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


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



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.

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.

γ matrix
Primary γ′
Secondary γ′

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 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. 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 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.


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.


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 rights and content


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.


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


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.


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)

Fig. 8 Distribution of solidification properties on the yz cross section at the maximum width of the melt pool.(a) thermal gradient G, (b) solidification velocity vT, (c) cooling rate G×vT, and (d) morphology factor G/vT. These profiles are calculated with a laser power 300 W and velocity 400 mm/s using (a1 through d1) analytical Rosenthal simulation and (a2 through d2) high-fidelity CFD simulation. The laser is moving out of the page from the upper left corner of each color map (Color figure online)

Quantifying Equiaxed vs Epitaxial Solidification in Laser Melting of CMSX-4 Single Crystal Superalloy

CMSX -4 단결정 초합금의 레이저 용융에서 등축 응고와 에피택셜 응고 정량화

본 논문은 독자의 편의를 위해 기계번역된 내용이어서 자세한 내용은 원문을 참고하시기 바랍니다.


에피택셜 과 등축 응고 사이의 경쟁은 적층 제조에서 실행되는 레이저 용융 동안 CMSX-4 단결정 초합금에서 조사되었습니다. 단일 트랙 레이저 스캔은 레이저 출력과 스캐닝 속도의 여러 조합으로 방향성 응고된 CMSX-4 합금의 분말 없는 표면에서 수행되었습니다. EBSD(Electron Backscattered Diffraction) 매핑은 새로운 방향의 식별을 용이하게 합니다. 영역 분율 및 공간 분포와 함께 융합 영역 내에서 핵을 형성한 “스트레이 그레인”은 충실도가 높은 전산 유체 역학 시뮬레이션을 사용하여 용융 풀 내의 온도 및 유체 속도 필드를 모두 추정했습니다. 이 정보를 핵 생성 모델과 결합하여 용융 풀에서 핵 생성이 발생할 확률이 가장 높은 위치를 결정했습니다. 금속 적층 가공의 일반적인 경험에 따라 레이저 용융 트랙의 응고된 미세 구조는 에피택셜 입자 성장에 의해 지배됩니다. 더 높은 레이저 스캐닝 속도와 더 낮은 출력이 일반적으로 흩어진 입자 감소에 도움이 되지만,그럼에도 불구하고 길쭉한 용융 풀에서 흩어진 입자가 분명했습니다.

The competition between epitaxial vs. equiaxed solidification has been investigated in CMSX-4 single crystal superalloy during laser melting as practiced in additive manufacturing. Single-track laser scans were performed on a powder-free surface of directionally solidified CMSX-4 alloy with several combinations of laser power and scanning velocity. Electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD) mapping facilitated identification of new orientations, i.e., “stray grains” that nucleated within the fusion zone along with their area fraction and spatial distribution. Using high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics simulations, both the temperature and fluid velocity fields within the melt pool were estimated. This information was combined with a nucleation model to determine locations where nucleation has the highest probability to occur in melt pools. In conformance with general experience in metals additive manufacturing, the as-solidified microstructure of the laser-melted tracks is dominated by epitaxial grain growth; nevertheless, stray grains were evident in elongated melt pools. It was found that, though a higher laser scanning velocity and lower power are generally helpful in the reduction of stray grains, the combination of a stable keyhole and minimal fluid velocity further mitigates stray grains in laser single tracks.


니켈 기반 초합금은 고온에서 긴 노출 시간 동안 높은 인장 강도, 낮은 산화 및 우수한 크리프 저항성을 포함하는 우수한 특성의 고유한 조합으로 인해 가스 터빈 엔진 응용 분야에서 광범위하게 사용됩니다. CMSX-4는 특히 장기 크리프 거동과 관련하여 초고강도의 2세대 레늄 함유 니켈 기반 단결정 초합금입니다. 1 , 2 ]입계의 존재가 크리프를 가속화한다는 인식은 가스 터빈 엔진의 고온 단계를 위한 단결정 블레이드를 개발하게 하여 작동 온도를 높이고 효율을 높이는 데 기여했습니다. 이러한 구성 요소는 사용 중 마모될 수 있습니다. 즉, 구성 요소의 무결성을 복원하고 단결정 미세 구조를 유지하는 수리 방법을 개발하기 위한 지속적인 작업이 있었습니다. 3 , 4 , 5 ]

적층 제조(AM)가 등장하기 전에는 다양한 용접 공정을 통해 단결정 초합금에 대한 수리 시도가 수행되었습니다. 균열 [ 6 , 7 ] 및 흩어진 입자 8 , 9 ] 와 같은 심각한 결함 이 이 수리 중에 자주 발생합니다. 일반적으로 “스트레이 그레인”이라고 하는 응고 중 모재의 방향과 다른 결정학적 방향을 가진 새로운 그레인의 형성은 니켈 기반 단결정 초합금의 수리 중 유해한 영향으로 인해 중요한 관심 대상입니다. 3 , 10 ]결과적으로 재료의 단결정 구조가 손실되고 원래 구성 요소에 비해 기계적 특성이 손상됩니다. 이러한 흩어진 입자는 특정 조건에서 에피택셜 성장을 대체하는 등축 응고의 시작에 해당합니다.

떠돌이 결정립 형성을 완화하기 위해 이전 작업은 용융 영역(FZ) 내에서 응고하는 동안 떠돌이 결정립 형성에 영향을 미치는 수지상 응고 거동 및 처리 조건을 이해하는 데 중점을 두었습니다. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ] 연구원들은 단결정 합금의 용접 중에 표류 결정립 형성에 대한 몇 가지 가능한 메커니즘을 제안했습니다. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]응고 전단에 앞서 국부적인 구성 과냉각은 이질적인 핵 생성 및 등축 결정립의 성장을 유발할 수 있습니다. 또한 용융 풀에서 활발한 유체 흐름으로 인해 발생하는 덴드라이트 조각화는 용융 풀 경계 근처에서 새로운 결정립을 형성할 수도 있습니다. 두 메커니즘 모두에서, 표류 결정립 형성은 핵 생성 위치에 의존하며, 차이점은 수상 돌기 조각화는 수상 돌기 조각이 핵 생성 위치로 작용한다는 것을 의미하는 반면 다른 메커니즘은 재료,  를 들어 산화물 입자에서 발견되는 다른 유형의 핵 생성 위치를 사용한다는 것을 의미합니다. 잘 알려진 바와 같이, 많은 주물에 대한 반대 접근법은 TiB와 같은 핵제의 도입을 통해 등축 응고를 촉진하는 것입니다.22알루미늄 합금에서.

헌법적 과냉 메커니즘에서 Hunt 11 ] 는 정상 상태 조건에서 기둥에서 등축으로의 전이(CET)를 설명하는 모델을 개발했습니다. Gaumann과 Kurz는 Hunt의 모델을 수정하여 단결정이 응고되는 동안 떠돌이 결정립이 핵을 생성하고 성장할 수 있는 정도를 설명했습니다. 12 , 14 ] 이후 연구에서 Vitek은 Gaumann의 모델을 개선하고 출력 및 스캐닝 속도와 같은 용접 조건의 영향에 대한 보다 자세한 분석을 포함했습니다. Vitek은 또한 실험 및 모델링 기술을 통해 표류 입자 형성에 대한 기판 방향의 영향을 포함했습니다. 3 , 10 ]일반적으로 높은 용접 속도와 낮은 출력은 표류 입자의 양을 최소화하고 레이저 용접 공정 중 에피택셜 단결정 성장을 최대화하는 것으로 나타났습니다. 3,10 ] 그러나 Vitek은 덴드라이트 조각화를 고려하지 않았으며 그의 연구는 불균질 핵형성이 레이저 용접된 CMSX -4 단결정 합금에서 표류 결정립 형성을 이끄는 주요 메커니즘임을 나타냅니다. 현재 작업에서 Vitek의 수치적 방법이 채택되고 금속 AM의 급속한 특성의 더 높은 속도와 더 낮은 전력 특성으로 확장됩니다.

AM을 통한 금속 부품 제조 는 지난 10년 동안 급격한 인기 증가를 목격했습니다. 16 ] EBM(Electron Beam Melting)에 의한 CMSX-4의 제작 가능성은 자주 조사되었으나 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ] CMSX의 제조 및 수리에 대한 조사는 매우 제한적이었다. – 4개의 단결정 구성요소는 레이저 분말 베드 융합(LPBF)을 사용하며, AM의 인기 있는 하위 집합으로, 특히 표류 입자 형성을 완화하는 메커니즘과 관련이 있습니다. 22 ]이러한 조사 부족은 주로 이러한 합금 시스템과 관련된 처리 문제로 인해 발생합니다. 2 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 24 ] 공정 매개변수( 예: 열원 전력, 스캐닝 속도, 스폿 크기, 예열 온도 및 스캔 전략)의 엄격한 제어는 완전히 조밀한 부품을 만들고 유지 관리할 수 있도록 하는 데 필수적입니다. 단결정 미세구조. 25 ] EBM을 사용하여 단결정 합금의 균열 없는 수리가 현재 가능하지만 19 , 24 ] 표류 입자를 생성하지 않는 수리는 쉽게 달성할 수 없습니다.23 , 26 ]

이 작업에서 LPBF를 대표하는 조건으로 레이저 용융을 사용하여 단결정 CMSX-4에서 표류 입자 완화를 조사했습니다. LPBF는 스캐닝 레이저 빔을 사용하여 금속 분말의 얇은 층을 기판에 녹이고 융합합니다. 층별 증착에서 레이저 빔의 사용은 급격한 온도 구배, 빠른 가열/냉각 주기 및 격렬한 유체 흐름을 경험하는 용융 풀을 생성 합니다 이것은 일반적으로 부품에 결함을 일으킬 수 있는 매우 동적인 물리적 현상으로 이어집니다. 28 , 29 , 30 ] 레이저 유도 키홀의 동역학( 예:, 기화 유발 반동 압력으로 인한 위상 함몰) 및 열유체 흐름은 AM 공정에서 응고 결함과 강하게 결합되고 관련됩니다. 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ] 기하 구조의 급격한 변화가 발생하기 쉬운 불안정한 키홀은 다공성, 볼링, 스패터 형성 및 흔하지 않은 미세 구조 상을 포함하는 유해한 물리적 결함을 유발할 수 있습니다. 그러나 키홀 진화와 유체 흐름은 자연적으로 다음을 통해 포착 하기 어렵 습니다 .전통적인 사후 특성화 기술. 고충실도 수치 모델링을 활용하기 위해 이 연구에서는 전산유체역학(CFD)을 적용하여 표면 아래의 레이저-물질 상호 작용을 명확히 했습니다. 36 ] 이것은 응고된 용융물 풀의 단면에 대한 오랫동안 확립된 사후 특성화와 비교하여 키홀 및 용융물 풀 유체 흐름 정량화를 실행합니다.

CMSX-4 구성 요소의 레이저 기반 AM 수리 및 제조를 위한 적절한 절차를 개발하기 위해 적절한 공정 창을 설정하고 응고 중 표류 입자 형성 경향에 대한 예측 기능을 개발하는 것부터 시작합니다. 다중 합금에 대한 단일 트랙 증착은 분말 층이 있거나 없는 AM 공정에서 용융 풀 형상 및 미세 구조의 정확한 분석을 제공하는 것으로 나타났습니다. 37 , 38 , 39 ]따라서 본 연구에서는 CMSX-4의 응고 거동을 알아보기 위해 분말을 사용하지 않는 단일 트랙 레이저 스캔 실험을 사용하였다. 이는 CMSX-4 단결정의 LPBF 제조를 위한 예비 실험 지침을 제공합니다. 또한 응고 모델링은 기존 용접에서 LPBF와 관련된 급속 용접으로 확장되어 표류 입자 감소를 위한 최적의 레이저 용융 조건을 식별했습니다. 가공 매개변수 최적화를 위한 추가 지침을 제공하기 위해 용융물 풀의 매우 동적인 유체 흐름을 모델링했습니다.

재료 및 방법

단일 트랙 실험

방전 가공(EDM)을 사용하여 CMSX-4 방향성 응고 단결정 잉곳으로부터 샘플을 제작했습니다. 샘플의 최종 기하학은 치수 20의 직육면체 형태였습니다.××20××6mm. 6개 중 하나⟨ 001 ⟩⟨001⟩잉곳의 결정학적 방향은 레이저 트랙이 이 바람직한 성장 방향을 따라 스캔되도록 절단 표면에 수직으로 위치했습니다. 단일 레이저 용융 트랙은 EOS M290 기계를 사용하여 분말이 없는 샘플 표면에 만들어졌습니다. 이 기계는 최대 출력 400W, 가우시안 빔 직경 100의 이터븀 파이버 레이저가 장착된 LPBF 시스템입니다. μμ초점에서 m. 실험 중에 직사각형 샘플을 LPBF 기계용 맞춤형 샘플 홀더의 포켓에 끼워 표면을 동일한 높이로 유지했습니다. 이 맞춤형 샘플 홀더에 대한 자세한 내용은 다른 곳에서 설명합니다. 실험 은 아르곤 퍼지 분위기에서 수행되었으며 예열은 적용되지 않았습니다 단일 트랙 레이저 용융 실험은 다양한 레이저 출력(200~370W)과 스캔 속도(0.4~1.4m/s)에서 수행되었습니다.

성격 묘사

레이저 스캐닝 후, 레이저 빔 스캐닝 방향에 수직인 평면에서 FZ를 통해 다이아몬드 톱을 사용하여 샘플을 절단했습니다. 그 후, 샘플을 장착하고 220 그릿 SiC 페이퍼로 시작하여 콜로이드 실리카 현탁액 광택제로 마무리하여 자동 연마했습니다. 결정학적 특성화는 20kV의 가속 전압에서 TESCAN MIRA 3XMH 전계 방출 주사 전자 현미경(SEM)에서 수행되었습니다. EBSD 지도는0.4μm _0.4μ미디엄단계 크기. Bruker 시스템을 사용하여 EBSD 데이터를 정리하고 분석했습니다. EBSD 클린업은 그레인을 접촉시키기 위한 그레인 확장 루틴으로 시작한 다음 인덱스되지 않은 회절 패턴과 관련된 검은색 픽셀을 해결하기 위해 이웃 방향 클린업 루틴으로 이어졌습니다. 용융 풀 형태를 분석하기 위해 단면을 광학 현미경으로 분석했습니다. 광학 특성화의 대비를 향상시키기 위해 10g CuSO로 구성된 Marbles 시약의 변형으로 샘플을 에칭했습니다.44, 50mL HCl 및 70mL H22영형.

응고 모델링

구조적 과냉 기준에 기반한 응고 모델링을 수행하여 표유 입자의 성향 및 분포에 대한 가공 매개변수의 영향을 평가했습니다. 이 분석 모델링 접근 방식에 대한 자세한 내용은 이전 작업에서 제공됩니다. 3 , 10 ] 참고문헌 3 에 기술된 바와 같이 , 기본 재료의 결정학적 배향을 가진 용융 풀에서 총 표유 입자 면적 분율의 변화는 최소이므로 기본 재료 배향의 영향은 이 작업에서 고려되지 않았습니다. 우리의 LPBF 결과를 이전 작업과 비교하기 위해 Vitek의 작업에서 사용된 수학적으로 간단한 Rosenthal 방정식 3 ]또한 레이저 매개변수의 함수로 용융 풀의 모양과 FZ의 열 조건을 계산하기 위한 기준으로 여기에서 채택되었습니다. Rosenthal 솔루션은 열이 일정한 재료 특성을 가진 반무한 판의 정상 상태 점원을 통해서만 전도를 통해 전달된다고 가정하며 일반적으로 다음과 같이 표현 됩니다 40 , 41 ] .

티=티0+η피2 파이케이엑스2+와이2+지2———-√경험치[- 브이(엑스2+와이2+지2———-√− 엑스 )2α _] ,티=티0+η피2파이케이엑스2+와이2+지2경험치⁡[-V(엑스2+와이2+지2-엑스)2α],(1)

여기서 T 는 온도,티0티0본 연구에서 313K(  , EOS 기계 챔버 온도)로 설정된 주변 온도, P 는 레이저 빔 파워, V 는 레이저 빔 스캐닝 속도,ηη는 레이저 흡수율, k 는 열전도율,αα베이스 합금의 열확산율입니다. x , y , z 는 각각 레이저 스캐닝 방향, 가로 방향 및 세로 방향의 반대 방향과 정렬된 방향입니다 . 이 직교 좌표는 참조 3 의 그림 1에 있는 시스템을 따랐습니다 . CMSX-4에 대한 고상선 온도(1603K)와 액상선 온도(1669K)의 등온선 평균으로 응고 프런트( 즉 , 고체-액체 계면)를 정의했습니다. 42 , 43 , 44 ] 시뮬레이션에 사용된 열물리적 특성은 표 I 에 나열되어 있습니다.표 I CMSX-4의 응고 모델링에 사용된 열물리적 특성

풀 사이즈 테이블

열 구배는 외부 열 흐름에 의해 결정되었습니다.∇ 티∇티45 ] 에 의해 주어진 바와 같이 :

지 = | ∇ 티| =∣∣∣∂티∂엑스나^^+∂티∂와이제이^^+∂티∂지케이^^∣∣∣=(∂티∂엑스)2+(∂티∂와이)2+(∂티∂지)2————————√,G=|∇티|=|∂티∂엑스나^^+∂티∂와이제이^^+∂티∂지케이^^|=(∂티∂엑스)2+(∂티∂와이)2+(∂티∂지)2,(2)

어디나^^나^^,제이^^제이^^, 그리고케이^^케이^^는 각각 x , y 및 z 방향 을 따른 단위 벡터 입니다. 응고 등온선 속도,V티V티는 다음 관계에 의해 레이저 빔 스캐닝 속도 V 와 기하학적으로 관련됩니다.

V티= V코사인θ =V∂티∂엑스(∂티∂엑스)2+(∂티∂와이)2+(∂티∂지)2——————-√,V티=V코사인⁡θ=V∂티∂엑스(∂티∂엑스)2+(∂티∂와이)2+(∂티∂지)2,(삼)

어디θθ는 스캔 방향과 응고 전면의 법선 방향(  , 최대 열 흐름 방향) 사이의 각도입니다. 이 연구의 용접 조건과 같은 제한된 성장에서 수지상 응고 전면은 고체-액체 등온선의 속도로 성장하도록 강제됩니다.V티V티. 46 ]

응고 전선이 진행되기 전에 새로 핵 생성된 입자의 국지적 비율ΦΦ, 액체 온도 구배 G 에 의해 결정 , 응고 선단 속도V티V티및 핵 밀도N0N0. 고정된 임계 과냉각에서 모든 입자가 핵형성된다고 가정함으로써△티N△티N, 등축 결정립의 반경은 결정립이 핵 생성을 시작하는 시점부터 주상 전선이 결정립에 도달하는 시간까지의 성장 속도를 통합하여 얻습니다. 과냉각으로 대체 시간d (ΔT_) / dt = – _V티G디(△티)/디티=-V티G, 열 구배 G 사이의 다음 관계 , 등축 입자의 국부적 부피 분율ΦΦ, 수상 돌기 팁 과냉각ΔT _△티, 핵 밀도N0N0, 재료 매개변수 n 및 핵생성 과냉각△티N△티N, Gäumann 외 여러분 에 의해 파생되었습니다 . 12 , 14 ] Hunt의 모델 11 ] 의 수정에 기반함 :

지 =1엔 + 1- 4π _N03 인치( 1 − Φ )———√삼ΔT _( 1 -△티엔 + 1N△티엔 + 1) .G=1N+1-4파이N0삼인⁡(1-Φ)삼△티(1-△티NN+1△티N+1).(4)

계산을 단순화하기 위해 덴드라이트 팁 과냉각을 전적으로 구성 과냉각의 것으로 추정합니다.△티씨△티씨, 멱법칙 형식으로 근사화할 수 있습니다.△티씨= ( _V티)1 / 엔△티씨=(ㅏV티)1/N, 여기서 a 와 n 은 재료 종속 상수입니다. CMSX-4의 경우 이 값은a = 1.25 ×106ㅏ=1.25×106 s K 3.4m− 1-1,엔 = 3.4N=3.4, 그리고N0= 2 ×1015N0=2×1015미디엄− 3,-삼,참고문헌 3 에 의해 보고된 바와 같이 .△티N△티N2.5K이며 보다 큰 냉각 속도에서 응고에 대해 무시할 수 있습니다.106106 K/s. 에 대한 표현ΦΦ위의 방정식을 재배열하여 해결됩니다.

