asme’s b46.1 surface texture 2019 edition - updates with

ASME’s B46.1 Surface Texture 2019 Edition -Updates with Additive Manufacturing

September 10, 2020

Today’s Speakers

T. Brian RenegarPhysical ScientistPhysical Measurement Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Dr. Jason C. FoxMechanical EngineerEngineering Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

1

Christopher A. Brown, PhD, FASMEProfessor of Mechanical Engineering, Surface Metrology Lab Founding DirectorWorcester Polytechnic Institute

B46.1-2019 Webinar - September 10, 2020

• Overview and Key Changes - Brian Renegar• Outline of Additive Manufacturing Updates - Jason Fox

o Brief Update of the section o What is needed in the future on the project team

• New Section on Functional Correlations - Chris Browno Transition from AM into functional correlationso Discrimination and Curvature

• Question and Answer Moderator - Dan Schertz, B46 Standards Committee Vice Chair

2 B46.1-2019 Webinar - September 10, 2020

Agenda


Overview of Changes

• All Sectionso Minor updates, fixes, tweaks

• Section 1o Definition changeso Changes to several Figureso RSm – updates to

calculation & examples• Section 11

o Table revisions for clarity• App. B

o Additive Manufacturing• App. I

o Table I-1 updated• App. K

o Functional Correlations

2009profile irregularity

profile peakdef: point of maximum height

profile valleydef: point of minimum height


Definition Changes

2019profile elementdef: profile peak + adjacent profile valley

profile peakdef: portion of profile above mean line

profile peak heightdef: max height of profile peak

profile valleydef: portion of profile below mean line

profile valley depthdef: max depth of profile valley

2009

2019


Changes to RSm Definition & Figure ‒ 2009

• Only gives general guidance• Does not include real-world examples


Changes to RSm Definition & Figure - 2019

New definition:


Changes to RSm Definition & Figure - 2019

Legend:A = the start of the profile.B = in Direction 1, the first mean line crossing of the

profile; it does not count as the beginning of a valid profile element because the profile does not fully cross the meandiscrimination band.

B = in Direction 2, the termination point for Sm12; it is the last mean line crossing prior to the last full crossing of the mean discrimination band.

C = the start of Sm1; it is the last mean line crossing prior to a full crossing of the mean discrimination band.

D = a candidate mean line crossing where the profile does not exceed the lower limit of the mean discrimination band. Because it is not a full crossing, it does not count in either direction.

E = a candidate profile element where both the upper and lower limits of the mean discrimination band are crossed but the width of the candidate profile element isinsufficient to meet the width requirement (see inset graph). This section of the profile will be combined with the next profile element.

F = the end of Sm6 and the beginning of Sm7. Such congruence is not always the case, as illustrated in C and B for Sm1 and Sm12.

RSm –2019


New Fig. - Indications of Surface Lay

Example of perpendicular lay

Example of particulate lay

• Figure updated• Same types of directionality are indicated• Reference changed from ISO 1302:2002 to

ASME Y14.36-2018


Section 11 - Updated Tables

• Tables have been updated for readability• Gives guidance for Type C1, C2, & C4 periodic profile surfaces

Outline of Additive Manufacturing Updates

Dr. Jason FoxMechanical Engineer

Engineering Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)



Outline of AM Updates

• Problems characterizing additive manufacturing (AM) surfaces• How B46.1 addresses these problems• PT 53: What’s next and how to get involved

J.C. Fox, Variation of Surface Topography in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing of Nickel Super Alloy 625, J. Res. NIST. 124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.124.023.

https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.124.023

Challenges for AM Surface Measurement

• Complex fabrication processo Dependent on many variableso Inconsistent

• Complexity in the AM surfaceo Large height variationso Steep slopeso Overhangs and undercuts

• Large variation in scaleso Sub-micrometer to centimeters


J.C. Fox, B.M. Lane, H. Yeung, Measurement of process dynamics through coaxially aligned high speed NIR imaging in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, in: Proc. SPIE 10214, Anaheim, CA, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2263863.

https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2263863


Problems Characterizing AM Surfaces

• Large variations across the surface

J.C. Fox, A. Pintar, Effect of measurement and sampling strategy in surface analysis of laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of nickel superalloy 625, Proceedings of the 2019 Special Interest Group Meeting: Advancing Precision in Additive Manufacturing, Nantes, FR, 2019: p. 4.

Large Stitched Area

Single Field of View

Sq Variation Across the Surface

Lateral Size of Measurement (mm)

Variation from Measurement Procedure

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Height map from the 10x objective data subdivided to a single (1 x 1) FoV, where NM represents non-measured points. Calculated Sq for each single (1 x 1) FoV subset on the surface.

14


• Strong dependence on the roughness average (Ra)• Ra is likely insufficient for describing AM surfaces

Ra = 20.9 μm Ra = 21.2 μm

J.C. Fox, S.P. Moylan, B.M. Lane, Effect of Process Parameters on the Surface Roughness of Overhanging Structures in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing, Procedia CIRP, Charlotte, NC, 2016: pp. 131–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.347.


