Predicting solid-state phase transformations during metal additive manufacturing: A case study on electron-beam powder bed fusion of Inconel-738

Predicting solid-state phase transformations during metal additive manufacturing: A case study on electron-beam powder bed fusion of Inconel-738

금속 적층 제조 중 고체 상 변형 예측: Inconel-738의 전자빔 분말층 융합에 대한 사례 연구

Nana Kwabena Adomako a, Nima Haghdadi a, James F.L. Dingle bc, Ernst Kozeschnik d, Xiaozhou Liao bc, Simon P. Ringer bc, Sophie Primig a

Abstract

Metal additive manufacturing (AM) has now become the perhaps most desirable technique for producing complex shaped engineering parts. However, to truly take advantage of its capabilities, advanced control of AM microstructures and properties is required, and this is often enabled via modeling. The current work presents a computational modeling approach to studying the solid-state phase transformation kinetics and the microstructural evolution during AM. Our approach combines thermal and thermo-kinetic modelling. A semi-analytical heat transfer model is employed to simulate the thermal history throughout AM builds. Thermal profiles of individual layers are then used as input for the MatCalc thermo-kinetic software. The microstructural evolution (e.g., fractions, morphology, and composition of individual phases) for any region of interest throughout the build is predicted by MatCalc. The simulation is applied to an IN738 part produced by electron beam powder bed fusion to provide insights into how γ′ precipitates evolve during thermal cycling. Our simulations show qualitative agreement with our experimental results in predicting the size distribution of γ′ along the build height, its multimodal size character, as well as the volume fraction of MC carbides. Our findings indicate that our method is suitable for a range of AM processes and alloys, to predict and engineer their microstructures and properties.

Graphical Abstract

ga1

Keywords

Additive manufacturing, Simulation, Thermal cycles, γ′ phase, IN738

1. Introduction

Additive manufacturing (AM) is an advanced manufacturing method that enables engineering parts with intricate shapes to be fabricated with high efficiency and minimal materials waste. AM involves building up 3D components layer-by-layer from feedstocks such as powder [1]. Various alloys, including steel, Ti, Al, and Ni-based superalloys, have been produced using different AM techniques. These techniques include directed energy deposition (DED), electron- and laser powder bed fusion (E-PBF and L-PBF), and have found applications in a variety of industries such as aerospace and power generation [2][3][4]. Despite the growing interest, certain challenges limit broader applications of AM fabricated components in these industries and others. One of such limitations is obtaining a suitable and reproducible microstructure that offers the desired mechanical properties consistently. In fact, the AM as-built microstructure is highly complex and considerably distinctive from its conventionally processed counterparts owing to the complicated thermal cycles arising from the deposition of several layers upon each other [5][6].

Several studies have reported that the solid-state phases and solidification microstructure of AM processed alloys such as CMSX-4, CoCr [7][8], Ti-6Al-4V [9][10][11]IN738 [6]304L stainless steel [12], and IN718 [13][14] exhibit considerable variations along the build direction. For instance, references [9][10] have reported that there is a variation in the distribution of α and β phases along the build direction in Ti-alloys. Similarly, the microstructure of an L-PBF fabricated martensitic steel exhibits variations in the fraction of martensite [15]. Furthermore, some of the present authors and others [6][16][17][18][19][20] have recently reviewed and reported that there is a difference in the morphology and fraction of nanoscale precipitates as a function of build height in Ni-based superalloys. These non-uniformities in the as-built microstructure result in an undesired heterogeneity in mechanical and other important properties such as corrosion and oxidation [19][21][22][23]. To obtain the desired microstructure and properties, additional processing treatments are utilized, but this incurs extra costs and may lead to precipitation of detrimental phases and grain coarsening. Therefore, a through-process understanding of the microstructure evolution under repeated heating and cooling is now needed to further advance 3D printed microstructure and property control.

It is now commonly understood that the microstructure evolution during printing is complex, and most AM studies concentrate on the microstructure and mechanical properties of the final build only. Post-printing studies of microstructure characteristics at room temperature miss crucial information on how they evolve. In-situ measurements and modelling approaches are required to better understand the complex microstructural evolution under repeated heating and cooling. Most in-situ measurements in AM focus on monitoring the microstructural changes, such as phase transformations and melt pool dynamics during fabrication using X-ray scattering and high-speed X-ray imaging [24][25][26][27]. For example, Zhao et al. [25] measured the rate of solidification and described the α/β phase transformation during L-PBF of Ti-6Al-4V in-situ. Also, Wahlmann et al. [21] recently used an L-PBF machine coupled with X-ray scattering to investigate the changes in CMSX-4 phase during successive melting processes. Although these techniques provide significant understanding of the basic principles of AM, they are not widely accessible. This is due to the great cost of the instrument, competitive application process, and complexities in terms of the experimental set-up, data collection, and analysis [26][28].

Computational modeling techniques are promising and more widely accessible tools that enable advanced understanding, prediction, and engineering of microstructures and properties during AM. So far, the majority of computational studies have concentrated on physics based process models for metal AM, with the goal of predicting the temperature profile, heat transfer, powder dynamics, and defect formation (e.g., porosity) [29][30]. In recent times, there have been efforts in modeling of the AM microstructure evolution using approaches such as phase-field [31], Monte Carlo (MC) [32], and cellular automata (CA) [33], coupled with finite element simulations for temperature profiles. However, these techniques are often restricted to simulating the evolution of solidification microstructures (e.g., grain and dendrite structure) and defects (e.g., porosity). For example, Zinovieva et al. [33] predicted the grain structure of L-PBF Ti-6Al-4V using finite difference and cellular automata methods. However, studies on the computational modelling of the solid-state phase transformations, which largely determine the resulting properties, remain limited. This can be attributed to the multi-component and multi-phase nature of most engineering alloys in AM, along with the complex transformation kinetics during thermal cycling. This kind of research involves predictions of the thermal cycle in AM builds, and connecting it to essential thermodynamic and kinetic data as inputs for the model. Based on the information provided, the thermokinetic model predicts the history of solid-state phase microstructure evolution during deposition as output. For example, a multi-phase, multi-component mean-field model has been developed to simulate the intermetallic precipitation kinetics in IN718 [34] and IN625 [35] during AM. Also, Basoalto et al. [36] employed a computational framework to examine the contrasting distributions of process-induced microvoids and precipitates in two Ni-based superalloys, namely IN718 and CM247LC. Furthermore, McNamara et al. [37] established a computational model based on the Johnson-Mehl-Avrami model for non-isothermal conditions to predict solid-state phase transformation kinetics in L-PBF IN718 and DED Ti-6Al-4V. These models successfully predicted the size and volume fraction of individual phases and captured the repeated nucleation and dissolution of precipitates that occur during AM.

In the current study, we propose a modeling approach with appreciably short computational time to investigate the detailed microstructural evolution during metal AM. This may include obtaining more detailed information on the morphologies of phases, such as size distribution, phase fraction, dissolution and nucleation kinetics, as well as chemistry during thermal cycling and final cooling to room temperature. We utilize the combination of the MatCalc thermo-kinetic simulator and a semi-analytical heat conduction model. MatCalc is a software suite for simulation of phase transformations, microstructure evolution and certain mechanical properties in engineering alloys. It has successfully been employed to simulate solid-state phase transformations in Ni-based superalloys [38][39], steels [40], and Al alloys [41] during complex thermo-mechanical processes. MatCalc uses the classical nucleation theory as well as the so-called Svoboda-Fischer-Fratzl-Kozeschnik (SFFK) growth model as the basis for simulating precipitation kinetics [42]. Although MatCalc was originally developed for conventional thermo-mechanical processes, we will show that it is also applicable for AM if the detailed time-temperature profile of the AM build is known. The semi-analytical heat transfer code developed by Stump and Plotkowski [43] is used to simulate these profile throughout the AM build.

1.1. Application to IN738

Inconel-738 (IN738) is a precipitation hardening Ni-based superalloy mainly employed in high-temperature components, e.g. in gas turbines and aero-engines owing to its exceptional mechanical properties at temperatures up to 980 °C, coupled with high resistance to oxidation and corrosion [44]. Its superior high-temperature strength (∼1090 MPa tensile strength) is provided by the L12 ordered Ni3(Al,Ti) γ′ phase that precipitates in a face-centered cubic (FCC) γ matrix [45][46]. Despite offering great properties, IN738, like most superalloys with high γ′ fractions, is challenging to process owing to its propensity to hot cracking [47][48]. Further, machining of such alloys is challenging because of their high strength and work-hardening rates. It is therefore difficult to fabricate complex INC738 parts using traditional manufacturing techniques like casting, welding, and forging.

The emergence of AM has now made it possible to fabricate such parts from IN738 and other superalloys. Some of the current authors’ recent research successfully applied E-PBF to fabricate defect-free IN738 containing γ′ throughout the build [16][17]. The precipitated γ′ were heterogeneously distributed. In particular, Haghdadi et al. [16] studied the origin of the multimodal size distribution of γ′, while Lim et al. [17] investigated the gradient in γ′ character with build height and its correlation to mechanical properties. Based on these results, the present study aims to extend the understanding of the complex and site-specific microstructural evolution in E-PBF IN738 by using a computational modelling approach. New experimental evidence (e.g., micrographs not published previously) is presented here to support the computational results.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials preparation

IN738 Ni-based superalloy (59.61Ni-8.48Co-7.00Al-17.47Cr-3.96Ti-1.01Mo-0.81W-0.56Ta-0.49Nb-0.47C-0.09Zr-0.05B, at%) gas-atomized powder was used as feedstock. The powders, with average size of 60 ± 7 µm, were manufactured by Praxair and distributed by Astro Alloys Inc. An Arcam Q10 machine by GE Additive with an acceleration voltage of 60 kV was used to fabricate a 15 × 15 × 25 mm3 block (XYZ, Z: build direction) on a 316 stainless steel substrate. The block was 3D-printed using a ‘random’ spot melt pattern. The random spot melt pattern involves randomly selecting points in any given layer, with an equal chance of each point being melted. Each spot melt experienced a dwell time of 0.3 ms, and the layer thickness was 50 µm. Some of the current authors have previously characterized the microstructure of the very same and similar builds in more detail [16][17]. A preheat temperature of ∼1000 °C was set and kept during printing to reduce temperature gradients and, in turn, thermal stresses [49][50][51]. Following printing, the build was separated from the substrate through electrical discharge machining. It should be noted that this sample was simultaneously printed with the one used in [17] during the same build process and on the same build plate, under identical conditions.

2.2. Microstructural characterization

The printed sample was longitudinally cut in the direction of the build using a Struers Accutom-50, ground, and then polished to 0.25 µm suspension via standard techniques. The polished x-z surface was electropolished and etched using Struers A2 solution (perchloric acid in ethanol). Specimens for image analysis were polished using a 0.06 µm colloidal silica. Microstructure analyses were carried out across the height of the build using optical microscopy (OM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with focus on the microstructure evolution (γ′ precipitates) in individual layers. The position of each layer being analyzed was determined by multiplying the layer number by the layer thickness (50 µm). It should be noted that the position of the first layer starts where the thermal profile is tracked (in this case, 2 mm from the bottom). SEM images were acquired using a JEOL 7001 field emission microscope. The brightness and contrast settings, acceleration voltage of 15 kV, working distance of 10 mm, and other SEM imaging parameters were all held constant for analysis of the entire build. The ImageJ software was used for automated image analysis to determine the phase fraction and size of γ′ precipitates and carbides. A 2-pixel radius Gaussian blur, following a greyscale thresholding and watershed segmentation was used [52]. Primary γ′ sizes (>50 nm), were measured using equivalent spherical diameters. The phase fractions were considered equal to the measured area fraction. Secondary γ′ particles (<50 nm) were not considered here. The γ′ size in the following refers to the diameter of a precipitate.

2.3. Hardness testing

A Struers DuraScan tester was utilized for Vickers hardness mapping on a polished x-z surface, from top to bottom under a maximum load of 100 mN and 10 s dwell time. 30 micro-indentations were performed per row. According to the ASTM standard [53], the indentations were sufficiently distant (∼500 µm) to assure that strain-hardened areas did not interfere with one another.

2.4. Computational simulation of E-PBF IN738 build

2.4.1. Thermal profile modeling

The thermal history was generated using the semi-analytical heat transfer code (also known as the 3DThesis code) developed by Stump and Plotkowski [43]. This code is an open-source C++ program which provides a way to quickly simulate the conductive heat transfer found in welding and AM. The key use case for the code is the simulation of larger domains than is practicable with Computational Fluid Dynamics/Finite Element Analysis programs like FLOW-3D AM. Although simulating conductive heat transfer will not be an appropriate simplification for some investigations (for example the modelling of keyholding or pore formation), the 3DThesis code does provide fast estimates of temperature, thermal gradient, and solidification rate which can be useful for elucidating microstructure formation across entire layers of an AM build. The mathematics involved in the code is as follows:

In transient thermal conduction during welding and AM, with uniform and constant thermophysical properties and without considering fluid convection and latent heat effects, energy conservation can be expressed as:(1)��∂�∂�=�∇2�+�̇where � is density, � specific heat, � temperature, � time, � thermal conductivity, and �̇ a volumetric heat source. By assuming a semi-infinite domain, Eq. 1 can be analytically solved. The solution for temperature at a given time (t) using a volumetric Gaussian heat source is presented as:(2)��,�,�,�−�0=33�����32∫0�1������exp−3�′�′2��+�′�′2��+�′�′2����′(3)and��=12��−�′+��2for�=�,�,�(4)and�′�′=�−���′Where � is the vector �,�,� and �� is the location of the heat source.

The numerical integration scheme used is an adaptive Gaussian quadrature method based on the following nondimensionalization:(5)�=��xy2�,�′=��xy2�′,�=��xy,�=��xy,�=��xy,�=���xy

A more detailed explanation of the mathematics can be found in reference [43].

The main source of the thermal cycling present within a powder-bed fusion process is the fusion of subsequent layers. Therefore, regions near the top of a build are expected to undergo fewer thermal cycles than those closer to the bottom. For this purpose, data from the single scan’s thermal influence on multiple layers was spliced to represent the thermal cycles experienced at a single location caused by multiple subsequent layers being fused.

The cross-sectional area simulated by this model was kept constant at 1 × 1 mm2, and the depth was dependent on the build location modelled with MatCalc. For a build location 2 mm from the bottom, the maximum number of layers to simulate is 460. Fig. 1a shows a stitched overview OM image of the entire build indicating the region where this thermal cycle is simulated and tracked. To increase similarity with the conditions of the physical build, each thermal history was constructed from the results of two simulations generated with different versions of a random scan path. The parameters used for these thermal simulations can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that the main purpose of the thermal profile modelling was to demonstrate how the conditions at different locations of the build change relative to each other. Accurately predicting the absolute temperature during the build would require validation via a temperature sensor measurement during the build process which is beyond the scope of the study. Nonetheless, to establish the viability of the heat source as a suitable approximation for this study, an additional sensitivity analysis was conducted. This analysis focused on the influence of energy input on γ′ precipitation behavior, the central aim of this paper. This was achieved by employing varying beam absorption energies (0.76, 0.82 – the values utilized in the simulation, and 0.9). The direct impact of beam absorption efficiency on energy input into the material was investigated. Specifically, the initial 20 layers of the build were simulated and subsequently compared to experimental data derived from SEM. While phase fractions were found to be consistent across all conditions, disparities emerged in the mean size of γ′ precipitates. An absorption efficiency of 0.76 yielded a mean size of approximately 70 nm. Conversely, absorption efficiencies of 0.82 and 0.9 exhibited remarkably similar mean sizes of around 130 nm, aligning closely with the outcomes of the experiments.

Fig. 1

Table 1. A list of parameters used in thermal simulation of E-PBF.

ParameterValue
Spatial resolution5 µm
Time step0.5 s
Beam diameter200 µm
Beam penetration depth1 µm
Beam power1200 W
Beam absorption efficiency0.82
Thermal conductivity25.37 W/(m⋅K)
Chamber temperature1000 °C
Specific heat711.756 J/(kg⋅K)
Density8110 kg/m3

2.4.2. Thermo-kinetic simulation

The numerical analyses of the evolution of precipitates was performed using MatCalc version 6.04 (rel 0.011). The thermodynamic (‘mc_ni.tdb’, version 2.034) and diffusion (‘mc_ni.ddb’, version 2.007) databases were used. MatCalc’s basic principles are elaborated as follows:

The nucleation kinetics of precipitates are computed using a computational technique based on a classical nucleation theory [54] that has been modified for systems with multiple components [42][55]. Accordingly, the transient nucleation rate (�), which expresses the rate at which nuclei are formed per unit volume and time, is calculated as:(6)�=�0��*∙�xp−�*�∙�∙exp−��where �0 denotes the number of active nucleation sites, �* the rate of atomic attachment, � the Boltzmann constant, � the temperature, �* the critical energy for nucleus formation, τ the incubation time, and t the time. � (Zeldovich factor) takes into consideration that thermal excitation destabilizes the nucleus as opposed to its inactive state [54]. Z is defined as follows:(7)�=−12�kT∂2∆�∂�2�*12where ∆� is the overall change in free energy due to the formation of a nucleus and n is the nucleus’ number of atoms. ∆�’s derivative is evaluated at n* (critical nucleus size). �* accounts for the long-range diffusion of atoms required for nucleation, provided that the matrix’ and precipitates’ composition differ. Svoboda et al. [42] developed an appropriate multi-component equation for �*, which is given by:(8)�*=4��*2�4�∑�=1��ki−�0�2�0��0�−1where �* denotes the critical radius for nucleation, � represents atomic distance, and � is the molar volume. �ki and �0� represent the concentration of elements in the precipitate and matrix, respectively. The parameter �0� denotes the rate of diffusion of the ith element within the matrix. The expression for the incubation time � is expressed as [54]:(9)�=12�*�2

and �*, which represents the critical energy for nucleation:(10)�*=16�3�3∆�vol2where � is the interfacial energy, and ∆Gvol the change in the volume free energy. The critical nucleus’ composition is similar to the γ′ phase’s equilibrium composition at the same temperature. � is computed based on the precipitate and matrix compositions, using a generalized nearest neighbor broken bond model, with the assumption of interfaces being planar, sharp, and coherent [56][57][58].

In Eq. 7, it is worth noting that �* represents the fundamental variable in the nucleation theory. It contains �3/∆�vol2 and is in the exponent of the nucleation rate. Therefore, even small variations in γ and/or ∆�vol can result in notable changes in �, especially if �* is in the order of �∙�. This is demonstrated in [38] for UDIMET 720 Li during continuous cooling, where these quantities change steadily during precipitation due to their dependence on matrix’ and precipitate’s temperature and composition. In the current work, these changes will be even more significant as the system is exposed to multiple cycles of rapid cooling and heating.

Once nucleated, the growth of a precipitate is assessed using the radius and composition evolution equations developed by Svoboda et al. [42] with a mean-field method that employs the thermodynamic extremal principle. The expression for the total Gibbs free energy of a thermodynamic system G, which consists of n components and m precipitates, is given as follows:(11)�=∑���0��0�+∑�=1�4���33��+∑�=1��ki�ki+∑�=1�4���2��.

The chemical potential of component � in the matrix is denoted as �0�(�=1,…,�), while the chemical potential of component � in the precipitate is represented by �ki(�=1,…,�,�=1,…,�). These chemical potentials are defined as functions of the concentrations �ki(�=1,…,�,�=1,…,�). The interface energy density is denoted as �, and �� incorporates the effects of elastic energy and plastic work resulting from the volume change of each precipitate.

Eq. (12) establishes that the total free energy of the system in its current state relies on the independent state variables: the sizes (radii) of the precipitates �� and the concentrations of each component �ki. The remaining variables can be determined by applying the law of mass conservation to each component �. This can be represented by the equation:(12)��=�0�+∑�=1�4���33�ki,

Furthermore, the global mass conservation can be expressed by equation:(13)�=∑�=1���When a thermodynamic system transitions to a more stable state, the energy difference between the initial and final stages is dissipated. This model considers three distinct forms of dissipation effects [42]. These include dissipations caused by the movement of interfaces, diffusion within the precipitate and diffusion within the matrix.

Consequently, �̇� (growth rate) and �̇ki (chemical composition’s rate of change) of the precipitate with index � are derived from the linear system of equation system:(14)�ij��=��where �� symbolizes the rates �̇� and �̇ki [42]. Index i contains variables for precipitate radius, chemical composition, and stoichiometric boundary conditions suggested by the precipitate’s crystal structure. Eq. (10) is computed separately for every precipitate �. For a more detailed description of the formulae for the coefficients �ij and �� employed in this work please refer to [59].

The MatCalc software was used to perform the numerical time integration of �̇� and �̇ki of precipitates based on the classical numerical method by Kampmann and Wagner [60]. Detailed information on this method can be found in [61]. Using this computational method, calculations for E-PBF thermal cycles (cyclic heating and cooling) were computed and compared to experimental data. The simulation took approximately 2–4 hrs to complete on a standard laptop.

3. Results

3.1. Microstructure

Fig. 1 displays a stitched overview image and selected SEM micrographs of various γ′ morphologies and carbides after observations of the X-Z surface of the build from the top to 2 mm above the bottom. Fig. 2 depicts a graph that charts the average size and phase fraction of the primary γ′, as it changes with distance from the top to the bottom of the build. The SEM micrographs show widespread primary γ′ precipitation throughout the entire build, with the size increasing in the top to bottom direction. Particularly, at the topmost height, representing the 460th layer (Z = 22.95 mm), as seen in Fig. 1b, the average size of γ′ is 110 ± 4 nm, exhibiting spherical shapes. This is representative of the microstructure after it solidifies and cools to room temperature, without experiencing additional thermal cycles. The γ′ size slightly increases to 147 ± 6 nm below this layer and remains constant until 0.4 mm (∼453rd layer) from the top. At this position, the microstructure still closely resembles that of the 460th layer. After the 453rd layer, the γ′ size grows rapidly to ∼503 ± 19 nm until reaching the 437th layer (1.2 mm from top). The γ′ particles here have a cuboidal shape, and a small fraction is coarser than 600 nm. γ′ continue to grow steadily from this position to the bottom (23 mm from the top). A small fraction of γ′ is > 800 nm.

Fig. 2

Besides primary γ′, secondary γ′ with sizes ranging from 5 to 50 nm were also found. These secondary γ′ precipitates, as seen in Fig. 1f, were present only in the bottom and middle regions. A detailed analysis of the multimodal size distribution of γ′ can be found in [16]. There is no significant variation in the phase fraction of the γ′ along the build. The phase fraction is ∼ 52%, as displayed in Fig. 2. It is worth mentioning that the total phase fraction of γ′ was estimated based on the primary γ′ phase fraction because of the small size of secondary γ′. Spherical MC carbides with sizes ranging from 50 to 400 nm and a phase fraction of 0.8% were also observed throughout the build. The carbides are the light grey precipitates in Fig. 1g. The light grey shade of carbides in the SEM images is due to their composition and crystal structure [52]. These carbides are not visible in Fig. 1b-e because they were dissolved during electro-etching carried out after electropolishing. In Fig. 1g, however, the sample was examined directly after electropolishing, without electro-etching.

Table 2 shows the nominal and measured composition of γ′ precipitates throughout the build by atom probe microscopy as determined in our previous study [17]. No build height-dependent composition difference was observed in either of the γ′ precipitate populations. However, there was a slight disparity between the composition of primary and secondary γ′. Among the main γ′ forming elements, the primary γ′ has a high Ti concentration while secondary γ′ has a high Al concentration. A detailed description of the atom distribution maps and the proxigrams of the constituent elements of γ′ throughout the build can be found in [17].

Table 2. Bulk IN738 composition determined using inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Compositions of γ, primary γ′, and secondary γ′ at various locations in the build measured by APT. This information is reproduced from data in Ref. [17] with permission.

at%NiCrCoAlMoWTiNbCBZrTaOthers
Bulk59.1217.478.487.001.010.813.960.490.470.050.090.560.46
γ matrix
Top50.4832.9111.591.941.390.820.440.80.030.030.020.24
Mid50.3732.6111.931.791.540.890.440.10.030.020.020.010.23
Bot48.1034.5712.082.141.430.880.480.080.040.030.010.12
Primary γ′
Top72.172.513.4412.710.250.397.780.560.030.020.050.08
Mid71.602.573.2813.550.420.687.040.730.010.030.040.04
Bot72.342.473.8612.500.260.447.460.500.050.020.020.030.04
Secondary γ′
Mid70.424.203.2314.190.631.035.340.790.030.040.040.05
Bot69.914.063.6814.320.811.045.220.650.050.100.020.11

3.2. Hardness

Fig. 3a shows the Vickers hardness mapping performed along the entire X-Z surface, while Fig. 3b shows the plot of average hardness at different build heights. This hardness distribution is consistent with the γ′ precipitate size gradient across the build direction in Fig. 1Fig. 2. The maximum hardness of ∼530 HV1 is found at ∼0.5 mm away from the top surface (Z = 22.5), where γ′ particles exhibit the smallest observed size in Fig. 2b. Further down the build (∼ 2 mm from the top), the hardness drops to the 440–490 HV1 range. This represents the region where γ′ begins to coarsen. The hardness drops further to 380–430 HV1 at the bottom of the build.

Fig. 3

3.3. Modeling of the microstructural evolution during E-PBF

3.3.1. Thermal profile modeling

Fig. 4 shows the simulated thermal profile of the E-PBF build at a location of 23 mm from the top of the build, using a semi-analytical heat conduction model. This profile consists of the time taken to deposit 460 layers until final cooling, as shown in Fig. 4a. Fig. 4b-d show the magnified regions of Fig. 4a and reveal the first 20 layers from the top, a single layer (first layer from the top), and the time taken for the build to cool after the last layer deposition, respectively.

Fig. 4

The peak temperatures experienced by previous layers decrease progressively as the number of layers increases but never fall below the build preheat temperature (1000 °C). Our simulated thermal cycle may not completely capture the complexity of the actual thermal cycle utilized in the E-PBF build. For instance, the top layer (Fig. 4c), also representing the first deposit’s thermal profile without additional cycles (from powder heating, melting, to solidification), recorded the highest peak temperature of 1390 °C. Although this temperature is above the melting range of the alloy (1230–1360 °C) [62], we believe a much higher temperature was produced by the electron beam to melt the powder. Nevertheless, the solidification temperature and dynamics are outside the scope of this study as our focus is on the solid-state phase transformations during deposition. It takes ∼25 s for each layer to be deposited and cooled to the build temperature. The interlayer dwell time is 125 s. The time taken for the build to cool to room temperature (RT) after final layer deposition is ∼4.7 hrs (17,000 s).

3.3.2. MatCalc simulation

During the MatCalc simulation, the matrix phase is defined as γ. γ′, and MC carbide are included as possible precipitates. The domain of these precipitates is set to be the matrix (γ), and nucleation is assumed to be homogenous. In homogeneous nucleation, all atoms of the unit volume are assumed to be potential nucleation sitesTable 3 shows the computational parameters used in the simulation. All other parameters were set at default values as recommended in the version 6.04.0011 of MatCalc. The values for the interfacial energies are automatically calculated according to the generalized nearest neighbor broken bond model and is one of the most outstanding features in MatCalc [56][57][58]. It should be noted that the elastic misfit strain was not included in the calculation. The output of MatCalc includes phase fraction, size, nucleation rate, and composition of the precipitates. The phase fraction in MatCalc is the volume fraction. Although the experimental phase fraction is the measured area fraction, it is relatively similar to the volume fraction. This is because of the generally larger precipitate size and similar morphology at the various locations along the build [63]. A reliable phase fraction comparison between experiment and simulation can therefore be made.

Table 3. Computational parameters used in the simulation.

