Fig. 3. (a–c) Snapshots of the CtFD simulation of laser-beam irradiation: (a) Top, (b) longitudinal vertical cross-sectional, and (c) transversal vertical cross-sectional views. (d) z-position of the solid/liquid interface during melting and solidification.

Solute segregation in a rapidly solidified Hastelloy-X Ni-based superalloy during laser powder bed fusion investigated by phase-field simulations and computational thermal-fluid dynamics

Masayuki Okugawa ab, Kenji Saito a, Haruki Yoshima a, Katsuhiko Sawaizumi a, Sukeharu Nomoto c, Makoto Watanabe c, Takayoshi Nakano ab, Yuichiro Koizumi abShow moreAdd to MendeleyShareCite

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2024.104079

Get rights and content Under a Creative Commons license open access

Abstract

Solute segregation significantly affects material properties and is a critical issue in the laser powder-bed fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing (AM) of Ni-based superalloys. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate a computational thermal-fluid dynamics (CtFD) simulation coupled multi-phase-field (MPF) simulation with a multicomponent-composition model of Ni-based superalloy to predict solute segregation under solidification conditions in LPBF. The MPF simulation of the Hastelloy-X superalloy reproduced the experimentally observed submicron-sized cell structure. Significant solute segregations were formed within interdendritic regions during solidification at high cooling rates of up to 10K s-1, a characteristic feature of LPBF. Solute segregation caused a decrease in the solidus temperature (TS), with a reduction of up to 30.4 K, which increases the risk of liquation cracks during LPBF. In addition, the segregation triggers the formation of carbide phases, which increases the susceptibility to ductility dip cracking. Conversely, we found that the decrease in TS is suppressed at the melt-pool boundary regions, where re-remelting occurs during the stacking of the layer above. Controlling the re-remelting behavior is deemed to be crucial for designing crack-free alloys. Thus, we demonstrated that solute segregation at the various interfacial regions of Ni-based multicomponent alloys can be predicted by the conventional MPF simulation. The design of crack-free Ni-based superalloys can be expedited by MPF simulations of a broad range of element combinations and their concentrations in multicomponent Ni-based superalloys.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Laser powder-bed fusion, Hastelloy-X Nickel-based superalloy, solute element segregation, computational thermal-fluid dynamics simulation, phase-field method

1. Introduction

Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies have attracted considerable attention as they allow us to easily build three-dimensional (3D) parts with complex geometries. Among the wide range of available AM techniques, laser powder-bed fusion (LPBF) has emerged as a preferred technique for metal AM [1][2][3][4][5]. In LPBF, metal products are built layer-by-layer by scanning laser, which fuse metal powder particles into bulk solids.

Significant attempts have been made to integrate LPBF techniques within the aerospace industry, with a particular focus on weldable Ni-based superalloys, such as IN718 [6][7][8], IN625 [9][10], and Hastelloy-X (HX) [11][12][13][14]. Non-weldable alloys, such as IN738LC [15][16] and CMSX-4 [1][17] are also suitable for their sufficient creep resistance under higher temperature conditions. However, non-weldable alloys are difficult to build using LPBF because of their susceptibility to cracking during the process. In general, a macro solute-segregation during solidification is suppressed by the rapid cooling conditions (up to 108 K s-1) unique to the LPBF process [18]. However, the solute segregation still occurs in the interdendritic regions that are smaller than the micrometer scale [5][19][20][21]; these regions are suggested to be related to the hot cracks in LPBF-fabricated parts. Therefore, an understanding of solute segregation is essential for the fabrication of reliable LPBF-fabricated parts while avoiding cracks.

