The development of large residual elastic strains and stresses during laser powder-bed fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing is one of the most significant barriers to widespread adoption. Accurate modeling of these strains and stresses is broadly recognized as an effective tool for mitigating these challenges, but rigorous validation data are needed. This data publication includes measurement data from diffraction-based characterizations of residual elastic strains in as-built (not heat treated) artifacts manufactured as part the the 2018 Additive Manufacturing Benchmark Series (AM Bench). Comprehensive details about AM Bench and the measurement data released in 2018 and 2022 may be found at .

The following data files include residual elastic strain, residual stress, and part deflection results associated with the 2022 Additive Manufacturing Benchmark test series (AM Bench 2022) AMB2022-01 benchmark on laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D builds of nickel-based superalloy IN718 test objects. The AM builds were performed on the NIST Additive Manufacturing Metrology Testbed (AMMT). The residual elastic strains were measured using synchrotron X-ray diffraction at the Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source (CHESS) and neutron diffraction at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR). Residual stresses were characterized using the contour method by UC Davis and Hill Engineering. Part deflection after partial cutting of the build part off the build plate was measured at NIST. Detailed descriptions of the build process parameters, scan pattern, heat treatment, and descriptions of all of the AMB2022-01 measurements are provided on the AMB2022-01 challenge description webpage (https://www.nist.gov/ambench/amb2022-01-benchmark-measurements-and-challenge-problems). Due to the time-sensitive nature of the AM Bench challenge problems, those measurements and analyses were prioritized. The challenges that this data publication address are:Residual elastic strain (CHAL-AMB2022-01-RS): Residual elastic strain components at select locations internal to the bridge structure, corresponding to synchrotron X-ray diffraction measurements. Part deflection (CHAL-AMB2022-01-PD): Deflection of the as-built (no heat treatment) bridge structure after it is partially separated from the build plate.Additional datasets that are not required for the challenges will be added soon. For updates, please check back here or at www.nist.gov/ambench.

The following data files include residual elastic strain, residual stress, and part deflection results associated with the 2022 Additive Manufacturing Benchmark test series (AM Bench 2022) AMB2022-01 benchmark on laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D builds of nickel-based superalloy IN718 test objects. The AM builds were performed on the NIST Additive Manufacturing Metrology Testbed (AMMT). The residual elastic strains were measured using synchrotron X-ray diffraction at the Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source (CHESS) and neutron diffraction at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR). Residual stresses were characterized using the contour method by UC Davis and Hill Engineering. Part deflection after partial cutting of the build part off the build plate was measured at NIST. Detailed descriptions of the build process parameters, scan pattern, heat treatment, and descriptions of all of the AMB2022-01 measurements are provided on the AMB2022-01 challenge description webpage (https://www.nist.gov/ambench/amb2022-01-benchmark-measurements-and-challenge-problems). Due to the time-sensitive nature of the AM Bench challenge problems, those measurements and analyses were prioritized. The challenges that this data publication address are:Residual elastic strain (CHAL-AMB2022-01-RS): Residual elastic strain components at select locations internal to the bridge structure, corresponding to synchrotron X-ray diffraction measurements. Part deflection (CHAL-AMB2022-01-PD): Deflection of the as-built (no heat treatment) bridge structure after it is partially separated from the build plate.Additional datasets that are not required for the challenges will be added soon. For updates, please check back here or at www.nist.gov/ambench.

Additively manufactured (AM) laser powder bed fusion (PBF-L) Inconel 625 blocks were built with two different scan strategies: XY and X-only. 96 tensile specimens were extracted from blocks at different tensile axis orientations with respect to the build direction to yield the following conditions: XY scan strategy (0, 30, 45, 60, and 90 degree orientation w.r.t. build direction) and X-only scan strategy (0, 60, 90 degree orientation w.r.t. build direction). Tensile testing was performed at room temperature using a quasistatic strain rate of 0.001/s to failure. Microstructure was measured using x-ray computed tomography (XRCT) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) techniques on representative specimens of each scan strategy. Large-area electron backscatter diffraction was used to measure crystallographic texture and grain size/morphology for three orthogonal planes. Backscatter electron imaging was used to characterize the subgrain structure and assess recast layer thickness from electric discharge machining. Electron channeling contrast imaging was used to estimate dislocation density. XRCT was used to analyze the pore population. Literature sources were used to estimate phase fraction, residual stress, and the single crystal C-tensor. All processing details, specimen preparation details, tensile test method details, and microstructure measurements are provided for both XY and X-only scan strategies. Additionally, true stress strain curves for all XY-scan strategy, 0 degree orientation specimens are provided. Predictions are requested for the bulk/continuum stress strain behavior of as-built Inconel 625 tensile specimens at different orientations (XY-scan strategy 30, 45, 60, 90 degree orientation w.r.t. build direction) and scan strategy (X-only scan strategy 0, 60, and 90 degree orientation w.r.t. build direction).