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.347


15

AM Users and Researchers

Surface Metrologists/B46.1 Users


• Lack of overlap in areas of expertiseo Leads to miscommunicationo Did anyone notice I didn’t

specify the filters used on the previous slide?

• Key goal is to increase this overlap

How B46.1 Addresses These Issues

All contained in Appendix B-5:• References to standard AM terminology, characterization best

practices, and other relevant standards are provided• Handling issues from cracks and porosity (similar to casting)• Cautionary statements on limited knowledge base and wide

range of AM systems and materials


Presenter

Presentation Notes


PT53: What’s Next and How to Get Involved!

• Needs for non-metal materials (i.e., polymers, ceramics) is also required• Goals:

o Develop a stronger understanding of… Available parameters, filters, and their use with AM surfaces Sensitivity of parameters Uncertainty

o Closing the knowledge gapo Development of functional correlations for AM

• Participation in PT 53 does not require ASME membership!• Contacts:

o Jason Fox: [email protected] Kate Hyam: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


New B46.1 Section on Functional Correlations

NONMANDATORY APPENDIX KSUGGESTED TERMINOLOGY AND PROCEDURES FOR THE

EVALUATION OF FUNCTIONAL CORRELATIONS OF SURFACETEXTURES WITH PROCESSING AND PERFORMANCE

Christopher A. Brown, PhD, FASMEProfessor of Mechanical Engineering

Worcester Polytechnic InstituteWorcester, Massachusetts

September 10, 2020


Where is Value in Measuring and Analyzing Surface Textures?

• Repeatability and reproducibilityoQuality assuranceo Agreement between buyer and seller Supports commerce

• Ability to discriminate with confidenceoQuality assurance o Anthropology, Archaeology and Forensics

• Discovery of functional correlationso Product and process designo Dimensioning and Tolerancing roughness, waviness and lay


20

Two Functional Correlation Types: Processing & Performance

y = 1.1571x + 0.9464R² = 0.993

01020304050607080

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Y D

epen

dent

Var

iabl

e1s

tTe

xtur

e, 2

ndPe

rfor

man

ce

X Independent Variable1st Processing, 2nd Texture

1st Texture vs Processing2nd Performance vs Texture

Texture: combination of roughness, waviness, & lay is 1st a dependent variable

&2nd an independent variable


21

Support: Evidenced-Based Specs for Product & Process Designs

Design of products uses correlations of the 2nd kind - between textures and performance parameters

SURFACE BEHAVIORPERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

SURFACE CREATIONPROCESSING PARAMETERS

TEXTURESSCALES, MEASUREMENTS AND

CHARACTERIZATIONS

Design of manufacturing processesuses correlations of the 1st kind - between processing parameters and textures


Rationale: New Manufacturing Methods Can Require New Texture Characterizations

Subtractive:Conventionally machined surface

Additive: Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF aka FDM)

Friction and fatigue performance should be markedly different for similar values of conventional height parameters like Sa and St, or Ra and Rt.


Ra = Σn

1

z1n Rq = z 2Σ

n

1

1n

z0

x

nz

arithmetic average: root mean square:

=Subtractive - machined Additive - FFF


Average Roughness

23

Customer Needs(what adds value)

Functional Requirements(what it does)

Design Parameters(what it looks like)

Process Variables(how you make it)

Functional correlations of the2nd kind

Functional correlations of the1st kind

N.P.Suh, Principles of Design, 1990

Stronger functional correlations increase certainty in processing and performance


Engineering Design and Tolerancing

24

Text

ure

char

acte

rizat

ion

para

met

er

Manufacturing process parameter

Process tolerance

Roughness tolerance

Abrasive processesRz = b + K (F/H)½

(Brown and Savary 1991 Wear 141, 211)

Supports process design and process control


Functional Correlations, 1st Kind: Texture vs Process

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 100 200 300

theoretical

measured

Rou

ghne

ss R

zμm

Feed μm/rev

Rz = f²/8r

Rz = f²/8r + 1.4μm

Texture-process relations for machining by turning at WPI on a Haas SL10, with a 0.4mm tool nose Kennametal insert. Unpublished 2013. Used in ME1800 at WPI.


Example of a Correlation of the 1st Kind (Process-Texture)

26

Texture characterization parameter

Perf

orm

ance

char

acte

rizat

ion

para

met

er

Performance tolerance

Roughness tolerance


Functional Correlations, 2nd Kind: Performance vs Texture

Supports product design

27


Perf

orm

ance

char

acte

rizat

ion

para

met

er

Performance tolerance

Roughness tolerance




28


Perf

orm

ance

char

acte

rizat

ion

para

met

er

Perfo

rman

ce

tole

ranc

e

Roughness tolerance




29

30

Conventional characterization parameters, e.g., Ra, Sa, do not describe textures adequately.Stylus instruments often lack sufficient resolutionCurrent specifications for product are based on experience with machining and grinding, which cannot be extended to additiveHow can:• Measurement instruments and methods be chosen• Appropriate characterization parameters be selected• New characterization parameters be developed• Useful statistical analyses be designed