The multiphase-field (MPF) method has gained popularity for modeling the microstructure evolution and solute segregation under rapid cooling conditions [5][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]. Moreover, quantifiable predictions have been achieved by combining the MPF method with temperature distribution analysis methods such as the finite-element method (FEM) [20] and computational thermal-fluid dynamics (CtFD) simulations [28]. These aforementioned studies have used binary-approximated multicomponent systems, such as Ni–Nb binary alloys, to simulate IN718 alloys. While MPF simulations using binary alloy systems can effectively reproduce microstructure formations and segregation behaviors, the binary approximation might be affected by the chemical interactions between the removed solute elements in the target multicomponent alloy. The limit of absolute stability predicted by the Mullins-Sekerka theory [29] is also crucial because the limit velocity is close to the solidification rate in the LPBF process and is different in multicomponent and binary-approximated systems. The difference between the solidus and liquidus temperatures, ΔT0, directly determines the absolute stability according to the Mullins-Sekerka theory. For example, the ΔT0 values of IN718 and its binary-approximated Ni–5 wt.%Nb alloy are 134 K [28] and 71 K [30], respectively. The solidification rate compared to the limit of absolute stability, i.e., the relative non-equilibrium of solidification, changes by simplification of the system. It is therefore important to use the composition of the actual multicomponent system in such simulations. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no MPF simulation using a multicomponent model coupled with a temperature analysis simulation to predict solute segregation in a Ni-based superalloy.

In this study, we demonstrate that the conventional MPF model can reproduce experimentally observed dendritic structures by performing a phase-field simulation using the temperature distribution obtained by a CtFD simulation of a multicomponent Ni-based alloy (conventional solid-solution hardening-type HX). The MPF simulation revealed that the segregation behavior of solute elements largely depends on the regions of the melt pool, such as the cell boundary, the interior of the melt-pool boundary, and heat-affected regions. The sensitivities of the various interfaces to liquation and solidification cracks are compared based on the predicted concentration distributions. Moreover, the feasibility of using the conventional MPF model for LPBF is discussed in terms of the absolute stability limit.

2. Methods

2.1. Laser-beam irradiation experiments

Rolled and recrystallized HX ingots with dimensions of 20 × 50 × 10 mm were used as the specimens for laser-irradiation experiments. The specimens were irradiated with a laser beam scanned along straight lines of 10 mm in length using a laser AM machine (EOS 290 M, EOS) equipped with a 400 W Yb-fiber laser. Irradiation was performed with a beam power of P = 300 W and a scanning speed of V = 600 mm s-1, which are the conditions generally used in the LPBF fabrication of Ni-based superalloy [8]. The corresponding line energy was 0.5 J mm-1. The samples were cut perpendicular to the beam-scanning direction for cross-sectional observation using a field-emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM, JEOL JSM 6500). Crystal orientation analysis was performed by electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD). The sizes of each crystal grain and their aspect ratios were evaluated by analyzing the EBSD data.

2.2. CtFD simulation

CtFD simulations of the laser-beam irradiation of HX were performed using a 3D thermo-fluid analysis software (Flow Science FLOW-3D® with Flow-3D Weld module). A Gaussian heat source model was used, in which the irradiation intensity distribution of the beam is regarded as a symmetrical Gaussian distribution over the entire beam. The distribution of the beam irradiation intensity is expressed by the following equation.(1)q̇=2ηPπR2exp−2r2R2.

Here, P is the power, R is the effective beam radius, r is the actual beam radius, and η is the beam absorption rate of the substrate. To improve the accuracy of the model, η was calculated by assuming multiple reflections using the Fresnel equation:(2)�=1−121+1−�cos�21+1+�cos�2+�2−2�cos�+2cos2��2+2�cos�+2cos2�.

ε is the Fresnel coefficient and θ is the incident angle of the laser. A local laser melt causes the vaporization of the material and results in a high vapor pressure. This vapor pressure acts as a recoil pressure on the surface, pushing the weld pool down. The recoil pressure is reproduced using the following equation.(3)precoil=Ap0exp∆HLVRTV1−TVT.

