New Approach for Verifying the Accuracy of X-ray Computed Tomography Measurements of Surface Topographies in Additively Manufactured Metal Parts
- 66 Downloads
Surface topographies of metal additively manufactured components are inherently characterized by the presence of complex surface characteristics that are not accessible by contact or optical measuring techniques. Micro X-ray computed tomography is capable of measuring non-accessible surfaces and micro-scale surface features, including undercuts. In this work, an innovative approach for evaluating the accuracy and establishing the traceability of surface topography measurements obtained by X-ray computed tomography is presented. Reference samples produced by selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V were specifically designed in order to acquire reference cross-sectional surface profiles representing the actual morphology (including re-entrant features) using an imaging probing system. Surface topographies were measured on these samples by using three different techniques: X-ray computed tomography, confocal microscopy and focus variation. Moreover, the effect of different voxel dimensions on the accuracy of surface topography measurements performed by X-ray computed tomography was investigated. Results showed that X-ray computed tomography (at the highest tested resolution) can acquire surfaces and re-entrant features with small deviations with respect to the reference profiles; the deviations were quantified. On the contrary, focus variation and confocal microscopy can measure surfaces obtaining results that are close to the reference profiles only if such surfaces have no undercuts or inaccessible features.
KeywordsX-ray computed tomography Surface topography measurement Metal additive manufacturing Accuracy determination
The authors would like to thank Mr. Raffaele Berardi, University of Padova, for his contribution with the experimental analyses. This work has received funding from the University of Padua, under Projects Nr. CPDA151522/15 and BIRD167853/16.
- 5.Salzinger, M. et al. (2010). Analysis and comparison of the surface filtering characteristics of CT and tactile measurements. In: 6th ICT Conference, Wels, AustriaGoogle Scholar
- 7.ISO 25178-2:2012 Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—surface texture: areal—Part 2: terms, definitions and surface texture parameters. ISO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 14.Zanini, F., Sbettega, E., Sorgato, M., Carmignato, S. (2018). Accuracy of surface topography measurements performed by X-ray computed tomography on additively manufactured metal parts. In: euspen’s 18th Conference, Venice, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- 15.VDI/VDE 2630—2.1:2015—Computed tomography in dimensional measurement—determination of the uncertainty of measurement and the test process suitability of coordinate measurement systems with CT sensors. VDI/VDE Society for Metrology and Automation Engineering (GMA), DuesseldorfGoogle Scholar
- 16.ISO 15530-3:2011, Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—coordinate measuring machines (CMM): technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement—Part 3: use of calibrated workpieces or standards, ISOGoogle Scholar
- 17.ISO 4288:1996 Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface texture: profile method—rules and procedures for the assessment of surface texture. ISO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 20.Pagani, L., Zanini, F., Carmignato, S., Jiang, X., Scott, P.J. (2018). Generalization of profile texture parameters for additively manufactured surfaces. In: XXII IMEKO World Congress, Belfast (UK)Google Scholar