Precipitation domainγ
Nucleation site γ′Bulk (homogenous)
Nucleation site MC carbideBulk (Homogenous)
Precipitates class size250
Regular solution critical temperature γ′2500 K[64]
Calculated interfacial energyγ′ = 0.080–0.140 J/m2 and MC carbide = 0.410–0.430 J/m2
3.3.2.1. Precipitate phase fraction

Fig. 5a shows the simulated phase fraction of γ′ and MC carbide during thermal cycling. Fig. 5b is a magnified view of 5a showing the simulated phase fraction at the center points of the top 70 layers, whereas Fig. 5c corresponds to the first two layers from the top. As mentioned earlier, the top layer (460th layer) represents the microstructure after solidification. The microstructure of the layers below is determined by the number of thermal cycles, which increases with distance to the top. For example, layers 459, 458, 457, up to layer 1 (region of interest) experience 1, 2, 3 and 459 thermal cycles, respectively. In the top layer in Fig. 5c, the volume fraction of γ′ and carbides increases with temperature. For γ′, it decreases to zero when the temperature is above the solvus temperature after a few seconds. Carbides, however, remain constant in their volume fraction reaching equilibrium (phase fraction ∼ 0.9%) in a short time. The topmost layer can be compared to the first deposit, and the peak in temperature symbolizes the stage where the electron beam heats the powder until melting. This means γ′ and carbide precipitation might have started in the powder particles during heating from the build temperature and electron beam until the onset of melting, where γ′ dissolves, but carbides remain stable [28].

Fig. 5

During cooling after deposition, γ′ reprecipitates at a temperature of 1085 °C, which is below its solvus temperature. As cooling progresses, the phase fraction increases steadily to ∼27% and remains constant at 1000 °C (elevated build temperature). The calculated equilibrium fraction of phases by MatCalc is used to show the complex precipitation characteristics in this alloy. Fig. 6 shows that MC carbides form during solidification at 1320 °C, followed by γ′, which precipitate when the solidified layer cools to 1140 °C. This indicates that all deposited layers might contain a negligible amount of these precipitates before subsequent layer deposition, while being at the 1000 °C build temperature or during cooling to RT. The phase diagram also shows that the equilibrium fraction of the γ′ increases as temperature decreases. For instance, at 1000, 900, and 800 °C, the phase fractions are ∼30%, 38%, and 42%, respectively.

Fig. 6

Deposition of subsequent layers causes previous layers to undergo phase transformations as they are exposed to several thermal cycles with different peak temperatures. In Fig. 5c, as the subsequent layer is being deposited, γ′ in the previous layer (459th layer) begins to dissolve as the temperature crosses the solvus temperature. This is witnessed by the reduction of the γ′ phase fraction. This graph also shows how this phase dissolves during heating. However, the phase fraction of MC carbide remains stable at high temperatures and no dissolution is seen during thermal cycling. Upon cooling, the γ′ that was dissolved during heating reprecipitates with a surge in the phase fraction until 1000 °C, after which it remains constant. This microstructure is similar to the solidification microstructure (layer 460), with a similar γ′ phase fraction (∼27%).

The complete dissolution and reprecipitation of γ′ continue for several cycles until the 50th layer from the top (layer 411), where the phase fraction does not reach zero during heating to the peak temperature (see Fig. 5d). This indicates the ‘partial’ dissolution of γ′, which continues progressively with additional layers. It should be noted that the peak temperatures for layers that underwent complete dissolution were much higher (1170–1300 °C) than the γ′ solvus.

The dissolution and reprecipitation of γ′ during thermal cycling are further confirmed in Fig. 7, which summarizes the nucleation rate, phase fraction, and concentration of major elements that form γ′ in the matrix. Fig. 7b magnifies a single layer (3rd layer from top) within the full dissolution region in Fig. 7a to help identify the nucleation and growth mechanisms. From Fig. 7b, γ′ nucleation begins during cooling whereby the nucleation rate increases to reach a maximum value of approximately 1 × 1020 m−3s−1. This fast kinetics implies that some rearrangement of atoms is required for γ′ precipitates to form in the matrix [65][66]. The matrix at this stage is in a non-equilibrium condition. Its composition is similar to the nominal composition and remains unchanged. The phase fraction remains insignificant at this stage although nucleation has started. The nucleation rate starts declining upon reaching the peak value. Simultaneously, diffusion-controlled growth of existing nuclei occurs, depleting the matrix of γ′ forming elements (Al and Ti). Thus, from (7)(11), ∆�vol continuously decreases until nucleation ceases. The growth of nuclei is witnessed by the increase in phase fraction until a constant level is reached at 27% upon cooling to and holding at build temperature. This nucleation event is repeated several times.

Fig. 7

At the onset of partial dissolution, the nucleation rate jumps to 1 × 1021 m−3s−1, and then reduces sharply at the middle stage of partial dissolution. The nucleation rate reaches 0 at a later stage. Supplementary Fig. S1 shows a magnified view of the nucleation rate, phase fraction, and thermal profile, underpinning this trend. The jump in nucleation rate at the onset is followed by a progressive reduction in the solute content of the matrix. The peak temperatures (∼1130–1160 °C) are lower than those in complete dissolution regions but still above or close to the γ′ solvus. The maximum phase fraction (∼27%) is similar to that of the complete dissolution regions. At the middle stage, the reduction in nucleation rate is accompanied by a sharp drop in the matrix composition. The γ′ fraction drops to ∼24%, where the peak temperatures of the layers are just below or at γ′ solvus. The phase fraction then increases progressively through the later stage of partial dissolution to ∼30% towards the end of thermal cycling. The matrix solute content continues to drop although no nucleation event is seen. The peak temperatures are then far below the γ′ solvus. It should be noted that the matrix concentration after complete dissolution remains constant. Upon cooling to RT after final layer deposition, the nucleation rate increases again, indicating new nucleation events. The phase fraction reaches ∼40%, with a further depletion of the matrix in major γ′ forming elements.

3.3.2.2. γ′ size distribution

Fig. 8 shows histograms of the γ′ precipitate size distributions (PSD) along the build height during deposition. These PSDs are predicted at the end of each layer of interest just before final cooling to room temperature, to separate the role of thermal cycles from final cooling on the evolution of γ′. The PSD for the top layer (layer 460) is shown in Fig. 8a (last solidified region with solidification microstructure). The γ′ size ranges from 120 to 230 nm and is similar to the 44 layers below (2.2 mm from the top).

Fig. 8

Further down the build, γ′ begins to coarsen after layer 417 (44th layer from top). Fig. 8c shows the PSD after the 44th layer, where the γ′ size exhibits two peaks at ∼120–230 and ∼300 nm, with most of the population being in the former range. This is the onset of partial dissolution where simultaneously with the reprecipitation and growth of fresh γ′, the undissolved γ′ grows rapidly through diffusive transport of atoms to the precipitates. This is shown in Fig. 8c, where the precipitate class sizes between 250 and 350 represent the growth of undissolved γ′. Although this continues in the 416th layer, the phase fractions plot indicates that the onset of partial dissolution begins after the 411th layer. This implies that partial dissolution started early, but the fraction of undissolved γ′ was too low to impact the phase fraction. The reprecipitated γ′ are mostly in the 100–220 nm class range and similar to those observed during full dissolution.

As the number of layers increases, coarsening intensifies with continued growth of more undissolved γ′, and reprecipitation and growth of partially dissolved ones. Fig. 8d, e, and f show this sequence. Further down the build, coarsening progresses rapidly, as shown in Figs. 8d, 8e, and 8f. The γ′ size ranges from 120 to 1100 nm, with the peaks at 160, 180, and 220 nm in Figs. 8d, 8e, and 8f, respectively. Coarsening continues until nucleation ends during dissolution, where only the already formed γ′ precipitates continue to grow during further thermal cycling. The γ′ size at this point is much larger, as observed in layers 361 and 261, and continues to increase steadily towards the bottom (layer 1). Two populations in the ranges of ∼380–700 and ∼750–1100 nm, respectively, can be seen. The steady growth of γ′ towards the bottom is confirmed by the gradual decrease in the concentration of solute elements in the matrix (Fig. 7a). It should be noted that for each layer, the γ′ class with the largest size originates from continuous growth of the earliest set of the undissolved precipitates.

Fig. 9Fig. 10 and supplementary Figs. S2 and S3 show the γ′ size evolution during heating and cooling of a single layer in the full dissolution region, and early, middle stages, and later stages of partial dissolution, respectively. In all, the size of γ′ reduces during layer heating. Depending on the peak temperature of the layer which varies with build height, γ′ are either fully or partially dissolved as mentioned earlier. Upon cooling, the dissolved γ′ reprecipitate.

Fig. 9
Fig. 10

In Fig. 9, those layers that underwent complete dissolution (top layers) were held above γ′ solvus temperature for longer. In Fig. 10, layers at the early stage of partial dissolution spend less time in the γ′ solvus temperature region during heating, leading to incomplete dissolution. In such conditions, smaller precipitates are fully dissolved while larger ones shrink [67]. Layers in the middle stages of partial dissolution have peak temperatures just below or at γ′ solvus, not sufficient to achieve significant γ′ dissolution. As seen in supplementary Fig. S2, only a few smaller γ′ are dissolved back into the matrix during heating, i.e., growth of precipitates is more significant than dissolution. This explains the sharp decrease in concentration of Al and Ti in the matrix in this layer.

The previous sections indicate various phenomena such as an increase in phase fraction, further depletion of matrix composition, and new nucleation bursts during cooling. Analysis of the PSD after the final cooling of the build to room temperature allows a direct comparison to post-printing microstructural characterization. Fig. 11 shows the γ′ size distribution of layer 1 (460th layer from the top) after final cooling to room temperature. Precipitation of secondary γ′ is observed, leading to the multimodal size distribution of secondary and primary γ′. The secondary γ′ size falls within the 10–80 nm range. As expected, a further growth of the existing primary γ′ is also observed during cooling.

Fig. 11
3.3.2.3. γ′ chemistry after deposition

Fig. 12 shows the concentration of the major elements that form γ′ (Al, Ti, and Ni) in the primary and secondary γ′ at the bottom of the build, as calculated by MatCalc. The secondary γ′ has a higher Al content (13.5–14.5 at% Al), compared to 13 at% Al in the primary γ′. Additionally, within the secondary γ′, the smallest particles (∼10 nm) have higher Al contents than larger ones (∼70 nm). In contrast, for the primary γ′, there is no significant variation in the Al content as a function of their size. The Ni concentration in secondary γ′ (71.1–72 at%) is also higher in comparison to the primary γ′ (70 at%). The smallest secondary γ′ (∼10 nm) have higher Ni contents than larger ones (∼70 nm), whereas there is no substantial change in the Ni content of primary γ′, based on their size. As expected, Ti shows an opposite size-dependent variation. It ranges from ∼ 7.7–8.7 at% Ti in secondary γ′ to ∼9.2 at% in primary γ′. Similarly, within the secondary γ′, the smallest (∼10 nm) have lower Al contents than the larger ones (∼70 nm). No significant variation is observed for Ti content in primary γ′.

Fig. 12

4. Discussion

A combined modelling method is utilized to study the microstructural evolution during E-PBF of IN738. The presented results are discussed by examining the precipitation and dissolution mechanism of γ′ during thermal cycling. This is followed by a discussion on the phase fraction and size evolution of γ′ during thermal cycling and after final cooling. A brief discussion on carbide morphology is also made. Finally, a comparison is made between the simulation and experimental results to assess their agreement.

4.1. γ′ morphology as a function of build height

4.1.1. Nucleation of γ′

The fast precipitation kinetics of the γ′ phase enables formation of γ′ upon quenching from higher temperatures (above solvus) during thermal cycling [66]. In Fig. 7b, for a single layer in the full dissolution region, during cooling, the initial increase in nucleation rate signifies the first formation of nuclei. The slight increase in nucleation rate during partial dissolution, despite a decrease in the concentration of γ′ forming elements, may be explained by the nucleation kinetics. During partial dissolution and as the precipitates shrink, it is assumed that the regions at the vicinity of partially dissolved precipitates are enriched in γ′ forming elements [68][69]. This differs from the full dissolution region, in which case the chemical composition is evenly distributed in the matrix. Several authors have attributed the solute supersaturation of the matrix around primary γ′ to partial dissolution during isothermal ageing [69][70][71][72]. The enhanced supersaturation in the regions close to the precipitates results in a much higher driving force for nucleation, leading to a higher nucleation rate upon cooling. This phenomenon can be closely related to the several nucleation bursts upon continuous cooling of Ni-based superalloys, where second nucleation bursts exhibit higher nucleation rates [38][68][73][74].

At middle stages of partial dissolution, the reduction in the nucleation rate indicates that the existing composition and low supersaturation did not trigger nucleation as the matrix was closer to the equilibrium state. The end of a nucleation burst means that the supersaturation of Al and Ti has reached a low level, incapable of providing sufficient driving force during cooling to or holding at 1000 °C for further nucleation [73]. Earlier studies on Ni-based superalloys have reported the same phenomenon during ageing or continuous cooling from the solvus temperature to RT [38][73][74].

4.1.2. Dissolution of γ′ during thermal cycling

γ′ dissolution kinetics during heating are fast when compared to nucleation due to exponential increase in phase transformation and diffusion activities with temperature [65]. As shown in Fig. 9Fig. 10, and supplementary Figs. S2 and S3, the reduction in γ′ phase fraction and size during heating indicates γ′ dissolution. This is also revealed in Fig. 5 where phase fraction decreases upon heating. The extent of γ′ dissolution mostly depends on the temperature, time spent above γ′ solvus, and precipitate size [75][76][77]. Smaller γ′ precipitates are first to be dissolved [67][77][78]. This is mainly because more solute elements need to be transported away from large γ′ precipitates than from smaller ones [79]. Also, a high temperature above γ′ solvus temperature leads to a faster dissolution rate [80]. The equilibrium solvus temperature of γ′ in IN738 in our MatCalc simulation (Fig. 6) and as reported by Ojo et al. [47] is 1140 °C and 1130–1180 °C, respectively. This means the peak temperature experienced by previous layers decreases progressively from γ′ supersolvus to subsolvus, near-solvus, and far from solvus as the number of subsequent layers increases. Based on the above, it can be inferred that the degree of dissolution of γ′ contributes to the gradient in precipitate distribution.

Although the peak temperatures during later stages of partial dissolution are much lower than the equilibrium γ′ solvus, γ′ dissolution still occurs but at a significantly lower rate (supplementary Fig. S3). Wahlmann et al. [28] also reported a similar case where they observed the rapid dissolution of γ′ in CMSX-4 during fast heating and cooling cycles at temperatures below the γ′ solvus. They attributed this to the γ′ phase transformation process taking place in conditions far from the equilibrium. While the same reasoning may be valid for our study, we further believe that the greater surface area to volume ratio of the small γ′ precipitates contributed to this. This ratio means a larger area is available for solute atoms to diffuse into the matrix even at temperatures much below the solvus [81].

4.2. γ′ phase fraction and size evolution

4.2.1. During thermal cycling

In the first layer, the steep increase in γ′ phase fraction during heating (Fig. 5), which also represents γ′ precipitation in the powder before melting, has qualitatively been validated in [28]. The maximum phase fraction of 27% during the first few layers of thermal cycling indicates that IN738 theoretically could reach the equilibrium state (∼30%), but the short interlayer time at the build temperature counteracts this. The drop in phase fraction at middle stages of partial dissolution is due to the low number of γ′ nucleation sites [73]. It has been reported that a reduction of γ′ nucleation sites leads to a delay in obtaining the final volume fraction as more time is required for γ′ precipitates to grow and reach equilibrium [82]. This explains why even upon holding for 150 s before subsequent layer deposition, the phase fraction does not increase to those values that were observed in the previous full γ′ dissolution regions. Towards the end of deposition, the increase in phase fraction to the equilibrium value of 30% is as a result of the longer holding at build temperature or close to it [83].

During thermal cycling, γ′ particles begin to grow immediately after they first precipitate upon cooling. This is reflected in the rapid increase in phase fraction and size during cooling in Fig. 5 and supplementary Fig. S2, respectively. The rapid growth is due to the fast diffusion of solute elements at high temperatures [84]. The similar size of γ′ for the first 44 layers from the top can be attributed to the fact that all layers underwent complete dissolution and hence, experienced the same nucleation event and growth during deposition. This corresponds with the findings by Balikci et al. [85], who reported that the degree of γ′ precipitation in IN738LC does not change when a solution heat treatment is conducted above a certain critical temperature.

The increase in coarsening rate (Fig. 8) during thermal cycling can first be ascribed to the high peak temperature of the layers [86]. The coarsening rate of γ′ is known to increase rapidly with temperature due to the exponential growth of diffusion activity. Also, the simultaneous dissolution with coarsening could be another reason for the high coarsening rate, as γ′ coarsening is a diffusion-driven process where large particles grow by consuming smaller ones [78][84][86][87]. The steady growth of γ′ towards the bottom of the build is due to the much lower layer peak temperature, which is almost close to the build temperature, and reduced dissolution activity, as is seen in the much lower solute concentration in γ′ compared to those in the full and partial dissolution regions.

4.2.2. During cooling

The much higher phase fraction of ∼40% upon cooling signifies the tendency of γ′ to reach equilibrium at lower temperatures (Fig. 4). This is due to the precipitation of secondary γ′ and a further increase in the size of existing primary γ′, which leads to a multimodal size distribution of γ′ after cooling [38][73][88][89][90]. The reason for secondary γ′ formation during cooling is as follows: As cooling progresses, it becomes increasingly challenging to redistribute solute elements in the matrix owing to their lower mobility [38][73]. A higher supersaturation level in regions away from or free of the existing γ′ precipitates is achieved, making them suitable sites for additional nucleation bursts. More cooling leads to the growth of these secondary γ′ precipitates, but as the temperature and in turn, the solute diffusivity is low, growth remains slow.

4.3. Carbides

MC carbides in IN738 are known to have a significant impact on the high-temperature strength. They can also act as effective hardening particles and improve the creep resistance [91]. Precipitation of MC carbides in IN738 and several other superalloys is known to occur during solidification or thermal treatments (e.g., hot isostatic pressing) [92]. In our case, this means that the MC carbides within the E-PBF build formed because of the thermal exposure from the E-PBF thermal cycle in addition to initial solidification. Our simulation confirms this as MC carbides appear during layer heating (Fig. 5). The constant and stable phase fraction of MC carbides during thermal cycling can be attributed to their high melting point (∼1360 °C) and the short holding time at peak temperatures [75][93][94]. The solvus temperature for most MC carbides exceeds most of the peak temperatures observed in our simulation, and carbide dissolution kinetics at temperatures above the solvus are known to be comparably slow [95]. The stable phase fraction and random distribution of MC carbides signifies the slight influence on the gradient in hardness.

4.4. Comparison of simulations and experiments

4.4.1. Precipitate phase fraction and morphology as a function of build height

A qualitative agreement is observed for the phase fraction of carbides, i.e. ∼0.8% in the experiment and ∼0.9% in the simulation. The phase fraction of γ′ differs, with the experiment reporting a value of ∼51% and the simulation, 40%. Despite this, the size distribution of primary γ′ along the build shows remarkable consistency between experimental and computational analyses. It is worth noting that the primary γ′ morphology in the experimental analysis is observed in the as-fabricated state, whereas the simulation (Fig. 8) captures it during deposition process. The primary γ′ size in the experiment is expected to experience additional growth during the cooling phase. Regardless, both show similar trends in primary γ′ size increments from the top to the bottom of the build. The larger primary γ’ size in the simulation versus the experiment can be attributed to the fact that experimental and simulation results are based on 2D and 3D data, respectively. The absence of stereological considerations [96] in our analysis could have led to an underestimation of the precipitate sizes from SEM measurements. The early starts of coarsening (8th layer) in the experiment compared to the simulation (45th layer) can be attributed to a higher actual γ′ solvus temperature than considered in our simulation [47]. The solvus temperature of γ′ in a Ni-based superalloy is mainly determined by the detailed composition. A high amount of Cr and Co are known to reduce the solvus temperature, whereas Ta and Mo will increase it [97][98][99]. The elemental composition from our experimental work was used for the simulation except for Ta. It should be noted that Ta is not included in the thermodynamic database in MatCalc used, and this may have reduced the solvus temperature. This could also explain the relatively higher γ′ phase fraction in the experiment than in simulation, as a higher γ′ solvus temperature will cause more γ′ to precipitate and grow early during cooling [99][100].

Another possible cause of this deviation can be attributed to the extent of γ′ dissolution, which is mainly determined by the peak temperature. It can be speculated that individual peak temperatures at different layers in the simulation may have been over-predicted. However, one needs to consider that the true thermal profile is likely more complicated in the actual E-PBF process [101]. For example, the current model assumes that the thermophysical properties of the material are temperature-independent, which is not realistic. Many materials, including IN738, exhibit temperature-dependent properties such as thermal conductivityspecific heat capacity, and density [102]. This means that heat transfer simulations may underestimate or overestimate the temperature gradients and cooling rates within the powder bed and the solidified part. Additionally, the model does not account for the reduced thermal diffusivity through unmelted powder, where gas separating the powder acts as insulation, impeding the heat flow [1]. In E-PBF, the unmelted powder regions with trapped gas have lower thermal diffusivity compared to the fully melted regions, leading to localized temperature variations, and altered solidification behavior. These limitations can impact the predictions, particularly in relation to the carbide dissolution, as the peak temperatures may be underestimated.

While acknowledging these limitations, it is worth emphasizing that achieving a detailed and accurate representation of each layer’s heat source would impose tough computational challenges. Given the substantial layer count in E-PBF, our decision to employ a semi-analytical approximation strikes a balance between computational feasibility and the capture of essential trends in thermal profiles across diverse build layers. In future work, a dual-calibration strategy is proposed to further reduce simulation-experiment disparities. By refining temperature-independent thermophysical property approximations and absorptivity in the heat source model, and by optimizing interfacial energy descriptions in the kinetic model, the predictive precision could be enhanced. Further refining the simulation controls, such as adjusting the precipitate class size may enhance quantitative comparisons between modeling outcomes and experimental data in future work.

4.4.2. Multimodal size distribution of γ′ and concentration

Another interesting feature that sees qualitative agreement between the simulation and the experiment is the multimodal size distribution of γ′. The formation of secondary γ′ particles in the experiment and most E-PBF Ni-based superalloys is suggested to occur at low temperatures, during final cooling to RT [16][73][90]. However, so far, this conclusion has been based on findings from various continuous cooling experiments, as the study of the evolution during AM would require an in-situ approach. Our simulation unambiguously confirms this in an AM context by providing evidence for secondary γ′ precipitation during slow cooling to RT. Additionally, it is possible to speculate that the chemical segregation occurring during solidification, due to the preferential partitioning of certain elements between the solid and liquid phases, can contribute to the multimodal size distribution during deposition [51]. This is because chemical segregation can result in variations in the local composition of superalloys, which subsequently affects the nucleation and growth of γ′. Regions with higher concentrations of alloying elements will encourage the formation of larger γ′ particles, while regions with lower concentrations may favor the nucleation of smaller precipitates. However, it is important to acknowledge that the elevated temperature during the E-PBF process will largely homogenize these compositional differences [103][104].

A good correlation is also shown in the composition of major γ′ forming elements (Al and Ti) in primary and secondary γ′. Both experiment and simulation show an increasing trend for Al content and a decreasing trend for Ti content from primary to secondary γ′. The slight composition differences between primary and secondary γ′ particles are due to the different diffusivity of γ′ stabilizers at different thermal conditions [105][106]. As the formation of multimodal γ′ particles with different sizes occurs over a broad temperature range, the phase chemistry of γ′ will be highly size dependent. The changes in the chemistry of various γ′ (primary, secondary, and tertiary) have received significant attention since they have a direct influence on the performance [68][105][107][108][109]. Chen et al. [108][109], reported a high Al content in the smallest γ′ precipitates compared to the largest, while Ti showed an opposite trend during continuous cooling in a RR1000 Ni-based superalloy. This was attributed to the temperature and cooling rate at which the γ′ precipitates were formed. The smallest precipitates formed last, at the lowest temperature and cooling rate. A comparable observation is evident in the present investigation, where the secondary γ′ forms at a low temperature and cooling rate in comparison to the primary. The temperature dependence of γ′ chemical composition is further evidenced in supplementary Fig. S4, which shows the equilibrium chemical composition of γ′ as a function of temperature.

5. Conclusions

A correlative modelling approach capable of predicting solid-state phase transformations kinetics in metal AM was developed. This approach involves computational simulations with a semi-analytical heat transfer model and the MatCalc thermo-kinetic software. The method was used to predict the phase transformation kinetics and detailed morphology and chemistry of γ′ and MC during E-PBF of IN738 Ni-based superalloy. The main conclusions are:

  • 1.The computational simulations are in qualitative agreement with the experimental observations. This is particularly true for the γ′ size distribution along the build height, the multimodal size distribution of particles, and the phase fraction of MC carbides.
  • 2.The deviations between simulation and experiment in terms of γ′ phase fraction and location in the build are most likely attributed to a higher γ′ solvus temperature during the experiment than in the simulation, which is argued to be related to the absence of Ta in the MatCalc database.
  • 3.The dissolution and precipitation of γ′ occur fast and under non-equilibrium conditions. The level of γ′ dissolution determines the gradient in γ′ size distribution along the build. After thermal cycling, the final cooling to room temperature has further significant impacts on the final γ′ size, morphology, and distribution.
  • 4.A negligible amount of γ′ forms in the first deposited layer before subsequent layer deposition, and a small amount of γ′ may also form in the powder induced by the 1000 °C elevated build temperature before melting.

Our findings confirm the suitability of MatCalc to predict the microstructural evolution at various positions throughout a build in a Ni-based superalloy during E-PBF. It also showcases the suitability of a tool which was originally developed for traditional thermo-mechanical processing of alloys to the new additive manufacturing context. Our simulation capabilities are likely extendable to other alloy systems that undergo solid-state phase transformations implemented in MatCalc (various steels, Ni-based superalloys, and Al-alloys amongst others) as well as other AM processes such as L-DED and L-PBF which have different thermal cycle characteristics. New tools to predict the microstructural evolution and properties during metal AM are important as they provide new insights into the complexities of AM. This will enable control and design of AM microstructures towards advanced materials properties and performances.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Primig Sophie: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Adomako Nana Kwabena: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Software, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Haghdadi Nima: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Conceptualization. Dingle James F.L.: Methodology, Conceptualization, Software, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Kozeschnik Ernst: Writing – review & editing, Software, Methodology. Liao Xiaozhou: Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition. Ringer Simon P: Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This research was sponsored by the Department of Industry, Innovation, and Science under the auspices of the AUSMURI program – which is a part of the Commonwealth’s Next Generation Technologies Fund. The authors acknowledge the facilities and the scientific and technical assistance at the Electron Microscope Unit (EMU) within the Mark Wainwright Analytical Centre (MWAC) at UNSW Sydney and Microscopy Australia. Nana Adomako is supported by a UNSW Scientia PhD scholarship. Michael Haines’ (UNSW Sydney) contribution to the revised version of the original manuscript is thankfully acknowledged.

Appendix A. Supplementary material

Download : Download Word document (462KB)

Supplementary material.