Here, p0 is the atmospheric pressure, ∆HLV is the latent heat of vaporization, R is the gas constant, and TV is the boiling point at the saturated vapor pressure. A is a ratio coefficient that is generally assumed to be 0.54, indicating that the recoil pressure due to evaporation is 54% of the vapor pressure at equilibrium on the liquid surface.

Table 1 shows the parameters used in the simulations. Most parameters were evaluated using an alloy physical property calculation software (Sente software JMatPro v11). The values in a previously published study [31] were used for the emissivity and the Stefan–Boltzmann constant, and the values for pure Ni [32] were used for the heat of vaporization and vaporization temperatures. The Fresnel coefficient, which determines the beam absorption efficiency, was used as a fitting parameter to reproduce the morphology of the experimentally observed melt region, and a Fresnel coefficient of 0.12 was used in this study.

Table 1. Parameters used in the CtFD simulations.

ParameterSymbolValueReference
Density at 298.15 Kρ8.24 g cm-3[]
Liquidus temperatureTL1628.15 K[]
Solidus temperatureTS1533.15 K[]
Viscosity at TLη6.8 g m-1 s-1[]
Specific heat at 298.15 KCP0.439 J g-1 K-1[]
Thermal conductivity at 298.15 Kλ10.3 W m-1 K-1[]
Surface tension at TLγL1.85 J m-2[]
Temperature coefficient of surface tensiondγL/dT–2.5 × 10−4 J m-2 K-1[]
EmissivityΕ0.27[31]
Stefan–Boltzmann constantσ5.67 × 10-8 W m-2 K-4[31]
Heat of fusionΔHSL2.76 × 102 J g-1[32]
Heat of vaporizationΔHLV4.29 × 10J g-1[32]
Vaporization temperatureTV3110 K[32]

Calculated using JMatPro v11.

The dimensions of the computational domain of the numerical model were 4.0 mm in the beam-scanning direction, 0.4 mm in width, and 0.3 mm in height. A uniform mesh size of 10 μm was applied throughout the computational domain. The boundary condition of continuity was applied to all boundaries except for the top surface. The temperature was initially set to 300 K. P and V were set to their experimental values, i.e., 300 W and 600 mm s-1, respectively. Solidification conditions based on the temperature gradient, G, the solidification rate, R, and the cooling rate were evaluated, and the obtained temperature distribution was used in the MPF simulations.

2.3. MPF simulation

Two-dimensional MPF simulations weakly coupled with the CtFD simulation were performed using the Microstructure Evolution Simulation Software (MICRESS) [33][34][35][36][37] with the TQ-Interface for Thermo-Calc [38]. A simplified HX alloy composition of Ni-21.4Cr-17.6Fe-0.46Mn-8.80Mo-0.39Si-0.50W-1.10Co-0.08 C (mass %) was used in this study. The Gibbs free energy and diffusion coefficient of the system were calculated using the TCNI9 thermodynamic database [39] and the MOBNi5 mobility database [40]. Τhe equilibrium phase diagram calculated using Thermo-Calc indicates that the face-centered cubic (FCC) and σ phases appear as the equilibrium solid phases [19]. However, according to the time-temperature-transformation (TTT) diagram [41], the phases are formed after the sample is maintained for tens of hours in a temperature range of 1073 to 1173 K. Therefore, only the liquid and FCC phases were assumed to appear in the MPF simulations. The simulation domain was 5 × 100 μm, and the grid size Δx and interface width were set to 0.025 and 0.1 µm, respectively. The interfacial mobility between the solid and liquid phases was set to 1.0 × 10-8 m4 J-1 s-1. Initially, one crystalline nucleus with a [100] crystal orientation was placed at the left bottom of the simulation domain, with the liquid phase occupying the remainder of the domain. The model was solidified under the temperature field distribution obtained by the CtFD simulation. The concentration distribution and crystal orientation of the solidified model were examined. The primary dendrite arm space (PDAS) was compared to the experimental PDAS measured by the cross-sectional SEM observation.

