OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Vol. 26 No. 4 2024 Fig. 4. Microhardness of specimens obtained using various additive technologies: a – horizontal specimen obtained using EBAM technology; b – vertical specimen obtained using EBAM technology; c – horizontal specimen obtained using WAAM technology; d – vertical specimen obtained using WAAM technology а b c d Ta b l e 3 Microhardness of specimens Specimen manufacturing technology Specimen orientation Maximum hardness, HV Minimum hardness, HV Average hardness, HV WAAM Horizontally 251 286 273.0 WAAM Vertically 278 289 284.2 EBAM Horizontally 271 295 283.4 EBAM Vertically 289 300 294.4 The data also show that the hardness of the specimens obtained by EBAM technology is higher than that of the specimens obtained by WAAM technology. This is also in good agreement with the results of microstructure analysis. EBAM technology due to printing in vacuum gives a smoother cooling process of specimens. This leads to the formation of a more homogeneous structure with higher hardness. Conclusions The comparison of the specimens produced by two diff erent additive printing technologies (EBAM and WAAM) was carried out taking into account the diff erences in the resulting microstructure and hardness. Printing using both technologies resulted in dendritic microstructure of the specimens. All specimens contained zones rich in Ti, Mo and Nb. Pores were also observed in the specimens. The grains in the specimens had a predominantly elongated shape and were oriented in the direction of heat removal. The length of the grains reached values of 1 mm. These features were observed for all the specimens obtained, regardless of the manufacturing technology or the orientation of the specimen during printing.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk0ODM1