Data Availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

Thermo-fluid modeling of influence of attenuated laser beam intensity profile on melt pool behavior in laser-assisted powder-based direct energy deposition

레이저 보조 분말 기반 직접 에너지 증착에서 용융 풀 거동에 대한 감쇠 레이저 빔 강도 프로파일의 영향에 대한 열유체 모델링

Thermo-fluid modeling of influence of attenuated laser beam intensity profile on melt pool behavior in laser-assisted powder-based direct energy deposition

Mohammad Sattari, Amin Ebrahimi, Martin Luckabauer, Gert-willem R.B.E. Römer

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceedings/Edited volume › Conference contribution › Professional

5Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

A numerical framework based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD), using the finite volume method (FVM) and volume of fluid (VOF) technique is presented to investigate the effect of the laser beam intensity profile on melt pool behavior in laser-assisted powder-based directed energy deposition (L-DED). L-DED is an additive manufacturing (AM) process that utilizes a laser beam to fuse metal powder particles. To assure high-fidelity modeling, it was found that it is crucial to accurately model the interaction between the powder stream and the laser beam in the gas region above the substrate. The proposed model considers various phenomena including laser energy attenuation and absorption, multiple reflections of the laser rays, powder particle stream, particle-fluid interaction, temperature-dependent properties, buoyancy effects, thermal expansion, solidification shrinkage and drag, and Marangoni flow. The latter is induced by temperature and element-dependent surface tension. The model is validated using experimental results and highlights the importance of considering laser energy attenuation. Furthermore, the study investigates how the laser beam intensity profile affects melt pool size and shape, influencing the solidification microstructure and mechanical properties of the deposited material. The proposed model has the potential to optimize the L-DED process for a variety of materials and provides insights into the capability of numerical modeling for additive manufacturing optimization.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationFlow-3D World Users Conference
Publication statusPublished – 2023
EventFlow-3D World User Conference – Strasbourg, France
Duration: 5 Jun 2023 → 7 Jun 2023

Conference

ConferenceFlow-3D World User Conference
Country/TerritoryFrance
CityStrasbourg
Period5/06/23 → 7/06/23
Development of macro-defect-free PBF-EB-processed Ti–6Al–4V alloys with superior plasticity using PREP-synthesized powder and machine learning-assisted process optimization

Development of macro-defect-free PBF-EB-processed Ti–6Al–4V alloys with superior plasticity using PREP-synthesized powder and machine learning-assisted process optimization

Yunwei GuiabKenta Aoyagib Akihiko Chibab
aDepartment of Materials Processing, Graduate School of Engineering, Tohoku University, 6-6 Aramaki Aza Aoba, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8579, Japan
bInstitute for Materials Research, Tohoku University, 2-1-1 Katahira, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8577, Japan

Received 14 October 2022, Revised 23 December 2022, Accepted 3 January 2023, Available online 5 January 2023.Show lessAdd to MendeleyShareCite

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2023.144595Get rights and content

Abstract

The elimination of internal macro-defects is a key issue in Ti–6Al–4V alloys fabricated via powder bed fusion using electron beams (PBF-EB), wherein internal macro-defects mainly originate from the virgin powder and inappropriate printing parameters. This study compares different types powders by combining support vector machine techniques to determine the most suitable powder for PBF-EB and to predict the processing window for the printing parameters without internal macro-defects. The results show that powders fabricated via plasma rotating electrode process have the best sphericity, flowability, and minimal porosity and are most suitable for printing. Surface roughness criterion was also applied to determine the quality of the even surfaces, and support vector machine was used to construct processing maps capable of predicting a wide range of four-dimensional printing parameters to obtain macro-defect-free samples, offering the possibility of subsequent development of Ti–6Al–4V alloys with excellent properties. The macro-defect-free samples exhibited good elongation, with the best overall mechanical properties being the ultimate tensile strength and elongation of 934.7 MPa and 24.3%, respectively. The elongation of the three macro-defect-free samples was much higher than that previously reported for additively manufactured Ti–6Al–4V alloys. The high elongation of the samples in this work is mainly attributed to the elimination of internal macro-defects.

Introduction

Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies can rapidly manufacture complex or custom parts, reducing process steps and saving manufacturing time [[1], [2], [3], [4]], and are widely used in the aerospace, automotive, and other precision industries [5,6]. Powder bed fusion using an electron beam (PBF-EB) is an additive manufacturing method that uses a high-energy electron beam to melt metal powders layer by layer to produce parts. In contrast to selective laser melting, PBF-EB involves the preparation of samples in a high vacuum environment, which effectively prevents the introduction of impurities such as O and N. It also involves a preheating process for the print substrate and powder, which reduces residual thermal stress on the sample and subsequent heat treatment processes [[2], [3], [4],7]. Due to these features and advantages, PBF-EB technology is a very important AM technology with great potential in metallic materials. Moreover, PBF-EB is the ideal AM technology for the manufacture of complex components made of many alloys, such as titanium alloys, nickel-based superalloys, aluminum alloys and stainless steels [[2], [3], [4],8].

Ti–6Al–4V alloy is one of the prevalent commercial titanium alloys possessing high specific strength, excellent mechanical properties, excellent corrosion resistance, and good biocompatibility [9,10]. It is widely used in applications requiring low density and excellent corrosion resistance, such as the aerospace industry and biomechanical applications [11,12]. The mechanical properties of PBF-EB-processed Ti–6Al–4V alloys are superior to those fabricated by casting or forging, because the rapid cooling rate in PBF-EB results in finer grains [[12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]]. However, the PBF-EB-fabricated parts often include internal macro-defects, which compromises their mechanical properties [[19], [20], [21], [22]]. This study focused on the elimination of macro-defects, such as porosity, lack of fusion, incomplete penetration and unmelted powders, which distinguishes them from micro-defects such as vacancies, dislocations, grain boundaries and secondary phases, etc. Large-sized fusion defects cause a severe reduction in mechanical strength. Smaller defects, such as pores and cracks, lead to the initiation of fatigue cracking and rapidly accelerate the cracking process [23]. The issue of internal macro-defects must be addressed to expand the application of the PBF-EB technology. The main studies for controlling internal macro-defects are online monitoring of defects, remelting and hot isostatic pressing (HIP). The literatures [24,25] report the use of infrared imaging or other imaging techniques to identify defects, but the monitoring of smaller sized defects is still not adequate. And in some cases remelting does not reduce the internal macro-defects of the part, but instead causes coarsening of the macrostructure and volatilization of some metal elements [23]. The HIP treatment does not completely eliminate the internal macro-defects, the original defect location may still act as a point of origin of the crack, and the subsequent treatment will consume more time and economic costs [23]. Therefore, optimizing suitable printing parameters to avoid internal macro-defects in printed parts at source is of great industrial value and research significance, and is an urgent issue in PBF-EB related technology.

There are two causes of internal macro-defects in the AM process: gas pores trapped in the virgin powder and the inappropriate printing parameters [7,23]. Gui et al. [26] classify internal macro-defects during PBF-EB process according to their shape, such as spherical defects, elongated shape defects, flat shape defects and other irregular shape defects. Of these, spherical defects mainly originate from raw material powders. Other shape defects mainly originate from lack of fusion or unmelted powders caused by unsuitable printing parameters, etc. The PBF-EB process requires powders with good flowability, and spherical powders are typically chosen as raw materials. The prevalent techniques for the fabrication of pre-alloyed powders are gas atomization (GA), plasma atomization (PA), and the plasma rotating electrode process (PREP) [27,28]. These methods yield powders with different characteristics that affect the subsequent fabrication. The selection of a suitable powder for PBF-EB is particularly important to produce Ti–6Al–4V alloys without internal macro-defects. The need to optimize several printing parameters such as beam current, scan speed, line offset, and focus offset make it difficult to eliminate internal macro-defects that occur during printing [23]. Most of the studies [11,12,22,[29], [30], [31], [32], [33]] on the optimization of AM processes for Ti–6Al–4V alloys have focused on samples with a limited set of parameters (e.g., power–scan speed) and do not allow for the guidance and development of unknown process windows for macro-defect-free samples. In addition, process optimization remains a time-consuming problem, with the traditional ‘trial and error’ method demanding considerable time and economic costs. The development of a simple and efficient method to predict the processing window for alloys without internal macro-defects is a key issue. In recent years, machine learning techniques have increasingly been used in the field of additive manufacturing and materials development [[34], [35], [36], [37]]. Aoyagi et al. [38] recently proposed a novel and efficient method based on a support vector machine (SVM) to optimize the two-dimensional process parameters (current and scan speed) and obtain PBF-EB-processed CoCr alloys without internal macro-defects. The method is one of the potential approaches toward effective optimization of more than two process parameters and makes it possible for the machine learning techniques to accelerate the development of alloys without internal macro-defects.

Herein, we focus on the elimination of internal macro-defects, such as pores, lack of fusion, etc., caused by raw powders and printing parameters. The Ti–6Al–4V powders produced by three different methods were compared, and the powder with the best sphericity, flowability, and minimal porosity was selected as the feedstock for subsequent printing. The relationship between the surface roughness and internal macro-defects in the Ti–6Al–4V components was also investigated. The combination of SVM and surface roughness indices (Sdr) predicted a wider four-dimensional processing window for obtaining Ti–6Al–4V alloys without internal macro-defects. Finally, we investigated the tensile properties of Ti–6Al–4V alloys at room temperature with different printing parameters, as well as the corresponding microstructures and fracture types.

Section snippets

Starting materials

Three types of Ti–6Al–4V alloy powders, produced by GA, PA, and PREP, were compared. The particle size distribution of the powders was determined using a laser particle size analyzer (LS230, Beckman Coulter, USA), and the flowability was measured using a Hall flowmeter (JIS-Z2502, Tsutsui Scientific Instruments Co., Ltd., Japan), according to the ASTM B213 standard. The powder morphology and internal macro-defects were determined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JEOL JCM-6000) and X-ray 

Comparison of the characteristics of GA, PA, and PREP Ti–6Al–4V powders

The particle size distributions (PSDs) and flowability of the three types of Ti–6Al–4V alloy powders produced by GA, PA, and PREP are shown in Fig. 2. Although the average particle sizes are similar (89.4 μm for GA, 82.5 μm for PA, and 86.1μm for PREP), the particle size range is different for the three types of powder (6.2–174.8 μm for GA, 27.3–139.2 μm for PA, and 39.4–133.9 μm for PREP). The flowability of the GA, PA, and PREP powders was 30.25 ± 0.98, 26.54 ± 0.37, and 25.03 ± 0.22 (s/50

Conclusions

The characteristics of the three types of Ti–6Al–4V alloy powders produced via GA, PA, and PREP were compared. The PREP powder with the best sphericity, flowability, and low porosity was found to be the most favorable powder for subsequent printing of Ti–6Al–4V alloys without internal macro-defects. The quantitative criterion of Sdr <0.015 for even surfaces was also found to be applicable to Ti–6Al–4V alloys. The process maps of Ti–6Al–4V alloys include two regions, high beam current/scan speed 

Uncited references

[55]; [56]; [57]; [58]; [59]; [60]; [61]; [62]; [63]; [64]; [65].

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Yunwei Gui: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Investigation. Kenta Aoyagi: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Resources, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Akihiko Chiba: Supervision, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

This study was based on the results obtained from project JPNP19007, commissioned by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO). This work was also supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Proposal No. 21K03801) and the Inter-University Cooperative Research Program (Proposal nos. 18G0418, 19G0411, and 20G0418) of the Cooperative Research and Development Center for Advanced Materials, Institute for Materials Research, Tohoku University. It was also supported by the Council for

References (65)

View more references

Cited by (0)

Recommended articles (6)

Figure 3.10: Snapshots of Temperature Profile for Single Track in Keyhole Regime (P = 250W and V = 0.5m/s) at the Preheating Temperature of 100 °C

Multiscale Process Modeling of Residual Deformation and Defect Formation for Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing

Qian Chen, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, 2021

레이저 분말 베드 퓨전(L-PBF) 적층 제조(AM)는 우수한 기계적 특성으로 그물 모양에 가까운 복잡한 부품을 생산할 수 있습니다. 그러나 빌드 실패 및 다공성과 같은 결함으로 이어지는 원치 않는 잔류 응력 및 왜곡이 L-PBF의 광범위한 적용을 방해하고 있습니다.

L-PBF의 잠재력을 최대한 실현하기 위해 잔류 변형, 용융 풀 및 다공성 형성을 예측하는 다중 규모 모델링 방법론이 개발되었습니다. L-PBF의 잔류 변형 및 응력을 부품 규모에서 예측하기 위해 고유 변형 ​​방법을 기반으로 하는 다중 규모 프로세스 모델링 프레임워크가 제안됩니다.

고유한 변형 벡터는 마이크로 스케일에서 충실도가 높은 상세한 다층 프로세스 시뮬레이션에서 추출됩니다. 균일하지만 이방성인 변형은 잔류 왜곡 및 응력을 예측하기 위해 준 정적 평형 유한 요소 분석(FEA)에서 레이어별로 L-PBF 부품에 적용됩니다.

부품 규모에서의 잔류 변형 및 응력 예측 외에도 분말 규모의 다중물리 모델링을 수행하여 공정 매개변수, 예열 온도 및 스패터링 입자에 의해 유도된 용융 풀 변동 및 결함 형성을 연구합니다. 이러한 요인과 관련된 용융 풀 역학 및 다공성 형성 메커니즘은 시뮬레이션 및 실험을 통해 밝혀졌습니다.

제안된 부품 규모 잔류 응력 및 왜곡 모델을 기반으로 경로 계획 방법은 큰 잔류 변형 및 건물 파손을 방지하기 위해 주어진 형상에 대한 레이저 스캐닝 경로를 조정하기 위해 개발되었습니다.

연속 및 아일랜드 스캐닝 전략을 위한 기울기 기반 경로 계획이 공식화되고 공식화된 컴플라이언스 및 스트레스 최소화 문제에 대한 전체 감도 분석이 수행됩니다. 이 제안된 경로 계획 방법의 타당성과 효율성은 AconityONE L-PBF 시스템을 사용하여 실험적으로 입증되었습니다.

또한 기계 학습을 활용한 데이터 기반 프레임워크를 개발하여 L-PBF에 대한 부품 규모의 열 이력을 예측합니다. 본 연구에서는 실시간 열 이력 예측을 위해 CNN(Convolutional Neural Network)과 RNN(Recurrent Neural Network)을 포함하는 순차적 기계 학습 모델을 제안합니다.

유한 요소 해석과 비교하여 100배의 예측 속도 향상이 달성되어 실제 제작 프로세스보다 빠른 예측이 가능하고 실시간 온도 프로파일을 사용할 수 있습니다.

Laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF) additive manufacturing (AM) is capable of producing complex parts near net shape with good mechanical properties. However, undesired residual stress and distortion that lead to build failure and defects such as porosity are preventing broader applications of L-PBF. To realize the full potential of L-PBF, a multiscale modeling methodology is developed to predict residual deformation, melt pool, and porosity formation. To predict the residual deformation and stress in L-PBF at part-scale, a multiscale process modeling framework based on inherent strain method is proposed.

Inherent strain vectors are extracted from detailed multi-layer process simulation with high fidelity at micro-scale. Uniform but anisotropic strains are then applied to L-PBF part in a layer-by-layer fashion in a quasi-static equilibrium finite element analysis (FEA) to predict residual distortion and stress. Besides residual distortion and stress prediction at part scale, multiphysics modeling at powder scale is performed to study the melt pool variation and defect formation induced by process parameters, preheating temperature and spattering particles. Melt pool dynamics and porosity formation mechanisms associated with these factors are revealed through simulation and experiments.

Based on the proposed part-scale residual stress and distortion model, path planning method is developed to tailor the laser scanning path for a given geometry to prevent large residual deformation and building failures. Gradient based path planning for continuous and island scanning strategy is formulated and full sensitivity analysis for the formulated compliance- and stress-minimization problem is performed.

The feasibility and effectiveness of this proposed path planning method is demonstrated experimentally using the AconityONE L-PBF system. In addition, a data-driven framework utilizing machine learning is developed to predict the thermal history at part-scale for L-PBF.

In this work, a sequential machine learning model including convolutional neural network (CNN) and recurrent neural network (RNN), long shortterm memory unit, is proposed for real-time thermal history prediction. A 100x prediction speed improvement is achieved compared to the finite element analysis which makes the prediction faster than real fabrication process and real-time temperature profile available.

Figure 1.1: Schematic Overview of Metal Laser Powder Bed Fusion Process [2]
Figure 1.1: Schematic Overview of Metal Laser Powder Bed Fusion Process [2]
Figure 1.2: Commercial Powder Bed Fusion Systems
Figure 1.2: Commercial Powder Bed Fusion Systems
Figure 1.3: Commercial Metal Components Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing: (a) GE Fuel Nozzle; (b) Stryker Hip Biomedical Implant.
Figure 1.3: Commercial Metal Components Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing: (a) GE Fuel Nozzle; (b) Stryker Hip Biomedical Implant.
Figure 2.1: Proposed Multiscale Process Simulation Framework
Figure 2.1: Proposed Multiscale Process Simulation Framework
Figure 2.2: (a) Experimental Setup for In-situ Thermocouple Measurement in the EOS M290 Build Chamber; (b) Themocouple Locations on the Bottom Side of the Substrate.
Figure 2.2: (a) Experimental Setup for In-situ Thermocouple Measurement in the EOS M290 Build Chamber; (b) Themocouple Locations on the Bottom Side of the Substrate.
Figure 2.3: (a) Finite Element Model for Single Layer Thermal Analysis; (b) Deposition Layer
Figure 2.3: (a) Finite Element Model for Single Layer Thermal Analysis; (b) Deposition Layer
Figure 2.4: Core-skin layer: (a) Surface Morphology; (b) Scanning Strategy; (c) Transient Temperature Distribution and Temperature History at (d) Point 1; (e) Point 2 and (f) Point 3
Figure 2.4: Core-skin layer: (a) Surface Morphology; (b) Scanning Strategy; (c) Transient Temperature Distribution and Temperature History at (d) Point 1; (e) Point 2 and (f) Point 3
Figure 2.5: (a) Scanning Orientation of Each Layer; (b) Finite Element Model for Micro-scale Representative Volume
Figure 2.5: (a) Scanning Orientation of Each Layer; (b) Finite Element Model for Micro-scale Representative Volume
Figure 2.6: Bottom Layer (a) Thermal History; (b) Plastic Strain and (c) Elastic Strain Evolution History
Figure 2.6: Bottom Layer (a) Thermal History; (b) Plastic Strain and (c) Elastic Strain Evolution History
Figure 2.7: Bottom Layer Inherent Strain under Default Process Parameters along Horizontal Scanning Path
Figure 2.7: Bottom Layer Inherent Strain under Default Process Parameters along Horizontal Scanning Path
Figure 2.8: Snapshots of the Element Activation Process
Figure 2.8: Snapshots of the Element Activation Process
Figure 2.9: Double Cantilever Beam Structure Built by the EOS M290 DMLM Process (a) Before and (b) After Cutting off; (c) Faro Laser ScanArm V3 for Distortion Measurement
Figure 2.9: Double Cantilever Beam Structure Built by the EOS M290 DMLM Process (a) Before and (b) After Cutting off; (c) Faro Laser ScanArm V3 for Distortion Measurement
Figure 2.10: Square Canonical Structure Built by the EOS M290 DMLM Process
Figure 2.10: Square Canonical Structure Built by the EOS M290 DMLM Process
Figure 2.11: Finite Element Mesh for the Square Canonical and Snapshots of Element Activation Process
Figure 2.11: Finite Element Mesh for the Square Canonical and Snapshots of Element Activation Process
Figure 2.12: Simulated Distortion Field for the Double Cantilever Beam before Cutting off the Supports: (a) Inherent Strain Method; (b) Simufact Additive 3.1
Figure 2.12: Simulated Distortion Field for the Double Cantilever Beam before Cutting off the Supports: (a) Inherent Strain Method; (b) Simufact Additive 3.1
Figure 3.10: Snapshots of Temperature Profile for Single Track in Keyhole Regime (P = 250W and V = 0.5m/s) at the Preheating Temperature of 100 °C
Figure 3.10: Snapshots of Temperature Profile for Single Track in Keyhole Regime (P = 250W and V = 0.5m/s) at the Preheating Temperature of 100 °C
s) at the Preheating Temperature of 500 °C
s) at the Preheating Temperature of 500 °C
Figure 3.15: Melt Pool Cross Section Comparison Between Simulation and Experiment for Single Track
Figure 3.15: Melt Pool Cross Section Comparison Between Simulation and Experiment for Single Track