In an actual LPBF process, solidified layers are remelted and resolidified during the stacking of the one layer above, thereby greatly affecting solute element distributions in those regions. Therefore, remelting and resolidification simulations were performed to examine the effect of remelting on solute segregation. The solidified model was remelted and resolidified by applying a time-dependent temperature field shifted by 60 μm in the height direction, assuming reheating during the stacking of the upper layer (i.e., the upper 40 μm region of the simulation box was remelted and resolidified). The changes in the composition distribution and formed microstructure were investigated.

3. Results

3.1. Experimental observation of melt pool

Fig. 1 shows a cross-sectional optical microscopy image and corresponding inverse pole figure (IPF) orientation maps obtained from the laser-melted region of HX. The dashed line indicates the fusion line. A deep melted region was formed by keyhole-mode melting due to the vaporization of the metal and resultant recoil pressure. Epitaxial growth from the unmelted region was observed. Columnar crystal grains with an average diameter of 5.46 ± 0.32 μm and an aspect ratio of 3.61 ± 0.13 appeared at the melt regions (Figs. 1b–1d). In addition, crystal grains growing in the z direction could be observed in the lower center.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2a shows a cross-sectional backscattering electron image (BEI) obtained from the laser-melted region indicated by the black square in Fig. 1a. The bright particles with a diameter of approximately 2 μm observed outside the melt pool. It is well known that M6C, M23C6, σ, and μ precipitate phases are formed in Hastelloy-X [41]. These precipitates mainly consisted of Mo, Cr, Fe, and Ni; The μ and M6C phases are rich in Mo, while the σ and M23C6 phases are rich in Cr. The SEM energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy analysis suggested that the bright particles are the stable precipitates as shown in Fig. S2 and Table S1. Conversely, there are no carbides in the melt pool. This suggests that the cooling rate is extremely high during LPBF, which prevents the formation of a stable carbide during solidification. Figs. 2b–2f show magnified BEI images at different height positions indicated in Fig. 2a. Bright regions are observed between the cells, which become fragmentary at the center of the melt pool, as indicated by the yellow arrow heads in Figs. 2e and 2f.

Fig. 2

3.2. CtFD simulation

Figs. 3a–3c show snapshots of the CtFD simulation of HX at 2.72 ms, with the temperature indicated in color. A melt pool with an elongated teardrop shape formed and keyhole-mode melting was observed at the front of the melt region. The cooling rate, temperature gradient (G), and solidification rate (R) were evaluated from the temporal change in the temperature distribution of the CtFD simulation results. The z-position of the solid/liquid interface during the melting and solidification processes is shown in Fig. 3d. The interface goes down rapidly during melting and then rises during solidification. The MPF simulation of the microstructure formation during solidification was performed using the temperature distribution. Moreover, the microstructure formation process during the fabrication of the upper layer was investigated by remelting and resolidifying the solidified layer using the same temperature distribution with a 60 μm upward shift, corresponding to the layer thickness commonly used in the LPBF of Ni-based superalloys.

Fig. 3

Figs. 4a–4c show the changes in the cooling rate, temperature gradient, and solidification rate in the center line of the melt pool parallel to the z direction. To output the solidification conditions at the solid/liquid interface in the melt pool, only the data of the mesh where the solid phase ratio was close to 0.5 were plotted. Solidification occurred where the cooling rate was in the range of 2.1 × 105–1.6 × 10K s-1G was in the range of 3.6 × 105–1.9 × 10K m-1, and R was in the range of 8.2 × 10−2–6.3 × 10−1 m s-1. The cooling rate was the highest near the fusion line and decreased as the interface approached the center of the melt region (Fig. 4a). G also exhibited the highest value in the regions near the fusion line and decreased throughout the solid/liquid interface toward the center of the melt pool (Fig. 4b). R had the lowest value near the fusion line and increased as the interface approached the center of the melt region (Fig. 4c).