This challenge is a follow-on from AMB2022-01 laser powder bed fusion (PBF-LB) alloy Inconel 718 in the as-built condition (no heat treatment). Eight continuum-but-miniature tensile specimens were excised from the same size legs (2.5 mm width) of one original AMB2022-01 specimen (AMB2022-718-AMMT-B7-P4). Excised tensile specimens were quasi-static uniaxially tensile tested according to ASTM E8 (strain rate 1*10-3 sec-1, 3 mm gauge length custom contact extensometer). Calibration data given includes all processing and microstructure data from AMB2022-01 (https://www.nist.gov/ambench/am-bench-2022-challenge-problems-and-measurement-results), including 3D serial sectioning electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) data (https://doi.org/10.18434/mds2-2767). Material property data such as elastic mechanical properties are not provided.

This challenge is a follow-on from AMB2022-01 laser powder bed fusion (PBF-LB) alloy Inconel 718 in the as-built condition (no heat treatment). Eight continuum-but-miniature tensile specimens were excised from the same size legs (2.5 mm width) of one original AMB2022-01 specimen (AMB2022-718-AMMT-B7-P4). Excised tensile specimens were quasi-static uniaxially tensile tested according to ASTM E8 (strain rate 1*10-3 sec-1, 3 mm gauge length custom contact extensometer). Calibration data given includes all processing and microstructure data from AMB2022-01 (https://www.nist.gov/ambench/am-bench-2022-challenge-problems-and-measurement-results), including 3D serial sectioning electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) data (https://doi.org/10.18434/mds2-2767). Material property data such as elastic mechanical properties are not provided.

One additively manufactured (AM) laser powder bed fusion (PBF-L) Inconel 625 mesoscale tensile specimen (gauge dimensions approximately 0.2mm x 0.2 mm x 1mm) was extracted from build AMB2022-CBM-B1 specimen TH1 and tested at room temperature using a quasistatic strain rate of 0.001/s to failure. Microstructure was measured using x-ray computed tomography (XRCT) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) techniques on the specimen gauge section or adjacent material. Large-area electron backscatter diffraction was used to measure crystallographic texture and grain size/morphology of the entire gauge section and two orthogonal planes. Backscatter electron imaging was used to characterize the subgrain structure and assess recast layer thickness from electric discharge machining. Electron channeling contrast imaging was used to estimate dislocation density. XRCT was used to analyze the pore population as well as uncertainty in cross-sectional area for stress calculations. Literature sources were used to estimate phase fraction, residual stress, and the single crystal C-tensor. All processing details, specimen preparation details, tensile test method details, and microstructure measurements are provided. Predictions are requested for the subcontinuum stress strain behavior and fracture pathway of one as-built IN625 meso-scale specimen.

One additively manufactured (AM) laser powder bed fusion (PBF-L) Inconel 625 mesoscale tensile specimen (gauge dimensions approximately 0.2mm x 0.2 mm x 1mm) was extracted from build AMB2022-CBM-B1 specimen TH1 and tested at room temperature using a quasistatic strain rate of 0.001/s to failure. Microstructure was measured using x-ray computed tomography (XRCT) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) techniques on the specimen gauge section or adjacent material. Large-area electron backscatter diffraction was used to measure crystallographic texture and grain size/morphology of the entire gauge section and two orthogonal planes. Backscatter electron imaging was used to characterize the subgrain structure and assess recast layer thickness from electric discharge machining. Electron channeling contrast imaging was used to estimate dislocation density. XRCT was used to analyze the pore population as well as uncertainty in cross-sectional area for stress calculations. Literature sources were used to estimate phase fraction, residual stress, and the single crystal C-tensor. All processing details, specimen preparation details, tensile test method details, and microstructure measurements are provided. Predictions are requested for the subcontinuum stress strain behavior and fracture pathway of one as-built IN625 meso-scale specimen.

The following data files are provided in support of the 2022 Additive Manufacturing Benchmark test series (AM-Bench 2022) modeling challenges associated with laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D builds of nickel-based superalloy IN718 test objects using variety of custom scan strategies. These AM builds were performed on the NIST Additive Manufacturing Metrology Testbed (AMMT, https://www.nist.gov/el/ammt-temps). Note that these 3D builds are an extension of those for the AMB2022-01 challenges, and part geometry, materials data, and 'nominal' 3D build data are available in the corresponding data repository (https://doi.org/10.18434/mds2-2607)Description of the associated 3D builds and measurements are provided on the AMB2022-02 challenge description webpage (https://www.nist.gov/ambench). Note that this dataset may be periodically updated. Refer to the Version number below, and updates described in this Description and the README file.

The following data files are provided in support of the 2022 Additive Manufacturing Benchmark test series (AM-Bench 2022) modeling challenges associated with laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D builds of nickel-based superalloy IN718 test objects using variety of custom scan strategies. These AM builds were performed on the NIST Additive Manufacturing Metrology Testbed (AMMT, https://www.nist.gov/el/ammt-temps). Note that these 3D builds are an extension of those for the AMB2022-01 challenges, and part geometry, materials data, and 'nominal' 3D build data are available in the corresponding data repository (https://doi.org/10.18434/mds2-2607)Description of the associated 3D builds and measurements are provided on the AMB2022-02 challenge description webpage (https://www.nist.gov/ambench). Note that this dataset may be periodically updated. Refer to the Version number below, and updates described in this Description and the README file.