Bibliography

[1] I. Astm, ASTM52900-15 Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing—General
Principles—Terminology, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA 3(4) (2015) 5.
[2] W.E. King, A.T. Anderson, R.M. Ferencz, N.E. Hodge, C. Kamath, S.A. Khairallah, A.M.
Rubenchik, Laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of metals; physics, computational,
and materials challenges, Applied Physics Reviews 2(4) (2015) 041304.
[3] W. Yan, Y. Lu, K. Jones, Z. Yang, J. Fox, P. Witherell, G. Wagner, W.K. Liu, Data-driven
characterization of thermal models for powder-bed-fusion additive manufacturing, Additive
Manufacturing (2020) 101503.
[4] K. Dai, L. Shaw, Thermal and stress modeling of multi-material laser processing, Acta
Materialia 49(20) (2001) 4171-4181.
[5] K. Dai, L. Shaw, Distortion minimization of laser-processed components through control of
laser scanning patterns, Rapid Prototyping Journal 8(5) (2002) 270-276.
[6] S.S. Bo Cheng, Kevin Chou, Stress and deformation evaluations of scanning strategy effect in
selective laser melting, Additive Manufacturing (2017).
[7] C. Fu, Y. Guo, Three-dimensional temperature gradient mechanism in selective laser melting
of Ti-6Al-4V, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 136(6) (2014) 061004.
[8] P. Prabhakar, W.J. Sames, R. Dehoff, S.S. Babu, Computational modeling of residual stress
formation during the electron beam melting process for Inconel 718, Additive Manufacturing 7
(2015) 83-91.
[9] A. Hussein, L. Hao, C. Yan, R. Everson, Finite element simulation of the temperature and
stress fields in single layers built without-support in selective laser melting, Materials & Design
(1980-2015) 52 (2013) 638-647.
[10] P.Z. Qingcheng Yang, Lin Cheng, Zheng Min, Minking Chyu, Albert C. To, articleFinite
element modeling and validation of thermomechanicalbehavior of Ti-6Al-4V in directed energy
deposition additivemanufacturing, Additive Manufacturing (2016).
[11] E.R. Denlinger, J. Irwin, P. Michaleris, Thermomechanical Modeling of Additive
Manufacturing Large Parts, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 136(6) (2014)
061007.
[12] E.R. Denlinger, M. Gouge, J. Irwin, P. Michaleris, Thermomechanical model development
and in situ experimental validation of the Laser Powder-Bed Fusion process, Additive
Manufacturing 16 (2017) 73-80.
[13] V.J. Erik R Denlinger, G.V. Srinivasan, Tahany EI-Wardany, Pan Michaleris, Thermal
modeling of Inconel 718 processed with powder bed fusionand experimental validation using in
situ measurements, Additive Manufacturing 11 (2016) 7-15.
[14] N. Patil, D. Pal, H.K. Rafi, K. Zeng, A. Moreland, A. Hicks, D. Beeler, B. Stucker, A
Generalized Feed Forward Dynamic Adaptive Mesh Refinement and Derefinement Finite Element
Framework for Metal Laser Sintering—Part I: Formulation and Algorithm Development, Journal
of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 137(4) (2015) 041001.
[15] D. Pal, N. Patil, K.H. Kutty, K. Zeng, A. Moreland, A. Hicks, D. Beeler, B. Stucker, A
Generalized Feed-Forward Dynamic Adaptive Mesh Refinement and Derefinement FiniteElement Framework for Metal Laser Sintering—Part II: Nonlinear Thermal Simulations and
Validations, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 138(6) (2016) 061003.
[16] N. Keller, V. Ploshikhin, New method for fast predictions of residual stress and distortion of
AM parts, Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, Texas, 2014, pp. 1229-1237.
[17] S.A. Khairallah, A.T. Anderson, A. Rubenchik, W.E. King, Laser powder-bed fusion additive
manufacturing: Physics of complex melt flow and formation mechanisms of pores, spatter, and
denudation zones, Acta Materialia 108 (2016) 36-45.
[18] M.J. Matthews, G. Guss, S.A. Khairallah, A.M. Rubenchik, P.J. Depond, W.E. King,
Denudation of metal powder layers in laser powder bed fusion processes, Acta Materialia 114
(2016) 33-42.
[19] A.A. Martin, N.P. Calta, S.A. Khairallah, J. Wang, P.J. Depond, A.Y. Fong, V. Thampy, G.M.
Guss, A.M. Kiss, K.H. Stone, Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive
manufacturing, Nature communications 10(1) (2019) 1987.
[20] R. Shi, S.A. Khairallah, T.T. Roehling, T.W. Heo, J.T. McKeown, M.J. Matthews,
Microstructural control in metal laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing using laser beam
shaping strategy, Acta Materialia (2019).
[21] S.A. Khairallah, A.A. Martin, J.R. Lee, G. Guss, N.P. Calta, J.A. Hammons, M.H. Nielsen,
K. Chaput, E. Schwalbach, M.N. Shah, Controlling interdependent meso-nanosecond dynamics
and defect generation in metal 3D printing, Science 368(6491) (2020) 660-665.
[22] W. Yan, W. Ge, Y. Qian, S. Lin, B. Zhou, W.K. Liu, F. Lin, G.J. Wagner, Multi-physics
modeling of single/multiple-track defect mechanisms in electron beam selective melting, Acta
Materialia 134 (2017) 324-333.
[23] S. Shrestha, Y. Kevin Chou, A Numerical Study on the Keyhole Formation During Laser
Powder Bed Fusion Process, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 141(10) (2019).
[24] S. Shrestha, B. Cheng, K. Chou, An Investigation into Melt Pool Effective Thermal
Conductivity for Thermal Modeling of Powder-Bed Electron Beam Additive Manufacturing.
[25] D. Rosenthal, Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and cutting, Welding
journal 20 (1941) 220-234.
[26] P. Promoppatum, S.-C. Yao, P.C. Pistorius, A.D. Rollett, A comprehensive comparison of the
analytical and numerical prediction of the thermal history and solidification microstructure of
Inconel 718 products made by laser powder-bed fusion, Engineering 3(5) (2017) 685-694.
[27] M. Tang, P.C. Pistorius, J.L. Beuth, Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed
fusion, Additive Manufacturing 14 (2017) 39-48.
[28] T. Moran, P. Li, D. Warner, N. Phan, Utility of superposition-based finite element approach
for part-scale thermal simulation in additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing 21 (2018)
215-219.
[29] Y. Yang, M. Knol, F. van Keulen, C. Ayas, A semi-analytical thermal modelling approach
for selective laser melting, Additive Manufacturing 21 (2018) 284-297.
[30] B. Cheng, S. Shrestha, K. Chou, Stress and deformation evaluations of scanning strategy
effect in selective laser melting, Additive Manufacturing 12 (2016) 240-251.
[31] L.H. Ahmed Hussein, Chunze Yan, Richard Everson, Finite element simulation of the
temperature and stress fields in single layers built without-support in selective laser melting,
Materials and Design 52 (2013) 638-647.
[32] H. Peng, D.B. Go, R. Billo, S. Gong, M.R. Shankar, B.A. Gatrell, J. Budzinski, P. Ostiguy,
R. Attardo, C. Tomonto, Part-scale model for fast prediction of thermal distortion in DMLS
additive manufacturing; Part 2: a quasi-static thermo-mechanical model, Austin, Texas (2016).
[33] M.F. Zaeh, G. Branner, Investigations on residual stresses and deformations in selective laser
melting, Production Engineering 4(1) (2010) 35-45.
[34] C. Li, C. Fu, Y. Guo, F. Fang, A multiscale modeling approach for fast prediction of part
distortion in selective laser melting, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 229 (2016) 703-
712.
[35] C. Li, Z. Liu, X. Fang, Y. Guo, On the Simulation Scalability of Predicting Residual Stress
and Distortion in Selective Laser Melting, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
140(4) (2018) 041013.
[36] S. Afazov, W.A. Denmark, B.L. Toralles, A. Holloway, A. Yaghi, Distortion Prediction and
Compensation in Selective Laser Melting, Additive Manufacturing 17 (2017) 15-22.
[37] Y. Lee, W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of
nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, Additive Manufacturing 12 (2016)
178-188.
[38] L. Scime, J. Beuth, A multi-scale convolutional neural network for autonomous anomaly
detection and classification in a laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing process, Additive
Manufacturing 24 (2018) 273-286.
[39] L. Scime, J. Beuth, Using machine learning to identify in-situ melt pool signatures indicative
of flaw formation in a laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing process, Additive
Manufacturing 25 (2019) 151-165.
[40] X. Xie, J. Bennett, S. Saha, Y. Lu, J. Cao, W.K. Liu, Z. Gan, Mechanistic data-driven
prediction of as-built mechanical properties in metal additive manufacturing, npj Computational
Materials 7(1) (2021) 1-12.
[41] C. Wang, X. Tan, S. Tor, C. Lim, Machine learning in additive manufacturing: State-of-theart and perspectives, Additive Manufacturing (2020) 101538.
[42] J. Li, R. Jin, Z.Y. Hang, Integration of physically-based and data-driven approaches for
thermal field prediction in additive manufacturing, Materials & Design 139 (2018) 473-485.
[43] M. Mozaffar, A. Paul, R. Al-Bahrani, S. Wolff, A. Choudhary, A. Agrawal, K. Ehmann, J.
Cao, Data-driven prediction of the high-dimensional thermal history in directed energy deposition
processes via recurrent neural networks, Manufacturing letters 18 (2018) 35-39.
[44] A. Paul, M. Mozaffar, Z. Yang, W.-k. Liao, A. Choudhary, J. Cao, A. Agrawal, A real-time
iterative machine learning approach for temperature profile prediction in additive manufacturing
processes, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA),
IEEE, 2019, pp. 541-550.
[45] S. Clijsters, T. Craeghs, J.-P. Kruth, A priori process parameter adjustment for SLM process
optimization, Innovative developments on virtual and physical prototyping, Taylor & Francis
Group., 2012, pp. 553-560.
[46] R. Mertens, S. Clijsters, K. Kempen, J.-P. Kruth, Optimization of scan strategies in selective
laser melting of aluminum parts with downfacing areas, Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Engineering 136(6) (2014) 061012.
[47] J.-P. Kruth, J. Deckers, E. Yasa, R. Wauthlé, Assessing and comparing influencing factors of
residual stresses in selective laser melting using a novel analysis method, Proceedings of the
institution of mechanical engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 226(6) (2012)
980-991.
[48] Y. Lu, S. Wu, Y. Gan, T. Huang, C. Yang, L. Junjie, J. Lin, Study on the microstructure,
mechanical property and residual stress of SLM Inconel-718 alloy manufactured by differing
island scanning strategy, Optics & Laser Technology 75 (2015) 197-206.
[49] E. Foroozmehr, R. Kovacevic, Effect of path planning on the laser powder deposition process:
thermal and structural evaluation, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology 51(5-8) (2010) 659-669.
[50] L.H. Ahmed Hussein, Chunze Yan, Richard Everson, Finite element simulation of the
temperature and stress fields in single layers built without-support in selective laser melting,
Materials and Design (2013).
[51] J.-P. Kruth, M. Badrossamay, E. Yasa, J. Deckers, L. Thijs, J. Van Humbeeck, Part and
material properties in selective laser melting of metals, Proceedings of the 16th international
symposium on electromachining, 2010, pp. 1-12.
[52] L. Thijs, K. Kempen, J.-P. Kruth, J. Van Humbeeck, Fine-structured aluminium products with
controllable texture by selective laser melting of pre-alloyed AlSi10Mg powder, Acta Materialia
61(5) (2013) 1809-1819.
[53] D. Ding, Z.S. Pan, D. Cuiuri, H. Li, A tool-path generation strategy for wire and arc additive
manufacturing, The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology 73(1-4) (2014)
173-183.
[54] B.E. Carroll, T.A. Palmer, A.M. Beese, Anisotropic tensile behavior of Ti–6Al–4V
components fabricated with directed energy deposition additive manufacturing, Acta Materialia
87 (2015) 309-320.
[55] D. Ding, Z. Pan, D. Cuiuri, H. Li, A practical path planning methodology for wire and arc
additive manufacturing of thin-walled structures, Robotics and Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing 34 (2015) 8-19.
[56] D. Ding, Z. Pan, D. Cuiuri, H. Li, S. van Duin, N. Larkin, Bead modelling and implementation
of adaptive MAT path in wire and arc additive manufacturing, Robotics and Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing 39 (2016) 32-42.
[57] R. Ponche, O. Kerbrat, P. Mognol, J.-Y. Hascoet, A novel methodology of design for Additive
Manufacturing applied to Additive Laser Manufacturing process, Robotics and ComputerIntegrated Manufacturing 30(4) (2014) 389-398.
[58] D.E. Smith, R. Hoglund, Continuous fiber angle topology optimization for polymer fused
fillament fabrication, Annu. Int. Solid Free. Fabr. Symp. Austin, TX, 2016.
[59] J. Liu, J. Liu, H. Yu, H. Yu, Concurrent deposition path planning and structural topology
optimization for additive manufacturing, Rapid Prototyping Journal 23(5) (2017) 930-942.
[60] Q. Xia, T. Shi, Optimization of composite structures with continuous spatial variation of fiber
angle through Shepard interpolation, Composite Structures 182 (2017) 273-282.
[61] C. Kiyono, E. Silva, J. Reddy, A novel fiber optimization method based on normal distribution
function with continuously varying fiber path, Composite Structures 160 (2017) 503-515.
[62] C.J. Brampton, K.C. Wu, H.A. Kim, New optimization method for steered fiber composites
using the level set method, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 52(3) (2015) 493-505.
[63] J. Liu, A.C. To, Deposition path planning-integrated structural topology optimization for 3D
additive manufacturing subject to self-support constraint, Computer-Aided Design 91 (2017) 27-
45.
[64] H. Shen, J. Fu, Z. Chen, Y. Fan, Generation of offset surface for tool path in NC machining
through level set methods, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
46(9-12) (2010) 1043-1047.
[65] C. Zhuang, Z. Xiong, H. Ding, High speed machining tool path generation for pockets using
level sets, International Journal of Production Research 48(19) (2010) 5749-5766.
[66] K.C. Mills, Recommended values of thermophysical properties for selected commercial
alloys, Woodhead Publishing2002.
[67] S.S. Sih, J.W. Barlow, The prediction of the emissivity and thermal conductivity of powder
beds, Particulate Science and Technology 22(4) (2004) 427-440.
[68] L. Dong, A. Makradi, S. Ahzi, Y. Remond, Three-dimensional transient finite element
analysis of the selective laser sintering process, Journal of materials processing technology 209(2)
(2009) 700-706.
[69] J.J. Beaman, J.W. Barlow, D.L. Bourell, R.H. Crawford, H.L. Marcus, K.P. McAlea, Solid
freeform fabrication: a new direction in manufacturing, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell,
MA 2061 (1997) 25-49.
[70] G. Bugeda Miguel Cervera, G. Lombera, Numerical prediction of temperature and density
distributions in selective laser sintering processes, Rapid Prototyping Journal 5(1) (1999) 21-26.
[71] T. Mukherjee, W. Zhang, T. DebRoy, An improved prediction of residual stresses and
distortion in additive manufacturing, Computational Materials Science 126 (2017) 360-372.
[72] A.J. Dunbar, E.R. Denlinger, M.F. Gouge, P. Michaleris, Experimental validation of finite
element modeling for laser powderbed fusion deformation, Additive Manufacturing 12 (2016)
108-120.
[73] J. Goldak, A. Chakravarti, M. Bibby, A new finite element model for welding heat sources,
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B 15(2) (1984) 299-305.
[74] J. Liu, Q. Chen, Y. Zhao, W. Xiong, A. To, Quantitative Texture Prediction of Epitaxial
Columnar Grains in Alloy 718 Processed by Additive Manufacturing, Proceedings of the 9th
International Symposium on Superalloy 718 & Derivatives: Energy, Aerospace, and Industrial
Applications, Springer, 2018, pp. 749-755.
[75] J. Irwin, P. Michaleris, A line heat input model for additive manufacturing, Journal of
Manufacturing Science and Engineering 138(11) (2016) 111004.
[76] M. Gouge, J. Heigel, P. Michaleris, T. Palmer, Modeling forced convection in the thermal
simulation of laser cladding processes, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology 79 (2015).
[77] J. Heigel, P. Michaleris, E. Reutzel, Thermo-mechanical model development and validation
of directed energy deposition additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V, Additive manufacturing 5
(2015) 9-19.
[78] E.R. Denlinger, J.C. Heigel, P. Michaleris, Residual stress and distortion modeling of electron
beam direct manufacturing Ti-6Al-4V, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 229(10) (2015) 1803-1813.
[79] X. Liang, Q. Chen, L. Cheng, Q. Yang, A. To, A modified inherent strain method for fast
prediction of residual deformation in additive manufacturing of metal parts, 2017 Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium Proceedings, Austin, Texas, 2017.
[80] X. Liang, L. Cheng, Q. Chen, Q. Yang, A. To, A Modified Method for Estimating Inherent
Strains from Detailed Process Simulation for Fast Residual Distortion Prediction of Single-Walled
Structures Fabricated by Directed Energy Deposition, Additive Manufacturing 23 (2018) 471-486.
[81] L. Sochalski-Kolbus, E.A. Payzant, P.A. Cornwell, T.R. Watkins, S.S. Babu, R.R. Dehoff,
M. Lorenz, O. Ovchinnikova, C. Duty, Comparison of residual stresses in Inconel 718 simple parts
made by electron beam melting and direct laser metal sintering, Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions A 46(3) (2015) 1419-1432.
[82] P. Mercelis, J.-P. Kruth, Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser
melting, Rapid Prototyping Journal 12(5) (2006) 254-265.
[83] N. Hodge, R. Ferencz, J. Solberg, Implementation of a thermomechanical model for the
simulation of selective laser melting, Computational Mechanics 54(1) (2014) 33-51.
[84] A.S. Wu, D.W. Brown, M. Kumar, G.F. Gallegos, W.E. King, An experimental investigation
into additive manufacturing-induced residual stresses in 316L stainless steel, Metallurgical and
Materials Transactions A 45(13) (2014) 6260-6270.
[85] C. Li, J. liu, Y. Guo, Efficient predictive model of part distortion and residual stress in
selective laser melting, Solid Freeform Fabrication 2016, 2017.
[86] Y. Zhao, Y. Koizumi, K. Aoyagi, D. Wei, K. Yamanaka, A. Chiba, Molten pool behavior and
effect of fluid flow on solidification conditions in selective electron beam melting (SEBM) of a
biomedical Co-Cr-Mo alloy, Additive Manufacturing 26 (2019) 202-214.
[87] J.-H. Cho, S.-J. Na, Implementation of real-time multiple reflection and Fresnel absorption of
laser beam in keyhole, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 39(24) (2006) 5372.
[88] Q. Guo, C. Zhao, M. Qu, L. Xiong, L.I. Escano, S.M.H. Hojjatzadeh, N.D. Parab, K. Fezzaa,
W. Everhart, T. Sun, In-situ characterization and quantification of melt pool variation under
constant input energy density in laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing process, Additive
Manufacturing (2019).
[89] E. Assuncao, S. Williams, D. Yapp, Interaction time and beam diameter effects on the
conduction mode limit, Optics and Lasers in Engineering 50(6) (2012) 823-828.
[90] R. Cunningham, C. Zhao, N. Parab, C. Kantzos, J. Pauza, K. Fezzaa, T. Sun, A.D. Rollett,
Keyhole threshold and morphology in laser melting revealed by ultrahigh-speed x-ray imaging,
Science 363(6429) (2019) 849-852.
[91] W. Tan, N.S. Bailey, Y.C. Shin, Investigation of keyhole plume and molten pool based on a
three-dimensional dynamic model with sharp interface formulation, Journal of Physics D: Applied
Physics 46(5) (2013) 055501.
[92] W. Tan, Y.C. Shin, Analysis of multi-phase interaction and its effects on keyhole dynamics
with a multi-physics numerical model, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 47(34) (2014)
345501.
[93] R. Fabbro, K. Chouf, Keyhole modeling during laser welding, Journal of applied Physics
87(9) (2000) 4075-4083.
[94] Q. Guo, C. Zhao, M. Qu, L. Xiong, S.M.H. Hojjatzadeh, L.I. Escano, N.D. Parab, K. Fezzaa,
T. Sun, L. Chen, In-situ full-field mapping of melt flow dynamics in laser metal additive
manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing 31 (2020) 100939.
[95] Y. Ueda, K. Fukuda, K. Nakacho, S. Endo, A new measuring method of residual stresses with
the aid of finite element method and reliability of estimated values, Journal of the Society of Naval
Architects of Japan 1975(138) (1975) 499-507.
[96] M.R. Hill, D.V. Nelson, The inherent strain method for residual stress determination and its
application to a long welded joint, ASME-PUBLICATIONS-PVP 318 (1995) 343-352.
[97] H. Murakawa, Y. Luo, Y. Ueda, Prediction of welding deformation and residual stress by
elastic FEM based on inherent strain, Journal of the society of Naval Architects of Japan 1996(180)
(1996) 739-751.
[98] M. Yuan, Y. Ueda, Prediction of residual stresses in welded T-and I-joints using inherent
strains, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, Transactions of the ASME 118(2)
(1996) 229-234.
[99] L. Zhang, P. Michaleris, P. Marugabandhu, Evaluation of applied plastic strain methods for
welding distortion prediction, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 129(6) (2007)
1000-1010.
[100] M. Bugatti, Q. Semeraro, Limitations of the Inherent Strain Method in Simulating Powder
Bed Fusion Processes, Additive Manufacturing 23 (2018) 329-346.
[101] L. Cheng, X. Liang, J. Bai, Q. Chen, J. Lemon, A. To, On Utilizing Topology Optimization
to Design Support Structure to Prevent Residual Stress Induced Build Failure in Laser Powder Bed
Metal Additive Manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing (2019).
[102] Q. Chen, X. Liang, D. Hayduke, J. Liu, L. Cheng, J. Oskin, R. Whitmore, A.C. To, An
inherent strain based multiscale modeling framework for simulating part-scale residual
deformation for direct metal laser sintering, Additive Manufacturing 28 (2019) 406-418.
[103] S. Osher, J.A. Sethian, Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: algorithms based
on Hamilton-Jacobi formulations, Journal of computational physics 79(1) (1988) 12-49.
[104] M.Y. Wang, X. Wang, D. Guo, A level set method for structural topology optimization,
Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering 192(1) (2003) 227-246.
[105] G. Allaire, F. Jouve, A.-M. Toader, Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a
level-set method, Journal of computational physics 194(1) (2004) 363-393.
[106] Y. Wang, Z. Luo, Z. Kang, N. Zhang, A multi-material level set-based topology and shape
optimization method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 283 (2015)
1570-1586.
[107] P. Dunning, C. Brampton, H. Kim, Simultaneous optimisation of structural topology and
material grading using level set method, Materials Science and Technology 31(8) (2015) 884-894.
[108] P. Liu, Y. Luo, Z. Kang, Multi-material topology optimization considering interface
behavior via XFEM and level set method, Computer methods in applied mechanics and
engineering 308 (2016) 113-133.
[109] J. Liu, Q. Chen, Y. Zheng, R. Ahmad, J. Tang, Y. Ma, Level set-based heterogeneous object
modeling and optimization, Computer-Aided Design (2019).
[110] J. Liu, Q. Chen, X. Liang, A.C. To, Manufacturing cost constrained topology optimization
for additive manufacturing, Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering 14(2) (2019) 213-221.
[111] Z. Kang, Y. Wang, Integrated topology optimization with embedded movable holes based
on combined description by material density and level sets, Computer methods in applied
mechanics and engineering 255 (2013) 1-13.
[112] P.D. Dunning, H. Alicia Kim, A new hole insertion method for level set based structural
topology optimization, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 93(1) (2013)
118-134.
[113] J.A. Sethian, A fast marching level set method for monotonically advancing fronts,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 93(4) (1996) 1591-1595.
[114] J.A. Sethian, Level set methods and fast marching methods: evolving interfaces in
computational geometry, fluid mechanics, computer vision, and materials science, Cambridge
university press1999.
[115] C. Le, J. Norato, T. Bruns, C. Ha, D. Tortorelli, Stress-based topology optimization for
continua, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 41(4) (2010) 605-620.
[116] A. Takezawa, G.H. Yoon, S.H. Jeong, M. Kobashi, M. Kitamura, Structural topology
optimization with strength and heat conduction constraints, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering 276 (2014) 341-361.
[117] S. Hochreiter, J. Schmidhuber, Long short-term memory, Neural computation 9(8) (1997)
1735-1780.
[118] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, G.E. Hinton, Imagenet classification with deep convolutional
neural networks, Advances in neural information processing systems 25 (2012) 1097-1105.
[119] K. Simonyan, A. Zisserman, Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image
recognition, arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 (2014).
[120] K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, J. Sun, Deep residual learning for image recognition, Proceedings
of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 770-778.
[121] O. Russakovsky, J. Deng, H. Su, J. Krause, S. Satheesh, S. Ma, Z. Huang, A. Karpathy, A.
Khosla, M. Bernstein, Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge, International journal of
computer vision 115(3) (2015) 211-252.
[122] S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, J. Sun, Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with
region proposal networks, Advances in neural information processing systems 28 (2015) 91-99.
[123] E.J. Schwalbach, S.P. Donegan, M.G. Chapman, K.J. Chaput, M.A. Groeber, A discrete
source model of powder bed fusion additive manufacturing thermal history, Additive
Manufacturing 25 (2019) 485-498.
[124] D.G. Duffy, Green’s functions with applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC2015.
[125] J. Martínez-Frutos, D. Herrero-Pérez, Efficient matrix-free GPU implementation of fixed
grid finite element analysis, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 104 (2015) 61-71.
[126] F. Dugast, P. Apostolou, A. Fernandez, W. Dong, Q. Chen, S. Strayer, R. Wicker, A.C. To,
Part-scale thermal process modeling for laser powder bed fusion with matrix-free method and GPU
computing, Additive Manufacturing 37 (2021) 101732.
[127] A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A.N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, I.
Polosukhin, Attention is all you need, Advances in neural information processing systems, 2017,
pp. 5998-6008.
[128] J. Devlin, M.-W. Chang, K. Lee, K. Toutanova, Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional
transformers for language understanding, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018).

참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.

FLOW-3D AM 미세 구조 예측 | 열 응력 해석

미세 구조 예측

냉각 속도 및 온도 구배와 같은 FLOW-3D AM 데이터를 미세 구조 모델에 입력하여 결정 성장 및 수상 돌기 암 간격을 예측할 수 있습니다. 

레이저 파우더 베드 융합으로 제작 된 니켈 기반 초합금의 열전달, 유체 흐름 및 응고 미세 구조 모델링

오하이오 주립 대학의 연구원들은 니켈 기반 초합금의 미세 구조 진화를 예측하기 위해 용융 풀과 고체 / 액체 인터페이스의 적절한 위치에서 열 구배 및 냉각 속도 데이터를 추출했습니다.

참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.
참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.

열 응력 | Thermal Stresses

FLOW-3D AM 시뮬레이션의 결과를 ABAQUS 또는 MSC NASTRAN과 같은 FEA 소프트웨어에 입력하여 추가 열 응력 분석을 실행할 수 있습니다. 여기에서 T- 조인트의 레이저 용접 시뮬레이션 결과를 추가 응력 분석을 위해 ABAQUS로 가져 오는 방법을 볼 수 있습니다. 마찬가지로 LPBF 시뮬레이션에서 응고 된 용융 풀 데이터의 결과를 사용하여 다른 FEA 소프트웨어에서 열 응력 및 왜곡 분석을 연구 할 수 있습니다.

Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig1
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig1
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig2
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig2

Thermal Stresses Case Study

Directed Energy Deposition

DED (Directed Energy Deposition)는 레이저 또는 전자 빔과 같은 에너지 소스를 사용하여 가열 및 융합되는 와이어 또는 분말을 증착하여 부품을 만드는 적층 제조 공정입니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 분말 또는 와이어 이송 속도 및 크기 특성, 레이저 출력 및 스캔 속도와 같은 공정 매개 변수를 고려하여 DED 공정을 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 또한, 기판과 분말 재료의 서로 다른 합금에 대해 독립적 인 열 물리적 재료 특성을 정의하여 다중 재료 DED 프로세스를 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 

레이저 물리학의 구현과 열 전달, 응고, 표면 장력, 차폐 가스 효과 및 반동 압력을 포함한 압력 효과를 통해 연구원은 결과 용접 비드의 강도 및 균일성에 대한 공정 매개 변수의 영향을 정확하게 분석 할 수 있습니다. 또한 이러한 시뮬레이션을 여러 레이어로 확장하여 후속 레이어 간의 융합을 분석 할 수 있습니다. 

FLOW-3D AM

flow3d AM-product
FLOW-3D AM-product

와이어 파우더 기반 DED | Wire Powder Based DED

일부 연구자들은 부품을 만들기 위해 더 넓은 범위의 처리 조건을 사용하여 하이브리드 와이어 분말 기반 DED 시스템을 찾고 있습니다. 예를 들어, 이 시뮬레이션은 다양한 분말 및 와이어 이송 속도를 가진 하이브리드 시스템을 살펴봅니다.

와이어 기반 DED | Wire Based DED

와이어 기반 DED는 분말 기반 DED보다 처리량이 높고 낭비가 적지만 재료 구성 및 증착 방향 측면에서 유연성이 떨어집니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 와이어 기반 DED의 처리 결과를 이해하는데 유용하며 최적화 연구를 통해 빌드에 대한 와이어 이송 속도 및 직경과 같은 최상의 처리 매개 변수를 찾을 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM은 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF), 바인더 제트 및 DED (Directed Energy Deposition)와 같은 적층 제조 공정 ( additive manufacturing )을 시뮬레이션하고 분석하는 CFD 소프트웨어입니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 다중 물리 기능은 공정 매개 변수의 분석 및 최적화를 위해 분말 확산 및 압축, 용융 풀 역학, L-PBF 및 DED에 대한 다공성 형성, 바인더 분사 공정을 위한 수지 침투 및 확산에 대해 매우 정확한 시뮬레이션을 제공합니다.

3D 프린팅이라고도하는 적층 제조(additive manufacturing)는 일반적으로 층별 접근 방식을 사용하여, 분말 또는 와이어로 부품을 제조하는 방법입니다. 금속 기반 적층 제조 공정에 대한 관심은 지난 몇 년 동안 시작되었습니다. 오늘날 사용되는 3 대 금속 적층 제조 공정은 PBF (Powder Bed Fusion), DED (Directed Energy Deposition) 및 바인더 제트 ( Binder jetting ) 공정입니다.  FLOW-3D  AM  은 이러한 각 프로세스에 대한 고유 한 시뮬레이션 통찰력을 제공합니다.

파우더 베드 융합 및 직접 에너지 증착 공정에서 레이저 또는 전자 빔을 열원으로 사용할 수 있습니다. 두 경우 모두 PBF용 분말 형태와 DED 공정용 분말 또는 와이어 형태의 금속을 완전히 녹여 융합하여 층별로 부품을 형성합니다. 그러나 바인더 젯팅(Binder jetting)에서는 결합제 역할을 하는 수지가 금속 분말에 선택적으로 증착되어 층별로 부품을 형성합니다. 이러한 부품은 더 나은 치밀화를 달성하기 위해 소결됩니다.

FLOW-3D AM 의 자유 표면 추적 알고리즘과 다중 물리 모델은 이러한 각 프로세스를 높은 정확도로 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF) 공정 모델링 단계는 여기에서 자세히 설명합니다. DED 및 바인더 분사 공정에 대한 몇 가지 개념 증명 시뮬레이션도 표시됩니다.

레이저 파우더 베드 퓨전 (L-PBF)

LPBF 공정에는 유체 흐름, 열 전달, 표면 장력, 상 변화 및 응고와 같은 복잡한 다중 물리학 현상이 포함되어 공정 및 궁극적으로 빌드 품질에 상당한 영향을 미칩니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 물리적 모델은 질량, 운동량 및 에너지 보존 방정식을 동시에 해결하는 동시에 입자 크기 분포 및 패킹 비율을 고려하여 중규모에서 용융 풀 현상을 시뮬레이션합니다.

FLOW-3D DEM FLOW-3D WELD 는 전체 파우더 베드 융합 공정을 시뮬레이션하는 데 사용됩니다. L-PBF 공정의 다양한 단계는 분말 베드 놓기, 분말 용융 및 응고,이어서 이전에 응고 된 층에 신선한 분말을 놓는 것, 그리고 다시 한번 새 층을 이전 층에 녹이고 융합시키는 것입니다. FLOW-3D AM  은 이러한 각 단계를 시뮬레이션하는 데 사용할 수 있습니다.

파우더 베드 부설 공정

FLOW-3D DEM을 통해 분말 크기 분포, 재료 특성, 응집 효과는 물론 롤러 또는 블레이드 움직임 및 상호 작용과 같은 기하학적 효과와 관련된 분말 확산 및 압축을 이해할 수 있습니다. 이러한 시뮬레이션은 공정 매개 변수가 후속 인쇄 공정에서 용융 풀 역학에 직접적인 영향을 미치는 패킹 밀도와 같은 분말 베드 특성에 어떻게 영향을 미치는지에 대한 정확한 이해를 제공합니다.

다양한 파우더 베드 압축을 달성하는 한 가지 방법은 베드를 놓는 동안 다양한 입자 크기 분포를 선택하는 것입니다. 아래에서 볼 수 있듯이 세 가지 크기의 입자 크기 분포가 있으며, 이는 가장 높은 압축을 제공하는 Case 2와 함께 다양한 분말 베드 압축을 초래합니다.

파우더 베드 분포 다양한 입자 크기 분포
세 가지 다른 입자 크기 분포를 사용하여 파우더 베드 배치
파우더 베드 압축 결과
세 가지 다른 입자 크기 분포를 사용한 분말 베드 압축

입자-입자 상호 작용, 유체-입자 결합 및 입자 이동 물체 상호 작용은 FLOW-3D DEM을 사용하여 자세히 분석 할 수도 있습니다 . 또한 입자간 힘을 지정하여 분말 살포 응용 분야를 보다 정확하게 연구 할 수도 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM  시뮬레이션은 이산 요소 방법 (DEM)을 사용하여 역 회전하는 원통형 롤러로 인한 분말 확산을 연구합니다. 비디오 시작 부분에서 빌드 플랫폼이 위로 이동하는 동안 분말 저장소가 아래로 이동합니다. 그 직후, 롤러는 분말 입자 (초기 위치에 따라 색상이 지정됨)를 다음 층이 녹고 구축 될 준비를 위해 구축 플랫폼으로 펼칩니다. 이러한 시뮬레이션은 저장소에서 빌드 플랫폼으로 전송되는 분말 입자의 선호 크기에 대한 추가 통찰력을 제공 할 수 있습니다.