Fig. 4

3.3. MPF simulations coupled with CtFD simulation

MPF simulations of solidification, remelting, and resolidification were performed using the temperature-time distribution obtained by the CtFD simulation. Fig. 5 shows the MPF solidified models colored by phase and Mo concentration. All the computational domains show the FCC phase after the solidification (Fig. 5a). Dendrites grew parallel to the heat flow direction, and solute segregations were observed in the interdendritic regions. At the bottom of the melt pool (Fig. 5d), planar interface growth occurred before the formation of primary dendrites. The bottom of the melt pool is the turning point of the solid/liquid interface from the downward motion in melting to the upward motion in solidification. Thus, the solidification rate at the boundary is zero, and is extremely low immediately above the molt-pool boundary. Here, the lower limit of the solidification rate (R) for dendritic growth can be represented by the constitutional supercooling criterion [29]Vcs = (G × DL) / ΔT, and planar interface growth occurs at R < VcsDL and ΔT denote the diffusion coefficient in the liquid and the equilibrium freezing range, respectively. The results suggest that planar interface growth occurs at the bottom of the melt pool, resulting in a dark region with a different solute element distribution. Some of the primary dendrites were diminished by competition with other dendrites. In addition, secondary dendrite arms could be seen in the upper regions (Fig. 5c), where solidification occurred at a lower cooling rate. The fragmentation of the solute segregation near the secondary dendrite arms is similar to that observed in the experimental melt pool shown in Figs. 2e and 2f, and the secondary dendrite arms are suggested to have appeared at the center of the melt region. Fig. 6 shows the PDASs measured from the MPF simulation models, compared to the experimental PDASs measured by the cross-sectional SEM observation of the laser-melted regions (Fig. 2). The PDAS obtained by the MPF simulation become larger as the solidification progress. Ghosh et al. [21] evident by the phase-field method that the PDAS decreases as the cooling rate increases under the rapid cooling conditions obtained by the finite element analysis. In this study, the cooling rate was decreased as the interface approached the center of the melt region (Fig. 4a), and the trends in PDAS changes with respect to cooling rate is same as the reported trend [21]. The simulated trends of the PDAS with the position in the melt pool agreed well with the experimental trends. However, all PDASs in the simulation were larger than those observed in the experiment at the same positions. Ode et al. [42] reported that PDAS differences between 2D and 3D MPF simulations can be represented by PDAS2D = 1.12 × PDAS3D owing to differences in the effects of the interfacial energy and diffusivity. We also performed 2D and 3D MPF simulations under the solidification conditions of G = 1.94 × 10K m-1 and R = 0.82 m s-1 (Fig. S1), and found that the PDAS from the 2D MPF simulation was 1.26 times larger than that from the 3D simulation. Therefore, the cell structure obtained by the CtFD simulation coupled with the 2D MPF simulation agreed well with the experimental results over the entire melt pool region considering the dimensional effects.

Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Fig. 7b1 and 7c1 show the concentration profiles of the solidified model along the growth direction indicated by dashed lines in Fig. 7a. The differences in concentrations from the alloy composition are also shown in Fig. 7b2 and 7c2. Cr, Mo, C, Mn, and W were segregated to the interdendritic regions, while Si, Fe, and Co were depressed. The solute segregation behavior agrees with the experimentally observation [43] and the prediction by the Scheil-Gulliver simulation [19]. Segregation occurred to the highest degree in Mo, while the ratio of segregation to the alloy composition was remarkable in C. The concentration fluctuations correlated with the position in the melt pool and decreased at the center of the melt pool, which was suggested to correspond to the lower cooling rate in this region. Conversely, droplets that appeared between secondary dendrite arms in the upper regions of the simulation domain exhibited a locally high segregation of solute elements, with the same amount of segregation as that at the bottom of the melt pool.