Φ= 1 -이자형에스\ 여기서\  S=- 4π _N0삼(1( 엔 + 1 ) (GN/ 아V티)1 / 엔)삼=−2.356×1019(vTG3.4)33.4.Φ=1−eS\ where\ S=−4πN03(1(n+1)(Gn/avT)1/n)3=−2.356×1019(vTG3.4)33.4.


As proposed by Hunt,[11] a value of Φ≤0.66Φ≤0.66 pct represents fully columnar epitaxial growth condition, and, conversely, a value of Φ≥49Φ≥49 pct indicates that the initial single crystal microstructure is fully replaced by an equiaxed microstructure. To calculate the overall stray grain area fraction, we followed Vitek’s method by dividing the FZ into roughly 19 to 28 discrete parts (depending on the length of the melt pool) of equal length from the point of maximum width to the end of melt pool along the x direction. The values of G and vTvT were determined at the center on the melt pool boundary of each section and these values were used to represent the entire section. The area-weighted average of ΦΦ over these discrete sections along the length of melt pool is designated as Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯, and is given by:



where k is the index for each subsection, and AkAk and ΦkΦk are the areas and ΦΦ values for each subsection. The summation is taken over all the sections along the melt pool. Vitek’s improved model allows the calculation of stray grain area fraction by considering the melt pool geometry and variations of G and vTvT around the tail end of the pool.

수년에 걸쳐 용융 풀 현상 모델링의 정확도를 개선하기 위해 많은 고급 수치 방법이 개발되었습니다. 우리는 FLOW-3D와 함께 고충실도 CFD를 사용했습니다. FLOW-3D는 여러 물리 모델을 통합하는 상용 FVM(Finite Volume Method)입니다. 47 , 48 ] CFD는 유체 운동과 열 전달을 수치적으로 시뮬레이션하며 여기서 사용된 기본 물리 모델은 레이저 및 표면력 모델이었습니다. 레이저 모델에서는 레이 트레이싱 기법을 통해 다중 반사와 프레넬 흡수를 구현합니다. 36 ]먼저, 레이저 빔은 레이저 빔에 의해 조명되는 각 그리드 셀을 기준으로 여러 개의 광선으로 이산화됩니다. 그런 다음 각 입사 광선에 대해 입사 벡터가 입사 위치에서 금속 표면의 법선 벡터와 정렬될 때 에너지의 일부가 금속에 의해 흡수됩니다. 흡수율은 Fresnel 방정식을 사용하여 추정됩니다. 나머지 에너지는 반사광선 에 의해 유지되며 , 반사광선은 재료 표면에 부딪히면 새로운 입사광선으로 처리됩니다. 두 가지 주요 힘이 액체 금속 표면에 작용하여 자유 표면을 변형시킵니다. 금속의 증발에 의해 생성된 반동 압력은 증기 억제를 일으키는 주요 힘입니다. 본 연구에서 사용된 반동 압력 모델은피아르 자형= 특급 _{ B ( 1- _티V/ 티) }피아르 자형=ㅏ경험치⁡{비(1-티V/티)}, 어디피아르 자형피아르 자형는 반동압력, A 와 B 는 재료의 물성에 관련된 계수로 각각 75와 15이다.티V티V는 포화 온도이고 T 는 키홀 벽의 온도입니다. 표면 흐름 및 키홀 형성의 다른 원동력은 표면 장력입니다. 표면 장력 계수는 Marangoni 흐름을 포함하기 위해 온도의 선형 함수로 추정되며,σ =1.79-9.90⋅10− 4( 티− 1654케이 )σ=1.79-9.90⋅10-4(티-1654년케이)엔엠− 1-1. 49 ] 계산 영역은 베어 플레이트의 절반입니다(2300 μμ미디엄××250 μμ미디엄××500 μμm) xz 평면 에 적용된 대칭 경계 조건 . 메쉬 크기는 8입니다. μμm이고 시간 단계는 0.15입니다. μμs는 계산 효율성과 정확성 간의 균형을 제공합니다.

결과 및 논의

용융 풀 형태

이 작업에 사용된 5개의 레이저 파워( P )와 6개의 스캐닝 속도( V )는 서로 다른 29개의 용융 풀을 생성했습니다.피- 브이피-V조합. P 와 V 값이 가장 높은 것은 그림 1 을 기준으로 과도한 볼링과 관련이 있기 때문에 본 연구에서는 분석하지 않았다  .

단일 트랙 용융 풀은 그림  1 과 같이 형상에 따라 네 가지 유형으로 분류할 수 있습니다 39 ] : (1) 전도 모드(파란색 상자), (2) 키홀 모드(빨간색), (3) 전환 모드(마젠타), (4) 볼링 모드(녹색). 높은 레이저 출력과 낮은 스캐닝 속도의 일반적인 조합인 키홀 모드에서 용융물 풀은 일반적으로 너비/깊이( W / D ) 비율이 0.5보다 훨씬 큰 깊고 가느다란 모양을 나타냅니다 . 스캐닝 속도가 증가함에 따라 용융 풀이 얕아져 W / D 가 약 0.5인 반원형 전도 모드 용융 풀을 나타냅니다. W / D _전환 모드 용융 풀의 경우 1에서 0.5 사이입니다. 스캐닝 속도를 1200 및 1400mm/s로 더 높이면 충분히 큰 캡 높이와 볼링 모드 용융 풀의 특징인 과도한 언더컷이 발생할 수 있습니다.

힘과 속도의 함수로서의 용융 풀 깊이와 너비는 각각 그림  2 (a)와 (b)에 표시되어 있습니다. 용융 풀 폭은 기판 표면에서 측정되었습니다. 그림  2 (a)는 깊이가 레이저 출력과 매우 선형적인 관계를 따른다는 것을 보여줍니다. 속도가 증가함에 따라 깊이  파워 곡선의 기울기는 꾸준히 감소하지만 더 높은 속도 곡선에는 약간의 겹침이 있습니다. 이러한 예상치 못한 중첩은 종종 용융 풀 형태의 동적 변화를 유발하는 유체 흐름의 영향과 레이저 스캔당 하나의 이미지만 추출되었다는 사실 때문일 수 있습니다. 이러한 선형 동작은 그림 2 (b) 의 너비에 대해 명확하지 않습니다  . 그림  2(c)는 선형 에너지 밀도 P / V 의 함수로서 용융 깊이와 폭을 보여줍니다 . 선형 에너지 밀도는 퇴적물의 단위 길이당 에너지 투입량을 측정한 것입니다. 50 ] 용융 풀 깊이는 에너지 밀도에 따라 달라지며 너비는 더 많은 분산을 나타냅니다. 동일한 에너지 밀도가 준공 부품의 용융 풀, 미세 구조 또는 속성에서 반드시 동일한 유체 역학을 초래하지는 않는다는 점에 유의하는 것이 중요합니다. 50 ]

그림 1
그림 1
그림 2
그림 2

레이저 흡수율 평가

레이저 흡수율은 LPBF 조건에서 재료 및 가공 매개변수에 따라 크게 달라진다는 것은 잘 알려져 있습니다. 31 , 51 , 52 ] 적분구를 이용한 전통적인 흡수율의 직접 측정은 일반적으로 높은 비용과 구현의 어려움으로 인해 쉽게 접근할 수 없습니다. 51 ] 그  . 39 ] 전도 모드 용융 풀에 대한 Rosenthal 방정식을 기반으로 경험적 레이저 흡수율 모델을 개발했지만 기본 가정으로 인해 키홀 용융 풀에 대한 정확한 예측을 제공하지 못했습니다. 40 ] 최근 간 . 53 ] Ti–6Al–4V에 대한 30개의 고충실도 다중 물리 시뮬레이션 사례를 사용하여 레이저 흡수에 대한 스케일링 법칙을 확인했습니다. 그러나 연구 중인 특정 재료에 대한 최소 흡수(평평한 용융 표면의 흡수율)에 대한 지식이 필요하며 이는 CMSX-4에 대해 알려지지 않았습니다. 다양한 키홀 모양의 용융 풀에 대한 레이저 흡수의 정확한 추정치를 얻기가 어렵기 때문에 상한 및 하한 흡수율로 분석 시뮬레이션을 실행하기로 결정했습니다. 깊은 키홀 모양의 용융 풀의 경우 대부분의 빛을 가두는 키홀 내 다중 반사로 인해 레이저 흡수율이 0.8만큼 높을 수 있습니다. 이것은 기하학적 현상이며 기본 재료에 민감하지 않습니다. 5152 , 54 ] 따라서 본 연구에서는 흡수율의 상한을 0.8로 설정하였다. 참고 문헌 51 에 나타낸 바와 같이 , 전도 용융 풀에 해당하는 최저 흡수율은 약 0.3이었으며, 이는 이 연구에서 합리적인 하한 값입니다. 따라서 레이저 흡수율이 스트레이 그레인 형성에 미치는 영향을 보여주기 위해 흡수율 값을 0.55 ± 0.25로 설정했습니다. Vitek의 작업에서는 1.0의 고정 흡수율 값이 사용되었습니다. 3 ]

퓨전 존 미세구조

그림  3 은 200~300W 및 600~300W 및 600~300W 범위의 레이저 출력 및 속도로 9가지 다른 처리 매개변수에 의해 생성된 CMSX-4 레이저 트랙의 yz 단면 에서 취한 EBSD 역극점도와 해당 역극점도를 보여 줍니다. 각각 1400mm/s. EBSD 맵에서 여러 기능을 쉽게 관찰할 수 있습니다. 스트레이 그레인은 EBSD 맵에서 그 방향에 해당하는 다른 RGB 색상으로 나타나고 그레인 경계를 묘사하기 위해 5도의 잘못된 방향이 사용되었습니다. 여기, 그림  3 에서 스트레이 그레인은 대부분 용융 풀의 상단 중심선에 집중되어 있으며, 이는 용접된 단결정 CMSX-4의 이전 보고서와 일치합니다. 10 ]역 극점도에서, 점 근처에 집중된 클러스터⟨ 001 ⟩⟨001⟩융합 경계에서 유사한 방향을 유지하는 단결정 기반 및 에피택셜로 응고된 덴드라이트를 나타냅니다. 그러나 흩어진 곡물은 식별할 수 있는 질감이 없는 흩어져 있는 점으로 나타납니다. 단결정 기본 재료의 결정학적 방향은 주로⟨ 001 ⟩⟨001⟩비록 샘플을 절단하는 동안 식별할 수 없는 기울기 각도로 인해 또는 단결정 성장 과정에서 약간의 잘못된 방향이 있었기 때문에 약간의 편차가 있지만. 용융 풀 내부의 응고된 수상 돌기의 기본 방향은 다시 한 번⟨ 001 ⟩⟨001⟩주상 결정립 구조와 유사한 에피택셜 성장의 결과. 그림 3 과 같이 용융 풀에서 수상돌기의 성장 방향은 하단의 수직 방향에서 상단의 수평 방향으로 변경되었습니다  . 이 전이는 주로 온도 구배 방향의 변화로 인한 것입니다. 두 번째 전환은 CET입니다. FZ의 상단 중심선 주변에서 다양한 방향의 흩어진 입자가 관찰되며, 여기서 안쪽으로 성장하는 수상돌기가 서로 충돌하여 용융 풀에서 응고되는 마지막 위치가 됩니다.

더 깊은 키홀 모양을 특징으로 하는 샘플에서 용융 풀의 경계 근처에 침전된 흩어진 입자가 분명합니다. 이러한 새로운 입자는 나중에 모델링 섹션에서 논의되는 수상돌기 조각화 메커니즘에 의해 잠재적으로 발생합니다. 결정립이 강한 열 구배에서 핵을 생성하고 성장한 결과, 대부분의 흩어진 결정립은 모든 방향에서 동일한 크기를 갖기보다는 장축이 열 구배 방향과 정렬된 길쭉한 모양을 갖습니다. 그림 3 의 전도 모드 용융 풀 흩어진 입자가 없는 것으로 입증되는 더 나은 단결정 품질을 나타냅니다. 상대적으로 낮은 출력과 높은 속도의 스캐닝 레이저에 의해 생성된 이러한 더 얕은 용융 풀에서 최소한의 결정립 핵형성이 발생한다는 것은 명백합니다. 더 큰 면적 분율을 가진 스트레이 그레인은 고출력 및 저속으로 생성된 깊은 용융 풀에서 더 자주 관찰됩니다. 국부 응고 조건에 대한 동력 및 속도의 영향은 후속 모델링 섹션에서 조사할 것입니다.

그림 3
그림 3

응고 모델링

서론에서 언급한 바와 같이 연구자들은 단결정 용접 중에 표류 결정립 형성의 가능한 메커니즘을 평가했습니다. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 55 ]논의된 가장 인기 있는 두 가지 메커니즘은 (1) 응고 전단에 앞서 구성적 과냉각에 의해 도움을 받는 이종 핵형성 및 (2) 용융물 풀의 유체 흐름으로 인한 덴드라이트 조각화입니다. 첫 번째 메커니즘은 광범위하게 연구되었습니다. 이원 합금을 예로 들면, 고체는 액체만큼 많은 용질을 수용할 수 없으므로 응고 중에 용질을 액체로 거부합니다. 결과적으로, 성장하는 수상돌기 앞에서 용질 분할은 실제 온도가 국부 평형 액상선보다 낮은 과냉각 액체를 생성합니다. 충분히 광범위한 체질적으로 과냉각된 구역의 존재는 새로운 결정립의 핵형성 및 성장을 촉진합니다. 56 ]전체 과냉각은 응고 전면에서의 구성, 동역학 및 곡률 과냉각을 포함한 여러 기여의 합입니다. 일반적인 가정은 동역학 및 곡률 과냉각이 합금에 대한 용질 과냉각의 더 큰 기여와 관련하여 무시될 수 있다는 것입니다. 57 ]

서로 다른 기본 메커니즘을 더 잘 이해하려면피- 브이피-V조건에서 응고 모델링이 수행됩니다. 첫 번째 목적은 스트레이 그레인의 전체 범위를 평가하는 것입니다(Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯) 처리 매개 변수의 함수로 국부적 표류 입자 비율의 변화를 조사하기 위해 (ΦΦ) 용융 풀의 위치 함수로. 두 번째 목적은 금속 AM의 빠른 응고 동안 응고 미세 구조와 표류 입자 형성 메커니즘 사이의 관계를 이해하는 것입니다.

그림 4
그림 4

그림  4 는 해석적으로 시뮬레이션된 표류 입자 비율을 보여줍니다.Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯세 가지 레이저 흡수율 값에서 다양한 레이저 스캐닝 속도 및 레이저 출력에 대해. 결과는 스트레이 그레인 면적 비율이 흡수된 에너지에 민감하다는 것을 보여줍니다. 흡수율을 0.30에서 0.80으로 증가시키면Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯약 3배이며, 이 효과는 저속 및 고출력 영역에서 더욱 두드러집니다. 다른 모든 조건이 같다면, 흡수된 전력의 큰 영향은 평균 열 구배 크기의 일반적인 감소와 용융 풀 내 평균 응고율의 증가에 기인합니다. 스캐닝 속도가 증가하고 전력이 감소함에 따라 평균 스트레이 그레인 비율이 감소합니다. 이러한 일반적인 경향은 Vitek의 작업에서 채택된 그림 5 의 파란색 영역에서 시뮬레이션된 용접 결과와 일치합니다  . 3 ] 더 큰 과냉각 구역( 즉, 지 /V티G/V티영역)은 용접 풀의 표유 입자의 면적 비율이 분홍색 영역에 해당하는 LPBF 조건의 면적 비율보다 훨씬 더 크다는 것을 의미합니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 두 데이터 세트의 일반적인 경향은 유사합니다.  , 레이저 출력이 감소하고 레이저 속도가 증가함에 따라 표류 입자의 비율이 감소합니다. 또한 그림  5 에서 스캐닝 속도가 LPBF 영역으로 증가함에 따라 표유 입자 면적 분율에 대한 레이저 매개변수의 변화 효과가 감소한다는 것을 추론할 수 있습니다. 그림  6 (a)는 그림 3 의 EBSD 분석에서 나온 실험적 표류 결정립 면적 분율  과 그림 4 의 해석 시뮬레이션 결과를  비교합니다.. 열쇠 구멍 모양의 FZ에서 정확한 값이 다르지만 추세는 시뮬레이션과 실험 데이터 모두에서 일관되었습니다. 키홀 모양의 용융 풀, 특히 전력이 300W인 2개는 분석 시뮬레이션 예측보다 훨씬 더 많은 양의 흩어진 입자를 가지고 있습니다. Rosenthal 방정식은 일반적으로 열 전달이 순전히 전도에 의해 좌우된다는 가정으로 인해 열쇠 구멍 체제의 열 흐름을 적절하게 반영하지 못하기 때문에 이러한 불일치가 실제로 예상됩니다. 39 , 40 ] 그것은 또한 그림  4 의 발견 , 즉 키홀 모드 동안 흡수된 전력의 증가가 표류 입자 형성에 더 이상적인 조건을 초래한다는 것을 검증합니다. 그림  6 (b)는 실험을 비교Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯수치 CFD 시뮬레이션Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯. CFD 모델이 약간 초과 예측하지만Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯전체적으로피- 브이피-V조건에서 열쇠 구멍 조건에서의 예측은 분석 모델보다 정확합니다. 전도 모드 용융 풀의 경우 실험 값이 분석 시뮬레이션 값과 더 가깝게 정렬됩니다.

그림 5
그림 5

모의 온도 구배 G 분포 및 응고율 검사V티V티분석 모델링의 쌍은 그림  7 (a)의 CMSX-4 미세 구조 선택 맵에 표시됩니다. 제공지 /V티G/V티(  , 형태 인자)는 형태를 제어하고지 ×V티G×V티(  , 냉각 속도)는 응고된 미세 구조의 규모를 제어하고 , 58 , 59 ]지 -V티G-V티플롯은 전통적인 제조 공정과 AM 공정 모두에서 미세 구조 제어를 지원합니다. 이 플롯의 몇 가지 분명한 특징은 등축, 주상, 평면 전면 및 이러한 경계 근처의 전이 영역을 구분하는 경계입니다. 그림  7 (a)는 몇 가지 선택된 분석 열 시뮬레이션에 대한 미세 구조 선택 맵을 나타내는 반면 그림  7 (b)는 수치 열 모델의 결과와 동일한 맵을 보여줍니다. 등축 미세구조의 형성은 낮은 G 이상 에서 명확하게 선호됩니다.V티V티정황. 이 플롯에서 각 곡선의 평면 전면에 가장 가까운 지점은 용융 풀의 최대 너비 위치에 해당하는 반면 등축 영역에 가까운 지점의 끝은 용융 풀의 후면 꼬리에 해당합니다. 그림  7 (a)에서 대부분의지 -V티G-V티응고 전면의 쌍은 원주형 영역에 속하고 점차 CET 영역으로 위쪽으로 이동하지만 용융 풀의 꼬리는 다음에 따라 완전히 등축 영역에 도달하거나 도달하지 않을 수 있습니다.피- 브이피-V조합. 그림 7 (a) 의 곡선 중 어느 것도  평면 전면 영역을 통과하지 않지만 더 높은 전력의 경우에 가까워집니다. 저속 레이저 용융 공정을 사용하는 이전 작업에서는 곡선이 평면 영역을 통과할 수 있습니다. 레이저 속도가 증가함에 따라 용융 풀 꼬리는 여전히 CET 영역에 있지만 완전히 등축 영역에서 멀어집니다. CET 영역으로 떨어지는 섹션의 수도 감소합니다.Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯응고된 물질에서.