Melting | 파우더 베드 용해

DEM 시뮬레이션에서 파우더 베드가 생성되면 STL 파일로 추출됩니다. 다음 단계는 CFD를 사용하여 레이저 용융 공정을 시뮬레이션하는 것입니다. 여기서는 레이저 빔과 파우더 베드의 상호 작용을 모델링 합니다. 이 프로세스를 정확하게 포착하기 위해 물리학에는 점성 흐름, 용융 풀 내의 레이저 반사 (광선 추적을 통해), 열 전달, 응고, 상 변화 및 기화, 반동 압력, 차폐 가스 압력 및 표면 장력이 포함됩니다. 이 모든 물리학은 이 복잡한 프로세스를 정확하게 시뮬레이션하기 위해 TruVOF 방법을 기반으로 개발되었습니다.

레이저 출력 200W, 스캔 속도 3.0m / s, 스폿 반경 100μm에서 파우더 베드의 용융 풀 분석.

용융 풀이 응고되면 FLOW-3D AM  압력 및 온도 데이터를 Abaqus 또는 MSC Nastran과 같은 FEA 도구로 가져와 응력 윤곽 및 변위 프로파일을 분석 할 수도 있습니다.

Multilayer | 다층 적층 제조

용융 풀 트랙이 응고되면 DEM을 사용하여 이전에 응고된 층에 새로운 분말 층의 확산을 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 유사하게, 레이저 용융은 새로운 분말 층에서 수행되어 후속 층 간의 융합 조건을 분석 할 수 있습니다.

해석 진행 절차는 첫 번째 용융층이 응고되면 입자의 두 번째 층이 응고 층에 증착됩니다. 새로운 분말 입자 층에 레이저 공정 매개 변수를 지정하여 용융 풀 시뮬레이션을 다시 수행합니다. 이 프로세스를 여러 번 반복하여 연속적으로 응고된 층 간의 융합, 빌드 내 온도 구배를 평가하는 동시에 다공성 또는 기타 결함의 형성을 모니터링 할 수 있습니다.

다층 적층 적층 제조 시뮬레이션

LPBF의 키홀 링 | Keyholing in LPBF

키홀링 중 다공성은 어떻게 형성됩니까? 이것은 TU Denmark의 연구원들이 FLOW-3D AM을 사용하여 답변한 질문이었습니다. 레이저 빔의 적용으로 기판이 녹으면 기화 및 상 변화로 인한 반동 압력이 용융 풀을 압박합니다. 반동 압력으로 인한 하향 흐름과 레이저 반사로 인한 추가 레이저 에너지 흡수가 공존하면 폭주 효과가 발생하여 용융 풀이 Keyholing으로 전환됩니다. 결국, 키홀 벽을 따라 온도가 변하기 때문에 표면 장력으로 인해 벽이 뭉쳐져서 진행되는 응고 전선에 의해 갇힐 수 있는 공극이 생겨 다공성이 발생합니다. FLOW-3D AM 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 공정 모듈은 키홀링 및 다공성 형성을 시뮬레이션 하는데 필요한 모든 물리 모델을 보유하고 있습니다.

바인더 분사 (Binder jetting)

Binder jetting 시뮬레이션은 모세관 힘의 영향을받는 파우더 베드에서 바인더의 확산 및 침투에 대한 통찰력을 제공합니다. 공정 매개 변수와 재료 특성은 증착 및 확산 공정에 직접적인 영향을 미칩니다.

Scan Strategy | 스캔 전략

스캔 전략은 온도 구배 및 냉각 속도에 영향을 미치기 때문에 미세 구조에 직접적인 영향을 미칩니다. 연구원들은 FLOW-3D AM 을 사용하여 결함 형성과 응고된 금속의 미세 구조에 영향을 줄 수 있는 트랙 사이에서 발생하는 재 용융을 이해하기 위한 최적의 스캔 전략을 탐색하고 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 하나 또는 여러 레이저에 대해 시간에 따른 방향 속도를 구현할 때 완전한 유연성을 제공합니다.

Beam Shaping | 빔 형성

레이저 출력 및 스캔 전략 외에도 레이저 빔 모양과 열유속 분포는 LPBF 공정에서 용융 풀 역학에 큰 영향을 미칩니다. AM 기계 제조업체는 공정 안정성 및 처리량에 대해 다중 코어 및 임의 모양의 레이저 빔 사용을 모색하고 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM을 사용하면 멀티 코어 및 임의 모양의 빔 프로파일을 구현할 수 있으므로 생산량을 늘리고 부품 품질을 개선하기 위한 최상의 구성에 대한 통찰력을 제공 할 수 있습니다.

이 영역에서 수행 된 일부 작업에 대해 자세히 알아 보려면 “The Next Frontier of Metal AM”웨비나를 시청하십시오.

Multi-material Powder Bed Fusion | 다중 재료 분말 베드 융합

이 시뮬레이션에서 스테인리스 강 및 알루미늄 분말은 FLOW-3D AM 이 용융 풀 역학을 정확하게 포착하기 위해 추적하는 독립적으로 정의 된 온도 의존 재료 특성을 가지고 있습니다. 시뮬레이션은 용융 풀에서 재료 혼합을 이해하는 데 도움이됩니다.

다중 재료 용접 사례 연구

이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사

GM과 University of Utah의 연구원들은 FLOW-3D WELD 를 사용 하여 레이저 키홀 용접을 통한 이종 금속의 혼합을 이해했습니다. 그들은 반동 압력 및 Marangoni 대류와 관련하여 구리와 알루미늄의 혼합 농도에 대한 레이저 출력 및 스캔 속도의 영향을 조사했습니다. 그들은 시뮬레이션을 실험 결과와 비교했으며 샘플 내의 절단 단면에서 재료 농도 사이에 좋은 일치를 발견했습니다.

이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사
이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사
참조 : Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, 이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사 , Materials & Design, Volume 195, (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056
참조 : Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, 이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사 , Materials & Design, Volume 195, (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056

방향성 에너지 증착

FLOW-3D AM 의 내장 입자 모델 을 사용하여 직접 에너지 증착 프로세스를 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 분말 주입 속도와 고체 기질에 입사되는 열유속을 지정함으로써 고체 입자는 용융 풀에 질량, 운동량 및 에너지를 추가 할 수 있습니다. 다음 비디오에서 고체 금속 입자가 용융 풀에 주입되고 기판에서 용융 풀의 후속 응고가 관찰됩니다.

Figure 6. Evolution of melt pool in the overhang region (θ = 45°, P = 100 W, v = 1000 mm/s, the streamlines are shown by arrows).

Experimental and numerical investigation of the origin of surface roughness in laser powder bed fused overhang regions

레이저 파우더 베드 융합 오버행 영역에서 표면 거칠기의 원인에 대한 실험 및 수치 조사

Shaochuan Feng,Amar M. Kamat,Soheil Sabooni &Yutao PeiPages S66-S84 | Received 18 Jan 2021, Accepted 25 Feb 2021, Published online: 10 Mar 2021

ABSTRACT

Surface roughness of laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF) printed overhang regions is a major contributor to deteriorated shape accuracy/surface quality. This study investigates the mechanisms behind the evolution of surface roughness (Ra) in overhang regions. The evolution of surface morphology is the result of a combination of border track contour, powder adhesion, warp deformation, and dross formation, which is strongly related to the overhang angle (θ). When 0° ≤ θ ≤ 15°, the overhang angle does not affect Ra significantly since only a small area of the melt pool boundaries contacts the powder bed resulting in slight powder adhesion. When 15° < θ ≤ 50°, powder adhesion is enhanced by the melt pool sinking and the increased contact area between the melt pool boundary and powder bed. When θ > 50°, large waviness of the overhang contour, adhesion of powder clusters, severe warp deformation and dross formation increase Ra sharply.

레이저 파우더 베드 퓨전 (L-PBF) 프린팅 오버행 영역의 표면 거칠기는 형상 정확도 / 표면 품질 저하의 주요 원인입니다. 이 연구 는 오버행 영역에서 표면 거칠기 (Ra ) 의 진화 뒤에 있는 메커니즘을 조사합니다 . 표면 형태의 진화는 오버행 각도 ( θ ) 와 밀접한 관련이있는 경계 트랙 윤곽, 분말 접착, 뒤틀림 변형 및 드로스 형성의 조합의 결과입니다 . 0° ≤  θ  ≤ 15° 인 경우 , 용융풀 경계의 작은 영역 만 분말 베드와 접촉하여 약간의 분말 접착이 발생하기 때문에 오버행 각도가 R a에 큰 영향을 주지 않습니다 . 15° < θ 일 때  ≤ 50°, 용융 풀 싱킹 및 용융 풀 경계와 분말 베드 사이의 증가된 접촉 면적으로 분말 접착력이 향상됩니다. θ  > 50° 일 때 오버행 윤곽의 큰 파형, 분말 클러스터의 접착, 심한 휨 변형 및 드 로스 형성이 Ra 급격히 증가 합니다.

KEYWORDS: Laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF), melt pool dynamics, overhang region, shape deviation, surface roughness

1. Introduction

레이저 분말 베드 융합 (L-PBF)은 첨단 적층 제조 (AM) 기술로, 집중된 레이저 빔을 사용하여 금속 분말을 선택적으로 융합하여 슬라이스 된 3D 컴퓨터 지원에 따라 층별로 3 차원 (3D) 금속 부품을 구축합니다. 설계 (CAD) 모델 (Chatham, Long 및 Williams 2019 ; Tan, Zhu 및 Zhou 2020 ). 재료가 인쇄 층 아래에 ​​존재하는지 여부에 따라 인쇄 영역은 각각 솔리드 영역 또는 돌출 영역으로 분류 될 수 있습니다. 따라서 오버행 영역은 고체 기판이 아니라 분말 베드 바로 위에 건설되는 특수 구조입니다 (Patterson, Messimer 및 Farrington 2017). 오버행 영역은지지 구조를 포함하거나 포함하지 않고 구축 할 수 있으며, 지지대가있는 돌출 영역의 L-PBF는 지지체가 더 낮은 밀도로 구축된다는 점을 제외 하고 (Wang and Chou 2018 ) 고체 기판의 공정과 유사합니다 (따라서 기계적 강도가 낮기 때문에 L-PBF 공정 후 기계적으로 쉽게 제거 할 수 있습니다. 따라서지지 구조로 인쇄 된 오버행 영역은 L-PBF 공정 후 지지물 제거, 연삭 및 연마와 같은 추가 후 처리 단계가 필요합니다.

수평 내부 채널의 제작과 같은 일부 특정 경우에는 공정 후 지지대를 제거하기가 어려우므로 채널 상단 절반의 돌출부 영역을 지지대없이 건설해야합니다 (Hopkinson and Dickens 2000 ). 수평 내부 채널에 사용할 수없는지지 구조 외에도 내부 표면, 특히 등각 냉각 채널 (Feng, Kamat 및 Pei 2021 ) 에서 발생하는 복잡한 3D 채널 네트워크의 경우 표면 마감 프로세스를 구현하는 것도 어렵습니다 . 결과적으로 오버행 영역은 (i) 잔류 응력에 의한 변형, (ii) 계단 효과 (Kuo et al. 2020 ; Li et al. 2020 )로 인해 설계된 모양에서 벗어날 수 있습니다 .) 및 (iii) 원하지 않는 분말 소결로 인한 향상된 표면 거칠기; 여기서, 앞의 두 요소는 일반적으로 mm 길이 스케일에서 ‘매크로’편차로 분류되고 후자는 일반적으로 µm 길이 스케일에서 ‘마이크로’편차로 인식됩니다.

열 응력에 의한 변형은 오버행 영역에서 발생하는 중요한 문제입니다 (Patterson, Messimer 및 Farrington 2017 ). 국부적 인 용융 / 냉각은 용융 풀 내부 및 주변에서 큰 온도 구배를 유도하여 응고 된 층에 집중적 인 열 응력을 유발합니다. 열 응력에 의한 뒤틀림은 고체 영역을 현저하게 변형하지 않습니다. 이러한 영역은 아래의 여러 레이어에 의해 제한되기 때문입니다. 반면에 오버행 영역은 구속되지 않고 공정 중 응력 완화로 인해 상당한 변형이 발생합니다 (Kamat 및 Pei 2019 ). 더욱이 용융 깊이는 레이어 두께보다 큽니다 (이전 레이어도 재용 해되어 빌드 된 레이어간에 충분한 결합을 보장하기 때문입니다 [Yadroitsev et al. 2013 ; Kamath et al.2014 ]),응고 된 두께가 설계된 두께보다 크기 때문에형태 편차 (예 : 드 로스 [Charles et al. 2020 ; Feng et al. 2020 ])가 발생합니다. 마이크로 스케일에서 인쇄 된 표면 (R a 및 S a ∼ 10 μm)은 기계적으로 가공 된 표면보다 거칠다 (Duval-Chaneac et al. 2018 ; Wen et al. 2018 ). 이 문제는고형화 된 용융 풀의 가장자리에 부착 된 용융되지 않은 분말의 결과로 표면 거칠기 (R a )가 일반적으로 약 20 μm인 오버행 영역에서 특히 심각합니다 (Mazur et al. 2016 ; Pakkanen et al. 2016 ).

오버행 각도 ( θ , 빌드 방향과 관련하여 측정)는 오버행 영역의 뒤틀림 편향과 표면 거칠기에 영향을 미치는 중요한 매개 변수입니다 (Kamat and Pei 2019 ; Mingear et al. 2019 ). θ ∼ 45 ° 의 오버행 각도 는 일반적으로지지 구조없이 오버행 영역을 인쇄 할 수있는 임계 값으로 합의됩니다 (Pakkanen et al. 2016 ; Kadirgama et al. 2018 ). θ 일 때이 임계 값보다 크면 오버행 영역을 허용 가능한 표면 품질로 인쇄 할 수 없습니다. 오버행 각도 외에도 레이저 매개 변수 (레이저 에너지 밀도와 관련된)는 용융 풀의 모양 / 크기 및 용융 풀 역학에 영향을줌으로써 오버행 영역의 표면 거칠기에 영향을줍니다 (Wang et al. 2013 ; Mingear et al . 2019 ).

용융 풀 역학은 고체 (Shrestha 및 Chou 2018 ) 및 오버행 (Le et al. 2020 ) 영역 모두에서 수행되는 L-PBF 공정을 포함한 레이저 재료 가공의 일반적인 물리적 현상입니다 . 용융 풀 모양, 크기 및 냉각 속도는 잔류 응력으로 인한 변형과 ​​표면 거칠기에 모두 영향을 미치므로 처리 매개 변수와 표면 형태 / 품질 사이의 다리 역할을하며 용융 풀을 이해하기 위해 수치 시뮬레이션을 사용하여 추가 조사를 수행 할 수 있습니다. 거동과 표면 거칠기에 미치는 영향. 현재까지 고체 영역의 L-PBF 동안 용융 풀 동작을 시뮬레이션하기 위해 여러 연구가 수행되었습니다. 유한 요소 방법 (FEM)과 같은 시뮬레이션 기술 (Roberts et al. 2009 ; Du et al.2019 ), 유한 차분 법 (FDM) (Wu et al. 2018 ), 전산 유체 역학 (CFD) (Lee and Zhang 2016 ), 임의의 Lagrangian-Eulerian 방법 (ALE) (Khairallah and Anderson 2014 )을 사용하여 증발 반동 압력 (Hu et al. 2018 ) 및 Marangoni 대류 (Zhang et al. 2018 ) 현상을포함하는 열 전달 (온도 장) 및 물질 전달 (용융 흐름) 프로세스. 또한 이산 요소법 (DEM)을 사용하여 무작위 분산 분말 베드를 생성했습니다 (Lee and Zhang 2016 ; Wu et al. 2018 ). 이 모델은 분말 규모의 L-PBF 공정을 시뮬레이션했습니다 (Khairallah et al. 2016) 메조 스케일 (Khairallah 및 Anderson 2014 ), 단일 트랙 (Leitz et al. 2017 )에서 다중 트랙 (Foroozmehr et al. 2016 ) 및 다중 레이어 (Huang, Khamesee 및 Toyserkani 2019 )로.

그러나 결과적인 표면 거칠기를 결정하는 오버행 영역의 용융 풀 역학은 문헌에서 거의 관심을받지 못했습니다. 솔리드 영역의 L-PBF에 대한 기존 시뮬레이션 모델이 어느 정도 참조가 될 수 있지만 오버행 영역과 솔리드 영역 간의 용융 풀 역학에는 상당한 차이가 있습니다. 오버행 영역에서 용융 금속은 분말 입자 사이의 틈새로 아래로 흘러 용융 풀이 다공성 분말 베드가 제공하는 약한 지지체 아래로 가라 앉습니다. 이것은 중력과 표면 장력의 영향이 용융 풀의 결과적인 모양 / 크기를 결정하는 데 중요하며, 결과적으로 오버행 영역의 마이크로 스케일 형태의 진화에 중요합니다. 또한 분말 입자 사이의 공극, 열 조건 (예 : 에너지 흡수,2019 ; Karimi et al. 2020 ; 노래와 영 2020 ). 표면 거칠기는 (마이크로) 형상 편차를 증가시킬뿐만 아니라 주기적 하중 동안 미세 균열의 시작 지점 역할을함으로써 기계적 강도를 저하시킵니다 (Günther et al. 2018 ). 오버행 영역의 높은 표면 거칠기는 (마이크로) 정확도 / 품질에 대한 엄격한 요구 사항이있는 부품 제조에서 L-PBF의 적용을 제한합니다.

본 연구는 실험 및 시뮬레이션 연구를 사용하여 오버행 영역 (지지물없이 제작)의 미세 형상 편차 형성 메커니즘과 표면 거칠기의 기원을 체계적이고 포괄적으로 조사합니다. 결합 된 DEM-CFD 시뮬레이션 모델은 경계 트랙 윤곽, 분말 접착 및 뒤틀림 변형의 효과를 고려하여 오버행 영역의 용융 풀 역학과 표면 형태의 형성 메커니즘을 나타 내기 위해 개발되었습니다. 표면 거칠기 R의 시뮬레이션 및 단일 요인 L-PBF 인쇄 실험을 사용하여 오버행 각도의 함수로 연구됩니다. 용융 풀의 침몰과 관련된 오버행 영역에서 분말 접착의 세 가지 메커니즘이 식별되고 자세히 설명됩니다. 마지막으로, 인쇄 된 오버행 영역에서 높은 표면 거칠기 문제를 완화 할 수 있는 잠재적 솔루션에 대해 간략하게 설명합니다.

The shape and size of the L-PBF printed samples are illustrated in Figure 1
The shape and size of the L-PBF printed samples are illustrated in Figure 1
Figure 2. Borders in the overhang region depending on the overhang angle θ
Figure 2. Borders in the overhang region depending on the overhang angle θ
Figure 3. (a) Profile of the volumetric heat source, (b) the model geometry of single-track printing on a solid substrate (unit: µm), and (c) the comparison of melt pool dimensions obtained from the experiment (right half) and simulation (left half) for a calibrated optical penetration depth of 110 µm (laser power 200 W and scan speed 800 mm/s, solidified layer thickness 30 µm, powder size 10–45 µm).
Figure 3. (a) Profile of the volumetric heat source, (b) the model geometry of single-track printing on a solid substrate (unit: µm), and (c) the comparison of melt pool dimensions obtained from the experiment (right half) and simulation (left half) for a calibrated optical penetration depth of 110 µm (laser power 200 W and scan speed 800 mm/s, solidified layer thickness 30 µm, powder size 10–45 µm).
Figure 4. The model geometry of an overhang being L-PBF processed: (a) 3D view and (b) right view.
Figure 4. The model geometry of an overhang being L-PBF processed: (a) 3D view and (b) right view.
Figure 5. The cross-sectional contour of border tracks in a 45° overhang region.
Figure 5. The cross-sectional contour of border tracks in a 45° overhang region.
Figure 6. Evolution of melt pool in the overhang region (θ = 45°, P = 100 W, v = 1000 mm/s, the streamlines are shown by arrows).
Figure 6. Evolution of melt pool in the overhang region (θ = 45°, P = 100 W, v = 1000 mm/s, the streamlines are shown by arrows).
Figure 7. The overhang contour is contributed by (a) only outer borders when θ ≤ 60° (b) both inner borders and outer borders when θ > 60°.
Figure 7. The overhang contour is contributed by (a) only outer borders when θ ≤ 60° (b) both inner borders and outer borders when θ > 60°.
Figure 8. Schematic of powder adhesion on a 45° overhang region.
Figure 8. Schematic of powder adhesion on a 45° overhang region.
Figure 9. The L-PBF printed samples with various overhang angle (a) θ = 0° (cube), (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45°, (d) θ = 55° and (e) θ = 60°.
Figure 9. The L-PBF printed samples with various overhang angle (a) θ = 0° (cube), (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45°, (d) θ = 55° and (e) θ = 60°.
Figure 10. Two mechanisms of powder adhesion related to the overhang angle: (a) simulation-predicted, θ = 45°; (b) simulation-predicted, θ = 60°; (c, e) optical micrographs, θ = 45°; (d, f) optical micrographs, θ = 60°. (e) and (f) are partial enlargement of (c) and (d), respectively.
Figure 10. Two mechanisms of powder adhesion related to the overhang angle: (a) simulation-predicted, θ = 45°; (b) simulation-predicted, θ = 60°; (c, e) optical micrographs, θ = 45°; (d, f) optical micrographs, θ = 60°. (e) and (f) are partial enlargement of (c) and (d), respectively.
Figure 11. Simulation-predicted surface morphology in the overhang region at different overhang angle: (a) θ = 15°, (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45°, (d) θ = 60° and (e) θ = 80° (Blue solid lines: simulation-predicted contour; red dashed lines: the planar profile of designed overhang region specified by the overhang angles).
Figure 11. Simulation-predicted surface morphology in the overhang region at different overhang angle: (a) θ = 15°, (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45°, (d) θ = 60° and (e) θ = 80° (Blue solid lines: simulation-predicted contour; red dashed lines: the planar profile of designed overhang region specified by the overhang angles).
Figure 12. Effect of overhang angle on surface roughness Ra in overhang regions
Figure 12. Effect of overhang angle on surface roughness Ra in overhang regions
Figure 13. Surface morphology of L-PBF printed overhang regions with different overhang angle: (a) θ = 15°, (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45° and (d) θ = 60° (overhang border parameters: P = 100 W, v = 1000 mm/s).
Figure 13. Surface morphology of L-PBF printed overhang regions with different overhang angle: (a) θ = 15°, (b) θ = 30°, (c) θ = 45° and (d) θ = 60° (overhang border parameters: P = 100 W, v = 1000 mm/s).
Figure 14. Effect of (a) laser power (scan speed = 1000 mm/s) and (b) scan speed (lase power = 100 W) on surface roughness Ra in overhang regions (θ = 45°, laser power and scan speed referred to overhang border parameters, and the other process parameters are listed in Table 2).
Figure 14. Effect of (a) laser power (scan speed = 1000 mm/s) and (b) scan speed (lase power = 100 W) on surface roughness Ra in overhang regions (θ = 45°, laser power and scan speed referred to overhang border parameters, and the other process parameters are listed in Table 2).