Fig. 7

3.4. Remelting and resolidification simulation

The solidified model was subjected to remelting and resolidification conditions by shifting the temperature profile upward by 60 µm to reveal the effect of reheating on the solute segregation behavior. Figs. 8a and 8b shows the simulation domains of the HX model after resolidification, colored by phase and Mo concentration. The magnified MPF models during the resolidification of the regions indicated by rectangles in Figs. 8a and 8b are also shown as Figs. 8c and 8d. Dendrites grew from the bottom of the remelted region, with the segregation of solute elements occurring in the interdendritic regions. The entire domain become the FCC phase after the resolidification, as shown in Fig. 8a. The bottom of the remelted regions exhibited a different microstructure, and Mo was depressed at the remelted regions, rather than the interdendritic regions. The different solute segregation behavior [44] and the microstructure formation [45] at the melt pool boundary is also observed in LPBF manufactured 316 L stainless steel. We found that this microstructure was formed by further remelting during the resolidification process, which is shown in Fig. 9. Here, the solidified HX model was heated, and the interdendritic regions were preferentially melted while concentration fluctuations were maintained (Fig. 9a1 and 9a2). Subsequently, planer interface growth occurs near the melt pool boundary where the solidification rate is almost zero, and the dendrites outside of the boundary are grown epitaxially (Fig. 9b1 and 9b2). However, these remelted again because of the temperature rise (Fig. 9c1 and 9c2, and the temperature-time profile shown in Fig. 9e). The remelted regions then cooled and solidified with the abnormal solute segregations (Fig. 9d1 and 9d2). Then, dendrite grows from amplified fluctuations under the solidification rate larger than the criterion of constitutional supercooling (Fig. 9d1, 9d2, and Fig. 8d). It has been reported [46][47] that temperature rising owning to latent heat affects microstructure formation: phase-field simulations of a Ni–Al binary alloy suggest that the release of latent heat during solidification increases the average temperature of the system [46] and strongly influences the solidification conditions [47]. In this study, the release of latent heat during solidification is considered in CtFD simulations for calculating the temperature distribution, and the temperature increase is suggested to have also occurred due to the release of latent heat.

Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Fig. 10b1 and 10c1 show the solute element concentration line profiles of the resolidified model along the growth direction indicated by dashed lines in Fig. 10a. Fig. 10b2 and 10c2 show the corresponding differences in concentration from the alloy composition. The segregation behavior of solute elements at the interdendritic regions (Fig. 10b1 and 10b2) was the same as that in the solidified model (Figs. 7b1 and 7b2). Here, Cr, Mo, C, Mn, and W were segregated to the interdendritic regions, while Si, Fe, and Co were depressed. However, the concentration fluctuations at the interdendritic regions were larger than those in the solidified model. Moreover, the segregation of the outside of the melt pool, i.e., the heat-affected zone, was remarkable throughout remelting and resolidification. Different segregation behaviors were observed in the re-remelted region: Mo, Si, Mn, and W were segregated, while Ni, Fe, and Co were depressed. These solute segregations caused by remelting are expected to heavily influence the crack behavior.