그림 6
그림 6

그만큼지 -V티G-V티CFD 모델을 사용하여 시뮬레이션된 응고 전면의 쌍이 그림  7 (b)에 나와 있습니다. 세 방향 모두에서 각 점 사이의 일정한 간격으로 미리 정의된 좌표에서 수행된 해석 시뮬레이션과 달리, 고충실도 CFD 모델의 출력은 불규칙한 사면체 좌표계에 있었고 G 를 추출하기 전에 일반 3D 그리드에 선형 보간되었습니다. 그리고V티V티그런 다음 미세 구조 선택 맵에 플롯됩니다. 일반적인 경향은 그림  7 (a)의 것과 일치하지만 이 방법으로 모델링된 매우 동적인 유체 흐름으로 인해 결과에 더 많은 분산이 있었습니다. 그만큼지 -V티G-V티분석 열 모델의 쌍 경로는 더 연속적인 반면 수치 시뮬레이션의 경로는 용융 풀 꼬리 모양의 차이를 나타내는 날카로운 굴곡이 있습니다(이는 G 및V티V티) 두 모델에 의해 시뮬레이션됩니다.

그림 7
그림 7
그림 8
그림 8

유체 흐름을 통합한 응고 모델링

수치 CFD 모델을 사용하여 유동 입자 형성 정도에 대한 유체 흐름의 영향을 이해하고 시뮬레이션 결과를 분석 Rosenthal 솔루션과 비교했습니다. 그림  8 은 응고 매개변수 G 의 분포를 보여줍니다.V티V티,지 /V티G/V티, 그리고지 ×V티G×V티yz 단면에서 x  FLOW-3D에서 (a1–d1) 분석 열 모델링 및 (a2–d2) FVM 방법을 사용하여 시뮬레이션된 용융 풀의 최대 폭입니다. 그림  8 의 값은 응고 전선이 특정 위치에 도달할 때 정확한 값일 수도 있고 아닐 수도 있지만 일반적인 추세를 반영한다는 의미의 임시 가상 값입니다. 이 프로파일은 출력 300W 및 속도 400mm/s의 레이저 빔에서 시뮬레이션됩니다. 용융 풀 경계는 흰색 곡선으로 표시됩니다. (a2–d2)의 CFD 시뮬레이션 용융 풀 깊이는 342입니다. μμm, 측정 깊이 352와 잘 일치 μμ일치하는 길쭉한 열쇠 구멍 모양과 함께 그림 1 에 표시된 실험 FZ의 m  . 그러나 분석 모델은 반원 모양의 용융 풀을 출력하고 용융 풀 깊이는 264에 불과합니다. μμ열쇠 구멍의 경우 현실과는 거리가 멀다. CFD 시뮬레이션 결과에서 열 구배는 레이저 반사 증가와 불안정한 액체-증기 상호 작용이 발생하는 증기 함몰의 동적 부분 근처에 있기 때문에 FZ 하단에서 더 높습니다. 대조적으로 해석 결과의 열 구배 크기는 경계를 따라 균일합니다. 두 시뮬레이션 결과 모두 그림 8 (a1) 및 (a2) 에서 응고가 용융 풀의 상단 중심선을 향해 진행됨에 따라 열 구배가 점차 감소합니다  . 응고율은 그림 8 과 같이 경계 근처에서 거의 0입니다. (b1) 및 (b2). 이는 경계 영역이 응고되기 시작할 때 국부 응고 전면의 법선 방향이 레이저 스캐닝 방향에 수직이기 때문입니다. 이것은 드라이브θ → π/ 2θ→파이/2그리고V티→ 0V티→0식에서 [ 3 ]. 대조적으로 용융 풀의 상단 중심선 근처 영역에서 응고 전면의 법선 방향은 레이저 스캐닝 방향과 잘 정렬되어 있습니다.θ → 0θ→0그리고V티→ 브이V티→V, 빔 스캐닝 속도. G 와 _V티V티값이 얻어지면 냉각 속도지 ×V티G×V티및 형태 인자지 /V티G/V티계산할 수 있습니다. 그림 8 (c2)는 용융 풀 바닥 근처의 온도 구배가 매우 높고 상단에서 더 빠른 성장 속도로  인해 냉각 속도가 용융 풀의 바닥 및 상단 중심선 근처에서 더 높다는 것을 보여줍니다. 지역. 그러나 이러한 추세는 그림  8 (c1)에 캡처되지 않았습니다. 그림 8 의 형태 요인 (d1) 및 (d2)는 중심선에 접근함에 따라 눈에 띄게 감소합니다. 경계에서 큰 값은 열 구배를 거의 0인 성장 속도로 나누기 때문에 발생합니다. 이 높은 형태 인자는 주상 미세구조 형성 가능성이 높음을 시사하는 반면, 중앙 영역의 값이 낮을수록 등축 미세구조의 가능성이 더 크다는 것을 나타냅니다. Tanet al. 또한 키홀 모양의 용접 풀 59 ] 에서 이러한 응고 매개변수의 분포 를 비슷한 일반적인 경향으로 보여주었습니다. 그림  3 에서 볼 수 있듯이 용융 풀의 상단 중심선에 있는 흩어진 입자는 낮은 특징을 나타내는 영역과 일치합니다.지 /V티G/V티그림  8 (d1) 및 (d2)의 값. 시뮬레이션과 실험 간의 이러한 일치는 용융 풀의 상단 중심선에 축적된 흩어진 입자의 핵 생성 및 성장이 등온선 속도의 증가와 온도 구배의 감소에 의해 촉진됨을 보여줍니다.

그림 9
그림 9

그림  9 는 유체 속도 및 국부적 핵형성 성향을 보여줍니다.ΦΦ300W의 일정한 레이저 출력과 400, 800 및 1200mm/s의 세 가지 다른 레이저 속도에 의해 생성된 3D 용융 풀 전체에 걸쳐. 그림  9 (d)~(f)는 로컬ΦΦ해당 3D 보기에서 밝은 회색 평면으로 표시된 특정 yz 단면의 분포. 이 yz 섹션은 가장 높기 때문에 선택되었습니다.Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯용융 풀 내의 값은 각각 23.40, 11.85 및 2.45pct입니다. 이들은 그림  3 의 실험 데이터와 비교하기에 적절하지 않을 수 있는 액체 용융 풀의 과도 값이며Φ¯¯¯¯Φ¯그림  6 의 값은 이 값이 고체-액체 계면에 가깝지 않고 용융 풀의 중간에서 취해졌기 때문입니다. 온도가 훨씬 낮아서 핵이 생존하고 성장할 수 있기 때문에 핵 형성은 용융 풀의 중간이 아닌 고체-액체 계면에 더 가깝게 발생할 가능성이 있습니다.

그림  3 (a), (d), (g), (h)에서 위쪽 중심선에서 멀리 떨어져 있는 흩어진 결정립이 있었습니다. 그들은 훨씬 더 높은 열 구배와 더 낮은 응고 속도 필드에 위치하기 때문에 과냉각 이론은 이러한 영역에서 표류 입자의 형성에 대한 만족스러운 설명이 아닙니다. 이것은 떠돌이 결정립의 형성을 야기할 수 있는 두 번째 메커니즘,  수상돌기의 팁을 가로지르는 유체 흐름에 의해 유발되는 수상돌기 조각화를 고려하도록 동기를 부여합니다. 유체 흐름이 열 구배를 따라 속도 성분을 갖고 고체-액체 계면 속도보다 클 때, 주상 수상돌기의 국지적 재용융은 용질이 풍부한 액체가 흐물흐물한 구역의 깊은 곳에서 액상선 등온선까지 이동함으로써 발생할 수 있습니다. . 55] 분리된 수상돌기는 대류에 의해 열린 액체로 운반될 수 있습니다. 풀이 과냉각 상태이기 때문에 이러한 파편은 고온 조건에서 충분히 오래 생존하여 길 잃은 입자의 핵 생성 사이트로 작용할 수 있습니다. 결과적으로 수상 돌기 조각화 과정은 활성 핵의 수를 효과적으로 증가시킬 수 있습니다.N0N0) 용융 풀 15 , 60 , 61 ] 에서 생성된 미세 구조에서 표류 입자의 면적을 증가시킵니다.

그림  9 (a) 및 (b)에서 반동 압력은 용융 유체를 아래쪽으로 흐르게 하여 결과 흐름을 지배합니다. 유체 속도의 역방향 요소는 V = 400 및 800mm/s에 대해 각각 최대값 1.0 및 1.6m/s로 더 느려집니다 . 그림  9 (c)에서 레이저 속도가 더 증가함에 따라 증기 침하가 더 얕고 넓어지고 반동 압력이 더 고르게 분포되어 증기 침강에서 주변 영역으로 유체를 밀어냅니다. 역류는 최대값 3.5m/s로 더 빨라집니다. 용융 풀의 최대 너비에서 yz 단면  의 키홀 아래 평균 유체 속도는 그림에 표시된 경우에 대해 0.46, 0.45 및 1.44m/s입니다.9 (a), (b) 및 (c). 키홀 깊이의 변동은 각 경우의 최대 깊이와 최소 깊이의 차이로 정의되는 크기로 정량화됩니다. 240 범위의 강한 증기 내림 변동 μμm은 그림 9 (a)의 V = 400mm/s 경우에서  발견 되지만 이 변동은 그림  9 (c)에서 16의 범위로  크게 감소합니다.μμ미디엄. V = 400mm/s인 경우 의 유체장과 높은 변동 범위는 이전 키홀 동역학 시뮬레이션과 일치합니다. 34 ]

따라서 V = 400mm/s 키홀 케이스의 무질서한 변동 흐름이 용융 풀 경계를 따라 응고된 주상 수상돌기에서 분리된 조각을 구동할 가능성이 있습니다. V = 1200mm/s의 경우 강한 역류 는 그림 3 에서 관찰되지 않았지만 동일한 효과를 가질 수 있습니다. . 덴드라이트 조각화에 대한 유체 유동장의 영향에 대한 이 경험적 설명은 용융 풀 경계 근처에 떠돌이 입자의 존재에 대한 그럴듯한 설명을 제공합니다. 분명히 하기 위해, 우리는 이 가설을 검증하기 위해 이 현상에 대한 직접적인 실험적 관찰을 하지 않았습니다. 이 작업에서 표유 입자 면적 분율을 계산할 때 단순화를 위해 핵 생성 모델링에 일정한 핵 생성 수 밀도가 적용되었습니다. 이는 그림  9 의 표류 입자 영역 비율 이 수지상정 조각화가 발생하는 경우 이러한 높은 유체 흐름 용융 풀에서 발생할 수 있는 것,  강화된 핵 생성 밀도를 반영하지 않는다는 것을 의미합니다.

위의 이유로 핵 형성에 대한 수상 돌기 조각화의 영향을 아직 배제할 수 없습니다. 그러나 단편화 이론은 용접 문헌 [ 62 ] 에서 검증될 만큼 충분히 개발되지 않았 으므로 부차적인 중요성만 고려된다는 점에 유의해야 합니다. 1200mm/s를 초과하는 레이저 스캐닝 속도는 최소한의 표류 결정립 면적 분율을 가지고 있음에도 불구하고 분명한 볼링을 나타내기 때문에 단결정 수리 및 AM 처리에 적합하지 않습니다. 따라서 낮은 P 및 높은 V 에 의해 생성된 응고 전면 근처에서 키홀 변동이 최소화되고 유체 속도가 완만해진 용융 풀이 생성된다는 결론을 내릴 수 있습니다., 처리 창의 극한은 아니지만 흩어진 입자를 나타낼 가능성이 가장 적습니다.

마지막으로 단일 레이저 트랙의 응고 거동을 조사하면 에피택셜 성장 동안 표류 입자 형성을 더 잘 이해할 수 있다는 점에 주목하는 것이 중요합니다. 우리의 현재 결과는 최적의 레이저 매개변수에 대한 일반적인 지침을 제공하여 최소 스트레이 그레인을 달성하고 단결정 구조를 유지합니다. 이 가이드라인은 250W 정도의 전력과 600~800mm/s의 스캔 속도로 최소 흩어진 입자에 적합한 공정 창을 제공합니다. 각 처리 매개변수를 신중하게 선택하면 과거에 스테인리스강에 대한 거의 단결정 미세 구조를 인쇄하는 데 성공했으며 이는 CMSX-4 AM 빌드에 대한 가능성을 보여줍니다. 63 ]신뢰성을 보장하기 위해 AM 수리 프로세스를 시작하기 전에 보다 엄격한 실험 테스트 및 시뮬레이션이 여전히 필요합니다. 둘 이상의 레이저 트랙 사이의 상호 작용도 고려해야 합니다. 또한 레이저, CMSX-4 분말 및 벌크 재료 간의 상호 작용이 중요하며, 수리 중에 여러 층의 CMSX-4 재료를 축적해야 하는 경우 다른 스캔 전략의 효과도 중요한 역할을 할 수 있습니다. 분말이 포함된 경우 Lopez-Galilea 등 의 연구에서 제안한 바와 같이 분말이 주로 완전히 녹지 않았을 때 추가 핵 생성 사이트를 도입하기 때문에 단순히 레이저 분말과 속도를 조작하여 흩어진 입자 형성을 완화하기 어려울 수 있습니다 . 22 ]결과적으로 CMSX-4 단결정을 수리하기 위한 레이저 AM의 가능성을 다루기 위해서는 기판 재료, 레이저 출력, 속도, 해치 간격 및 층 두께의 조합을 모두 고려해야 하며 향후 연구에서 다루어야 합니다. CFD 모델링은 2개 이상의 레이저 트랙 사이의 상호작용과 열장에 미치는 영향을 통합할 수 있으며, 이는 AM 빌드 시나리오 동안 핵 생성 조건으로 단일 비드 연구의 지식 격차를 해소할 것입니다.


LPBF 제조의 특징적인 조건 하에서 CMSX-4 단결정 의 에피택셜(기둥형)  등축 응고 사이의 경쟁을 실험적 및 이론적으로 모두 조사했습니다. 이 연구는 고전적인 응고 개념을 도입하여 빠른 레이저 용융의 미세 구조 특징을 설명하고 응고 조건과 표유 결정 성향을 예측하기 위해 해석적 및 수치적 고충실도 CFD 열 모델 간의 비교를 설명했습니다. 본 연구로부터 다음과 같은 주요 결론을 도출할 수 있다.

  • 단일 레이저 트랙의 레이저 가공 조건은 용융 풀 형상, 레이저 흡수율, 유체 흐름 및 키홀 요동, 입자 구조 및 표류 입자 형성 민감성에 강한 영향을 미치는 것으로 밝혀졌습니다.
  • 레이저 용접을 위해 개발된 이론적인 표유 결정립 핵형성 분석이 레이저 용융 AM 조건으로 확장되었습니다. 분석 모델링 결과와 단일 레이저 트랙의 미세구조 특성화를 비교하면 예측이 전도 및 볼링 조건에서 실험적 관찰과 잘 일치하는 반면 키홀 조건에서는 예측이 약간 과소하다는 것을 알 수 있습니다. 이러한 불일치는 레이저 트랙의 대표성이 없는 섹션이나 유체 속도 필드의 변화로 인해 발생할 수 있습니다. CFD 모델에서 추출한 열장에 동일한 표유 입자 계산 파이프라인을 적용하면 연구된 모든 사례에서 과대평가가 발생하지만 분석 모델보다 연장된 용융 풀의 실험 데이터와 더 정확하게 일치합니다.
  • 이 연구에서 두 가지 표류 결정립 형성 메커니즘인 불균일 핵형성 및 수상돌기 조각화가 평가되었습니다. 우리의 결과는 불균일 핵형성이 용융 풀의 상단 중심선에서 새로운 결정립의 형성으로 이어지는 주요 메커니즘임을 시사합니다.지 /V티G/V티정권.
  • 용융 풀 경계 근처의 흩어진 입자는 깊은 키홀 모양의 용융 풀에서 독점적으로 관찰되며, 이는 강한 유체 흐름으로 인한 수상 돌기 조각화의 영향이 이러한 유형의 용융 풀에서 고려하기에 충분히 강력할 수 있음을 시사합니다.
  • 일반적으로 더 높은 레이저 스캐닝 속도와 더 낮은 전력 외에도 안정적인 키홀과 최소 유체 속도는 또한 흩어진 입자 형성을 완화하고 레이저 단일 트랙에서 에피택셜 성장을 보존합니다.