References

  • Cai, Chao, Chrupcala Radoslaw, Jinliang Zhang, Qian Yan, Shifeng Wen, Bo Song, and Yusheng Shi. 2019. “In-Situ Preparation and Formation of TiB/Ti-6Al-4V Nanocomposite via Laser Additive Manufacturing: Microstructure Evolution and Tribological Behavior.” Powder Technology 342: 73–84. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018.09.088. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Cai, Chao, Wei Shian Tey, Jiayao Chen, Wei Zhu, Xingjian Liu, Tong Liu, Lihua Zhao, and Kun Zhou. 2021. “Comparative Study on 3D Printing of Polyamide 12 by Selective Laser Sintering and Multi Jet Fusion.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 288 (August 2020): 116882. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116882. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Cai, Chao, Xu Wu, Wan Liu, Wei Zhu, Hui Chen, Jasper Dong Qiu Chua, Chen Nan Sun, Jie Liu, Qingsong Wei, and Yusheng Shi. 2020. “Selective Laser Melting of Near-α Titanium Alloy Ti-6Al-2Zr-1Mo-1V: Parameter Optimization, Heat Treatment and Mechanical Performance.” Journal of Materials Science and Technology 57: 51–64. doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2020.05.004. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Charles, Amal, Ahmed Elkaseer, Lore Thijs, and Steffen G. Scholz. 2020. “Dimensional Errors Due to Overhanging Features in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Parts Made of Ti-6Al-4V.” Applied Sciences 10 (7): 2416. doi:10.3390/app10072416. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Chatham, Camden A., Timothy E. Long, and Christopher B. Williams. 2019. “A Review of the Process Physics and Material Screening Methods for Polymer Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing.” Progress in Polymer Science 93: 68–95. doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2019.03.003. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Du, Yang, Xinyu You, Fengbin Qiao, Lijie Guo, and Zhengwu Liu. 2019. “A Model for Predicting the Temperature Field during Selective Laser Melting.” Results in Physics 12 (November 2018): 52–60. doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2018.11.031. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Duval-Chaneac, M. S., S. Han, C. Claudin, F. Salvatore, J. Bajolet, and J. Rech. 2018. “Experimental Study on Finishing of Internal Laser Melting (SLM) Surface with Abrasive Flow Machining (AFM).” Precision Engineering 54 (July 2017): 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.precisioneng.2018.03.006. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Feng, Shaochuan, Shijie Chen, Amar M. Kamat, Ru Zhang, Mingji Huang, and Liangcai Hu. 2020. “Investigation on Shape Deviation of Horizontal Interior Circular Channels Fabricated by Laser Powder Bed Fusion.” Additive Manufacturing 36 (December): 101585. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2020.101585. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Feng, Shaochuan, Chuanzhen Huang, Jun Wang, Hongtao Zhu, Peng Yao, and Zhanqiang Liu. 2017. “An Analytical Model for the Prediction of Temperature Distribution and Evolution in Hybrid Laser-Waterjet Micro-Machining.” Precision Engineering 47: 33–45. doi:10.1016/j.precisioneng.2016.07.002. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Feng, Shaochuan, Amar M. Kamat, and Yutao Pei. 2021. “Design and Fabrication of Conformal Cooling Channels in Molds: Review and Progress Updates.” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121082. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Flow-3D V11.2 Documentation. 2016. Flow Science, Inc. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Foroozmehr, Ali, Mohsen Badrossamay, Ehsan Foroozmehr, and Sa’id Golabi. 2016. “Finite Element Simulation of Selective Laser Melting Process Considering Optical Penetration Depth of Laser in Powder Bed.” Materials and Design 89: 255–263. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2015.10.002. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • “Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) — Surface Texture: Profile Method — Rules and Procedures for the Assessment of Surface Texture (ISO 4288).” 1996. International Organization for Standardization. https://www.iso.org/standard/2096.html. [Google Scholar]
  • Günther, Johannes, Stefan Leuders, Peter Koppa, Thomas Tröster, Sebastian Henkel, Horst Biermann, and Thomas Niendorf. 2018. “On the Effect of Internal Channels and Surface Roughness on the High-Cycle Fatigue Performance of Ti-6Al-4V Processed by SLM.” Materials & Design 143: 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2018.01.042. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Hopkinson, Neil, and Phill Dickens. 2000. “Conformal Cooling and Heating Channels Using Laser Sintered Tools.” In Solid Freeform Fabrication Conference, 490–497. Texas. doi:10.26153/tsw/3075. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Hu, Zhiheng, Haihong Zhu, Changchun Zhang, Hu Zhang, Ting Qi, and Xiaoyan Zeng. 2018. “Contact Angle Evolution during Selective Laser Melting.” Materials and Design 139: 304–313. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.002. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Hu, Cheng, Kejia Zhuang, Jian Weng, and Donglin Pu. 2019. “Three-Dimensional Analytical Modeling of Cutting Temperature for Round Insert Considering Semi-Infinite Boundary and Non-Uniform Heat Partition.” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 155 (October 2018): 536–553. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.03.019. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Huang, Yuze, Mir Behrad Khamesee, and Ehsan Toyserkani. 2019. “A New Physics-Based Model for Laser Directed Energy Deposition (Powder-Fed Additive Manufacturing): From Single-Track to Multi-Track and Multi-Layer.” Optics & Laser Technology 109 (August 2018): 584–599. doi:10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.015. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Kadirgama, K., W. S. W. Harun, F. Tarlochan, M. Samykano, D. Ramasamy, Mohd Zaidi Azir, and H. Mehboob. 2018. “Statistical and Optimize of Lattice Structures with Selective Laser Melting (SLM) of Ti6AL4V Material.” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 97 (1–4): 495–510. doi:10.1007/s00170-018-1913-1. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Kamat, Amar M, and Yutao Pei. 2019. “An Analytical Method to Predict and Compensate for Residual Stress-Induced Deformation in Overhanging Regions of Internal Channels Fabricated Using Powder Bed Fusion.” Additive Manufacturing 29 (March): 100796. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2019.100796. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Kamath, Chandrika, Bassem El-Dasher, Gilbert F. Gallegos, Wayne E. King, and Aaron Sisto. 2014. “Density of Additively-Manufactured, 316L SS Parts Using Laser Powder-Bed Fusion at Powers up to 400 W.” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 74 (1–4): 65–78. doi:10.1007/s00170-014-5954-9. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Karimi, J., C. Suryanarayana, I. Okulov, and K. G. Prashanth. 2020. “Selective Laser Melting of Ti6Al4V: Effect of Laser Re-Melting.” Materials Science and Engineering A (July): 140558. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2020.140558. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Khairallah, Saad A., and Andy Anderson. 2014. “Mesoscopic Simulation Model of Selective Laser Melting of Stainless Steel Powder.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 214 (11): 2627–2636. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.001. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Khairallah, Saad A., Andrew T. Anderson, Alexander Rubenchik, and Wayne E. King. 2016. “Laser Powder-Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing: Physics of Complex Melt Flow and Formation Mechanisms of Pores, Spatter, and Denudation Zones.” Edited by Adedeji B. Badiru, Vhance V. Valencia, and David Liu. Acta Materialia 108 (April): 36–45. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.014. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Kuo, C. N., C. K. Chua, P. C. Peng, Y. W. Chen, S. L. Sing, S. Huang, and Y. L. Su. 2020. “Microstructure Evolution and Mechanical Property Response via 3D Printing Parameter Development of Al–Sc Alloy.” Virtual and Physical Prototyping 15 (1): 120–129. doi:10.1080/17452759.2019.1698967. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Le, K. Q., C. H. Wong, K. H. G. Chua, C. Tang, and H. Du. 2020. “Discontinuity of Overhanging Melt Track in Selective Laser Melting Process.” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 162 (December): 120284. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120284. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Lee, Y. S., and W. Zhang. 2016. “Modeling of Heat Transfer, Fluid Flow and Solidification Microstructure of Nickel-Base Superalloy Fabricated by Laser Powder Bed Fusion.” Additive Manufacturing 12: 178–188. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2016.05.003. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Leitz, K. H., P. Singer, A. Plankensteiner, B. Tabernig, H. Kestler, and L. S. Sigl. 2017. “Multi-Physical Simulation of Selective Laser Melting.” Metal Powder Report 72 (5): 331–338. doi:10.1016/j.mprp.2016.04.004. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Li, Jian, Jing Hu, Yi Zhu, Xiaowen Yu, Mengfei Yu, and Huayong Yang. 2020. “Surface Roughness Control of Root Analogue Dental Implants Fabricated Using Selective Laser Melting.” Additive Manufacturing 34 (September 2019): 101283. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2020.101283. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Li, Yingli, Kun Zhou, Pengfei Tan, Shu Beng Tor, Chee Kai Chua, and Kah Fai Leong. 2018. “Modeling Temperature and Residual Stress Fields in Selective Laser Melting.” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 136 (February): 24–35. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.001. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Mazur, MacIej, Martin Leary, Matthew McMillan, Joe Elambasseril, and Milan Brandt. 2016. “SLM Additive Manufacture of H13 Tool Steel with Conformal Cooling and Structural Lattices.” Rapid Prototyping Journal 22 (3): 504–518. doi:10.1108/RPJ-06-2014-0075. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Mingear, Jacob, Bing Zhang, Darren Hartl, and Alaa Elwany. 2019. “Effect of Process Parameters and Electropolishing on the Surface Roughness of Interior Channels in Additively Manufactured Nickel-Titanium Shape Memory Alloy Actuators.” Additive Manufacturing 27 (October 2018): 565–575. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2019.03.027. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Pakkanen, Jukka, Flaviana Calignano, Francesco Trevisan, Massimo Lorusso, Elisa Paola Ambrosio, Diego Manfredi, and Paolo Fino. 2016. “Study of Internal Channel Surface Roughnesses Manufactured by Selective Laser Melting in Aluminum and Titanium Alloys.” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 47 (8): 3837–3844. doi:10.1007/s11661-016-3478-7. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Patterson, Albert E., Sherri L. Messimer, and Phillip A. Farrington. 2017. “Overhanging Features and the SLM/DMLS Residual Stresses Problem: Review and Future Research Need.” Technologies 5 (4): 15. doi:10.3390/technologies5020015. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Roberts, I. A., C. J. Wang, R. Esterlein, M. Stanford, and D. J. Mynors. 2009. “A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Temperature Field during Laser Melting of Metal Powders in Additive Layer Manufacturing.” International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 49 (12–13): 916–923. doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2009.07.004. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Shrestha, Subin, and Kevin Chou. 2018. “Computational Analysis of Thermo-Fluid Dynamics with Metallic Powder in SLM.” In CFD Modeling and Simulation in Materials Processing 2018, edited by Laurentiu Nastac, Koulis Pericleous, Adrian S. Sabau, Lifeng Zhang, and Brian G. Thomas, 85–95. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-72059-3_9. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Sing, S. L., and W. Y. Yeong. 2020. “Laser Powder Bed Fusion for Metal Additive Manufacturing: Perspectives on Recent Developments.” Virtual and Physical Prototyping 15 (3): 359–370. doi:10.1080/17452759.2020.1779999. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Šmilauer, Václav, Emanuele Catalano, Bruno Chareyre, Sergei Dorofeenko, Jérôme Duriez, Nolan Dyck, Jan Eliáš, et al. 2015. Yade Documentation. 2nd ed. The Yade Project. doi:10.5281/zenodo.34073. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  • Tan, Pengfei, Fei Shen, Biao Li, and Kun Zhou. 2019. “A Thermo-Metallurgical-Mechanical Model for Selective Laser Melting of Ti6Al4V.” Materials & Design 168 (April): 107642. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107642. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Tan, Lisa Jiaying, Wei Zhu, and Kun Zhou. 2020. “Recent Progress on Polymer Materials for Additive Manufacturing.” Advanced Functional Materials 30 (43): 1–54. doi:10.1002/adfm.202003062. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Wang, Xiaoqing, and Kevin Chou. 2018. “Effect of Support Structures on Ti-6Al-4V Overhang Parts Fabricated by Powder Bed Fusion Electron Beam Additive Manufacturing.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 257 (February): 65–78. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.02.038. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Wang, Di, Yongqiang Yang, Ziheng Yi, and Xubin Su. 2013. “Research on the Fabricating Quality Optimization of the Overhanging Surface in SLM Process.” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 65 (9–12): 1471–1484. doi:10.1007/s00170-012-4271-4. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Wen, Peng, Maximilian Voshage, Lucas Jauer, Yanzhe Chen, Yu Qin, Reinhart Poprawe, and Johannes Henrich Schleifenbaum. 2018. “Laser Additive Manufacturing of Zn Metal Parts for Biodegradable Applications: Processing, Formation Quality and Mechanical Properties.” Materials and Design 155: 36–45. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2018.05.057. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Wu, Yu-che, Cheng-hung San, Chih-hsiang Chang, Huey-jiuan Lin, Raed Marwan, Shuhei Baba, and Weng-Sing Hwang. 2018. “Numerical Modeling of Melt-Pool Behavior in Selective Laser Melting with Random Powder Distribution and Experimental Validation.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 254 (November 2017): 72–78. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.11.032. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Yadroitsev, I., P. Krakhmalev, I. Yadroitsava, S. Johansson, and I. Smurov. 2013. “Energy Input Effect on Morphology and Microstructure of Selective Laser Melting Single Track from Metallic Powder.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 213 (4): 606–613. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2012.11.014. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Yu, Wenhui, Swee Leong Sing, Chee Kai Chua, and Xuelei Tian. 2019. “Influence of Re-Melting on Surface Roughness and Porosity of AlSi10Mg Parts Fabricated by Selective Laser Melting.” Journal of Alloys and Compounds 792: 574–581. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.04.017. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang, Dongyun, Pudan Zhang, Zhen Liu, Zhe Feng, Chengjie Wang, and Yanwu Guo. 2018. “Thermofluid Field of Molten Pool and Its Effects during Selective Laser Melting (SLM) of Inconel 718 Alloy.” Additive Manufacturing 21 (100): 567–578. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2018.03.031. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig3

On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel—Multiphysics modeling and experimental validation

MohamadBayataVenkata K.NadimpalliaFrancesco G.BiondaniaSinaJafarzadehbJesperThorborgaNiels S.TiedjeaGiulianoBissaccoaDavid B.PedersenaJesper H.Hattela
a Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Building 425, Lyngby, Denmark
Department of Energy Conversion and Storage, Technical University of Denmark, Building 301, Lyngby, Denmark

Received 15 December 2020, Revised 12 April 2021, Accepted 19 April 2021, Available online 8 May 2021.

Abstract

The Directed Energy Deposition (DED) process of metals, has a broad range of applications in several industrial sectors. Surface modification, component repairing, production of functionally graded materials and more importantly, manufacturing of complex geometries are major DED’s applications. In this work, a multi-physics numerical model of the DED process of maraging steel is developed to study the influence of the powder stream specifications on the melt pool’s thermal and fluid dynamics conditions. The model is developed based on the Finite Volume Method (FVM) framework using the commercial software package Flow-3D. Different physical phenomena e.g. solidification, evaporation, the Marangoni effect and the recoil pressure are included in the model. As a new feature, the powder particles’ dynamics are modeled using a Lagrangian framework and their impact on the melt pool conditions is taken into account as well. In-situ and ex-situ experiments are carried out using a thermal camera and optical microscopy. The predicted track morphology is in good agreement with the experimental measurements. Besides, the predicted melt pool evolution follows the same trend as observed with the online thermal camera. Furthermore, a parametric study is carried out to investigate the effect of the powder particles incoming velocity on the track morphology. It is shown that the height-to-width ratio of tracks increases while using higher powder velocities. Moreover, it is shown that by tripling the powder particles velocity, the height-to-width ratio increases by 104% and the wettability of the track decreases by 24%.

Korea Abstract

금속의 DED (Directed Energy Deposition) 공정은 여러 산업 분야에서 광범위한 응용 분야를 가지고 있습니다. 표면 수정, 부품 수리, 기능 등급 재료의 생산 및 더 중요한 것은 복잡한 형상의 제조가 DED의 주요 응용 분야입니다.

이 작업에서는 용융 풀의 열 및 유체 역학 조건에 대한 분말 스트림 사양의 영향을 연구하기 위해 강철 마레이징 DED 공정의 다중 물리 수치 모델이 개발되었습니다. 이 모델은 상용 소프트웨어 패키지 FLOW-3D를 사용하여 FVM (Finite Volume Method) 프레임 워크를 기반으로 개발되었습니다.

다른 물리적 현상 예 : 응고, 증발, 마랑고니 효과 및 반동 압력이 모델에 포함됩니다. 새로운 기능으로 분말 입자의 역학은 Lagrangian 프레임 워크를 사용하여 모델링되며 용융 풀 조건에 미치는 영향도 고려됩니다.

현장 및 현장 실험은 열 화상 카메라와 광학 현미경을 사용하여 수행됩니다. 예측된 트랙 형태는 실험 측정과 잘 일치합니다. 게다가 예측된 용융 풀 진화는 온라인 열 화상 카메라에서 관찰된 것과 동일한 추세를 따릅니다. 또한, 분말 입자 유입 속도가 트랙 형태에 미치는 영향을 조사하기 위해 매개 변수 연구가 수행됩니다.

더 높은 분말 속도를 사용하는 동안 트랙의 높이 대 너비 비율이 증가하는 것으로 나타났습니다. 또한 분말 입자 속도를 3 배로 늘림으로써 높이 대 너비 비율이 104 % 증가하고 트랙의 젖음성은 24 % 감소하는 것으로 나타났습니다.

Keywords

Multi-physics modelDEDHeat and fluid flowFVMParticle motion

On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig2
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig2
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig3
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig3
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig4
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig4
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig5
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig5
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig6
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig6
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig7
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig7
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig8
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig8
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig9
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig9
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig10
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig10
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig11
On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during Directed Energy Deposition of maraging steel-Fig11

FLOW-3D 금속3D프린팅분야 활용

FLOW-3D 레이저 용접분야 활용

금속 3D 프린팅은 적층제조(Additive Manufacturing) 가공법이라고 불리며 일반적으로 금속 파우더 또는 와이어를 한 층씩 적층하여 제조하는 공법이다. 금속 적층제조 공법에 대한 관심은 지난 몇 년 동안 지속적으로 이루어지고 있으며 이와 관련된 연구개발도 활발히 진행되고 있다. 금속 3D 프린팅은 복잡하거나 특수한 형상을 손쉽게 설계하고 제조할 수 있는 장점을 가지고 있어 조선, 우주 항공, 자동차, 의료,기계 등 다양한 분야에서 사용되고 있다.이러한 금속 3D 프린팅은 크게 Powder Bed Fusion(PBF) 공정과 Directed Energy Deposition(DED) 공정으로 분류할 수 있다.

PBF는 금속 파우더를 소재로 하는 공정으로 파우더를 평평히 깔고, 고밀도 에너지를 가진 레이저 또는 전자빔을 지정된 영역에 조사(Irradiation)하여 파우더를 소결시키거나 용융시켜 한 층씩 적층하는 방법이다. DED는 고출력 레이저 빔을 금속 표면에 조사하면서 동시에 금속 파우더도 같이 분출되어 용융지가 실시간으로 적층되는 공정이다. 용접과 유사한 방법으로 기존 제품에 덧붙여 쌓아 올릴 수 있어 보수 작업에 활용할 수 있다. 그리고, DED 공정에서는 이종 소재의 적층이 가능하여 다양한 금속 파우더를 활용한 합금 제작이나 다른 재질을 소재를 적층할 수 있다

Powder Bed Fusion(PBF) 공정

FLOW-3D의 Weld 모듈을 이용하여 레이저 파워, 열 유속, 레이저 Spot 사이즈, 레이저 움직임과 속도, 실드 가스, 멀티 반사효과, 반사율, 증발압력 효과, 표면장력 설정 등을 고려하여 Powder에 레이저조사 조건을 설정하여 용융거동을 확인할 수 있다.

Directed Energy Deposition(DED) 공정

DED 공정 해석은 FLOW-3D의 Particle 기능을 이용한 방법으로, Base Metal에 입자들이 낙하되면서 레이저의 열유속에 의해 용융 및 적층된다. 이 방법은 입자가 떨어지는 현상을 시각적으로 확인할 수 있다.

기사 상세 내용은 PDF로 제공됩니다.

다운로드 : [201907_FLOW3D_금속3D프린팅]

작성자 | 양정호_에스티아이C&D 솔루션사업부 대리, 조애령_에스티아이C&D 솔루션 사업부 차장
이메일 | flow3d@stikorea.co.kr
홈페이지 | www.flow3d.co.kr

출처 : CAD&Graphics 2019년 07월호

FLOW-3D 교육 안내

education_banner

HIGH-END TOP CLASS
FLOW-3D CFD EDUCATION


(주)에스티아이씨앤디에서는 FLOW-3D 제품군의 사용자 교육을 지원하고 있습니다. 홈페이지에 안내되어 있는 교육 일정과 교육신청 절차를 참고하시어 교육을 받으실 수 있습니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 수리 분야

댐, 하천의 여수로, 수문 등 구조물 설계 및 방류, 월류 등 흐름 검토를 하기 위한 유동 해석 방법을 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 유입 조건(수위, 유량 등)과 유출 조건에 따른 방류량 및 유속, 압력 분포 등 유체의 흐름을 검토를 할 수 있도록 관련 예제를 통해 적절한 기능을 습득하실 수 있습니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 수처리 분야

정수처리 및 하수처리 공정에서 각 시설물들의 특성에 맞는 최적 운영조건 검토 및 설계 검토을 위한 유동해석 방법을 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 취수부터 시작하여 혼화지, 분배수로, 응집지, 침전지, 여과지, 정수지, 협기조, 호기조, 소독조 등 각 공정별 유동 특성을 검토하기 위한 해석 모델을 설정하는 방법에 대해 알려드립니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 주조 분야

주조 분야 사용자들이 쉽게 접근할 수 있도록 각 공정별로 해석 절차 및 해석 방법을 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 고압다이캐스팅, 저압다이캐스팅, 경동주조, 중력주조, 원심주조, 정밀주조 등 주조 공법 별 관련 예제를 통해 적절한 기능들을 습득할 수 있도록 도와 드립니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : Micro/Bio/Nano Fluidics 분야

점성력 및 모세관력 같은 유체 표면에 작용하는 힘이 지배적인 미세 유동의 특성을 정확하게 표현할 수 있는 해석 방법에 대해 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 열적, 전기적 물리 현상을 구현할 수 있도록 관련 예제와 함께 해석 방법을 알려드립니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 코팅 분야 과정

코팅 공정에 따른 코팅액의 두께, 균일도, 유동 특성 분석을 위한 해석 방법을 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. Slide coating, Dip coating, Spin coating, Curtain coating, Slot coating, Roll coating, Gravure coating 등 각 공정별 예제와 함께 적절한 기능을 습득하실 수 있도록 도와 드립니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 레이저 용접 분야

레이저 용접 해석을 하기 위한 물리 모델과 용접 조건들을 설정하는 방법에 대해 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 해석을 통해 용접 공정을 최적화할 수 있도록 관련 예제와 함께 적절한 기능들을 습득할 수 있도록 도와 드립니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 3D프린팅 분야 과정

Powder Bed Fusion(PBF)와 Directed Energy Deposition(DED) 공정에 대한 해석 방법을 소개하는 교육 과정입니다. 파우더 적층 및 레이저 빔을 조사하면서 동시에 금속 파우더 용융지가 적층되는 공정을 해석하는 방법을 관련 예제와 함께 습득하실 수 있습니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 해안/해양 분야

해안, 항만, 해양 구조물에 대한 파랑의 영향 및 유체의 수위, 유속, 압력의 영향을 예측할 수 있는 해석 방법을 소개하는 과정입니다. 항주파, 슬로싱, 계류 등 해안, 해양, 에너지, 플랜트 분야 구조물 설계 및 검토에 필요한 유동해석을 하실 수 있는 방법을 알려드립니다. 각 현상에 대한 적절한 예제를 통해 기능을 습득하실 수 있습니다.

  • 교육 과정명 : 우주/항공 분야

항공기 및 우주선의 연료 탱크와 추진체 관리장치의 내부 유동, 엔진 및 터빈 노즐 내부의 유동해석을 하실 수 있도록 관련 메뉴에 대한 설명, 설정 방법을 소개하는 과정입니다. 경계조건 설정, Mesh 방법 등 유동해석을 위한 기본적인 내용과 함께 관련 예제를 통해 기능들을 습득하실 수 있습니다.

기타 고객 맞춤형 과정

상기 과정 이외의 경우 고객의 사업 업무 환경에 적합한 사례를 중심으로 맞춤형 교육을 실시합니다. 필요하신 부분이 있으시면 언제든지 교육 담당자에게 연락하여 협의해 주시기 바랍니다.

고객센터 및 교육 담당자

  • 전화 : 02)2026-0455, 02)2026-0450
  • 이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr

교육은 정해진 일정에 시행되는 정기 교육과 고객의 요청에 의해 시행되는 특별 교육이 있습니다. 특별 교육이 실시될 경우 홈페이지를 통해 사전 공지를 합니다.

1. 연간교육 일정
FLOW-3D 연간교육일정

2. 교육 내용 : FLOW-3D Basic
  1. FLOW-3D 소개 및 이론
    • FLOW-3D 소개  – 연혁, 특징 등
    • FLOW-3D 기본 개념
      • VOF
      • FAVOR
    • 해석사례 리뷰
  2. GUI 소개 및 사용법
    • 해석 모델 작성법  – 물리 모델 설정
      • 모델 형상 정의
      • 격자 분할
      • 초기 유체 지정
      • 경계 조건 설정
    • 해석 결과 분석 방법  – 해석 모델 설명
  3. 해석 모델 작성 실습
    • 해석 모델 작성 실습  – 격자 분할
      • 물리 모델 설정
      • 모델 형상 및 초기 조건 정의
      • 경계 조건 설정
      • 해석 과정 모니터링
      • 해석 결과 분석
    • 질의 응답 및 토의

3. 교육 과정 : FLOW-3D Advanced
  1. Physics Ⅰ
    • Density evaluation
    • Drift flux
    • Scalars
    • Sediment scour
    • Shallow water
  2. Physics Ⅱ
    • Gravity and non-inertial reference frame
    • Heat transfer
    • Moving objects
    • Solidification
  3. FLOW-3D POST (Post-processor)
    • FLOW-3D POST 소개
    • Interface Basics
    • 예제 실습
Education Banner
  • 교육 신청은 홈페이지의 교육 신청 창에서 최소 3일 전에 신청합니다.
  • 모든 교육과정은 신청 인원이 2인 이상일때 개설되며, 선착순 마감입니다.
  • 교육 신청을 완료하시면, 신청시 입력하신 메일주소로 교육 담당자가 확인 메일을 보내드립니다.
  • 교육 시간은 Basic : 오전10시~오후5시, Advanced : 오후1시30분~오후5시30분까지입니다.
  • 교육비 안내
    • FLOW-3D Basic (2일) : 기업 66만원, 학생 55만원
    • FLOW-3D Basic 레이저용접, 3D 프린팅(2일) : 기업 88만원, 학생 66만원
    • FLOW-3D Advanced (1일) : 기업 33만원, 학생 25만원
    • 상기 가격은 부가세 포함 가격입니다.
  • 교육비는 현금(계좌이체)로 납부 가능하며, 교재 및 중식이 제공됩니다.
  • 세금계산서 발급을 위해 사업자등록증 또는 신분증 사본을 함께 첨부하여 신청해 주시기 바랍니다.
  • 교육 종료 후 이메일로 수료증이 발급됩니다.
고객센터 및 교육 담당자
  • 전화 : 02)2026-0455, 02)2026-0450
  • 이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr
교육 장소 안내
  • 지하철 1호선/가산디지털단지역 (8번출구), 지하철 7호선/가산디지털단지역 (5번출구)
  • 우림라이온스밸리 B동 302호 또는 교육장
  • 당사 건물에 주차할 경우 무료 주차 1시간만 지원되오니, 가능하면 대중교통을 이용해 주시기 바랍니다.
오시는 길

Additive Manufacturing & Welding Bibliography

Additive Manufacturing & Welding Bibliography

다음은 적층 제조 및 용접 참고 문헌의 기술 문서 모음입니다. 이 모든 논문에는 FLOW-3D AM 결과가 나와 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM을 사용하여 적층 제조, 레이저 용접 및 기타 용접 기술에서 발견되는 프로세스를 성공적으로 시뮬레이션하는 방법에 대해 자세히 알아보십시오.

2023년 8월 7일 update

78-23   Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, Berin Šeta, Jon Spangenberg, Computational analysis of yield stress buildup and stability of deposited layers in material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 71; 103605, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103605

76-23   Asif Ur Rehman, Kashif Azher, Abid Ullah, Celal Sami Tüfekci, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Binder jetting of SS316L: a computational approach for droplet-powder interaction, Rapid Prototyping Journal, 2023. doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-08-2022-0264

75-23   Dengzhi Yao, Ju Wang, Hao Luo, Yuhang Wu, Xizhong An, Thermal behavior and control during multi-track laser powder bed fusion of 316 L stainless steel, Additive Manufacturing, 70; 103562, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103562

61-23   Yaqing Hou, Hang Su, Hao Zhang, Fafa Li, Xuandong Wang, Yazhou He, Dupeng He, An integrated simulation model towards laser powder bed fusion in-situ alloying technology, Materials & Design, 228; 111795, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2023.111795

56-23   Maohong Yang, Guiyi Wu, Xiangwei Li, Shuyan Zhang, Honghong Wang, Jiankang Huang, Influence of heat source model on the behavior of laser cladding pool, Journal of Laser Applications, 35.2; 2023. doi.org/10.2351/7.0000963

45-23   Daniel Martinez, Philip King, Santosh Reddy Sama, Jay Sim, Hakan Toykoc, Guha Manogharan, Effect of freezing range on reducing casting defects through 3D sand-printed mold designs, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11112-x

39-23   Peter S. Cook, David J. Ritchie, Determining the laser absorptivity of Ti-6Al-4V during laser powder bed fusion by calibrated melt pool simulation, Optics & Laser Technology, 162; 109247. 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109247

36-23   Yixuan Chen, Weihao Wang, Yao Ou, Yingna Wu, Zirong Zhai, Rui Yang, Impact of laser power and scanning velocity on microstructure and mechanical properties of Inconel 738LC alloys fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, TMS 2023 152nd Annual Meeting & Exhibition Supplemental Proceedings, pp. 138-149, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22524-6_15

34-23   Chao Kang, Ikki Ikeda, Motoki Sakaguchi, Recoil and solidification of a paraffin droplet impacted on a metal substrate: Numerical study and experimental verification, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 118; 103839, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2023.103839

30-23   Fei Wang, Tiechui Yuan, Ruidi Li, Shiqi Lin, Zhonghao Xie, Lanbo Li, Valentino Cristino, Rong Xu, Bing liu, Comparative study on microstructures and mechanical properties of ultra ductility single-phase Nb40Ti40Ta20 refractory medium entropy alloy by selective laser melting and vacuum arc melting, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 942; 169065, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2023.169065

29-23   Haejin Lee, Yeonghwan Song, Seungkyun Yim, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Byoungsoo Lee, Influence of linear energy on side surface roughness in powder bed fusion electron beam melting process: Coupled experimental and simulation study, Powder Technology, 418; 118292, 2023.

27-23   Yinan Chen, Bo Li, Double-phase refractory medium entropy alloy NbMoTi via selective laser melting (SLM) additive manufacturing, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2419; 012074, 2023. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2419/1/012074

23-23   Yunwei Gui, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Development of macro-defect-free PBF-EB-processed Ti–6Al–4V alloys with superior plasticity using PREP-synthesized powder and machine learning-assisted process optimization, Materials Science and Engineering: A, 864; 144595, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2023.144595

21-23   Tatsuhiko Sakai, Yasuhiro Okamoto, Nozomi Taura, Riku Saito, Akira Okada, Effect of scanning speed on molten metal behaviour under angled irradiation with a continuous-wave laser, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 313; 117866, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.117866

19-23   Gianna M. Valentino, Arunima Banerjee, Alexander lark, Christopher M. Barr, Seth H. Myers, Ian D. McCue, Influence of laser processing parameters on the density-ductility tradeoff in additively manufactured pure tantalum, Additive Manufacturing Letters, 4; 100117, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addlet.2022.100117

15-23   Runbo Jiang, Zhongshu Ren, Joseph Aroh, Amir Mostafaei, Benjamin Gould, Tao Sun, Anthony D. Rollett, Quantifying equiaxed vs epitaxial solidification in laser melting of CMSX-4 single crystal superalloy, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 54; pp. 808-822, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s11661-022-06929-2

14-23   Nguyen Thi Tien, Yu-Lung Lo, M. Mohsin Raza, Cheng-Yen Chen, Chi-Pin Chiu, Optimization of processing parameters for pulsed laser welding of dissimilar metal interconnects, Optics & Laser Technology, 159; 109022, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.109022

9-23 Hou Yi Chia, Wentao Yan, High-fidelity modeling of metal additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Technology: Design, Optimization, and Modeling, Ed. Kun Zhou, 2023.