Conventional Height Parameters Do Not Provide Strong Correlations

Incorporate an image to reflect some of these points

“…comparison of the strength of correlations of different texture characterization parameters, different measurement methods, or different filtering”

B46.1 appendix K


R2 Metric for the Strength of a Correlation

Incorporate a visual to help illustrate the idea

31

Strengths of Functional Correlations Depend on

• Measurements• Texture characterization parameters• Statistical analyses• Scales

o filtering cutoffs and multiscale characterizations (ch. 10 B46.1)

“If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it” William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin


1st Kind of Functional Correlation

Lemoine, Adam Christopher; Velez, Joseluis Angel; Mancini, Matthew Philip, 2016, Multi-scale Surface Metrology of Additive Manufactured Surfaces,Worcester Polytechnic Institute, MQP

Inconel-nickel based powder laser sintered parts


Examples: • 3-D printed• Laser melted metal powder surfaces

33

https://wpi.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma9936832146604746&context=L&vid=01WPI_INST:Default&lang=en&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=Everything&query=any,contains,lemoine%20MQP&sortby=rank&mode=basic

Which provides stronger correlations with processing and performance variables?


Laser Melted Metal Powder As Measured and Outlier Filtered

34

Height Parameter vs Laser’s Linear Energy Density (LED)


Area-Scale Analyses: Multiscale Geometric Characterization

B46.1 Section 10 Terminology and Procedures for Evaluation of Surface Textures Using Fractal Geometry


Multiscale Regression AnalysesR² for Relative Area vs LED



Relative Areas at Strongest Scales:Two Different Angles of Deposition

Example of a strong correlation using multiscale curvature analysis and regression testing


Vulliez, M., Gleason, M., Souto-Lebel, A., Quinsat, Y., Lartigue, C., Kordel, S., Lemoine, A. and Brown, C., 2014, May. Multi-scale curvature analysis and correlations with the fatigue limit on steel surfaces after milling.

Fatigue Limit of Machined Parts: 2nd Kind of Functional Correlation

MISSING IMAGE39

-3º stress relieved transverse loading

45º stress relieved longitudinal loading


Renderings of Measurements

40


Fatigue Test Results

41


R2 for Fatigue Limit vs Curvature vs Scale

42

Correlation (R²=0.96) between fatigue limit and curvature at 610μm


Fatigue Limit and Curvature Correlation

43

Procedure for Determining Functional Correlation Strengths, R²

44

ManufactureMeasure and characterize

textures

Test performance

Appendix K Regression

analyzes

Further reading:Brown, C.A., Hansen, H.N., Jiang, X.J., Blateyron, F., Berglund, J., Senin, N., Bartkowiak, T., Dixon, B., Le Goic, G., Quinsat, Y. and Stemp, W.J., 2018. Multiscale analyses and characterizations of surface topographies. CIRP annals, 67(2), pp.839-862.


45

Thank You Very Much For Your Kind Attention!


Moderator - Dan Schertz, B46 Standards Committee Vice Chair

• They’re living documents, the work has just begun!

• Interested in learning more about ASME B46.1 Surface Texture or how to get involved with the Committee?

o Contact Kate Hyam ([email protected] )


Questions & Answers



Take advantage of all the benefits of ASME’s B46.1 Surface Texture 2019 Edition by buying a copy today. To purchase the standard, click on the button below.

Share our on-demand webinar with colleagues and friends:

Purchase the B46.1 Surface Texture 2019 Edition Today

https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fevent.on24.com%2Fwcc%2Fr%2F2536556%2F52BCEDCFE8527074B10E0FFC5219850B%3Fpartnerref%3DPresenters&linkname=Explore%20key%20additions%20to%20ASME%E2%80%99s%20B46.1%20Surface%20Texture%20standard%20at%20our%20on-demand%20webinar%20

https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fevent.on24.com%2Fwcc%2Fr%2F2536556%2F52BCEDCFE8527074B10E0FFC5219850B%3Fpartnerref%3DPresenters&linkname=Explore%20key%20additions%20to%20ASME%E2%80%99s%20B46.1%20Surface%20Texture%20standard%20at%20our%20on-demand%20webinar%20

https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fevent.on24.com%2Fwcc%2Fr%2F2536556%2F52BCEDCFE8527074B10E0FFC5219850B%3Fpartnerref%3DPresenters&linkname=Explore%20key%20additions%20to%20ASME%E2%80%99s%20B46.1%20Surface%20Texture%20standard%20at%20our%20on-demand%20webinar%20

https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fevent.on24.com%2Fwcc%2Fr%2F2536556%2F52BCEDCFE8527074B10E0FFC5219850B%3Fpartnerref%3DPresenters&linkname=Explore%20key%20additions%20to%20ASME%E2%80%99s%20B46.1%20Surface%20Texture%20standard%20at%20our%20on-demand%20webinar%20

https://www.asme.org/codes-standards/find-codes-standards/b46-1-surface-texture?productKey=M0191U:M0191U

asme’s b46.1 surface texture 2019 edition - updates with

Documents