  1. R.C. Reed: The Superalloys: Fundamentals and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006, pp.17–20.Book Google Scholar 
  2. A. Basak, R. Acharya, and S. Das: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2016, vol. 47A, pp. 3845–59.Article Google Scholar 
  3. J. Vitek: Acta Mater., 2005, vol. 53, pp. 53–67.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  4. R. Vilar and A. Almeida: J. Laser Appl., 2015, vol. 27, p. S17004.Article Google Scholar 
  5. T. Kalfhaus, M. Schneider, B. Ruttert, D. Sebold, T. Hammerschmidt, J. Frenzel, R. Drautz, W. Theisen, G. Eggeler, O. Guillon, and R. Vassen: Mater. Des., 2019, vol. 168, p. 107656.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  6. S.S. Babu, S.A. David, J.W. Park, and J.M. Vitek: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2004, vol. 9, pp. 1–12.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  7. L. Felberbaum, K. Voisey, M. Gäumann, B. Viguier, and A. Mortensen: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2001, vol. 299, pp. 152–56.Article Google Scholar 
  8. S. Mokadem, C. Bezençon, J.M. Drezet, A. Jacot, J.D. Wagnière, and W. Kurz: TMS Annual Meeting, 2004, pp. 67–76.
  9. J.M. Vitek: ASM Proc. Int. Conf. Trends Weld. Res., vol. 2005, pp. 773–79.
  10. J.M. Vitek, S. Babu, and S. David: Process Optimization for Welding Single-Crystal Nickel-Bbased Superalloys
  11. J.D. Hunt: Mater. Sci. Eng., 1984, vol. 65, pp. 75–83.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  12. M. Gäumann, R. Trivedi, and W. Kurz: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1997, vol. 226–228, pp. 763–69.Article Google Scholar 
  13. M. Gäumann, S. Henry, F. Cléton, J.D. Wagnière, and W. Kurz: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1999, vol. 271, pp. 232–41.Article Google Scholar 
  14. M. Gäumann, C. Bezençon, P. Canalis, and W. Kurz: Acta Mater., 2001, vol. 49, pp. 1051–62.Article Google Scholar 
  15. J.M. Vitek, S.A. David, and S.S. Babu: Welding and Weld Repair of Single Crystal Gas Turbine Alloys
  16. B. Kianian: Wohlers Report 2017: 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing State of the Industry, Annual Worldwide Progress Report, Wohlers Associates, Inc., Fort Collins, 2017.Google Scholar 
  17. M. Ramsperger, L. Mújica Roncery, I. Lopez-Galilea, R.F. Singer, W. Theisen, and C. Körner: Adv. Eng. Mater., 2015, vol. 17, pp. 1486–93.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  18. A.B. Parsa, M. Ramsperger, A. Kostka, C. Somsen, C. Körner, and G. Eggeler: Metals, 2016, vol. 6, pp. 258-1–17.Article Google Scholar 
  19. C. Körner, M. Ramsperger, C. Meid, D. Bürger, P. Wollgramm, M. Bartsch, and G. Eggeler: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2018, vol. 49A, pp. 3781–92.Article Google Scholar 
  20. D. Bürger, A. Parsa, M. Ramsperger, C. Körner, and G. Eggeler: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2019, vol. 762, p. 138098,Article Google Scholar 
  21. J. Pistor and C. Körner: Sci. Rep., 2021, vol. 11, p. 24482.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  22. I. Lopez-Galilea, B. Ruttert, J. He, T. Hammerschmidt, R. Drautz, B. Gault, and W. Theisen: Addit. Manuf., 2019, vol. 30, p. 100874.CAS Google Scholar 
  23. N. Lu, Z. Lei, K. Hu, X. Yu, P. Li, J. Bi, S. Wu, and Y. Chen: Addit. Manuf., 2020, vol. 34, p. 101228.CAS Google Scholar 
  24. K. Chen, R. Huang, Y. Li, S. Lin, W. Zhu, N. Tamura, J. Li, Z.W. Shan, and E. Ma: Adv. Mater., 2020, vol. 32, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar 
  25. W.J. Sames, F.A. List, S. Pannala, R.R. Dehoff, and S.S. Babu: Int. Mater. Rev., 2016, vol. 61, pp. 315–60.Article Google Scholar 
  26. A. Basak, R. Acharya, and S. Das: Addit. Manuf., 2018, vol. 22, pp. 665–71.CAS Google Scholar 
  27. R. Jiang, A. Mostafaei, J. Pauza, C. Kantzos, and A.D. Rollett: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2019. Google Scholar 
  28. R. Cunningham, C. Zhao, N. Parab, C. Kantzos, J. Pauza, K. Fezzaa, T. Sun, and A.D. Rollett: Science, 2019, vol. 363, pp. 849–52.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  29. B. Fotovvati, S.F. Wayne, G. Lewis, and E. Asadi: Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng., 2018, vol. 2018, p. 4920718.Article Google Scholar 
  30. P.-J. Chiang, R. Jiang, R. Cunningham, N. Parab, C. Zhao, K. Fezzaa, T. Sun, and A.D. Rollett: in Advanced Real Time Imaging II, pp. 77–85.
  31. J. Ye, S.A. Khairallah, A.M. Rubenchik, M.F. Crumb, G. Guss, J. Belak, and M.J. Matthews: Adv. Eng. Mater., 2019, vol. 21, pp. 1–9.Article Google Scholar 
  32. C. Zhao, Q. Guo, X. Li, N. Parab, K. Fezzaa, W. Tan, L. Chen, and T. Sun: Phys. Rev. X, 2019, vol. 9, p. 021052.CAS Google Scholar 
  33. S.A. Khairallah, A.T. Anderson, A. Rubenchik, and W.E. King: Acta Mater., 2016, vol. 108, pp. 36–45.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  34. N. Kouraytem, X. Li, R. Cunningham, C. Zhao, N. Parab, T. Sun, A.D. Rollett, A.D. Spear, and W. Tan: Appl. Phys. Rev., 2019, vol. 11, p. 064054.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  35. T. DebRoy, H. Wei, J. Zuback, T. Mukherjee, J. Elmer, J. Milewski, A. Beese, A. Wilson-Heid, A. De, and W. Zhang: Prog. Mater. Sci., 2018, vol. 92, pp. 112–224.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  36. J.H. Cho and S.J. Na: J. Phys. D, 2006, vol. 39, pp. 5372–78.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  37. I. Yadroitsev, A. Gusarov, I. Yadroitsava, and I. Smurov: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 2010, vol. 210, pp. 1624–31.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  38. S. Ghosh, L. Ma, L.E. Levine, R.E. Ricker, M.R. Stoudt, J.C. Heigel, and J.E. Guyer: JOM, 2018, vol. 70, pp. 1011–16.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  39. Y. He, C. Montgomery, J. Beuth, and B. Webler: Mater. Des., 2019, vol. 183, p. 108126.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  40. D. Rosenthal: Weld. J., 1941, vol. 20, pp. 220–34.Google Scholar 
  41. M. Tang, P.C. Pistorius, and J.L. Beuth: Addit. Manuf., 2017, vol. 14, pp. 39–48.CAS Google Scholar 
  42. R.E. Aune, L. Battezzati, R. Brooks, I. Egry, H.J. Fecht, J.P. Garandet, M. Hayashi, K.C. Mills, A. Passerone, P.N. Quested, E. Ricci, F. Schmidt-Hohagen, S. Seetharaman, B. Vinet, and R.K. Wunderlich: Proc. Int.Symp. Superalloys Var. Deriv., 2005, pp. 467–76.
  43. B.C. Wilson, J.A. Hickman, and G.E. Fuchs: JOM, 2003, vol. 55, pp. 35–40.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  44. J.J. Valencia and P.N. Quested: ASM Handb., 2008, vol. 15, pp. 468–81.Google Scholar 
  45. H.L. Wei, J. Mazumder, and T. DebRoy: Sci. Rep., 2015, vol. 5, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar 
  46. N. Raghavan, R. Dehoff, S. Pannala, S. Simunovic, M. Kirka, J. Turner, N. Carlson, and S.S. Babu: Acta Mater., 2016, vol. 112, pp. 303–14.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  47. R. Lin, H. Wang, F. Lu, J. Solomon, and B.E. Carlson: Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., 2017, vol. 108, pp. 244–56.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  48. M. Bayat, A. Thanki, S. Mohanty, A. Witvrouw, S. Yang, J. Thorborg, N.S. Tiedje, and J.H. Hattel: Addit. Manuf., 2019, vol. 30, p. 100835.CAS Google Scholar 
  49. K. Higuchi, H.-J. Fecht, and R.K. Wunderlich: Adv. Eng. Mater., 2007, vol. 9, pp. 349–54.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  50. Q. Guo, C. Zhao, M. Qu, L. Xiong, L.I. Escano, S.M.H. Hojjatzadeh, N.D. Parab, K. Fezzaa, W. Everhart, T. Sun, and L. Chen: Addit. Manuf., 2019, vol. 28, pp. 600–09.Google Scholar 
  51. J. Trapp, A.M. Rubenchik, G. Guss, and M.J. Matthews: Appl. Mater. Today, 2017, vol. 9, pp. 341–49.Article Google Scholar 
  52. M. Schneider, L. Berthe, R. Fabbro, and M. Muller: J. Phys. D, 2008, vol. 41, p. 155502.Article Google Scholar 
  53. Z. Gan, O.L. Kafka, N. Parab, C. Zhao, L. Fang, O. Heinonen, T. Sun, and W.K. Liu: Nat. Commun., 2021, vol. 12, p. 2379.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  54. B.J. Simonds, E.J. Garboczi, T.A. Palmer, and P.A. Williams: Appl. Phys. Rev., 2020, vol. 13, p. 024057.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  55. J. Dantzig and M. Rappaz: Solidification, 2nd ed., EPFL Press, Lausanne, 2016, pp. 483–532.Google Scholar 
  56. W. Tiller, K. Jackson, J. Rutter, and B. Chalmers: Acta Metall., 1953, vol. 1, pp. 428–37.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  57. D. Zhang, A. Prasad, M.J. Bermingham, C.J. Todaro, M.J. Benoit, M.N. Patel, D. Qiu, D.H. StJohn, M. Qian, and M.A. Easton: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2020, vol. 51A, pp. 4341–59.Article Google Scholar 
  58. F. Yan, W. Xiong, and E.J. Faierson: Materials, 2017, vol. 10, p. 1260.Article Google Scholar 
  59. W. Tan and Y.C. Shin: Comput. Mater. Sci., 2015, vol. 98, pp. 446–58.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  60. A. Hellawell, S. Liu, and S.Z. Lu: JOM, 1997, vol. 49, pp. 18–20.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  61. H. Ji: China Foundry, 2019, vol. 16, pp. 262–66.Article Google Scholar 
  62. J.M. Vitek, S.A. David, and L.A. Boatner: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 1997, vol. 2, pp. 109–18.Article CAS Google Scholar 
  63. X. Wang, J.A. Muñiz-Lerma, O. Sanchez-Mata, S.E. Atabay, M.A. Shandiz, and M. Brochu: Prog. Addit. Manuf., 2020, vol. 5, pp. 41–49.Article Google Scholar 

Download references

Fig. 1. Schematic figure showing the PREP with additional gas flowing on the end face of electrode.

플라즈마 회전 전극 공정 중 분말 형성에 대한 공정 매개변수 및 냉각 가스의 영향

Effects of process parameters and cooling gas on powder formation during the plasma rotating electrode process

Yujie Cuia Yufan Zhaoa1 Haruko Numatab Kenta Yamanakaa Huakang Biana Kenta Aoyagia AkihikoChibaa
aInstitute for Materials Research, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8577, JapanbDepartment of Materials Processing, Graduate School of Engineering, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8577, Japan


•The limitation of increasing the rotational speed in decreasing powder size was clarified.

•Cooling and disturbance effects varied with the gas flowing rate.

•Inclined angle of the residual electrode end face affected powder formation.

•Additional cooling gas flowing could be applied to control powder size.


The plasma rotating electrode process (PREP) is rapidly becoming an important powder fabrication method in additive manufacturing. However, the low production rate of fine PREP powder limits the development of PREP. Herein, we investigated different factors affecting powder formation during PREP by combining experimental methods and numerical simulations. The limitation of increasing the rotation electrode speed in decreasing powder size is attributed to the increased probability of adjacent droplets recombining and the decreased tendency of granulation. The effects of additional Ar/He gas flowing on the rotational electrode on powder formation is determined through the cooling effect, the disturbance effect, and the inclined effect of the residual electrode end face simultaneously. A smaller-sized powder was obtained in the He atmosphere owing to the larger inclined angle of the residual electrode end face compared to the Ar atmosphere. Our research highlights the route for the fabrication of smaller-sized powders using PREP.

플라즈마 회전 전극 공정(PREP)은 적층 제조 에서 중요한 분말 제조 방법으로 빠르게 자리잡고 있습니다. 그러나 미세한 PREP 분말의 낮은 생산율은 PREP의 개발을 제한합니다. 여기에서 우리는 실험 방법과 수치 시뮬레이션을 결합하여 PREP 동안 분말 형성에 영향을 미치는 다양한 요인을 조사했습니다. 분말 크기 감소에서 회전 전극 속도 증가의 한계는 인접한 액적 재결합 확률 증가 및 과립화 경향 감소에 기인합니다.. 회전 전극에 흐르는 추가 Ar/He 가스가 분말 형성에 미치는 영향은 냉각 효과, 외란 효과 및 잔류 전극 단면의 경사 효과를 통해 동시에 결정됩니다. He 분위기에서는 Ar 분위기에 비해 잔류 전극 단면의 경사각이 크기 때문에 더 작은 크기의 분말이 얻어졌다. 우리의 연구는 PREP를 사용하여 더 작은 크기의 분말을 제조하는 경로를 강조합니다.


Plasma rotating electrode process

Ti-6Al-4 V alloy, Rotating speed, Numerical simulation, Gas flowing, Powder size


With the development of additive manufacturing, there has been a significant increase in high-quality powder production demand [1,2]. The initial powder characteristics are closely related to the uniform powder spreading [3,4], packing density [5], and layer thickness observed during additive manufacturing [6], thus determining the mechanical properties of the additive manufactured parts [7,8]. Gas atomization (GA) [9–11], centrifugal atomization (CA) [12–15], and the plasma rotating electrode process (PREP) are three important powder fabrication methods.

Currently, GA is the dominant powder fabrication method used in additive manufacturing [16] for the fabrication of a wide range of alloys [11]. GA produces powders by impinging a liquid metal stream to droplets through a high-speed gas flow of nitrogen, argon, or helium. With relatively low energy consumption and a high fraction of fine powders, GA has become the most popular powder manufacturing technology for AM.

The entrapped gas pores are generally formed in the powder after solidification during GA, in which the molten metal is impacted by a high-speed atomization gas jet. In addition, satellites are formed in GA powder when fine particles adhere to partially molten particles.

The gas pores of GA powder result in porosity generation in the additive manufactured parts, which in turn deteriorates its mechanical properties because pores can become crack initiation sites [17]. In CA, a molten metal stream is poured directly onto an atomizer disc spinning at a high rotational speed. A thin film is formed on the surface of the disc, which breaks into small droplets due to the centrifugal force. Metal powder is obtained when these droplets solidify.

Compared with GA powder, CA powder exhibits higher sphericity, lower impurity content, fewer satellites, and narrower particle size distribution [12]. However, very high speed is required to obtain fine powder by CA. In PREP, the molten metal, melted using the plasma arc, is ejected from the rotating rod through centrifugal force. Compared with GA powder, PREP-produced powders also have higher sphericity and fewer pores and satellites [18].

For instance, PREP-fabricated Ti6Al-4 V alloy powder with a powder size below 150 μm exhibits lower porosity than gas-atomized powder [19], which decreases the porosity of additive manufactured parts. Furthermore, the process window during electron beam melting was broadened using PREP powder compared to GA powder in Inconel 718 alloy [20] owing to the higher sphericity of the PREP powder.

In summary, PREP powder exhibits many advantages and is highly recommended for powder-based additive manufacturing and direct energy deposition-type additive manufacturing. However, the low production rate of fine PREP powder limits the widespread application of PREP powder in additive manufacturing.

Although increasing the rotating speed is an effective method to decrease the powder size [21,22], the reduction in powder size becomes smaller with the increased rotating speed [23]. The occurrence of limiting effects has not been fully clarified yet.

Moreover, the powder size can be decreased by increasing the rotating electrode diameter [24]. However, these methods are quite demanding for the PREP equipment. For instance, it is costly to revise the PREP equipment to meet the demand of further increasing the rotating speed or electrode diameter.

Accordingly, more feasible methods should be developed to further decrease the PREP powder size. Another factor that influences powder formation is the melting rate [25]. It has been reported that increasing the melting rate decreases the powder size of Inconel 718 alloy [26].

In contrast, the powder size of SUS316 alloy was decreased by decreasing the plasma current within certain ranges. This was ascribed to the formation of larger-sized droplets from fluid strips with increased thickness and spatial density at higher plasma currents [27]. The powder size of NiTi alloy also decreases at lower melting rates [28]. Consequently, altering the melting rate, varied with the plasma current, is expected to regulate the PREP powder size.

Furthermore, gas flowing has a significant influence on powder formation [27,29–31]. On one hand, the disturbance effect of gas flowing promotes fluid granulation, which in turn contributes to the formation of smaller-sized powder [27]. On the other hand, the cooling effect of gas flowing facilitates the formation of large-sized powder due to increased viscosity and surface tension. However, there is a lack of systematic research on the effect of different gas flowing on powder formation during PREP.

Herein, the authors systematically studied the effects of rotating speed, electrode diameter, plasma current, and gas flowing on the formation of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy powder during PREP as additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4 V alloy exhibits great application potential [32]. Numerical simulations were conducted to explain why increasing the rotating speed is not effective in decreasing powder size when the rotation speed reaches a certain level. In addition, the different factors incited by the Ar/He gas flowing on powder formation were clarified.

Fig. 1. Schematic figure showing the PREP with additional gas flowing on the end face of electrode.
Fig. 1. Schematic figure showing the PREP with additional gas flowing on the end face of electrode.


[1] W. Ding, G. Chen, M. Qin, Y. He, X. Qu, Low-cost Ti powders for additive manufacturing treated by fluidized bed, Powder Technol. 350 (2019) 117–122,
[2] W.S.W. Harun, M.S.I.N. Kamariah, N. Muhamad, S.A.C. Ghani, F. Ahmad, Z. Mohamed,
A review of powder additive manufacturing processes for metallic biomaterials,
Powder Technol. 327 (2018) 128–151,
[3] M. Ahmed, M. Pasha, W. Nan, M. Ghadiri, A simple method for assessing powder
spreadability for additive manufacturing, Powder Technol. 367 (2020) 671–679,
[4] W. Nan, M. Pasha, M. Ghadiri, Numerical simulation of particle flow and segregation
during roller spreading process in additive manufacturing, Powder Technol. 364
(2020) 811–821,
[5] A. Averardi, C. Cola, S.E. Zeltmann, N. Gupta, Effect of particle size distribution on the
packing of powder beds : a critical discussion relevant to additive manufacturing,
Mater. Today Commun. 24 (2020) 100964,
[6] K. Riener, N. Albrecht, S. Ziegelmeier, R. Ramakrishnan, L. Haferkamp, A.B. Spierings,
G.J. Leichtfried, Influence of particle size distribution and morphology on the properties of the powder feedstock as well as of AlSi10Mg parts produced by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), Addit. Manuf. 34 (2020) 101286,
[7] W.S.W. Harun, N.S. Manam, M.S.I.N. Kamariah, S. Sharif, A.H. Zulkifly, I. Ahmad, H.
Miura, A review of powdered additive manufacturing techniques for Ti-6Al-4V biomedical applications, Powder Technol. 331 (2018) 74–97,
[8] A.T. Sutton, C.S. Kriewall, M.C. Leu, J.W. Newkirk, Powder characterisation techniques and effects of powder characteristics on part properties in powder-bed fusion processes, Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 12 (2017) (2017) 3–29,
[9] G. Chen, Q. Zhou, S.Y. Zhao, J.O. Yin, P. Tan, Z.F. Li, Y. Ge, J. Wang, H.P. Tang, A pore
morphological study of gas-atomized Ti-6Al-4V powders by scanning electron microscopy and synchrotron X-ray computed tomography, Powder Technol. 330
(2018) 425–430,
[10] Y. Feng, T. Qiu, Preparation, characterization and microwave absorbing properties of
FeNi alloy prepared by gas atomization method, J. Alloys Compd. 513 (2012)