8-23 Akash Aggarwal, Yung C. Shin, Arvind Kumar, Investigation of the transient coupling between the dynamic laser beam absorptance and the melt pool – vapor depression morphology in laser powder bed fusion process, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 201.2; 123663, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.123663

199-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Numerical predictions of bottom layer stability in material extrusion additive manufacturing, JOM, 74; pp. 1096-1101, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-05035-9

198-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Amirpasha Moetazedian, Andy Gleadall, Jiongyi Yan, Wayne Edgar Alphonso, Raphael Comminal, Berin Seta, Tony Lock, Jon Spangenberg, Investigation on corner precision at different corner angles in material extrusion additive manufacturing: An experimental and computational fluid dynamics analysis, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 2022.

197-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Marcin P. Serdeczny, Raphaël Comminal, Berin Šeta, Marco Brander, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, A numerical investigation of the inter-layer bond and surface roughness during the yield stress buildup in wet-on-wet material extrusion additive manufacturing, ASPE and euspen Summer Topical Meeting, 77, 2022.

182-22   Chan Kyu Kim, Dae-Won Cho, Seok Kim, Sang Woo Song, Kang Myung Seo, Young Tae Cho, High-throughput metal 3D printing pen enabled by a continuous molten droplet transfer, Advanced Science, 2205085, 2022. doi.org/10.1002/advs.202205085

180-22 Xu Kaikai, Gong Yadong, Zhang Qiang, Numerical simulation of dynamic analysis of molten pool in the process of direct energy deposition, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10271-7

179-22 Yasuhiro Okamoto, Nozomi Taura, Akira Okada, Study on laser drilling process of solid metal on its liquid, International Journal of Electrical Machining, 27; 2022. doi.org/10.2526/ijem.27.35

175-22 Lu Min, Xhi Xiaojie, Lu Peipei, Wu Meiping, Forming quality and wettability of surface texture on CuSn10 fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, AIP Advances, 12.12; 125114, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0122076

174-22 Thinus Van Rhijn, Willie Du Preez, Maina Maringa, Dean Kouprianoff, An investigation into the optimization of the selective laser melting process parameters for Ti6Al4V through numerical modelling, JOM, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-022-05608-2

171-22 Jonathan Yoshioka, Mohsen Eshraghi, Temporal evolution of temperature gradient and solidification rate in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Heat and Mass Transfer, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00231-022-03318-8

170-22 Subin Shrestha and Kevin Chou, Residual heat effect on the melt pool geometry during the laser powder bed fusion process, Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 6.6; 153, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/jmmp6060153

169-22 Aryan Aryan, Obinna Chukwubuzo, Desmond Bourgeois, Wei Zhang, Hardness prediction by incorporating heat transfer and molten pool fluid flow in a mult-pass, multi-layer weld for onsite repair of Grade 91 steel, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information, DOE-OSU-0032067, 2022. doi.org/10.2172/1898594

158-22 Dafan Du, Lu Wang, Anping Dong, Wentao Yan, Guoliang Zhu, Baode Sun, Promoting the densification and grain refinement with assistance of static magnetic field in laser powder bed fusion, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 183; 103965, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.103965

157-22 Han Chu, Jiang Ping, Geng Shaoning, Liu Kun, Nucleation mechanism in oscillating laser welds of 2024 aluminium alloy: A combined experimental and numerical study, Optics & Laser Technology, 158.A; 108812, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.108812

153-22 Zixiang Li, Yinan Cui, Baohua Chang, Guan Liu, Ze Pu, Haoyu Zhang, Zhiyue Liang, Changmeng Liu, Li Wang, Dong Du, Manipulating molten pool in in-situ additive manufacturing of Ti-22Al-25 Nb through alternating dual-electron beams, Additive Manufacturing, 60.A; 103230, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103230

149-22   Qian Chen, Yao Fu, Albert C. To, Multiphysics modeling of particle spattering and induced defect formation mechanism in Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 123; pp. 783-791, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10201-7

146-22   Zixuan Wan, Hui-ping Wang, Jingjing Li, Baixuan Yang, Joshua Solomon, Blair Carlson, Effect of welding mode on remote laser stitch welding of zinc-coated steel with different sheet thickness combinations, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, MANU-21-1598, 2022. doi.org/10.1115/1.4055792

143-22   Du-Rim Eo, Seong-Gyu Chung, JeongHo Yang, Won Tae Cho, Sun-Hong Park, Jung-Wook Cho, Surface modification of high-Mn steel via laser-DED: Microstructural characterization and hot crack susceptibility of clad layer, Materials & Design, 223; 111188, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.111188

142-22   Zichuan Fu, Xiangman Zhou, Bin Luo, Qihua Tian, Numerical simulation study of the effect of weld current on WAAM welding pool dynamic and weld bead morphology, International Conference on Mechanical Design and Simulation, Proceedings, 12261; 122614G, 2022. doi.org/10.1117/12.2639074

132-22   Yiyu Huang, Zhonghao Xie, Wenshu Li, Haoyu Chen, Bin Liu, Bingfeng Wang, Dynamic mechanical properties of the selective laser melting NiCrFeCoMo0.2 high entropy alloy and the microstructure of molten pool, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 927; 167011, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2022.167011

126-22   Jingqi Zhang, Yingang Liu, Gang Sha, Shenbao Jin, Ziyong Hou, Mohamad Bayat, Nan Yang, Qiyang Tan, Yu Yin, Shiyang Liu, Jesper Henri Hattel, Matthew Dargusch, Xiaoxu Huang, Ming-Xing Zhang, Designing against phase and property heterogeneities in additively manufactured titanium alloys, Nature Communications, 13; 4660, 2022. doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32446-2

119-22   Xu Kaikai, Gong Yadong, Zhao Qiang, Numerical simulation on molten pool flow of Inconel718 alloy based on VOF during additive manufacturing, Materials Today Communications, 33; 104147, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.104147

118-22   AmirPouya Hemmasian, Francis Ogoke, Parand Akbari, Jonathan Malen, Jack Beuth, Amir Barati Farimani, Surrogate modeling of melt pool thermal field using deep learning, SSRN, 2022. doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4190835

117-22   Chiara Ransenigo, Marialaura Tocci, Filippo Palo, Paola Ginestra, Elisabetta Ceretti, Marcello Gelfi, Annalisa Pola, Evolution of melt pool and porosity during laser powder bed fusion of Ti6Al4V alloy: Numerical modelling and experimental validation, Lasers in Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s40516-022-00185-3

112-22   Chris Jasien, Alec Saville, Chandler Gus Becker, Jonah Klemm-Toole, Kamel Fezzaa, Tao Sun, Tresa Pollock, Amy J. Clarke, In situ x-ray radiography and computational modeling to predict grain morphology in β-titanium during simulated additive manufacturing, Metals, 12.7; 1217, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/met12071217

110-22   Haotian Zhou, Haijun Su, Yinuo Guo, Peixin Yang, Yuan Liu, Zhonglin Shen, Di Zhao, Haifang Liu, Taiwen Huang, Min Guo, Jun Zhang, Lin Liu, Hengzhi Fu, Formation and evolution mechanisms of pores in Inconel 718 during selective laser melting: Meso-scale modeling and experimental investigations, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 81; pp. 202-213, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2022.06.072

109-22   Yufan Zhao, Huakang Bian, Hao Wang, Aoyagi Kenta, Yamanaka Kenta, Akihiko Chiba, Non-equilibrium solidification behavior associated with powder characteristics during electron beam additive manufacturing, Materials & Design, 221; 110915, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110915

107-22   Dan Lönn, David Spångberg, Study of process parameters in laser beam welding of copper hairpins, Thesis, University of Skövde, 2022.

106-22   Liping Guo, Hongze Wang, Qianglong Wei, Hanjie Liu, An Wang, Yi Wu, Haowei Wang, A comprehensive model to quantify the effects of additional nano-particles on the printability in laser powder bed fusion of aluminum alloy and composite, Additive Manufacturing, 58; 103011, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103011

104-22   Hongjiang Pan, Thomas Dahmen, Mohamad Bayat, Kang Lin, Xiaodan Zhang, Independent effects of laser power and scanning speed on IN718’s precipitation and mechanical properties produced by LBPF plus heat treatment, Materials Science and Engineering: A, 849; 143530, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2022.143530

101-22   Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, A survey on basic influencing factors of solidified grain morphology during electron beam melting, Materials & Design, 221; 110927, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110927

98-22   Jon Spangenberg, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Integrating reinforcement with 3D concrete printing: Experiments and numerical modelling, Third RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication, Eds. Ana Blanco, Peter Kinnell, Richard Buswell, Sergio Cavalaro, pp. 379-384, 2022.

93-22   Minglei Qu, Qilin Guo, Luis I. Escano, Samuel J. Clark Kamel Fezzaa, Lianyi Chen, Mitigating keyhole pore formation by nanoparticles during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Letters, 100068, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addlet.2022.100068

86-22   Patiparn Ninpetch, Prasert Chalermkarnnon, Pruet Kowitwarangkul, Multiphysics simulation of thermal-fluid behavior in laser powder bed fusion of H13 steel: Influence of layer thickness and energy input, Metals and Materials International, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-022-01239-z

85-22   Merve Biyikli, Taner Karagoz, Metin Calli, Talha Muslim, A. Alper Ozalp, Ali Bayram, Single track geometry prediction of laser metal deposited 316L-Si via multi-physics modelling and regression analysis with experimental validation, Metals and Materials International, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-022-01243-3

76-22   Zhichao Yang, Shuhao Wang, Lida Zhu, Jinsheng Ning, Bo Xin, Yichao Dun, Wentao Yan, Manipulating molten pool dynamics during metal 3D printing by ultrasound, Applied Physics Reviews, 9; 021416, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0082461

73-22   Yu Sun, Liqun Li, Yu Hao, Sanbao Lin, Xinhua Tang, Fenggui Lu, Numerical modeling on formation of periodic chain-like pores in high power laser welding of thick steel plate, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 306; 117638, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117638

67-22   Yu Hao, Hiu-Ping Wang, Yu Sun, Liqun Li, Yihan Wu, Fenggui Lu, The evaporation behavior of zince and its effect on spattering in laser overlap welding of galvanized steels, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 306; 117625, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117625

65-22   Yanhua Zhao, Chuanbin Du, Peifu Wang, Wei Meng, Changming Li, The mechanism of in-situ laser polishing and its effect on the surface quality of nickel-based alloy fabricated by selective laser melting, Metals, 12.5; 778, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/met12050778

58-22   W.E. Alphonso, M. Bayat, M. Baier, S. Carmignato, J.H. Hattel, Multi-physics numerical modelling of 316L Austenitic stainless steel in laser powder bed fusion process at meso-scale, 17th UK Heat Transfer Conference (UKHTC2021), Manchester, UK, April 4-6, 2022.

57-22   Brandon Hayes, Travis Hainsworth, Robert MacCurdy, Liquid-solid co-printing of multi-material 3D fluidic devices via material jetting, Additive Manufacturing, in press, 102785, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.102785

55-22   Xiang Wang, Lin-Jie Zhang, Jie Ning, Suck-joo Na, Fluid thermodynamic simulation of Ti-6Al-4V alloy in laser wire deposition, 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, 2022. doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2021.0159

54-22   Junhao Zhao, Binbin Wang, Tong Liu, Liangshu Luo, Yanan Wang, Xiaonan Zheng, Liang Wang, Yanqing Su, Jingjie Guo, Hengzhi Fu, Dayong Chen, Study of in situ formed quasicrystals in Al-Mn based alloys fabricated by SLM, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 909; 164847, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2022.164847

48-22   Yueming Sun, Jianxing Ma, Fei Peng, Konstantin G. Kornev, Making droplets from highly viscous liquids by pushing a wire through a tube, Physics of Fluids, 34; 032119, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0082003

46-22   H.Z. Lu, T. Chen, H. Liu, H. Wang, X. Luo, C.H. Song, Constructing function domains in NiTi shape memory alloys by additive manufacturing, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 17.3; 2022. doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2022.2053821

42-22   Islam Hassan, P. Ravi Selvaganapathy, Microfluidic printheads for highly switchable multimaterial 3D printing of soft materials, Advanced Materials Technologies, 2101709, 2022. doi.org/10.1002/admt.202101709

41-22   Nan Yang, Youping Gong, Honghao Chen, Wenxin Li, Chuanping Zhou, Rougang Zhou, Huifeng Shao, Personalized artificial tibia bone structure design and processing based on laser powder bed fusion, Machines, 10.3; 205, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/machines10030205

31-22   Bo Shen, Raghav Gnanasambandam, Rongxuan Wang, Zhenyu (James) Kong, Multi-Task Gaussian process upper confidence bound for hyperparameter tuning and its application for simulation studies of additive manufacturing, IISE Transactions, 2022. doi.org/10.1080/24725854.2022.2039813

27-22   Lida Zhu, Shuhao Wang, Hao Lu, Dongxing Qi, Dan Wang, Zhichao Yang, Investigation on synergism between additive and subtractive manufacturing for curved thin-walled structure, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 17.2; 2022. doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2022.2029009

24-22   Hoon Sohn, Peipei Liu, Hansol Yoon, Kiyoon Yi, Liu Yang, Sangjun Kim, Real-time porosity reduction during metal directed energy deposition using a pulse laser, Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 116; pp. 214-223. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2021.12.013

18-22   Yaohong Xiao, Zixuan Wan, Pengwei Liu, Zhuo Wang, Jingjing Li, Lei Chen, Quantitative simulations of grain nucleation and growth at additively manufactured bimetallic interfaces of SS316L and IN625, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 302; 117506, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117506

06-22   Amal Charles, Mohamad Bayat, Ahmed Elkaseer, Lore Thijs, Jesper Henri Hattel, Steffen Scholz, Elucidation of dross formation in laser powder bed fusion at down-facing surfaces: Phenomenon-oriented multiphysics simulation and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, 50; 102551, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102551

05-22   Feilong Ji, Xunpeng Qin, Zeqi Hu, Xiaochen Xiong, Mao Ni, Mengwu Wu, Influence of ultrasonic vibration on molten pool behavior and deposition layer forming morphology for wire and arc additive manufacturing, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 130; 105789, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2021.105789

150-21   Daniel Knüttel, Stefano Baraldo, Anna Valente, Konrad Wegener, Emanuele Carpanzano, Model based learning for efficient modelling of heat transfer dynamics, Procedia CIRP, 102; pp. 252-257, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.09.043

149-21   T. van Rhijn, W. du Preez, M. Maringa, D. Kouprianoff, Towards predicting process parameters for selective laser melting of titanium alloys through the modelling of melt pool characteristics, Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Natuurwetenskap en Tegnologie, 40.1; 2021. 

148-21   Qian Chen, Multiscale process modeling of residual deformation and defect formation for laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA, 2021. 

147-21   Pareekshith Allu, Developing process parameters through CFD simulations, Lasers in Manufacturing Conference, 2021.

143-21   Asif Ur Rehman, Muhammad Arif Mahmood, Fatih Pitir, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Andrei C. Popescu, Ion N. Mihailescu, Spatter formation and splashing induced defects in laser-based powder bed fusion of AlSi10Mg alloy: A novel hydrodynamics modelling with empirical testing, Metals, 11.12; 2023, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/met11122023

142-21   Islam Hassan, Ponnambalam Ravi Selvaganapathy, A microfluidic printhead with integrated hybrid mixing by sequential injection for multimaterial 3D printing, Additive Manufacturing, 102559, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102559

137-21   Ting-Yu Cheng, Ying-Chih Liao, Enhancing drop mixing in powder bed by alternative particle arrangements with contradictory hydrophilicity, Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 104160, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2021.104160

134-21   Asif Ur Rehman, Muhammad Arif Mahmood, Fatih Pitir, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Andrei C. Popescu, Ion N. Mihailescu, Keyhole formation by laser drilling in laser powder bed fusion of Ti6Al4V biomedical alloy: Mesoscopic computational fluid dynamics simulation versus mathematical modelling using empirical validation, Nanomaterials, 11.2; 3284, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/nano11123284

128-21   Sang-Woo Han, Won-Ik Cho, Lin-Jie Zhang, Suck-Joo Na, Coupled simulation of thermal-metallurgical-mechanical behavior in laser keyhole welding of AH36 steel, Materials & Design, 212; 110275, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.110275

127-21   Jiankang Huang, Zhuoxuan Li, Shurong Yu, Xiaoquan Yu, Ding Fan, Real-time observation and numerical simulation of the molten pool flow and mass transfer behavior during wire arc additive manufacturing, Welding in the World, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s40194-021-01214-z

123-21   Boxue Song, Tianbiao Yu, Xingyu Jiang, Wenchao Xi, Xiaoli Lin, Zhelun Ma, ZhaoWang, Development of the molten pool and solidification characterization in single bead multilayer direct energy deposition, Additive Manufacturing, 102479, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102479

112-21   Kathryn Small, Ian D. McCue, Katrina Johnston, Ian Donaldson, Mitra L. Taheri, Precision modification of microstructure and properties through laser engraving, JOM, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-04959-6

111-21   Yongki Lee, Jason Cheon, Byung-Kwon Min, Cheolhee Kim, Modelling of fume particle behaviour and coupling glass contamination during vacuum laser beam welding, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, 2021. doi.org/10.1080/13621718.2021.1990658

110-21   Menglin Liu, Hao Yi, Huajun Cao, Rufeng Huang, Le Jia, Heat accumulation effect in metal droplet-based 3D printing: Evolution mechanism and elimination strategy, Additive Manufacturing, 48.A; 102413, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102413

108-21   Nozomi Taura, Akiya Mitsunobu, Tatsuhiko Sakai, Yasuhiro Okamoto, Akira Okada, Formation and its mechanism of high-speed micro-grooving on metal surface by angled CW laser irradiation, Journal of Laser Micro/Nanoengineering, 16.2, 2021. doi.org/10.2961/jlmn.2021.02.2006

105-21   Jon Spangenberg, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Raphaël Comminal, Md. Tusher Mollah, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Numerical simulation of multi-layer 3D concrete printing, RILEM Technical Letters, 6; pp. 119-123, 2021. doi.org/10.21809/rilemtechlett.2021.142

104-21   Lin Chen, Chunming Wang, Gaoyang Mi, Xiong Zhang, Effects of laser oscillating frequency on energy distribution, molten pool morphology and grain structure of AA6061/AA5182 aluminum alloys lap welding, Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 15; pp. 3133-3148, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.09.141

101-21   R.J.M. Wolfs, T.A.M. Salet, N. Roussel, Filament geometry control in extrusion-based additive manufacturing of concrete: The good, the bad and the ugly, Cement and Concrete Research, 150; 106615, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106615

89-21   Wenlin Ye, Jin Bao, Jie Lei, Yichang Huang, Zhihao Li, Peisheng Li, Ying Zhang, Multiphysics modeling of thermal behavior of commercial pure titanium powder during selective laser melting, Metals and Materials International, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-021-01019-1

81-21   Lin Chen, Gaoyang Mi, Xiong Zhang, Chunming Wang, Effects of sinusoidal oscillating laser beam on weld formation, melt flow and grain structure during aluminum alloys lap welding, Journals of Materials Processing Technology, 298; 117314, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117314

77-21   Yujie Cui, Yufan Zhao, Haruko Numata, Kenta Yamanaka, Huakang Bian, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Effects of process parameters and cooling gas on powder formation during the plasma rotating electrode process, Powder Technology, 393; pp. 301-311, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2021.07.062

76-21   Md Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Stability and deformations of deposited layers in material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 46; 102193, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102193

72-21   S. Sabooni, A. Chabok, S.C. Feng, H. Blaauw, T.C. Pijper, H.J. Yang, Y.T. Pei, Laser powder bed fusion of 17–4 PH stainless steel: A comparative study on the effect of heat treatment on the microstructure evolution and mechanical properties, Additive Manufacturing, 46; 102176, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102176

71-21   Yu Hao, Nannan Chena, Hui-Ping Wang, Blair E. Carlson, Fenggui Lu, Effect of zinc vapor forces on spattering in partial penetration laser welding of zinc-coated steels, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 298; 117282, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117282

67-21   Lu Wang, Wentao Yan, Thermoelectric magnetohydrodynamic model for laser-based metal additive manufacturing, Physical Review Applied, 15.6; 064051, 2021. doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.15.064051

61-21   Ian D. McCue, Gianna M. Valentino, Douglas B. Trigg, Andrew M. Lennon, Chuck E. Hebert, Drew P. Seker, Salahudin M. Nimer, James P. Mastrandrea, Morgana M. Trexler, Steven M. Storck, Controlled shape-morphing metallic components for deployable structures, Materials & Design, 208; 109935, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109935

60-21   Mahyar Khorasani, AmirHossein Ghasemi, Martin Leary, William O’Neil, Ian Gibson, Laura Cordova, Bernard Rolfe, Numerical and analytical investigation on meltpool temperature of laser-based powder bed fusion of IN718, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 177; 121477, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121477

57-21   Dae-Won Cho, Yeong-Do Park, Muralimohan Cheepu, Numerical simulation of slag movement from Marangoni flow for GMAW with computational fluid dynamics, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 125; 105243, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2021.105243

55-21   Won-Sang Shin, Dae-Won Cho, Donghyuck Jung, Heeshin Kang, Jeng O Kim, Yoon-Jun Kim, Changkyoo Park, Investigation on laser welding of Al ribbon to Cu sheet: Weldability, microstructure and mechanical and electrical properties, Metals, 11.5; 831, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/met11050831

50-21   Mohamad Bayat, Venkata K. Nadimpalli, Francesco G. Biondani, Sina Jafarzadeh, Jesper Thorborg, Niels S. Tiedje, Giuliano Bissacco, David B. Pedersen, Jesper H. Hattel, On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during directed energy deposition of maraging steel—Multiphysics modeling and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, 43;102021, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102021

47-21   Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, An investigation into melting modes in selective laser melting of Inconel 625 powder: single track geometry and porosity, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-07105-3

34-21   Haokun Sun, Xin Chu, Cheng Luo, Haoxiu Chen, Zhiying Liu, Yansong Zhang, Yu Zou, Selective laser melting for joining dissimilar materials: Investigations ofiInterfacial characteristics and in situ alloying, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 52; pp. 1540-1550, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s11661-021-06178-9

32-21   Shanshan Zhang, Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, On mesoscopic surface formation in metal laser powder-bed fusion process, Supplimental Proceedings, TMS 150th Annual Meeting & Exhibition (Virtual), pp. 149-161, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65261-6_14

22-21   Patiparn Ninpetch, Pruet Kowitwarangkul, Sitthipong Mahathanabodee, Prasert Chalermkarnnon, Phadungsak Rattanadecho, Computational investigation of thermal behavior and molten metal flow with moving laser heat source for selective laser melting process, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 24; 100860, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.100860

19-21   M.B. Abrami, C. Ransenigo, M. Tocci, A. Pola, M. Obeidi, D. Brabazon, Numerical simulation of laser powder bed fusion processes, La Metallurgia Italiana, February; pp. 81-89, 2021.

16-21   Wenjun Ge, Jerry Y.H. Fuh, Suck Joo Na, Numerical modelling of keyhole formation in selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 62; pp. 646-654, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.01.005

11-21   Mohamad Bayat, Venkata K. Nadimpalli, David B. Pedersen, Jesper H. Hattel, A fundamental investigation of thermo-capillarity in laser powder bed fusion of metals and alloys, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 166; 120766, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120766

10-21   Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, Thermal properties of powder beds in energy absorption and heat transfer during additive manufacturing with electron beam, Powder Technology, 381; pp. 44-54, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2020.11.082

9-21   Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, A study of transient and steady-state regions from single-track deposition in laser powder bed fusion, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 61; pp. 226-235, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.023

6-21   Qian Chen, Yunhao Zhao, Seth Strayer, Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Yuichiro Koizumi, Akihiko Chiba, Wei Xiong, Albert C. To, Elucidating the effect of preheating temperature on melt pool morphology variation in Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion via simulation and experiment, Additive Manufacturing, 37; 101642, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101642

04-21   Won-Ik Cho, Peer Woizeschke, Analysis of molten pool dynamics in laser welding with beam oscillation and filler wire feeding, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 164; 120623, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120623

128-20   Mahmood Al Bashir, Rajeev Nair, Martina M. Sanchez, Anil Mahapatro, Improving fluid retention properties of 316L stainless steel using nanosecond pulsed laser surface texturing, Journal of Laser Applications, 32.4, 2020. doi.org/10.2351/7.0000199

127-20   Eric Riedel, Niklas Bergedieck, Stefan Scharf, CFD simulation based investigation of cavitation cynamics during high intensity ultrasonic treatment of A356, Metals, 10.11; 1529, 2020. doi.org/10.3390/met10111529

126-20   Benjamin Himmel, Material jetting of aluminium: Analysis of a novel additive manufacturing process, Thesis, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany, 2020. 

121-20   Yufan Zhao, Yujie Cui, Haruko Numata, Huakang Bian, Kimio Wako, Kenta Yamanaka, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Centrifugal granulation behavior in metallic powder fabrication by plasma rotating electrode process, Scientific Reports, 10; 18446, 2020. doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75503-w

116-20   Raphael Comminal, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Modelling of 3D concrete printing based on computational fluid dynamics, Cement and Concrete Research, 138; 106256, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106256

112-20   Peng Liu, Lijin Huan, Yu Gan, Yuyu Lei, Effect of plate thickness on weld pool dynamics and keyhole-induced porosity formation in laser welding of Al alloy, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 111; pp. 735-747, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05818-5

108-20   Fan Chen, Wentao Yan, High-fidelity modelling of thermal stress for additive manufacturing by linking thermal-fluid and mechanical models, Materials & Design, 196; 109185, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109185

104-20   Yunfu Tian, Lijun Yang, Dejin Zhao, Yiming Huang, Jiajing Pan, Numerical analysis of powder bed generation and single track forming for selective laser melting of SS316L stainless steel, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 58; pp. 964-974, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.09.002

100-20   Raphaël Comminal, Sina Jafarzadeh, Marcin Serdeczny, Jon Spangenberg, Estimations of interlayer contacts in extrusion additive manufacturing using a CFD model, International Conference on Additive Manufacturing in Products and Applications (AMPA), Zurich, Switzerland, September 1-3: Industrializing Additive Manufacturing, pp. 241-250, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54334-1_17

97-20   Paree Allu, CFD simulation for metal Additive Manufacturing: Applications in laser- and sinter-based processes, Metal AM, 6.4; pp. 151-158, 2020.

