scholar

Bagehorn S, Wehr J, Maier HJ. Application of mechanical surface finishing processes for roughness reduction and fatigue improvement of additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V parts. Int J Fatig. 2017;102:135–142. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.05.008

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Greitemeier D, Dalle Donne C, Syassen F, et al. Effect of surface roughness on fatigue performance of additive manufactured Ti–6Al–4 V. Mater Sci Technol. 2015;32:1743284715Y.000.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Murakami Y. Metal fatigue: effects of small defects and nonmetallic inclusions. Oxford: Elsevier Ed; 2002.

 Google Scholar

Pugno N, Ciavarella M, Cornetti P, et al. A generalized Paris’ law for fatigue crack growth. J the Mech Phys Solid. 2006;54(7):1333–1349. doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2006.01.007

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gross T, Seelig T. Bruchmechanik: Mit einer Einführung in die Mikromechanik. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011.

 Google Scholar

Wu SC, Xiao TQ, Withers PJ. The imaging of failure in structural materials by synchrotron radiation X-ray microtomography. Eng Fract Mech. 2017;182:127–156. doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.07.027

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Liu S, Shi W, Zhan Z, et al. On the development of error-trained BP-ANN technique with CDM model for the HCF life prediction of aluminum alloy. Int J Fatig. 2022;160.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zhan Z, Li H. A novel approach based on the elastoplastic fatigue damage and machine learning models for life prediction of aerospace alloy parts fabricated by additive manufacturing. Int J Fatig. 2021;145. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106089

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zhan Z, Hu W, Meng Q. Data-driven fatigue life prediction in additive manufactured titanium alloy: a damage mechanics based machine learning framework. Eng Fract Mech. 2021;252. doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.107850

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Snow Z, Reutzel EW, Petrich J. Correlating in-situ sensor data to defect locations and part quality for additively manufactured parts using machine learning. J Mater Process Technol. 2022;302. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117476

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chen J, Liu Y. Fatigue property prediction of additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V using probabilistic physics-guided learning. Addit Manufact. 2021: 39.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.