[11] I.E. Anderson, R.L. Terpstra, Progress toward gas atomization processing with increased uniformity and control, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 326 (2002) 101–109, https://
[12] P. Phairote, T. Plookphol, S. Wisutmethangoon, Design and development of a centrifugal atomizer for producing zinc metal powder, Int. J. Appl. Phys. Math. 2 (2012)
[13] L. Tian, I. Anderson, T. Riedemann, A. Russell, Production of fine calcium powders by
centrifugal atomization with rotating quench bath, Powder Technol. 308 (2017)
[14] M. Eslamian, J. Rak, N. Ashgriz, Preparation of aluminum/silicon carbide metal matrix composites using centrifugal atomization, Powder Technol. 184 (2008) 11–20,
[15] T. Plookphol, S. Wisutmethangoon, S. Gonsrang, Influence of process parameters on
SAC305 lead-free solder powder produced by centrifugal atomization, Powder
Technol. 214 (2011) 506–512,
[16] M.Z. Gao, B. Ludwig, T.A. Palmer, Impact of atomization gas on characteristics of austenitic stainless steel powder feedstocks for additive manufacturing, Powder
Technol. 383 (2021) 30–42,
[17] X. Shui, K. Yamanaka, M. Mori, Y. Nagata, A. Chiba, Effects of post-processing on cyclic fatigue response of a titanium alloy additively manufactured by electron beam
melting, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 680 (2017) 239–248,
[18] C. Wang, X.H. Zhao, Y.C. Ma, Q.X. Wang, Y.J. Lai, S.J. Liang, Study of the spherical
HoCu powders prepared by supreme-speed plasma rotating electrode process,
Powder Metallurgy Technology 38 (3) (2020) 227–233,
j.cnki.cn11-1974/tf.2020.03.011 (in Chinese).
[19] G. Chen, S.Y. Zhao, P. Tan, J. Wang, C.S. Xiang, H.P. Tang, A comparative study of Ti6Al-4V powders for additive manufacturing by gas atomization, plasma rotating
electrode process and plasma atomization, Powder Technol. 333 (2018) 38–46,
[20] Y. Zhao, K. Aoyagi, Y. Daino, K. Yamanaka, A. Chiba, Significance of powder feedstock
characteristics in defect suppression of additively manufactured Inconel 718, Addit.
Manuf. 34 (2020) 101277,
[21] Y. Nie, J. Tang, B. Yang, Q. Lei, S. Yu, Y. Li, Comparison in characteristic and atomization behavior of metallic powders produced by plasma rotating electrode process,
Adv. Powder Technol. 31 (2020) 2152–2160,
[22] Y. Cui, Y. Zhao, H. Numata, H. Bian, K. Wako, K. Yamanaka, K. Aoyagi, C. Zhang, A.
Chiba, Effects of plasma rotating electrode process parameters on the particle size
distribution and microstructure of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy powder, Powder Technol 376
(2020) 363–372,
[23] J. Tang, Y. Nie, Q. Lei, Y. Li, Characteristics and atomization behavior of Ti-6Al-4V
powder produced by plasma rotating electrode process Adv, Powder Technol. 10
(2019) 2330–2337,
[24] M. Zdujić, D. Uskoković, Production of atomized metal and alloy powders by the rotating electrode process, Sov. Powder Metall. Met. Ceram. 29 (1990) 673–683,
[25] L. Zhang, Y. Zhao, Particle size distribution of tin powder produced by centrifugal
atomisation using rotating cups, Powder Technol. 318 (2017) 62–67, https://doi.
[26] Y. Liu, S. Liang, Z. Han, J. Song, Q. Wang, A novel model of calculating particle sizes in
plasma rotating electrode process for superalloys, Powder Technol. 336 (2018)
[27] Y. Zhao, Y. Cui, H. Numata, H. Bian, K. Wako, K. Yamanaka, Centrifugal granulation
behavior in metallic powder fabrication by plasma rotating electrode process, Sci.
Rep. (2020) 1–15,
[28] T. Hsu, C. Wei, L. Wu, Y. Li, A. Chiba, M. Tsai, Nitinol powders generate from plasma
rotation electrode process provide clean powder for biomedical devices used with
suitable size, spheroid surface and pure composition, Sci. Rep. 8 (2018) 1–8,
[29] M. Wei, S. Chen, M. Sun, J. Liang, C. Liu, M. Wang, Atomization simulation and preparation of 24CrNiMoY alloy steel powder using VIGA technology at high gas pressure, Powder Technol. 367 (2020) 724–739,
[30] Y. Tan, X. Zhu, X.Y. He, B. Ding, H. Wang, Q. Liao, H. Li, Granulation characteristics of
molten blast furnace slag by hybrid centrifugal-air blast technique, Powder Technol.
323 (2018) 176–185,
[31] P. Xu, D.H. Liu, J. Hu, G.Y. Lin, Synthesis of Ni-Ti composite powder by radio frequency plasma spheroidization process, Nonferrous Metals Science and Engineering
39 (1) (2020) 67–71 , (in Chinese) 10.13264/j.cnki.ysjskx.2020.01.011.
[32] H. Mehboob, F. Tarlochan, A. Mehboob, S.H. Chang, S. Ramesh, W.S.W. Harun, K.
Kadirgama, A novel design, analysis and 3D printing of Ti-6Al-4V alloy bioinspired porous femoral stem, J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 31 (2020) 78, https://doi.
[33] FLOW-3D® Version 11.2 [Computer software]. , Flow Science, Inc., Santa Fe, NM,
[34] M. Boivineau, C. Cagran, D. Doytier, V. Eyraud, M.H. Nadal, B. Wilthan, G. Pottlacher,
Thermophysical properties of solid and liquid Ti-6Al-4V (TA6V) alloy, Int. J.
Thermophys. 27 (2006) 507–529,
[35] J. Liu, Q. Qin, Q. Yu, The effect of size distribution of slag particles obtained in dry
granulation on blast furnace slag cement strength, Powder Technol. 362 (2020)
[36] M. Tanaka, S. Tashiro, A study of thermal pinch effect of welding arcs, J. Japan Weld.
Soc. 25 (2007) 336–342, (in Japanese).
[37] T. Kamiya, A. Kayano, Disintegration of viscous fluid in the ligament state purged
from a rotating disk, J. Chem. Eng. JAPAN. 4 (1971) 364–369,
[38] T. Kamiya, An analysis of the ligament-type disintegration of thin liquid film at the
edge of a rotating disk, J. Chem. Eng. Japan. 5 (1972) 391–396,
[39] J. Burns, C. Ramshaw, R. Jachuck, Measurement of liquid film thickness and the determination of spin-up radius on a rotating disc using an electrical resistance technique, Chem. Eng. Sci. 58 (2003) 2245–2253,
[40] J. Rauscher, R. Kelly, J. Cole, An asymptotic solution for the laminar flow of a thin film
on a rotating disk, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 40 (1973) 43–47,

Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition

Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition

Xiang WangLin-Jie ZhangJie Ning, and Suck-Joo Na
Published Online:8 Apr 2022


A 3D numerical model of heat transfer and fluid flow of molten pool in the process of laser wire deposition was presented by computational fluid dynamics technique. The simulation results of the deposition morphology were also compared with the experimental results under the condition of liquid bridge transfer mode. Moreover, they showed a good agreement. Considering the effect of recoil pressure, the morphology of the deposit metal obtained by the simulation was similar to the experiment result. Molten metal at the wire tip was peeled off and flowed into the molten pool, and then spread to both sides of the deposition layer under the recoil pressure. In addition, the results of simulation and high-speed charge-coupled device presented that a wedge transition zone, with a length of ∼6 mm, was formed behind the keyhole in the liquid bridge transfer process, where the height of deposited metal decreased gradually. After solidification, metal in the transition zone retained the original melt morphology, resulting in a decrease in the height of the tail of the deposition layer.


LWD, CFD, liquid bridge transfer, fluid dynamics, wedge transition zone

Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition
Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition
Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition
Fluid Thermodynamic Simulation of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy in Laser Wire Deposition


1. Matthews MJ, Guss G, Khairallah SA, et al. Denudation of metal powder layers in laser powder bed fusion processes. Acta Mater 2016;114:33–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

2. Ge WJ, Han SW, Fang YC, et al. Mechanism of surface morphology in electron beam melting of Ti6Al4V based on computational flow patterns. Appl Surf Sci 2017;419:150–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

3. Bai XW, Colegrove P, Ding JL, et al. Numerical analyswas of heat transfer and fluid flow in multilayer deposition of PAW-based wire and arc additive manufacturing. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2018;124:504–516. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

4. Torkamany MJ, Kaplan AFH, Ghaini FM. Wire deposition by a laser-induced boiling front. Opt Laser Technol 2015;69:104–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

5. Yu Y, Huang W, Wang G. Investigation of melting dynamics of filler wire during wire feed laser welding. J Mec Sci Technol 2013;27:1097–1108. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

6. Ma G, Li L, Chen Y. Effects of beam confgurations on wire melting and transfer behaviors in dual beam laser welding with fller wire. Opt Laser Technol 2017;91:138–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

7. Abioye TE, Folkes J, Clare AT. A parametric study of Inconel 625 wire laser deposition. J Mater Process Tech 2013;213:2145–2151. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

8. Wei S, Wang G, Shin YC, et al. Comprehensive modeling of transport phenomena in laser hot-wire deposition process. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2018;125:1356–1368. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

9. Gu H, Li L. Computational fluid dynamic simulation of gravity and pressure effects in laser metal deposition for potential additive manufacturing in space. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2019;140:51–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

10. Hu R, Luo M, Liu T, et al. Thermal fluid dynamics of liquid bridge transfer in laser wire deposition 3D printing. Sci Technolf Weld Join 2019;24:1–11. Google Scholar

11. Chatterjee D, Chakraborty S. A hybrid lattice Boltzmann model for solid–liquid phase transition in presence of fluid flow. Phys Lett A 2006;351:359–367. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

12. Wu L, Cheon J, Kiran DV, et al. CFD simulations of GMA welding of horizontal fillet joints based on coordinate rotation of arc models. J Mater Process Tech 2016;231:221–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

13. Gerhard W, Boyer RR, Collings EW. Materials Properties Handbook: Titanium Alloys. ASM International: Almere, The Netherlands, 1994. Google Scholar

14. Colegrove P, Simiand PE, Varughese A, et al. Evaluation of a drilling model approach to represent laser spot microwelding. In: ASM Proceedings of the international conference: trends in welding research; 2009. Google Scholar

15. Boivineau M, Cagran C, Doytier D, et al. Thermophysical properties of solid and liquid Ti-6Al-4V (TA6V) alloy. Int J Thermophys 2006;27:507–529. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

16. Shejndlin AE, Kenisarin MM, Chekhovskoj VY. Melting point of yttrium oxide. AN SSSR 1974;216:582–584. Google Scholar

17. Cho JH, Na SJ. Teflection and Fresnel absorption of laser beam in keyhole. J Phys D Appl Phys 2006;39:5372–5378. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

18. Han SW, Ahn J, Na SJ. A study on ray tracing method for CFD simulations of laser keyhole welding: Progressive search method. Weld World 2016;60:247–258. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

19. Allmen MV. Laser-Beam Interactions with Materials. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, 1995. Google Scholar

20. Dobson PJ. Absorption and scattering of light by small particles. Phys Bull 1984;35:104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

21. Greses J, Hilton PA, Barlow CY. Plume attenuation under high power Nd:yttritium aluminum garnet laser welding. J Laser Appl 2004;16:9–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

22. Shcheglov PY, Uspenskiy SA, Gumenyuk AV, et al. Plume attenuation of laser radiation during high power fiber laser welding. Laser Phys Lett 2011;8:475–480. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

23. Yang P, Liou KN. Effective refractive index for determining ray propagation in an absorbing dielectric particle. J Quant Spectrosc Radiat Transf 2009;110:300–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

24. Barber PW. Absorption and scattering of light by small particles. J Colloid Interface Sci 1984;98:290–291. Google Scholar

25. Hu ZR, Chen X, Yang G, et al. Metal transfer in wire feeding-based electron beam 3D printing: Modes, dynamics, and transition criterion. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2018;126:877–887. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

26. David SA, Babu SS, Vitek JM. Welding: Solidification and microstructure. JOM 2013;55:14–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

27. Zhong ML, Liu W. Laser surface cladding: The state of the art and challenges. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 2010;224:1041–1060. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

28. Kobryn PA, Semiatin S. Microstructure and texture evolution during solidification processing of Ti-6Al-4V. J Mater Process Technol 2003;135:330–339. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

29. Debroy T, David S. Physical processes in fusion welding. Rev Mod Phys 1995;67:85–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

30. Lee YS, Nordin M, Babu SS, et al. Effect of fluid convection on dendrite arm spacing in laser deposition. Metall Trans B 2014;45:1520–1528. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

31. Rappaz M, David SA, Vitek JM, et al. Development of microstructures in Fe15Ni15Cr single crystal electron beam welds. Metall Trans A 1989;20:1125–1138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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


[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)
[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)
[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-
[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)
[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)
[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)
[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-
[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)
[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)
[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)
[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)
[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)
[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)
[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).

Figure 2. (a) Scanning electron microscopy images of Ti6Al4V powder particles and (b) simulated powder bed using discrete element modelling

Laser Powder Bed에서 Laser Drilling에 의한 Keyhole 형성 Ti6Al4V 생체 의학 합금의 융합: 메조스코픽 전산유체역학 시뮬레이션 대 경험적 검증을 사용한 수학적 모델링

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

Asif Ur Rehman 1,2,3,*
,† , Muhammad Arif Mahmood 4,*
,† , Fatih Pitir 1
, Metin Uymaz Salamci 2,3
Andrei C. Popescu 4 and Ion N. Mihailescu 4


LPBF(Laser Powder Bed fusion) 공정에서 작동 조건은 열 분포를 기반으로 레이저 유도 키홀 영역을 결정하는 데 필수적입니다. 얕은 구멍과 깊은 구멍으로 분류되는 이러한 영역은 LPBF 프로세스에서 확률과 결함 형성 강도를 제어합니다.

LPBF 프로세스의 핵심 구멍을 연구하고 제어하기 위해 수학적 및 CFD(전산 유체 역학) 모델이 제공됩니다. CFD의 경우 이산 요소 모델링 기법을 사용한 유체 체적 방법이 사용되었으며, 분말 베드 보이드 및 표면에 의한 레이저 빔 흡수를 포함하여 수학적 모델이 개발되었습니다.

동적 용융 풀 거동을 자세히 살펴봅니다. 실험적, CFD 시뮬레이션 및 분석적 컴퓨팅 결과 간에 정량적 비교가 수행되어 좋은 일치를 얻습니다.

LPBF에서 레이저 조사 영역 주변의 온도는 높은 내열성과 분말 입자 사이의 공기로 인해 분말층 주변에 비해 급격히 상승하여 레이저 횡방향 열파의 이동이 느려집니다. LPBF에서 키홀은 에너지 밀도에 의해 제어되는 얕고 깊은 키홀 모드로 분류될 수 있습니다. 에너지 밀도를 높이면 얕은 키홀 구멍 모드가 깊은 키홀 구멍 모드로 바뀝니다.

깊은 키홀 구멍의 에너지 밀도는 다중 반사와 키홀 구멍 내의 2차 반사 빔의 집중으로 인해 더 높아져 재료가 빠르게 기화됩니다.

깊은 키홀 구멍 모드에서는 온도 분포가 높기 때문에 액체 재료가 기화 온도에 가까우므로 얕은 키홀 구멍보다 구멍이 형성될 확률이 훨씬 높습니다. 온도가 급격히 상승하면 재료 밀도가 급격히 떨어지므로 비열과 융해 잠열로 인해 유체 부피가 증가합니다.

그 대가로 표면 장력을 낮추고 용융 풀 균일성에 영향을 미칩니다.

In the laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) process, the operating conditions are essential in determining laser-induced keyhole regimes based on the thermal distribution. These regimes, classified into shallow and deep keyholes, control the probability and defects formation intensity in the LPBF process. To study and control the keyhole in the LPBF process, mathematical and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models are presented. For CFD, the volume of fluid method with the discrete element modeling technique was used, while a mathematical model was developed by including the laser beam absorption by the powder bed voids and surface. The dynamic melt pool behavior is explored in detail. Quantitative comparisons are made among experimental, CFD simulation and analytical computing results leading to a good correspondence. In LPBF, the temperature around the laser irradiation zone rises rapidly compared to the surroundings in the powder layer due to the high thermal resistance and the air between the powder particles, resulting in a slow travel of laser transverse heat waves. In LPBF, the keyhole can be classified into shallow and deep keyhole mode, controlled by the energy density. Increasing the energy density, the shallow keyhole mode transforms into the deep keyhole mode. The energy density in a deep keyhole is higher due to the multiple reflections and concentrations of secondary reflected beams within the keyhole, causing the material to vaporize quickly. Due to an elevated temperature distribution in deep keyhole mode, the probability of pores forming is much higher than in a shallow keyhole as the liquid material is close to the vaporization temperature. When the temperature increases rapidly, the material density drops quickly, thus, raising the fluid volume due to the specific heat and fusion latent heat. In return, this lowers the surface tension and affects the melt pool uniformity.

Keywords: laser powder bed fusion; computational fluid dynamics; analytical modelling; shallow
and deep keyhole modes; experimental correlation

Figure 1. Powder bed schematic with voids.
Figure 1. Powder bed schematic with voids.
Figure 2. (a) Scanning electron microscopy images of Ti6Al4V powder particles and (b) simulated powder bed using discrete element modelling
Figure 2. (a) Scanning electron microscopy images of Ti6Al4V powder particles and (b) simulated powder bed using discrete element modelling
Figure 3. Temperature field contour formation at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms.
Figure 3. Temperature field contour formation at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms.
Figure 4. Detailed view of shallow depth melt mode with temperature field at 0.695 ms
Figure 4. Detailed view of shallow depth melt mode with temperature field at 0.695 ms
Figure 5. Melt flow stream traces formation at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms
Figure 5. Melt flow stream traces formation at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms
Figure 6. Density evolution of the melt pool at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms.
Figure 6. Density evolution of the melt pool at various time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms.
Figure 7. Un-melted and melted regions at different time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms
Figure 7. Un-melted and melted regions at different time intervals (a) 0.695 ms, (b) 0.795 ms, (c) 0.995 ms and (d) 1.3 ms
Figure 8. Transformation from shallow depth melt flow to deep keyhole formation when laser power increased from (a) 170 W to (b) 200 W
Figure 8. Transformation from shallow depth melt flow to deep keyhole formation when laser power increased from (a) 170 W to (b) 200 W
Figure 9. Stream traces and laser beam multiple reflections in deep keyhole melt flow mode
Figure 9. Stream traces and laser beam multiple reflections in deep keyhole melt flow mode
Figure 10. A comparison between analytical and CFD simulation results for peak thermal distribution value in the deep keyhole formation
Figure 10. A comparison between analytical and CFD simulation results for peak thermal distribution value in the deep keyhole formation
Figure 11. A comparison among experiments [49], CFD and analytical simulations for deep keyhole top width and bottom width
Figure 11. A comparison among experiments [49], CFD and analytical simulations for deep keyhole top width and bottom width