95-20   Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, Role of operating and environmental conditions in determining molten pool dynamics during electron beam melting and selective laser melting, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101559, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101559

94-20   Yan Zeng, David Himmler, Peter Randelzhofer, Carolin Körner, Processing of in situ Al3Ti/Al composites by advanced high shear technology: influence of mixing speed, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 110; pp. 1589-1599, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05956-w

93-20   H. Hamed Zargari, K. Ito, M. Kumar, A. Sharma, Visualizing the vibration effect on the tandem-pulsed gas metal arc welding in the presence of surface tension active elements, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 161; 120310, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120310

90-20   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Siyuan Xu, Ruwei Geng, Numerical analysis of aluminum alloy fused coating process, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Science and Engineering, 42; 483, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s40430-020-02569-y

85-20   Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, Investigation of metal mixing in laser keyhold welding of dissimilar metals, Materials & Design, 195; 109056, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056

82-20   Pan Lu, Zhang Cheng-Lin, Wang Liang, Liu Tong, Liu Jiang-lin, Molten pool structure, temperature and velocity flow in selective laser melting AlCu5MnCdVA alloy, Materials Research Express, 7; 086516, 2020. doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/abadcf

80-20   Yujie Cui, Yufan Zhao, Haruko Numata, Huakang Bian, Kimio Wako, Kento Yamanaka, Kenta Aoyagi, Chen Zhang, Akihiko Chiba, Effects of plasma rotating electrode process parameters on the particle size distribution and microstructure of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy powder, Powder Technology, 376; pp. 363-372, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2020.08.027

78-20   F.Q. Liu, L. Wei, S.Q. Shi, H.L. Wei, On the varieties of build features during multi-layer laser directed energy deposition, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101491, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101491

75-20   Nannan Chen, Zixuan Wan, Hui-Ping Wang, Jingjing Li, Joshua Solomon, Blair E. Carlson, Effect of Al single bond Si coating on laser spot welding of press hardened steel and process improvement with annular stirring, Materials & Design, 195; 108986, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108986

72-20   Yujie Cui, Kenta Aoyagi, Yufan Zhao, Kenta Yamanaka, Yuichiro Hayasaka, Yuichiro Koizumi, Tadashi Fujieda, Akihiko Chiba, Manufacturing of a nanosized TiB strengthened Ti-based alloy via electron beam powder bed fusion, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101472, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101472

64-20   Dong-Rong Liu, Shuhao Wang, Wentao Yan, Grain structure evolution in transition-mode melting in direct energy deposition, Materials & Design, 194; 108919, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108919

61-20   Raphael Comminal, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Influence of processing parameters on the layer geometry in 3D concrete printing: Experiments and modelling, 2nd RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication, RILEM Bookseries, 28; pp. 852-862, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49916-7_83

60-20   Marcin P. Serdeczny, Raphaël Comminal, Md. Tusher Mollah, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Numerical modeling of the polymer flow through the hot-end in filament-based material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101454, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101454

58-20   H.L. Wei, T. Mukherjee, W. Zhang, J.S. Zuback, G.L. Knapp, A. De, T. DebRoy, Mechanistic models for additive manufacturing of metallic components, Progress in Materials Science, 116; 100703, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100703

55-20   Masoud Mohammadpour, Experimental study and numerical simulation of heat transfer and fluid flow in laser welded and brazed joints, Thesis, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, US; Available in Mechanical Engineering Research Theses and Dissertations, 24, 2020.

48-20   Masoud Mohammadpour, Baixuan Yang, Hui-Ping Wang, John Forrest, Michael Poss, Blair Carlson, Radovan Kovacevica, Influence of laser beam inclination angle on galvanized steel laser braze quality, Optics and Laser Technology, 129; 106303, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2020.106303

34-20   Binqi Liu, Gang Fang, Liping Lei, Wei Liu, A new ray tracing heat source model for mesoscale CFD simulation of selective laser melting (SLM), Applied Mathematical Modeling, 79; pp. 506-520, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2019.10.049

27-20   Xuesong Gao, Guilherme Abreu Farira, Wei Zhang and Kevin Wheeler, Numerical analysis of non-spherical particle effect on molten pool dynamics in laser-powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Computational Materials Science, 179, art. no. 109648, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2020.109648

26-20   Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka and Akihiko Chiba, Isothermal γ → ε phase transformation behavior in a Co-Cr-Mo alloy depending on thermal history during electron beam powder-bed additive manufacturing, Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 50, pp. 162-170, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.11.040

21-20   Won-Ik Cho and Peer Woizeschke, Analysis of molten pool behavior with buttonhole formation in laser keyhole welding of sheet metal, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 152, art. no. 119528, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.119528

06-20  Wei Xing, Di Ouyang, Zhen Chen and Lin Liu, Effect of energy density on defect evolution in 3D printed Zr-based metallic glasses by selective laser melting, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, art. no. 226111, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s11433-019-1485-8

04-20   Santosh Reddy Sama, Tony Badamo, Paul Lynch and Guha Manogharan, Novel sprue designs in metal casting via 3D sand-printing, Additive Manufacturing, 25, pp. 563-578, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.009

02-20   Dongsheng Wu, Shinichi Tashiro, Ziang Wu, Kazufumi Nomura, Xueming Hua, and Manabu Tanaka, Analysis of heat transfer and material flow in hybrid KPAW-GMAW process based on the novel three dimensional CFD simulation, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 147, art. no. 118921, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118921

01-20   Xiang Huang, Siying Lin, Zhenxiang Bu, Xiaolong Lin, Weijin Yi, Zhihong Lin, Peiqin Xie, and Lingyun Wang, Research on nozzle and needle combination for high frequency piezostack-driven dispenser, International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, 96, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2019.102453

88-19   Bo Cheng and Charles Tuffile, Numerical study of porosity formation with implementation of laser multiple reflection in selective laser melting, Proceedings Volume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Manufacturing Equipment and Systems; Bio and Sustainable Manufacturing, ASME 2019 14th International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, Erie, Pennsylvania, USA, June 10-14, 2019. doi.org/10.1115/MSEC2019-2891

87-19   Shuhao Wang, Lida Zhu, Jerry Ying His Fuh, Haiquan Zhang, and Wentao Yan, Multi-physics modeling and Gaussian process regression analysis of cladding track geometry for direct energy deposition, Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 127:105950, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2019.105950

78-19   Bo Cheng, Lukas Loeber, Hannes Willeck, Udo Hartel, and Charles Tuffile, Computational investigation of melt pool process dynamics and pore formation in laser powder bed fusion, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 28:11, 6565-6578, 2019. doi.org/10.1007/s11665-019-04435-y

77-19   David Souders, Pareekshith Allu, Anurag Chandorkar, and Ruendy Castillo, Application of computational fluid dynamics in developing process parameters for additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Journal, 9th International Conference on 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing Technologies (AM 2019), Bangalore, India, September 7-9, 2019.

75-19   Raphaël Comminal, Marcin Piotr Serdeczny, Navid Ranjbar, Mehdi Mehrali, David Bue Pedersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Modelling of material deposition in big area additive manufacturing and 3D concrete printing, Proceedings, Advancing Precision in Additive Manufacturing, Nantes, France, September 16-18, 2019.

73-19   Baohua Chang, Zhang Yuan, Hao Cheng, Haigang Li, Dong Du 1, and Jiguo Shan, A study on the influences of welding position on the keyhole and molten pool behavior in laser welding of a titanium alloy, Metals, 9:1082, 2019. doi.org/10.3390/met9101082

57-19     Shengjie Deng, Hui-Ping Wang, Fenggui Lu, Joshua Solomon, and Blair E. Carlson, Investigation of spatter occurrence in remote laser spiral welding of zinc-coated steels, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 140, pp. 269-280, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.06.009

53-19     Mohamad Bayat, Aditi Thanki, Sankhya Mohanty, Ann Witvrouw, Shoufeng Yang, Jesper Thorborg, Niels Skat Tieldje, and Jesper Henri Hattel, Keyhole-induced porosities in Laser-based Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) of Ti6Al4V: High-fidelity modelling and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 30, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100835

51-19     P. Ninpetch, P. Kowitwarangkul, S. Mahathanabodee, R. Tongsri, and P. Ratanadecho, Thermal and melting track simulations of laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF), International Conference on Materials Research and Innovation (ICMARI), Bangkok, Thailand, December 17-21, 2018. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 526, 2019. doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/526/1/012030

46-19     Hongze Wang and Yu Zou, Microscale interaction between laser and metal powder in powder-bed additive manufacturing: Conduction mode versus keyhole mode, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 142, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118473

45-19     Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, and Akihiko Chiba, Manipulating local heat accumulation towards controlled quality and microstructure of a Co-Cr-Mo alloy in powder bed fusion with electron beam, Materials Letters, Vol. 254, pp. 269-272, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.07.078

44-19     Guoxiang Xu, Lin Li, Houxiao Wang, Pengfei Li, Qinghu Guo, Qingxian Hu, and Baoshuai Du, Simulation and experimental studies of keyhole induced porosity in laser-MIG hybrid fillet welding of aluminum alloy in the horizontal position, Optics & Laser Technology, Vol. 119, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2019.105667

38-19     Subin Shrestha and Y. Kevin Chou, A numerical study on the keyhole formation during laser powder bed fusion process, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Vol. 141, No. 10, 2019. doi.org/10.1115/1.4044100

34-19     Dae-Won Cho, Jin-Hyeong Park, and Hyeong-Soon Moon, A study on molten pool behavior in the one pulse one drop GMAW process using computational fluid dynamics, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 139, pp. 848-859, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.038

30-19     Mohamad Bayat, Sankhya Mohanty, and Jesper Henri Hattel, Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution in IN718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 139, pp. 95-114, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003

29-19     Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Daixiu Wei, Kenta Yamanaka, and Akihiko Chiba, Comprehensive study on mechanisms for grain morphology evolution and texture development in powder bed fusion with electron beam of Co–Cr–Mo alloy, Materialia, Vol. 6, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.mtla.2019.100346

28-19     Pareekshith Allu, Computational fluid dynamics modeling in additive manufacturing processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS) 148th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, March 10-14, 2019.

24-19     Simulation Software: Use, Advantages & Limitations, The Additive Manufacturing and Welding Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019

22-19     Hunchul Jeong, Kyungbae Park, Sungjin Baek, and Jungho Cho, Thermal efficiency decision of variable polarity aluminum arc welding through molten pool analysis, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 138, pp. 729-737, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.04.089

07-19   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Ruwei Geng and Siyuan Xu, Numerical analysis of arc driving forces and temperature distribution in pulsed TIG welding, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 60, 2019. doi.org/10.1007/s40430-018-1563-0

04-19   Santosh Reddy Sama, Tony Badamo, Paul Lynch and Guha Manogharan, Novel sprue designs in metal casting via 3D sand-printing, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 25, pp. 563-578, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.009

03-19   Dongsheng Wu, Anh Van Nguyen, Shinichi Tashiro, Xueming Hua and Manabu Tanaka, Elucidation of the weld pool convection and keyhole formation mechanism in the keyhold plasma arc welding, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 131, pp. 920-931, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.11.108

97-18   Wentao Yan, Ya Qian, Wenjun Ge, Stephen Lin, Wing Kam Liu, Feng Lin, Gregory J. Wagner, Meso-scale modeling of multiple-layer fabrication process in Selective Electron Beam Melting: Inter-layer/track voids formation, Materials & Design, 2018. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.12.031

84-18   Bo Cheng, Xiaobai Li, Charles Tuffile, Alexander Ilin, Hannes Willeck and Udo Hartel, Multi-physics modeling of single track scanning in selective laser melting: Powder compaction effect, Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, pp. 1887-1902, 2018.

81-18 Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Daixiu Wei, Kenta Yamanaka and Akihiko Chiba, Molten pool behavior and effect of fluid flow on solidification conditions in selective electron beam melting (SEBM) of a biomedical Co-Cr-Mo alloy, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 26, pp. 202-214, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.002

77-18   Jun Du and Zhengying Wei, Numerical investigation of thermocapillary-induced deposited shape in fused-coating additive manufacturing process of aluminum alloy, Journal of Physics Communications, Vol. 2, No. 11, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/2399-6528/aaedc7

76-18   Yu Xiang, Shuzhe Zhang, Zhengying We, Junfeng Li, Pei Wei, Zhen Chen, Lixiang Yang and Lihao Jiang, Forming and defect analysis for single track scanning in selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V, Applied Physics A, 124:685, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s00339-018-2056-9

74-18   Paree Allu, CFD simulations for laser welding of Al Alloys, Proceedings, Die Casting Congress & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, October 15-17, 2018.

72-18   Hunchul Jeong, Kyungbae Park, Sungjin Baek, Dong-Yoon Kim, Moon-Jin Kang and Jungho Cho, Three-dimensional numerical analysis of weld pool in GMAW with fillet joint, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, Vol. 19, No. 8, pp. 1171-1177, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s12541-018-0138-4

60-18   R.W. Geng, J. Du, Z.Y. Wei and G.X. Zhao, An adaptive-domain-growth method for phase field simulation of dendrite growth in arc preheated fused-coating additive manufacturing, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012077, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012077

59-18   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Ruwei Geng and Siyuan Xu, Coupling analysis of molten pool during fused coating process with arc preheating, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012076, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012076 (Available at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012076/pdf and in shared drive)

58-18   Siyuan Xu, Zhengying Wei, Jun Du, Guangxi Zhao and Wei Liu, Numerical simulation and analysis of metal fused coating forming, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012075, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012075

55-18   Jason Cheon, Jin-Young Yoon, Cheolhee Kim and Suck-Joo Na, A study on transient flow characteristic in friction stir welding with realtime interface tracking by direct surface calculation, Journal of Materials Processing Tech., vol. 255, pp. 621-634, 2018.

54-18   V. Sukhotskiy, P. Vishnoi, I. H. Karampelas, S. Vader, Z. Vader, and E. P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic drop-on-demand liquid metal additive manufacturing: System overview and modeling, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer, Niagara Falls, Canada, June 7 – 9, 2018; Paper no. 155, 2018. doi.org/10.11159/ffhmt18.155

52-18   Michael Hilbinger, Claudia Stadelmann, Matthias List and Robert F. Singer, Temconex® – Kontinuierliche Pulverextrusion: Verbessertes Verständnis mit Hilfe der numerischen Simulation, Hochleistungsmetalle und Prozesse für den Leichtbau der Zukunft, Tagungsband 10. Ranshofener Leichtmetalltage, 13-14 Juni 2018, Linz, pp. 175-186, 2018.

38-18   Zhen Chen, Yu Xiang, Zhengying Wei, Pei Wei, Bingheng Lu, Lijuan Zhang and Jun Du, Thermal dynamic behavior during selective laser melting of K418 superalloy: numerical simulation and experimental verification, Applied Physics A, vol. 124, pp. 313, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s00339-018-1737-8

19-18   Chenxiao Zhu, Jason Cheon, Xinhua Tang, Suck-Joo Na, and Haichao Cui, Molten pool behaviors and their influences on welding defects in narrow gap GMAW of 5083 Al-alloy, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 126:A, pp.1206-1221, 2018. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.05.132

16-18   P. Schneider, V. Sukhotskiy, T. Siskar, L. Christie and I.H. Karampelas, Additive Manufacturing of Microfluidic Components via Wax Extrusion, Biotech, Biomaterials and Biomedical TechConnect Briefs, vol. 3, pp. 162 – 165, 2018.

09-18   The Furlani Research Group, Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal 3D Printing, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, © University at Buffalo, May 2018.

08-18   Benjamin Himmel, Dominik Rumschöttel and Wolfram Volk, Thermal process simulation of droplet based metal printing with aluminium, Production Engineering, March 2018 © German Academic Society for Production Engineering (WGP) 2018.

07-18   Yu-Che Wu, Cheng-Hung San, Chih-Hsiang Chang, Huey-Jiuan Lin, Raed Marwan, Shuhei Baba and Weng-Sing Hwang, Numerical modeling of melt-pool behavior in selective laser melting with random powder distribution and experimental validation, Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 254 (2018) 72–78.

60-17   Pei Wei, Zhengying Wei, Zhen Chen, Yuyang He and Jun Du, Thermal behavior in single track during selective laser melting of AlSi10Mg powder, Applied Physics A: Materials Science & Processing, 123:604, 2017. doi.org/10.1007/z00339-017-1194-9

51-17   Koichi Ishizaka, Keijiro Saitoh, Eisaku Ito, Masanori Yuri, and Junichiro Masada, Key Technologies for 1700°C Class Ultra High Temperature Gas Turbine, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical Review, vol. 54, no. 3, 2017.

49-17   Yu-Che Wu, Weng-Sing Hwang, Cheng-Hung San, Chih-Hsiang Chang and Huey-Jiuan Lin, Parametric study of surface morphology for selective laser melting on Ti6Al4V powder bed with numerical and experimental methods, International Journal of Material Forming, © Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2017. doi.org/10.1007/s12289-017-1391-2.

37-17   V. Sukhotskiy, I. H. Karampelas, G. Garg, A. Verma, M. Tong, S. Vader, Z. Vader, and E. P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic Drop-on-Demand Liquid Metal 3D Printing, Solid Freeform Fabrication 2017: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium – An Additive Manufacturing Conference

15-17   I.H. Karampelas, S. Vader, Z. Vader, V. Sukhotskiy, A. Verma, G. Garg, M. Tong and E.P. Furlani, Drop-on-Demand 3D Metal Printing, Informatics, Electronics and Microsystems TechConnect Briefs 2017, Vol. 4

14-17   Jason Cheon and Suck-Joo Na, Prediction of welding residual stress with real-time phase transformation by CFD thermal analysis, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 131–132 (2017) 37–51.

91-16   Y. S. Lee and D. F. Farson, Surface tension-powered build dimension control in laser additive manufacturing process, Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2016) 85:1035–1044, doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7974-5.

84-16   Runqi Lin, Hui-ping Wang, Fenggui Lu, Joshua Solomon, Blair E. Carlson, Numerical study of keyhole dynamics and keyhole-induced porosity formation in remote laser welding of Al alloys, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 108 (2017) 244–256, Available online December 2016.

68-16   Dongsheng Wu, Xueming Hua, Dingjian Ye and Fang Li, Understanding of humping formation and suppression mechanisms using the numerical simulation, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 104, January 2017, Pages 634–643, Published online 2016.

39-16   Chien-Hsun Wang, Ho-Lin Tsai, Yu-Che Wu and Weng-Sing Hwang, Investigation of molten metal droplet deposition and solidification for 3D printing techniques, IOP Publishing, J. Micromech. Microeng. 26 (2016) 095012 (14pp), doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/26/9/095012, July 8, 2016

29-16   Scott Vader, Zachary Vader, Ioannis H. Karampelas and Edward P. Furlani, Advances in Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal Jet Printing, Nanotech 2016 Conference & Expo, May 22-25, Washington, DC.

26-16   Y.S. Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, S2214-8604(16)30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.05.003, ADDMA 86.

123-15   Koji Tsukimoto, Masashi Kitamura, Shuji Tanigawa, Sachio Shimohata, and Masahiko Mega, Laser welding repair for single crystal blades, Proceedings of International Gas Turbine Congress, pp. 1354-1358, 2015.

122-15   Y.S. Lee, W. Zhang, Mesoscopic simulation of heat transfer and fluid flow in laser powder bed additive manufacturing, Proceedings, 26th Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, Texas, 2015. 

116-15   Yousub Lee, Simulation of Laser Additive Manufacturing and its Applications, Ph.D. Thesis: Graduate Program in Welding Engineering, The Ohio State University, 2015, Copyright by Yousub Lee 2015

103-15   Ligang Wu, Jason Cheon, Degala Venkata Kiran, and Suck-Joo Na, CFD Simulations of GMA Welding of Horizontal Fillet Joints based on Coordinate Rotation of Arc Models, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Available online December 29, 2015

96-15   Jason Cheon, Degala Venkata Kiran, and Suck-Joo Na, Thermal metallurgical analysis of GMA welded AH36 steel using CFD – FEM framework, Materials & Design, Volume 91, February 5 2016, Pages 230-241, published online November 2015

86-15   Yousub Lee and Dave F. Farson, Simulation of transport phenomena and melt pool shape for multiple layer additive manufacturing, J. Laser Appl. 28, 012006 (2016). doi: 10.2351/1.4935711, published online 2015.

63-15   Scott Vader, Zachary Vader, Ioannis H. Karampelas and Edward P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal Jet Printing, TechConnect World Innovation Conference & Expo, Washington, D.C., June 14-17, 2015

46-15   Adwaith Gupta, 3D Printing Multi-Material, Single Printhead Simulation, Advanced Qualification of Additive Manufacturing Materials Workshop, July 20 – 21, 2015, Santa Fe, NM

25-15   Dae-Won Cho and Suck-Joo Na, Molten pool behaviors for second pass V-groove GMAW, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 88 (2015) 945–956.

21-15   Jungho Cho, Dave F. Farson, Kendall J. Hollis and John O. Milewski, Numerical analysis of weld pool oscillation in laser welding, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 29 (4) (2015) 1715~1722, www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x, doi.org/10.1007/s12206-015-0344-2.

82-14  Yousub Lee, Mark Nordin, Sudarsanam Suresh Babu, and Dave F. Farson, Effect of Fluid Convection on Dendrite Arm Spacing in Laser Deposition, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, August 2014, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 1520-1529

59-14   Y.S. Lee, M. Nordin, S.S. Babu, and D.F. Farson, Influence of Fluid Convection on Weld Pool Formation in Laser Cladding, Welding Research/ August 2014, VOL. 93

18-14  L.J. Zhang, J.X. Zhang, A. Gumenyuk, M. Rethmeier, and S.J. Na, Numerical simulation of full penetration laser welding of thick steel plate with high power high brightness laser, Journal of Materials Processing Technology (2014), doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.03.016.

36-13  Dae-Won Cho,Woo-Hyun Song, Min-Hyun Cho, and Suck-Joo Na, Analysis of Submerged Arc Welding Process by Three-Dimensional Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2013. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.06.017

12-13 D.W. Cho, S.J. Na, M.H. Cho, J.S. Lee, A study on V-groove GMAW for various welding positions, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, April 2013, doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.02.015.

01-13  Dae-Won Cho & Suck-Joo Na & Min-Hyun Cho & Jong-Sub Lee, Simulations of weld pool dynamics in V-groove GTA and GMA welding, Weld World, doi.org/10.1007/s40194-012-0017-z, © International Institute of Welding 2013.

63-12  D.W. Cho, S.H. Lee, S.J. Na, Characterization of welding arc and weld pool formation in vacuum gas hollow tungsten arc welding, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2012.09.024, September 2012.

77-10  Lim, Y. C.; Yu, X.; Cho, J. H.; et al., Effect of magnetic stirring on grain structure refinement Part 1-Autogenous nickel alloy welds, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 15 Issue: 7, Pages: 583-589, doi.org/10.1179/136217110X12720264008277, October 2010

18-10 K Saida, H Ohnishi, K Nishimoto, Fluxless laser brazing of aluminium alloy to galvanized steel using a tandem beam–dissimilar laser brazing of aluminium alloy and steels, Welding International, 2010

58-09  Cho, Jung-Ho; Farson, Dave F.; Milewski, John O.; et al., Weld pool flows during initial stages of keyhole formation in laser welding, Journal of Physics D-Applied Physics, Volume: 42 Issue: 17 Article Number: 175502 ; doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/42/17/175502, September 2009

57-09  Lim, Y. C.; Farson, D. F.; Cho, M. H.; et al., Stationary GMAW-P weld metal deposit spreading, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 14 Issue: 7 ;Pages: 626-635, doi.org/10.1179/136217109X441173, October 2009

1-09 J.-H. Cho and S.-J. Na, Three-Dimensional Analysis of Molten Pool in GMA-Laser Hybrid Welding, Welding Journal, February 2009, Vol. 88

52-07   Huey-Jiuan Lin and Wei-Kuo Chang, Design of a sheet forming apparatus for overflow fusion process by numerical simulation, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 353 (2007) 2817–2825.

50-07  Cho, Min Hyun; Farson, Dave F., Understanding bead hump formation in gas metal arc welding using a numerical simulation, Metallurgical and Mateials Transactions B-Process Metallurgy and Materials Processing Science, Volume: 38, Issue: 2, Pages: 305-319, doi.org/10.1007/s11663-007-9034-5, April 2007

49-07  Cho, M. H.; Farson, D. F., Simulation study of a hybrid process for the prevention of weld bead hump formation, Welding Journal Volume: 86, Issue: 9, Pages: 253S-262S, September 2007

48-07  Cho, M. H.; Farson, D. F.; Lim, Y. C.; et al., Hybrid laser/arc welding process for controlling bead profile, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 12 Issue: 8, Pages: 677-688, doi.org/10.1179/174329307X236878, November 2007

47-07   Min Hyun Cho, Dave F. Farson, Understanding Bead Hump Formation in Gas Metal Arc Welding Using a Numerical Simulation, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 305-319, April 2007

36-06  Cho, M. H.; Lim, Y. C.; Farson, D. F., Simulation of weld pool dynamics in the stationary pulsed gas metal arc welding process and final weld shape, Welding Journal, Volume: 85 Issue: 12, Pages: 271S-283S, December 2006

Products

FLOW-3D 제품 소개


STI C&D 에서 공급하는 CFD 프로그램은 미국 Flow Science 에서 개발된 FLOW-3D solver 를 기반으로 한 매우 강력하고 정확한 열유동 수치해석 프로그램 입니다. 귀하의 업무에 적합한 제품군을 찾고자 하시면 당사의 솔루션팀으로 문의 주시기 바랍니다.
 

FLOW-3D 는 유체의 동적 거동을 연구하는 개발 및 설계 엔지니어에게 꼭 필요한 유동 시뮬레이션 솔루션을 제공합니다. FLOW-3D는 1, 2, 3차원의 자유 표면 해석, 시간에 따른 유체의 유동해석, 제한된 유체의 흐름, 정상 상태의 문제들을 완벽하게 해결 할 수 있습니다.
 

FLOW-3D HPC 는 흔히 슈퍼컴퓨터 또는 클러스터 컴퓨터를 이용하여 고성능 컴퓨팅(HPC, High-Performance Computing)을 할 수 있는 제품으로 대규모 또는 장시간 계산이 필요한 문제를 효과적으로 해결할 수 있도록 뛰어난 성능을 제공합니다. FLOW-3D HPC 는 초대형 컴퓨팅 시스템부터 조립 클러스터까지 쉽게 고성능 컴퓨팅 클러스터를 활용할 수 있습니다.
 
FLOW-3D/CAST 는 금속 주조 공정 시뮬레이션을 위해 특별히 설계된 FLOW-3D의 특별 버전입니다. 본 제품은 FLOW-3D의 강력한 해석기능을 주조분야 설계자가 쉽게 사용할 수 있는 쉬운 인터페이스를 제공합니다.
 

FLOW-3D Weld DEM

FLOW Weld 는 용접 해석에 필요한 모델을 FLOW-3D 에 추가하는 추가 모듈입니다.  FLOW-3D 표면 장력 자유 표면 분석, 용융 · 응고 · 증발 상 변화 모델 등의 기본 기능을 응용하여 각종 용접 현상을 분석 할 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM 은 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF), 바인더 제트 및 DED (Directed Energy Deposition)와 같은 적층 제조 공정 ( additive manufacturing )을 시뮬레이션하고 분석하는 CFD 소프트웨어입니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 다중 물리 기능은 공정 매개 변수의 분석 및 최적화를 위해 분말 확산 및 압축, 용융 풀 역학, L-PBF 및 DED에 대한 다공성 형성, 바인더 분사 공정을위한 수지 침투 및 확산에 대한 매우 정확한 시뮬레이션을 제공합니다.

FSAI는 유체-구조 연성해석을 쉽게 할 수 있는 프로그램으로 FLOW-3D / FLOW-3D MP 해석 결과 데이터(유체 압력, 유체 온도, 벽 온도)를 구조 해석의 유한 요소(FEM) Mesh에 출력할 수 있습니다.  반대로 구조 해석의 유한 요소(FEM) Mesh 데이터를 FLOW-3D Solid 형상으로 읽어 처리 할 수 있습니다.

 
 
 
<제품 브로셔 다운로드>
 
flow3dflow3dmphydraulicsmaritimeaerospace
 microfluidicsinkjetscoatingcastinghpdc