  1. Kok, Y.; Tan, X.P.; Wang, P.; Nai, M.L.S.; Loh, N.H.; Liu, E.; Tor, S.B. Anisotropy and heterogeneity of microstructure and
    mechanical properties in metal additive manufacturing: A critical review. Mater. Des. 2018, 139, 565–586. [CrossRef]
  2. Ansari, P.; Salamci, M.U. On the selective laser melting based additive manufacturing of AlSi10Mg: The process parameter
    investigation through multiphysics simulation and experimental validation. J. Alloys Compd. 2022, 890, 161873. [CrossRef]
  3. Guo, N.; Leu, M.C. Additive manufacturing: Technology, applications and research needs. Front. Mech. Eng. 2013, 8, 215–243.
  4. Mohsin Raza, M.; Lo, Y.L. Experimental investigation into microstructure, mechanical properties, and cracking mechanism of
    IN713LC processed by laser powder bed fusion. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2021, 819, 141527. [CrossRef]
  5. Dezfoli, A.R.A.; Lo, Y.L.; Raza, M.M. Prediction of Epitaxial Grain Growth in Single-Track Laser Melting of IN718 Using Integrated
    Finite Element and Cellular Automaton Approach. Materials 2021, 14, 5202. [CrossRef]
  6. Tiwari, S.K.; Pande, S.; Agrawal, S.; Bobade, S.M. Selection of selective laser sintering materials for different applications. Rapid
    Prototyp. J. 2015, 21, 630–648. [CrossRef]
  7. Liu, F.H. Synthesis of bioceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering by rapid prototyping technique. J. Sol-Gel Sci. Technol.
    2012, 64, 704–710. [CrossRef]
  8. Ur Rehman, A.; Sglavo, V.M. 3D printing of geopolymer-based concrete for building applications. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2020, 26,
    1783–1788. [CrossRef]
  9. Ur Rehman, A.; Sglavo, V.M. 3D printing of Portland cement-containing bodies. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2021. ahead of print. [CrossRef]
  10. Popovich, A.; Sufiiarov, V. Metal Powder Additive Manufacturing. In New Trends in 3D Printing; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2016.
  11. Jia, T.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.K.; He, Y.L. Dynamic simulation of granular packing of fine cohesive particles with different size
    distributions. Powder Technol. 2012, 218, 76–85. [CrossRef]
  12. Ansari, P.; Ur Rehman, A.; Pitir, F.; Veziroglu, S.; Mishra, Y.K.; Aktas, O.C.; Salamci, M.U. Selective Laser Melting of 316L
    Austenitic Stainless Steel: Detailed Process Understanding Using Multiphysics Simulation and Experimentation. Metals 2021,
    11, 1076. [CrossRef]
  13. Ur Rehman, A.; Tingting, L.; Liao, W. 4D Printing; Printing Ceramics from Metals with Selective Oxidation. Patent No.
    W0/2019/052128, 21 March 2019.
  14. Ullah, A.; Wu, H.; Ur Rehman, A.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, T.; Zhang, K. Influence of laser parameters and Ti content on the surface
    morphology of L-PBF fabricated Titania. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2021, 27, 71–80. [CrossRef]
  15. Ur Rehman, A. Additive Manufacturing of Ceramic Materials and Combinations with New Laser Strategies. Master’s Thesis,
    Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, China, 2017.
  16. Wong, K.V.; Hernandez, A. A Review of Additive Manufacturing. ISRN Mech. Eng. 2012, 2012, 1–10. [CrossRef]
  17. Körner, C. Additive manufacturing of metallic components by selective electron beam melting—A review. Int. Mater. Rev. 2016,
    61, 361–377. [CrossRef]
  18. Fayazfar, H.; Salarian, M.; Rogalsky, A.; Sarker, D.; Russo, P.; Paserin, V.; Toyserkani, E. A critical review of powder-based additive
    manufacturing of ferrous alloys: Process parameters, microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater. Des. 2018, 144, 98–128.
  19. Everton, S.K.; Hirsch, M.; Stavroulakis, P.I.; Leach, R.K.; Clare, A.T. Review of in-situ process monitoring and in-situ metrology
    for metal additive manufacturing. Mater. Des. 2016, 95, 431–445. [CrossRef]
  20. Sing, S.L.; An, J.; Yeong, W.Y.; Wiria, F.E. Laser and electron-beam powder-bed additive manufacturing of metallic implants: A
    review on processes, materials and designs. J. Orthop. Res. 2016, 34, 369–385. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Olakanmi, E.O.; Cochrane, R.F.; Dalgarno, K.W. A review on selective laser sintering/melting (SLS/SLM) of aluminium alloy
    powders: Processing, microstructure, and properties. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2015, 74, 401–477. [CrossRef]
  22. Mahmood, M.A.; Popescu, A.C.; Hapenciuc, C.L.; Ristoscu, C.; Visan, A.I.; Oane, M.; Mihailescu, I.N. Estimation of clad geometry
    and corresponding residual stress distribution in laser melting deposition: Analytical modeling and experimental correlations.
    Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 111, 77–91. [CrossRef]
  23. Mahmood, M.A.; Popescu, A.C.; Oane, M.; Ristoscu, C.; Chioibasu, D.; Mihai, S.; Mihailescu, I.N. Three-jet powder flow
    and laser–powder interaction in laser melting deposition: Modelling versus experimental correlations. Metals 2020, 10, 1113.
  24. King, W.; Anderson, A.T.; Ferencz, R.M.; Hodge, N.E.; Kamath, C.; Khairallah, S.A. Overview of modelling and simulation of
    metal powder bed fusion process at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2015, 31, 957–968. [CrossRef]
  1. Gong, H.; Rafi, K.; Gu, H.; Starr, T.; Stucker, B. Analysis of defect generation in Ti-6Al-4V parts made using powder bed fusion
    additive manufacturing processes. Addit. Manuf. 2014, 1, 87–98. [CrossRef]
  2. Frazier, W.E. Metal additive manufacturing: A review. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2014, 23, 1917–1928. [CrossRef]
  3. Panwisawas, C.; Qiu, C.L.; Sovani, Y.; Brooks, J.W.; Attallah, M.M.; Basoalto, H.C. On the role of thermal fluid dynamics into the
    evolution of porosity during selective laser melting. Scr. Mater. 2015, 105, 14–17. [CrossRef]
  4. Yan, W.; Ge, W.; Qian, Y.; Lin, S.; Zhou, B.; Liu, W.K.; Lin, F.; Wagner, G.J. Multi-physics modeling of single/multiple-track defect
    mechanisms in electron beam selective melting. Acta Mater. 2017, 134, 324–333. [CrossRef]
  5. Qian, Y.; Yan, W.; Lin, F. Parametric study and surface morphology analysis of electron beam selective melting. Rapid Prototyp. J.
    2018, 24, 1586–1598. [CrossRef]
  6. Panwisawas, C.; Perumal, B.; Ward, R.M.; Turner, N.; Turner, R.P.; Brooks, J.W.; Basoalto, H.C. Keyhole formation and thermal
    fluid flow-induced porosity during laser fusion welding in titanium alloys: Experimental and modelling. Acta Mater. 2017, 126,
    251–263. [CrossRef]
  7. King, W.E.; Barth, H.D.; Castillo, V.M.; Gallegos, G.F.; Gibbs, J.W.; Hahn, D.E.; Kamath, C.; Rubenchik, A.M. Observation of
    keyhole-mode laser melting in laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2014, 214, 2915–2925.
  8. Panwisawas, C.; Sovani, Y.; Turner, R.P.; Brooks, J.W.; Basoalto, H.C.; Choquet, I. Modelling of thermal fluid dynamics for fusion
    welding. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2018, 252, 176–182. [CrossRef]
  9. Martin, A.A.; Calta, N.P.; Hammons, J.A.; Khairallah, S.A.; Nielsen, M.H.; Shuttlesworth, R.M.; Sinclair, N.; Matthews, M.J.;
    Jeffries, J.R.; Willey, T.M.; et al. Ultrafast dynamics of laser-metal interactions in additive manufacturing alloys captured by in situ
    X-ray imaging. Mater. Today Adv. 2019, 1, 100002. [CrossRef]
  10. Cunningham, R.; Zhao, C.; Parab, N.; Kantzos, C.; Pauza, J.; Fezzaa, K.; Sun, T.; Rollett, A.D. Keyhole threshold and morphology
    in laser melting revealed by ultrahigh-speed x-ray imaging. Science 2019, 363, 849–852. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Tang, C.; Tan, J.L.; Wong, C.H. A numerical investigation on the physical mechanisms of single track defects in selective laser
    melting. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 126, 957–968. [CrossRef]
  12. Mirkoohi, E.; Ning, J.; Bocchini, P.; Fergani, O.; Chiang, K.-N.; Liang, S. Thermal Modeling of Temperature Distribution in Metal
    Additive Manufacturing Considering Effects of Build Layers, Latent Heat, and Temperature-Sensitivity of Material Properties. J.
    Manuf. Mater. Process. 2018, 2, 63. [CrossRef]
  13. Oane, M.; Sporea, D. Temperature profiles modeling in IR optical components during high power laser irradiation. Infrared Phys.
    Technol. 2001, 42, 31–40. [CrossRef]
  14. Cleary, P.W.; Sawley, M.L. DEM modelling of industrial granular flows: 3D case studies and the effect of particle shape on hopper
    discharge. Appl. Math. Model. 2002, 26, 89–111. [CrossRef]
  15. Parteli, E.J.R.; Pöschel, T. Particle-based simulation of powder application in additive manufacturing. Powder Technol. 2016, 288,
    96–102. [CrossRef]
  16. Cao, L. Numerical simulation of the impact of laying powder on selective laser melting single-pass formation. Int. J. Heat Mass
    Transf. 2019, 141, 1036–1048. [CrossRef]
  17. Tian, Y.; Yang, L.; Zhao, D.; Huang, Y.; Pan, J. Numerical analysis of powder bed generation and single track forming for selective
    laser melting of SS316L stainless steel. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 58, 964–974. [CrossRef]
  18. Lee, Y.S.; Zhang, W. Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by
    laser powder bed fusion. Addit. Manuf. 2016, 12, 178–188. [CrossRef]
  19. Tang, M.; Pistorius, P.C.; Beuth, J.L. Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit. Manuf. 2017, 14, 39–48.
  20. Promoppatum, P.; Yao, S.C.; Pistorius, P.C.; Rollett, A.D. 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 2017, 3, 685–694. [CrossRef]
  21. Rosenthal, D. Mathematical Theory of Heat Distribution During Welding and Cutting. Weld. J. 1941, 20, 220–234.
  22. Chen, Q.; Zhao, Y.Y.; Strayer, S.; Zhao, Y.Y.; Aoyagi, K.; Koizumi, Y.; Chiba, A.; Xiong, W.; To, A.C. Elucidating the Effect
    of Preheating Temperature on Melt Pool Morphology Variation in Inconel 718 Laser Powder Bed Fusion via Simulation and
    Experiment. Available online: (accessed on 30
    April 2021).
  23. Ur Rehman, A.; Pitir, F.; Salamci, M.U. Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF) of In718 and the Impact of Pre-Heating at 500 and
    1000 ◦C: Operando Study. Materials 2021, 14, 6683. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ur Rehman, A.; Pitir, F.; Salamci, M.U. Full-Field Mapping and Flow Quantification of Melt Pool Dynamics in Laser Powder Bed
    Fusion of SS316L. Materials 2021, 14, 6264. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Gong, H.; Gu, H.; Zeng, K.; Dilip, J.J.S.; Pal, D.; Stucker, B.; Christiansen, D.; Beuth, J.; Lewandowski, J.J. Melt Pool Characterization
    for Selective Laser Melting of Ti-6Al-4V Pre-alloyed Powder. In Proceedings of the International Solid Freeform Fabrication
    Symposium, Austin, TX, USA, 10–12 August 2014; 2014; pp. 256–267.
  26. Song, B.; Dong, S.; Liao, H.; Coddet, C. Process parameter selection for selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V based on temperature
    distribution simulation and experimental sintering. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 61, 967–974. [CrossRef]
  27. Guo, Q.; Zhao, C.; Qu, M.; Xiong, L.; Hojjatzadeh, S.M.H.; Escano, L.I.; Parab, N.D.; Fezzaa, K.; Sun, T.; Chen, L. In-situ full-field
  28. mapping of melt flow dynamics in laser metal additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 31, 100939. [CrossRef]
  29. Messler, J.R.W. Principles of Welding: Processes, Physics, Chemistry, and Metallurgy; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2008;
  30. ISBN 9783527617494.
  31. Khairallah, S.A.; Anderson, A.T.; Rubenchik, A.M.; King, W.E. Laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing: Physics of
  32. complex melt flow and formation mechanisms of pores, spatter, and denudation zones. Acta Mater. 2016, 108, 36–45. [CrossRef]
  33. Ur Rehman, A.; Mahmood, M.A.; Pitir, F.; Salamci, M.U.; Popescu, A.C.; Mihailescu, I.N. Mesoscopic Computational Fluid
  34. Dynamics Modelling for the Laser-Melting Deposition of AISI 304 Stainless Steel Single Tracks with Experimental Correlation: A
  35. Novel Study. Metals 2021, 11, 1569. [CrossRef]
  36. Paul, A.; Debroy, T. Free surface flow and heat transfer in conduction mode laser welding. Metall. Trans. B 1988, 19, 851–858.
  37. [CrossRef]
  38. Aucott, L.; Dong, H.; Mirihanage, W.; Atwood, R.; Kidess, A.; Gao, S.; Wen, S.; Marsden, J.; Feng, S.; Tong, M.; et al. Revealing
  39. internal flow behaviour in arc welding and additive manufacturing of metals. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 5414. [CrossRef]
  40. Abderrazak, K.; Bannour, S.; Mhiri, H.; Lepalec, G.; Autric, M. Numerical and experimental study of molten pool formation
  41. during continuous laser welding of AZ91 magnesium alloy. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2009, 44, 858–866. [CrossRef]
  42. Bayat, M.; Thanki, A.; Mohanty, S.; Witvrouw, A.; Yang, S.; Thorborg, J.; Tiedje, N.S.; Hattel, J.H. Keyhole-induced porosities in
  43. Laser-based Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) of Ti6Al4V: High-fidelity modelling and experimental validation. Addit. Manuf. 2019,
  44. 30, 100835. [CrossRef]
Fig. 5 Comparison of experimental SEM image and CtFD simulated melt pool with beam diameters of(a)700 μm,(b)1000 μm, and(c)1300 μm and an absorption rate of 0.3. Electron beam power and scan speed are 900 W and 100 mm s-1, respectively

추가 생산용 전자빔 조사에 의한 316L 스테인리스 용융 · 응고 거동

Melting and Solidification Behavior of 316L Steel Induced by Electron-Beam Irradiation for Additive Manufacturing

付加製造用電子ビーム照射による 316L ステンレス鋼の溶融・凝固挙動

奥 川 将 行*・宮 田 雄一朗*・王     雷*・能 勢 和 史*
小 泉 雄一郎*・中 野 貴 由*
Masayuki OKUGAWA, Yuichiro MIYATA, Lei WANG, Kazufumi NOSE,
Yuichiro KOIZUMI and Takayoshi NAKANO


적층 제조(AM) 기술은 복잡한 형상의 3D 부품을 쉽게 만들고 미세 구조 제어를 통해 재료 특성을 크게 제어할 수 있기 때문에 많은 관심을 받았습니다. PBF(Powderbed fusion) 방식의 AM 공정에서는 금속 분말을 레이저나 전자빔으로 녹이고 응고시키는 과정을 반복하여 3D 부품을 제작합니다.

일반적으로 응고 미세구조는 Hunt[Mater. 과학. 영어 65, 75(1984)]. 그러나 CET 이론이 일반 316L 스테인리스강에서도 높은 G와 R로 인해 PBF형 AM 공정에 적용될 수 있을지는 불확실하다.

본 연구에서는 미세구조와 응고 조건 간의 관계를 밝히기 위해 전자빔 조사에 의해 유도된 316L 강의 응고 미세구조를 분석하고 CtFD(Computational Thermal-Fluid Dynamics) 방법을 사용하여 고체/액체 계면에서의 응고 조건을 평가했습니다.

CET 이론과 반대로 높은 G 조건에서 등축 결정립이 종종 형성되는 것으로 밝혀졌다. CtFD 시뮬레이션은 약 400 mm s-1의 속도까지 유체 흐름이 있음을 보여 주며 수상 돌기의 파편 및 이동의 영향으로 등축 결정립이 형성됨을 시사했습니다.

Additive manufacturing(AM)technologies have attracted much attention because it enables us to build 3D parts with complicated geometry easily and control material properties significantly via the control of microstructures. In the powderbed fusion(PBF)type AM process, 3D parts are fabricated by repeating a process of melting and solidifying metal powders by laser or electron beams. In general, the solidification microstructures can be predicted from solidification conditions defined by the combination of temperature gradient G and solidification rate R on the basis of columnar-equiaxed transition(CET)theory proposed by Hunt [Mater. Sci. Eng. 65, 75(1984)]. However, it is unclear whether the CET theory can be applied to the PBF type AM process because of the high G and R, even for general 316L stainless steel. In this study, to reveal relationships between microstructures and solidification conditions, we have analyzed solidification microstructures of 316L steel induced by electronbeam irradiation and evaluated solidification conditions at the solid/liquid interface using a computational thermal-fluid dynamics (CtFD)method. It was found that equiaxed grains were often formed under high G conditions contrary to the CET theory. CtFD simulation revealed that there is a fluid flow up to a velocity of about 400 mm s-1, and suggested that equiaxed grains are formed owing to the effect of fragmentations and migrations of dendrites.


Additive Manufacturing, 316L Stainless Steel, Powder Bed Fusion, Electron Beam Melting, Computational Thermal
Fluid Dynamics Simulation

Fig. 1 Width, height, and height differences calculated from laser microscope analysis of melt tracks formed by scanning electron beam. Fig. 2(a)Scanning electron microscope(SEM)image and(b) corresponding electron back-scattering diffraction(EBSD) IPF-map taken from the electron-beam irradiated region in P900-V100 sample. Fig. 3 Average grain size and their aspect ratio calculated from EBSD IPF-map taken from the electron-beam irradiated region.
Fig. 1 Width, height, and height differences calculated from laser microscope analysis of melt tracks formed by scanning electron beam. Fig. 2(a)Scanning electron microscope(SEM)image and(b) corresponding electron back-scattering diffraction(EBSD) IPF-map taken from the electron-beam irradiated region in P900-V100 sample. Fig. 3 Average grain size and their aspect ratio calculated from EBSD IPF-map taken from the electron-beam irradiated region.
Fig. 4 Comparison of experimental SEM image and computational thermal fluid dynamics(CtFD)simulated melt pool with a beam diameter of 700 μm and absorption rates of(a)0.3,(b)0.5, and (c)0.7. Electron beam power and scan speed are 900 W and 100 mm s-1, respectively.
Fig. 4 Comparison of experimental SEM image and computational thermal fluid dynamics(CtFD)simulated melt pool with a beam diameter of 700 μm and absorption rates of(a)0.3,(b)0.5, and (c)0.7. Electron beam power and scan speed are 900 W and 100 mm s-1, respectively.
Fig. 5 Comparison of experimental SEM image and CtFD simulated melt pool with beam diameters of(a)700 μm,(b)1000 μm, and(c)1300 μm and an absorption rate of 0.3. Electron beam power and scan speed are 900 W and 100 mm s-1, respectively
Fig. 5 Comparison of experimental SEM image and CtFD simulated melt pool with beam diameters of(a)700 μm,(b)1000 μm, and(c)1300 μm and an absorption rate of 0.3. Electron beam power and scan speed are 900 W and 100 mm s-1, respectively
Fig. 6 Depth of melt tracks calculated from experimental SEM image and CtFD simulation results.
Fig. 6 Depth of melt tracks calculated from experimental SEM image and CtFD simulation results.
Fig. 7 G-R plots of 316L steel colored by(a)aspect ratio of crystalline grains and(b)fluid velocity.
Fig. 7 G-R plots of 316L steel colored by(a)aspect ratio of crystalline grains and(b)fluid velocity.
Fig. 8 Comparison of solidification microstructure(EBSD IPF-map)of melt region formed by scanning electron beam and corresponding snap shot of CtFD simulation colored by fluid velocity
Fig. 8 Comparison of solidification microstructure(EBSD IPF-map)of melt region formed by scanning electron beam and corresponding snap shot of CtFD simulation colored by fluid velocity


1) M.C. Sow, T. De Terris, O. Castelnau, Z. Hamouche, F. Coste, R.
Fabbro and P. Peyre: “Influence of beam diameter on Laser Powder

Bed Fusion(L-PBF)process”, Addit. Manuf. 36(2020), 101532.
2) J.C. Simmons, X. Chen, A. Azizi, M.A. Daeumer, P.Y. Zavalij, G.
Zhou and S.N. Schiffres: “Influence of processing and microstructure
on the local and bulk thermal conductivity of selective laser melted
316L stainless steel”, Addit. Manuf. 32(2020), 100996.
3) S. Dryepondt, P. Nandwana, P. Fernandez-Zelaia and F. List:
“Microstructure and High Temperature Tensile properties of 316L
Fabricated by Laser Powder-Bed Fusion”, Addit. Manuf. 37(2020),
4) S.H. Sun, T. Ishimoto, K. Hagihara, Y. Tsutsumi, T. Hanawa and T.
Nakano: “Excellent mechanical and corrosion properties of austenitic
stainless steel with a unique crystallographic lamellar microstructure
via selective laser melting”, Scr. Mater. 159(2019), 89-93.
5) T. Ishimoto, S. Wu, Y. Ito, S.H. Sun, H. Amano and T. Nakano:
“Crystallographic orientation control of 316L austenitic stainless
steel via selective laser melting”, ISIJ Int. 60(2020), 1758-1764.
6) T. Ishimoto, K. Hagihara, K. Hisamoto, S.H. Sun and T. Nakano:
“Crystallographic texture control of beta-type Ti-15Mo-5Zr3Al alloy by selective laser melting for the development of novel
implants with a biocompatible low Young’s modulus”, Scr. Mater.
132(2017), 34-38.
7) X. Ding, Y. Koizumi, D. Wei and A. Chiba: “Effect of process
parameters on melt pool geometry and microstructure development
for electron beam melting of IN718: A systematic single bead
analysis study”, Addit. Manuf. 26(2019), 215-226.
8) K. Karayagiz, L. Johnson, R. Seede, V. Attari, B. Zhang, X. Huang,
S. Ghosh, T. Duong, I. Karaman, A. Elwany and R. Arróyave: “Finite
interface dissipation phase field modeling of Ni-Nb under additive
manufacturing conditions”, Acta Mater. 185(2020), 320-339.
9) M.M. Kirka, Y. Lee, D.A. Greeley, A. Okello, M.J. Goin, M.T.
Pearce and R.R. Dehoff: “Strategy for Texture Management in
Metals Additive Manufacturing”, JOM, 69(2017), 523-531.
10) S.S. Babu, N. Raghavan, J. Raplee, S.J. Foster, C. Frederick, M.
Haines, R. Dinwiddie, M.K. Kirka, A. Plotkowski, Y. Lee and
R.R. Dehoff: “Additive Manufacturing of Nickel Superalloys:
Opportunities for Innovation and Challenges Related to
Qualification”, Metall. Mater. Trans. A. 49(2018), 3764-3780.
11) M.R. Gotterbarm, A.M. Rausch and C. Körner: “Fabrication of
Single Crystals through a μ-Helix Grain Selection Process during
Electron Beam Metal Additive Manufacturing”, Metals, 10(2020),
12) J.D.D. Hunt: “Steady state columnar and equiaxed growth of
dendrites and eutectic”, Mater. Sci. Eng. 65(1984), 75-83.
13) S. Bontha, N.W. Klingbeil, P.A. Kobryn and H.L. Fraser: “Effects of
process variables and size-scale on solidification microstructure in
beam-based fabrication of bulky 3D structures”, Mater. Sci. Eng. A.
513-514(2009), 311-318.
14) J. Gockel and J. Beuth: “Understanding Ti-6Al-4V microstructure
control in additive manufacturing via process maps”, 24th Int. SFF
Symp. – An Addit. Manuf. Conf. SFF 2013.(2013), 666-674.
15) B. Schoinochoritis, D. Chantzis and K. Salonitis: “Simulation of
metallic powder bed additive manufacturing processes with the finite
element method: A critical review”, Proc. of Instit. Mech. Eng., Part
B: J. Eng. Manuf. 231(2017), 96-117.
16)小泉雄一郎: “計算機シミュレーションを用いたAdditive
Manufacturing プロセス最適化予測”, スマートプロセス学会誌,
8-4(2019), 132-138.
17) Y. Zhao, Y. Koizumi, K. Aoyagi, D. Wei, K. Yamanaka and 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”, Addit. Manuf. 26(2019), 202-214.
18) C. Tang, J.L. Tan and C.H. Wong: “A numerical investigation on
the physical mechanisms of single track defects in selective laser
melting”, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 126(2018), 957-968.
19) Technical data for Iron, [Online]. Available:
Elements/026/data.html. [Accessed: 8-Feb-2021].
20) N. Raghavan, R. Dehoff, S. Pannala, S. Simunovic, M. Kirka, J.
Turner, N. Carl-son and S.S. Babu: “Numerical modeling of heattransfer and the influence of process parameters on tailoring the grain
morphology of IN718 in electron beam additive manufacturing”,
Acta Mater. 112(2016), 303-314.
21) S. Morita, Y. Miki and K. Toishi: “Introduction of Dendrite
Fragmentation to Microstructure Calculation by Cellular Automaton
Method”, Tetsu-to-Hagane. 104(2018), 559-566.
22) H. Esaka and M. Tamura: “Model Experiment Using Succinonitrile
on the Formation of Equiaxed Grains caused by Forced Convection”,
Tetsu-to-Hagane. 86(2000), 252-258.

Review on the evolution and technology of State-of-the-Art metal additive manufacturing processes

Review on the evolution and technology of State-of-the-Art metal additive manufacturing processes

최첨단 금속 적층 제조 공정의 진화 및 기술 검토

S.Pratheesh Kumar


Nowadays, the requirements of customers undergo dynamic changes and industries are heading towards the manufacturing of customized end-user products, making market fluctuations extremely unpredictable. This demands the production industries to shift towards instantaneous product development strategies that can deliver products on the shortest lead time without compromise in the quality and accuracy. Direct metal deposition is one such evolving additive manufacturing (AM) technique that has found its application from rapid prototyping to production of real-time industrial components. In addition, the process is ideal for just-in-time manufacturing, producing parts-on-demand while offering the potential to reduce cost, energy consumption, and carbon footprint. The evolution of this advanced manufacturing technique had drastically reduced the manufacturing constraints and greatly improved the product versatility. This review provides insight into the evolution, current status, and challenges of metal additive manufacturing (MAM) techniques, starting from powder bed fusion and direct metal deposition. In addition to this, the review explores the variants of metal additive manufacturing with its process mechanism, merits, demerits, and applications. The efficiency of the processes is finally analysed using a time–cost triangle and the mechanical properties are comprehensively compared. The review will enhance the basic understanding of MAM and thus broaden the scope of research and development.

오늘날 고객의 요구 사항은 역동적 인 변화를 겪고 있으며 산업은 맞춤형 최종 사용자 제품의 제조로 향하고있어 시장 변동을 예측할 수 없게 만듭니다. 따라서 생산 산업은 품질과 정확성을 타협하지 않고 최단 리드 타임에 제품을 제공 할 수있는 즉각적인 제품 개발 전략으로 전환해야합니다. 직접 금속 증착은 쾌속 프로토 타이핑에서 실시간 산업 부품 생산에 이르기까지 응용 분야를 발견 한 진화하는 적층 제조 (AM) 기술 중 하나입니다. 또한이 프로세스는 적시 제조에 이상적이며 주문형 부품을 생산하는 동시에 비용, 에너지 소비 및 탄소 발자국을 줄일 수있는 잠재력을 제공합니다. 이 고급 제조 기술의 발전으로 제조 제약이 크게 줄어들고 제품의 다양성이 크게 향상되었습니다. 이 리뷰는 분말 베드 융합 및 직접 금속 증착에서 시작하여 금속 적층 제조 (MAM) 기술의 발전, 현재 상태 및 과제에 대한 통찰력을 제공합니다. 이 외에도이 리뷰에서는 프로세스 메커니즘, 장점, 단점 및 응용 프로그램과 함께 금속 적층 제조의 변형을 탐색합니다. 프로세스의 효율성은 마지막으로 시간-비용 삼각형을 사용하여 분석되고 기계적 특성이 포괄적으로 비교됩니다. 검토는 MAM에 대한 기본적인 이해를 높이고 연구 개발 범위를 넓힐 것입니다.

Keywords: Metal additive manufacturing, 3D Printing, Direct energy deposition, Electron beam meltingRapid prototyping

Fig. 9 (a) Velocity field, keyhole profile, and breakage of the keyhole to form bubble and (b) 2D temperature and velocity field along the longitudinal section

A Numerical Study on the Keyhole Formation During Laser Powder Bed Fusion Process

Keyhole에 대한 수치적 연구 : 레이저 분말 중 형성 베드 퓨전 공정

Subin Shrestha1
J.B. Speed School of Engineering,University of Louisville,Louisville, KY 40292

Y. Kevin Chou
J.B. Speed School of Engineering,University of Louisville,Louisville, KY 40292

LPBF (Laser Powder Bed fusion) 공정 중 용융 풀의 동적 현상은 복잡하고 공정 매개 변수에 민감합니다. 에너지 밀도 입력이 특정 임계 값을 초과하면 키홀이라고 하는 거대한 증기 함몰이 형성 될 수 있습니다.

이 연구는 수치 분석을 통해 LPBF 과정에서 키홀 거동 및 관련 기공 형성을 이해하는 데 중점을 둡니다. 이를 위해 이산 분말 입자가 있는 열 유동 모델이 개발되었습니다.

이산 요소 방법 (DEM)에서 얻은 분말 분포는 계산 영역에 통합되어 FLOW-3D를 사용하는 3D 프로세스 물리학 모델을 개발합니다.

전도 모드 중 용융 풀 형성과 용융의 키홀 모드가 식별되고 설명되었습니다. 높은 에너지 밀도는 증기 기둥의 형성으로 이어지고 결과적으로 레이저 스캔 트랙 아래에 구멍이 생깁니다.

또한 다양한 레이저 출력과 스캔 속도로 인한 Keyhole 모양을 조사합니다. 수치 결과는 동일한 에너지 밀도에서도 레이저 출력이 증가함에 따라 Keyhole크기가 증가 함을 나타냅니다. Keyhole은 더 높은 출력에서 ​​안정되어 레이저 스캔 중 Keyhole 발생을 줄일 수 있습니다.

The dynamic phenomenon of a melt pool during the laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) process is complex and sensitive to process parameters. As the energy density input exceeds a certain threshold, a huge vapor depression may form, known as the keyhole. This study focuses on understanding the keyhole behavior and related pore formation during the LPBF process through numerical analysis. For this purpose, a thermo-fluid model with discrete powder particles is developed. The powder distribution, obtained from a discrete element method (DEM), is incorporated into the computational domain to develop a 3D process physics model using flow-3d. The melt pool formation during the conduction mode and the keyhole mode of melting has been discerned and explained. The high energy density leads to the formation of a vapor column and consequently pores under the laser scan track. Further, the keyhole shape resulted from different laser powers and scan speeds is investigated. The numerical results indicated that the keyhole size increases with the increase in the laser power even with the same energy density. The keyhole becomes stable at a higher power, which may reduce the occurrence of pores during laser scanning.

Keywords: additive manufacturing, keyhole, laser powder bed fusion, porosity

Fig. 1 (a) Powder added to the dispenser platform and (b) powder particles settled over build plate after the recoating process
Fig. 1 (a) Powder added to the dispenser platform and (b) powder particles settled over build plate after the recoating process
Fig. 2 3D computational domain used for single-track simulation
Fig. 2 3D computational domain used for single-track simulation
Fig. 3 Temperature-dependent material properties of Ti-6Al-4V
Fig. 3 Temperature-dependent material properties of Ti-6Al-4V
Fig. 4 Powder and substrate melting during laser application
Fig. 4 Powder and substrate melting during laser application
Fig. 5 Melt region formed after complete melting and solidification
Fig. 5 Melt region formed after complete melting and solidification
Fig. 6 Melt pool boundary comparison between the experiment [25] and the simulation
Fig. 6 Melt pool boundary comparison between the experiment [25] and the simulation
Fig. 7 Equilibrium points during the formation of vapor column [27]
Fig. 7 Equilibrium points during the formation of vapor column [27]
Fig. 8 Multiple reflection vectors from the keyhole wall
Fig. 8 Multiple reflection vectors from the keyhole wall
Fig. 9 (a) Velocity field, keyhole profile, and breakage of the keyhole to form bubble and (b) 2D temperature and velocity field along the longitudinal section
Fig. 9 (a) Velocity field, keyhole profile, and breakage of the keyhole to form bubble and (b) 2D temperature and velocity field along the longitudinal section
Fig. 10 Fluid flow in the transverse direction during keyhole melting
Fig. 10 Fluid flow in the transverse direction during keyhole melting
Fig. 11 Melt pool boundary compared with the experiment [21] for 195 W laser power and 400 mm/s scan speed
Fig. 11 Melt pool boundary compared with the experiment [21] for 195 W laser power and 400 mm/s scan speed
Fig. 12 Melt region formed after complete melting and solidification
Fig. 12 Melt region formed after complete melting and solidification
Fig. 13 2D images of the pores formed at the beginning of the single track and their 3D-rendered morphology
Fig. 13 2D images of the pores formed at the beginning of the single track and their 3D-rendered morphology
Fig. 14 Pore number and volume from a different level of power with LED = 0.4 J/mm [29]
Fig. 14 Pore number and volume from a different level of power with LED = 0.4 J/mm [29]
Fig. 15 Keyhole shape at different time steps from different parameters: (a) P = 100 W, v = 250 mm/s, (b) P = 200 W, v = 500 mm/s, (c) P = 300 W, v = 750 mm/s, and (d) P = 400 W, v = 1000 mm/s
Fig. 15 Keyhole shape at different time steps from different parameters: (a) P = 100 W, v = 250 mm/s, (b) P = 200 W, v = 500 mm/s, (c) P = 300 W, v = 750 mm/s, and (d) P = 400 W, v = 1000 mm/s
Fig. 16 Intensity dependence in the relationship between vapor column and evaporation pressure [27]
Fig. 16 Intensity dependence in the relationship between vapor column and evaporation pressure [27]
Fig. 17 Temperature distribution when laser has moved 0.8 mm with P = 300 W, v = 750 mm/s and P = 400 W, v = 1000 mm/s
Fig. 17 Temperature distribution when laser has moved 0.8 mm with P = 300 W, v = 750 mm/s and P = 400 W, v = 1000 mm/s
Fig. 18 Melt region with different level of power with LED of 0.4 J/mm
Fig. 18 Melt region with different level of power with LED of 0.4 J/mm


[1] Bauereiß, A., Scharowsky, T., and Körner, C., 2014, “Defect Generation and
Propagation Mechanism During Additive Manufacturing by Selective Beam
Melting,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 214(11), pp. 2522–2528.
[2] Gong, H., Rafi, K., Gu, H., Starr, T., and Stucker, B., 2014, “Analysis of Defect
Generation in Ti–6Al–4V Parts Made Using Powder Bed Fusion Additive
Manufacturing Processes,” Add. Manuf., 1(2014), pp. 87–98.
[3] Wang, Y., Kamath, C., Voisin, T., and Li, Z., 2018, “A Processing Diagram for
High-Density Ti-6Al-4V by Selective Laser Melting,” Rapid Prototyping J., 24
(9), pp. 1469–1478.
[4] Khairallah, S. A., and Anderson, A., 2014, “Mesoscopic Simulation Model of
Selective Laser Melting of Stainless Steel Powder,” J. Mater. Process. Technol.,
214(11), pp. 2627–2636.
[5] Yadroitsev, I., Gusarov, A., Yadroitsava, I., and Smurov, I., 2010, “Single Track
Formation in Selective Laser Melting of Metal Powders,” J. Mater. Process.
Technol., 210(12), pp. 1624–1631.
[6] Xia, M., Gu, D., Yu, G., Dai, D., Chen, H., and Shi, Q., 2016, “Influence of Hatch
Spacing on Heat and Mass Transfer, Thermodynamics and Laser Processability
During Additive Manufacturing of Inconel 718 Alloy,” Int. J. Mach. Tools
Manuf., 109(2016), pp. 147–157.
[7] Lee, Y., and Zhang, W., 2016, “Modeling of Heat Transfer, Fluid Flow and
Solidification Microstructure of Nickel-Base Superalloy Fabricated by Laser
Powder bed Fusion,” Add. Manuf., 12(2016), pp. 178–188.
[8] Wu, Y.-C., San, C.-H., Chang, C.-H., Lin, H.-J., Marwan, R., Baba, S., and
Hwang, W.-S., 2018, “Numerical Modeling of Melt-Pool Behavior in Selective
Laser Melting with Random Powder Distribution and Experimental
Validation,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 254(2018), pp. 72–78.
[9] Khairallah, S. A., Anderson, A. T., Rubenchik, A., and King, W. E., 2016, “Laser
Powder-bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing: Physics of Complex Melt Flow and
Formation Mechanisms of Pores, Spatter, and Denudation Zones,” Acta
Materialia, 108(2016), pp. 36–45.
[10] Tan, J., Tang, C., and Wong, C., 2018, “A Computational Study on Porosity
Evolution in Parts Produced by Selective Laser Melting,” Metall. Mater. Trans.
A, 49A(8), pp. 3663–3673.
[11] Leitz, K.-H., Singer, P., Plankensteiner, A., Tabernig, B., Kestler, H., and Sigl,
L. J. M. P. R., 2017, “Multi-Physical Simulation of Selective Laser Melting,”
Metal Powder Report, 72(5), pp. 331–338.
[12] Zhao, C., Fezzaa, K., Cunningham, R. W., Wen, H., Carlo, F., Chen, L., Rollett,
A. D., and Sun, T., 2017, “Real-time Monitoring of Laser Powder Bed Fusion
Process Using High-Speed X-ray Imaging and Diffraction,” Sci. Rep., 7(1),
p. 3602.
[13] Parab, N. D., Zhao, C., Cunningham, R., Escano, L. I., Fezzaa, K., Everhart, W.,
Rollett, A. D., Chen, L., and Sun, T., 2018, “Ultrafast X-ray Imaging of Laser–
Metal Additive Manufacturing Processes,” J. Synchrotron Radiat., 25(5),
pp. 1467–1477.
[14] Cunningham, R., Zhao, C., Parab, N., Kantzos, C., Pauza, J., Fezzaa, K., Sun, T.,
and Rollett, A. D., 2019, “Keyhole Threshold and Morphology in Laser Melting
Revealed by Ultrahigh-Speed X-Ray Imaging,” Science, 363(6429), pp. 849–852.
[15] Shrestha, S., Starr, T., and Chou, K., 2019, “A Study of Keyhole Porosity in
Selective Laser Melting: Single Track Scanning With Micro-CT Analysis,”
ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 141(7), pp. 1–23.
[16] Ye, J., Rubenchik, A. M., Crumb, M. F., Guss, G., and Matthews, M. J., 2018,
“Laser Absorption and Scaling Behavior in Powder Bed Fusion Additive
Manufacturing of Metals,” Proceedings of the CLEO: Science and Innovations,
Optical Society of America, San Jose, CA, May 13–18, Optical Society of
America, p. JW2A.117.
[17] Mishra, B., and Rajamani, R. K., 1992, “The Discrete Element Method for the
Simulation of Ball Mills,” Appl. Math. Modell., 16(11), pp. 598–604.
[18] Yan, W., Qian, Y., Ge, W., Lin, S., Liu, W. K., Lin, F., and Wagner, G. J., 2018,
“Meso-Scale Modeling of Multiple-Layer Fabrication Process in Selective
Electron Beam Melting: Inter-Layer/Track Voids Formation,” Materials and
Design, 141(2018), pp. 210–219.
[19] Kloss, C., Goniva, C., Hager, A., Amberger, S., and Pirker, S., 2012, “Models,
Algorithms and Validation for Opensource DEM and CFD–DEM,” Prog.
Comput. Fluid Dynam. Int. J., 12(2–3), pp. 140–152.
[20] Escano, L. I., Parab, N. D., Xiong, L., Guo, Q., Zhao, C., Fezzaa, K., Everhart,
W., Sun, T., and Chen, L., 2018, “Revealing Particle-Scale Powder Spreading
Dynamics in Powder-Bed-Based Additive Manufacturing Process by
High-Speed X-Ray Imaging,” Sci. Rep., 8(1), p. 15079.
[21] Gong, H., Gu, H., Zeng, K., Dilip, J., Pal, D., Stucker, B., Christiansen, D., Beuth,
J., and Lewandowski, J. J., 2014, “Melt Pool Characterization for Selective Laser
Melting of Ti-6Al-4V Pre-Alloyed Powder,” Proceedings of the Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium, Austin, TX, Aug. 4–6, pp. 256–267.
[22] Mills, K. C., 2002, Recommended Values of Thermophysical Properties for
Selected Commercial Alloys, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK.
[23] Shrestha, S., and Chou, K., 2017, “A Build Surface Study of Powder-Bed
Electron Beam Additive Manufacturing by 3D Thermo-Fluid Simulation and
White-Light Interferometry,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 121(2017), pp. 37–49.
[24] Cho, J.-H., and Na, S.-J., 2006, “Implementation of Real-Time Multiple
Reflection and Fresnel Absorption of Laser Beam in Keyhole,” J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys., 39(24), p. 5372.
[25] Dilip, J., Zhang, S., Teng, C., Zeng, K., Robinson, C., Pal, D., and Stucker, B.,
2017, “Influence of Processing Parameters on the Evolution of Melt Pool,
Porosity, and Microstructures in Ti-6Al-4V Alloy Parts Fabricated by Selective
Laser Melting,” Prog. Add. Manuf., 2(3), pp. 157–167.
[26] Bertoli, U. S., Wolfer, A. J., Matthews, M. J., Delplanque, J.-P. R., and Schoenung,
J. M., 2017, “On the Limitations of Volumetric Energy Density as a Design
Parameter for Selective Laser Melting,” Mater. Des., 113(2017), pp. 331–340.
[27] Kroos, J., Gratzke, U., and Simon, G., 1993, “Towards a Self-Consistent Model of
the Keyhole in Penetration Laser Beam Welding,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 26(3),
p. 474.
[28] Martin, A., Calta, N., Hammons, J., Khairallah, S., Nielsen, M., Shuttlesworth, R.,
Sinclair, N., Matthews, M., Jeffries, J., and Willey, T., 2019, “Ultrafast Dynamics
of Laser-Metal Interactions in Additive Manufacturing Alloys Captured by In Situ
X-Ray Imaging,” Mater. Today Adv., 1(2019), p. 100002.
[29] Shrestha, S., Starr, T., and Chou, K., 2018, “Individual and coupled contributions
of laser power and scanning speed towards process-induced porosity in selective
laser melting,” Proceedings of the Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium,
Austin, TX, Aug. 13–15, pp. 1400–1409.
[30] Hann, D., Iammi, J., and Folkes, J., 2011, “A Simple Methodology for Predicting
Laser-Weld Properties From Material and Laser Parameters,” J. Phys. D: Appl.
Phys., 44(44), p. 445401.
[31] Trapp, J., Rubenchik, A. M., Guss, G., and Matthews, M. J., 2017, “In Situ
Absorptivity Measurements of Metallic Powders During Laser Powder-bed
Fusion Additive Manufacturing,” Appl. Mat. Today, 9(2017), pp. 341–349.

Liquid Metal 3D Printing

Liquid Metal 3D Printing

This article was contributed by V.Sukhotskiy1,2, I. H. Karampelas3, G. Garg 1, A. Verma1, M. Tong 1, S. Vader2, Z. Vader2, and E. P. Furlani1
University at Buffalo SUNY, 2Vader Systems, 3Flow Science, Inc.

Drop-on-demand 잉크젯 인쇄는 상업 및 소비자 이미지 재생을 위한 잘 정립 된 방법입니다. 이 기술을 주도하는 동일한 원리는 인쇄 및 적층 제조 분야에도 적용될 수 있습니다. 기존의 잉크젯 기술은 폴리머에서 살아있는 세포에 이르기까지 다양한 재료를 증착하고 패턴화하여 다양한 기능성 매체, 조직 및 장치를 인쇄하는 데 사용되었습니다 [1, 2]. 이 작업의 초점은 잉크젯 기반 기술을 3D 솔리드 금속 구조 인쇄로 확장하는 데 있습니다 [3, 4]. 현재 대부분의 3D 금속 프린팅 응용 프로그램은 고체 물체를 형성하기 위해 레이저 [6] 또는 전자 빔 [7]과 같은 외부 지향 에너지 원의 영향을 받아 증착 된 금속 분말 소결 또는 용융을 포함합니다. 그러나 이러한 방법은 비용 및 프로세스 복잡성 측면에서 단점이 있습니다. 예를 들어, 3D 프린팅 프로세스에 앞서 분말을 생성하기 위해 시간과 에너지 집약적인 기술이 필요합니다.

이 기사에서는 MHD (자기 유체 역학) drop-on-demand 방출 및 움직이는 기판에 액체 방울 증착을 기반으로 3D 금속 구조의 적층 제조에 대한 새로운 접근 방식에 대해 설명합니다. 프로세스의 각 부분을 연구하기 위해 많은 시뮬레이션이 수행되었습니다.

단순화를 위해 이 연구는 두 부분으로 나뉘었습니다.

첫 번째 부분에서는 MHD 분석을 사용하여 프린트 헤드 내부의 Lorentz 힘 밀도에 의해 생성 된 압력을 추정 한 다음 FLOW-3D 모델의 경계 조건으로 사용됩니다. 액적 방출 역학을 연구하는 데 사용되었습니다.

두 번째 부분에서는 이상적인 액적 증착 조건을 식별하기 위해 FLOW-3D 매개 변수 분석을 수행했습니다. 모델링 노력의 결과는 그림 1에 표시된 장치의 설계를 안내하는데 사용되었습니다.

코일은 배출 챔버를 둘러싸고 전기적으로 펄스되어 액체 금속을 투과하고 폐쇄 루프를 유도하는 과도 자기장을 생성합니다. 그 안에 일시적인 전기장. 전기장은 순환 전류 밀도를 발생시키고, 이는 과도장에 역 결합되고 챔버 내에서 자홍 유체 역학적 로렌츠 힘 밀도를 생성합니다. 힘의 방사형 구성 요소는 오리피스에서 액체 금속 방울을 분출하는 역할을 하는 압력을 생성합니다. 분출된 액적은 기질로 이동하여 결합 및 응고되어 확장된 고체 구조를 형성합니다. 임의의 형태의 3 차원 구조는 입사 액적의 정확한 패턴 증착을 가능하게 하는 움직이는 기판을 사용하여 층별로 인쇄 될 수 있습니다. 이 기술은 상표명 MagnetoJet으로 Vader Systems (에 의해 특허 및 상용화되었습니다.

MagnetoJet 프린팅 공정의 장점은 상대적으로 높은 증착 속도와 낮은 재료 비용으로 임의 형상의 3D 금속 구조를 인쇄하는 것입니다 [8, 9]. 또한 고유한 금속 입자 구조가 존재하기 때문에 기계적 특성이 개선된 부품을 인쇄 할 수 있습니다.

프로토타입 디바이스 개발

Vader Systems의 3D 인쇄 시스템의 핵심 구성 요소는 두 부분의 노즐과 솔레노이드 코일로 구성된 프린트 헤드 어셈블리입니다. 액체화는 노즐의 상부에서 발생합니다. 하부에는 직경이 100μm ~ 500μm 인 서브 밀리미터 오리피스가 있습니다. 수냉식 솔레노이드 코일은 위 그림에 표시된 바와 같이 오리피스 챔버를 둘러싸고있습니다 (냉각 시스템은 도시되지 않음). 다수의 프린트 헤드 디자인의 반복적인 개발은 액체 금속 배출 거동뿐만 아니라, 액체 금속 충전 거동에 대한 사출 챔버 기하적인 효과를 분석하기 위해 연구되었습니다.

이 프로토타입 시스템은 일반적인 알루미늄 합금으로 만들어진 견고한 3D 구조를 성공적으로 인쇄했습니다 (아래 그림 참조). 액적 직경, 기하학, 토출 빈도 및 기타 매개 변수에 따라 직경이 50 μm에서 500 μm까지 다양합니다. 짧은 버스트에서 최대 5000 Hz까지 40-1000 Hz의 지속적인 방울 분사 속도가 달성 되었습니다.

Computational Models

프로토 타입 장치 개발의 일환으로, 성능 (예 : 액적 방출 역학, 액적-공기 및 액적-기질 상호 작용)에 대한 설계 개념을 스크리닝하기 위해 프로토타입 제작 전에 계산 시뮬레이션을 수행했습니다. 분석을 단순화하기 위해 CFD 분석 뿐만 아니라 컴퓨터 전자기(CE)를 사용하는 두 가지 다른 보완 모델이 개발되었습니다. 첫 번째 모델에서는 2 단계 CE 및 CFD 분석을 사용하여 MHD 기반 액적 분출 거동과 효과적인 압력 생성을 연구했습니다. 두 번째 모델에서는 열-유체 CFD 분석을 사용하여 기판상의 액적 패턴화, 유착 및 응고를 연구했습니다.

MHD 분석 후, 첫 번째 모델에서 등가 압력 프로파일을 추출하여 액적 분출 및 액적-기질 상호 작용의 과도 역학을 탐구하도록 설계된 FLOW-3D 모델의 입력으로 사용되었습니다. FLOW-3D 시뮬레이션은 액적 분출에 대한 오리피스 안과 주변의 습윤 효과를 이해하기 위해 수행되었습니다. 오리피스 내부와 외부 모두에서 유체 초기화 수준을 변경하고 펄스 주파수에 의해 결정된 펄스 사이의 시간을 허용함으로써 크기 및 속도를 포함하여 분출 된 액 적의 특성 차이를 식별 할 수있었습니다.

Droplet 생성

MagnetoJet 인쇄 프로세스에서, 방울은 전압 펄스 매개 변수에 따라 일반적으로 1 – 10m/s 범위의 속도로 배출되고 기판에 충돌하기 전에 비행 중에 약간 냉각됩니다. 기판상의 액적들의 패터닝 및 응고를 제어하는 ​​능력은 정밀한 3D 솔리드 구조의 형성에 중요합니다. 고해상도 3D 모션베이스를 사용하여 패터닝을 위한 정확한 Droplet 배치가 이루어집니다. 그러나 낮은 다공성과 원하지 않는 레이어링 artifacts가 없는 잘 형성된 3D 구조를 만들기 위해 응고를 제어하는 ​​것은 다음과 같은 제어를 필요로하기 때문에 어려움이 있습니다.

  • 냉각시 액체 방울로부터 주변 물질로의 열 확산,
  • 토출된 액적의 크기,
  • 액적 분사 빈도 및
  • 이미 형성된 3D 물체로부터의 열 확산.

이들 파라미터를 최적화 함으로써, 인쇄된 형상의 높은 공간 분해능을 제공하기에 충분히 작으며, 인접한 액적들 및 층들 사이의 매끄러운 유착을 촉진하기에 충분한 열 에너지를 보유 할 것입니다. 열 관리 문제에 직면하는 한 가지 방법은 가열된 기판을 융점보다 낮지만 상대적으로 가까운 온도에서 유지하는 것입니다. 이는 액체 금속 방울과 그 주변 사이의 온도 구배를 감소시켜 액체 금속 방울로부터의 열의 확산을 늦춤으로써 유착을 촉진시키고 고형화하여 매끄러운 입체 3D 덩어리를 형성합니다. 이 접근법의 실행 가능성을 탐구하기 위해 FLOW-3D를 사용한 파라 메트릭 CFD 분석이 수행되었습니다.

액체 금속방울 응집과 응고

우리는 액체 금속방울 분사 주파수뿐만 아니라 액체 금속방울 사이의 중심 간 간격의 함수로서 가열된 기판에서 내부 층의 금속방울 유착 및 응고를 조사했습니다. 이 분석에서 액체 알루미늄의 구형 방울은 3mm 높이에서 가열 된 스테인리스 강 기판에 충돌합니다. 액적 분리 거리 (100)로 변화 될 때 방울이 973 K의 초기 온도를 가지고, 기판이 다소 943 K.도 3의 응고 온도보다 900 K로 유지됩니다. 실선의 인쇄 중에 액적 유착 및 응고를 도시 50㎛의 간격으로 500㎛에서 400㎛까지 연속적으로 유지하고, 토출 주파수는 500Hz에서 일정하게 유지 하였습니다.

방울 분리가 250μm를 초과하면 선을 따라 입자가 있는 응고된 세그먼트가 나타납니다. 350μm 이상의 거리에서는 세그먼트가 분리되고 선이 채워지지 않은 간극이 있어 부드러운 솔리드 구조를 형성하는데 적합하지 않습니다. 낮은 온도에서 유지되는 기질에 대해서도 유사한 분석을 수행했습니다(예: 600K, 700K 등). 3D 구조물이 쿨러 기질에 인쇄될 수 있지만, 그것들은 후속적인 퇴적 금속 층들 사이에 강한 결합의 결여와 같은 바람직하지 않은 공예품을 보여주는 것이 관찰되었습니다. 이는 침전된 물방울의 열 에너지 손실률이 증가했기 때문입니다. 기판 온도의 최종 선택은 주어진 용도에 대해 물체의 허용 가능한 인쇄 품질에 따라 결정될 수 있습니다. 인쇄 중에 부품이 커짐에 따라 더 높은 열 확산에 맞춰 동적으로 조정할 수도 있습니다.

FLOW-3D 결과 검증

위 그림은 가열된 기판 상에 인쇄된 컵 구조 입니다. 인쇄 과정에서 가열된 인쇄물의 온도는 인쇄된 부분의 순간 높이를 기준으로 실시간으로 733K (430 ° C)에서 833K (580 ° C)로 점차 증가했습니다. 이것은 물체 표면적이 증가함에 따라 국부적인 열 확산의 증가를 극복하기 위해 행해졌습니다. 알루미늄의 높은 열전도율은 국부적인 온도 구배에 대한 조정이 신속하게 이루어져야 하기 때문에 특히 어렵습니다. 그렇지 않으면 온도가 빠르게 감소하고 층내 유착을 저하시킵니다.


시뮬레이션 결과를 바탕으로, Vader System의 프로토타입 마그네슘 유체 역학 액체 금속 Drop-on-demand 3D 프린터 프로토 타입은 임의의 형태의 3D 솔리드 알루미늄 구조를 인쇄할 수 있었습니다. 이러한 구조물은 서브 밀리미터의 액체 금속방울을 층 단위로 패턴화하여 성공적으로 인쇄되었습니다. 시간당 540 그램 이상의 재료 증착 속도는 오직 하나의 노즐을 사용하여 달성 되었습니다.

이 기술의 상업화는 잘 진행되고 있지만 처리량, 효율성, 해상도 및 재료 선택면에서 최적의 인쇄 성능을 실현하는 데는 여전히 어려움이 있습니다. 추가 모델링 작업은 인쇄 과정 중 과도 열 영향을 정량화하고, 메니스커스 동작뿐만 아니라 인쇄된 부품의 품질을 평가하는 데 초점을 맞출 것입니다.

[1] Roth, E.A., Xu, T., Das, M., Gregory, C., Hickman, J.J. and Boland, T., “Inkjet printing for high-throughput cell patterning,” Biomaterials 25(17), 3707-3715 (2004).

[2] Sirringhaus, H., Kawase, T., Friend, R.H., Shimoda, T., Inbasekaran, M., Wu, W. and Woo, E.P., “High-resolution inkjet printing of all-polymer transistor circuits,” Science 290(5499), 2123-2126 (2000).

[3] Tseng, A.A., Lee, M.H. and Zhao, B., “Design and operation of a droplet deposition system for freeform fabrication of metal parts,” Transactions-American Society of Mechanical Engineers Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 123(1), 74-84 (2001).

[4] Suter, M., Weingärtner, E. and Wegener, K., “MHD printhead for additive manufacturing of metals,” Procedia CIRP 2, 102-106 (2012).

[5] Loh, L.E., Chua, C.K., Yeong, W.Y., Song, J., Mapar, M., Sing, S.L., Liu, Z.H. and Zhang, D.Q., “Numerical investigation and an effective modelling on the Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process with aluminium alloy 6061,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 80, 288-300 (2015).

[6] Simchi, A., “Direct laser sintering of metal powders: Mechanism, kinetics and microstructural features,” Materials Science and Engineering: A 428(1), 148-158 (2006).

[7] Murr, L.E., Gaytan, S.M., Ramirez, D.A., Martinez, E., Hernandez, J., Amato, K.N., Shindo, P.W., Medina, F.R. and Wicker, R.B., “Metal fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron beam melting technologies,” Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 28(1), 1-14 (2012).

[8] J. Jang and S. S. Lee, “Theoretical and experimental study of MHD (magnetohydrodynamic) micropump,” Sensors & Actuators: A. Physical, 80(1), 84-89 (2000).

[9] M. Orme and R. F. Smith, “Enhanced aluminum properties by means of precise droplet deposition,” Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME, 122(3), 484-493, (2000)

Selective electron beam melting – void Formation (선택적 전자 빔 용해 – 빈 공간 형성)

선택적 전자 빔 용해란?

  • L-PBF 프로세스와 매우 유사하지만 몇 가지 주요 차이점이 존재함
    – 레이저 소스 대신 사용되는 전자 빔
    – 진공 챔버에서 공정이 발생
    – 더 큰 층 / 분말 크기로 인해 만드는 속도는 높아지지만 표면 조도는 낮아짐
    – 고온에서 공정이 발생
    – 낮은 잔류 응력 및 더 조밀한 미세 구조
  • SEBM 프로세스 모델링
    – 깊이는 전자빔의 흡수를 기반함
    – 볼링이나 불균일성과 같은 용융지 결함은 여전히 연관됨

스캔 전략 및 빈 공간 형성

  • Ti-6Al-4V에서 다중 트랙 및 다중 레이어의 SEBM 프로세스를 조사한 연구
    – 분말 확산의 이산 소자 방법 (DEM) 모델과 분말 용융의 (CFD) 모델을 통합
  • 스캔 전략은 빈 공간의 심각성에 어떤 영향을 미칠까?

빈 공간 형성의 성향

  • 여러 트랙의 여러 레이어
    1. 단방향 케이스 (a)
    – 두 스캔 경로의 중간 부근에 빈 공간이 형성됨
    – 이 위치에서는 분말 입자의 두꺼운 층과 낮은 에너지 밀도를 가짐
    2. 반대 방향 케이스 (b)
    – 두 번째 레이어 트랙의 시작 근처에 추가로 빈 공간이 있는 중심으로부터 빈 위치 오프셋
    – 시작점 근처의 녹는 깊이는 트랙을 따라 멀어짐
    – 가장자리 근처의 빈 공간은 단방향보다 반대 방향의 경우 더 뚜렷함
  • 레이어 별로 회전하며 스캔하는 전략
    – 중심선 사이의 중간 지점에서 첫 번째 및 두 번째 레이어에서 빈 공간이 관찰 됨
    -빈 공간은 θ=0° 및 θ=180°에서 더 일반적임
  • 레이어 별로 엮어가며 스캔하는 전략
    – 제 2층 스캔 라인은 제 1층 스캔 라인의 중심을 따라 놓임
    – 두 번째 레이어 스캔 위치로 인한 빈 공간 제거가 보다 효과적임

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. (Available at 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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,

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,, 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,,

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),

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.

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,

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,, © 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,, 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,, 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 ;, 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,, 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,, 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,, 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