Fig. 10

4. Discussion

4.1. Effect of segregation of solute elements on liquation cracking susceptibility

Strong solute segregation was observed between the interdendritic regions of the solidified alloy (Fig. 7). In addition, the solute segregation behavior was significantly affected by remelting and resolidification and varied across the alloy. Solute segregation can be categorized by the regions shown in Fig. 11a1–11a4, namely the cell boundary (Fig. 11a1), interior of the melt-pool boundary (Fig. 11a2), re-remelted regions (Fig. 11a3), and heat-affected regions (Fig. 11a4). The concentration profiles of these regions are shown in Fig. 11b1–11b4. Solute segregation was the highest in the cell boundary region. The solute segregation in the heat-affected region was almost the same as that in the cell boundary region, but seemed to have been attenuated by reheating during remelting and resolidification. The interior of the melt-pool boundary region also had the same tendency for solute segregation. However, the amount of Cr segregation was smaller than that of Mo. A decrease in the Cr concentration was also mitigated, and the concentration remained the same as that in the alloy composition. Fig. 11c1–11c4 show the chemical potentials of the solute elements for the FCC phase at 1073 K calculated using the compositions of those interfacial regions. All the interfacial regions showed non-constant chemical potentials for each element along the perpendicular direction, but the fluctuations of the chemical potentials differed by the type of interfaces. In particular, the fluctuation of the chemical potential of C at the cell boundary region was the largest, suggesting it can be relaxed easily by heat treatment. On the other hand, the fluctuations of the other elements in all the regions were small. The solute segregations are most likely to remain after the heat treatment and are supposed to affect the cracking susceptibilities.

Fig. 11

The solidus temperatures TS, the difference between the liquidus and solidus temperatures (i.e., the brittle temperature range (BTR)), and the fractions of the equilibrium precipitate phases at 1073 K of the interfacial regions were calculated as the liquation, solidification, and ductility dip cracking susceptibilities, respectively. At the cell boundary (Fig. 12a1), interior of the melt-pool boundary (Fig. 12a1), and heat-affected regions (Fig. 12a1), the internal and interfacial regions exhibited higher and lower TS compared to that of the alloy composition, respectively. The lowest Ts was obtained with the composition at the cell boundary region, which is the largest solute-segregated region. It has been suggested that strong segregations of solute elements in LPBF lead to liquation cracks [16]. This study also supports this suggestion, and liquation cracks are more likely to occur at the interfacial regions indicated by predicting the solute segregation behavior using the MPF model. Additionally, the BTRs of the cell boundary, interior of the melt-pool boundary, and heat-affected regions were wider at the interdendritic regions, and solidification cracks were also likely to occur in these regions. Moreover, within the solute segregation regions, the fraction of the precipitate phases in these interfacial regions was larger than that calculated using the alloy composition (Fig. 12c1, 12c2, and 12c4). This indicates that ductility dip cracking is also likely to occur at the cell boundary, interior of the melt-pool boundary, and in heat-affected regions. Contrarily, we found that the re-remelted region exhibited a higher TS and smaller BTR even in the interfacial region (Fig. 12a3 and 12b3), where the solute segregation behavior was different from that of the other regions. In addition, the re-remelting region exhibited less precipitation compared with the other segregated regions (Fig. 12c3). The re-remelting caused by the latent heat can attenuate solute segregation, prevent Ts from decreasing, decrease the BTR, and decrease the amount of precipitate phases. Alloys with a large amount of latent heat are expected to increase the re-remelting region, thereby decreasing the susceptibility to liquation and ductility dip cracks due to solute element segregation. This can be a guide for designing alloys for the LPBF process. As mentioned in Section 3.4, the microstructure [45] and the solute segregation behavior [44] at the melt pool boundary of LPBF-manufactured 316 L stainless steel are observed, and they are different from that of the interdendritic regions. Experimental observations of the solute segregation behavior in the LPBF-fabricated Ni-based alloys are currently underway.

Fig. 12

4.2. Applicability of the conventional MPF simulation to microstructure formation under LPBF

As the solidification growth rate increases, segregation coefficients approach 1, and the fluctuation of the solid/liquid interface is suppressed by the interfacial tension. The interface growth occurs in a flat fashion instead of having a cellular morphology at a velocity above the absolute stability limit, Ras, predicted by the Mullins-Sekerka theory [29]Ras = (ΔT0 DL) / (k Γ) where ΔT0DLk, and Γ are the difference between the liquidus and solidus temperatures, equilibrium segregation coefficient, the diffusivity of liquid, and the Gibbs-Thomson coefficient, respectively.

The Ras of HX was calculated using the equation and the thermodynamic parameters obtained by the TCNI9 thermodynamic database [39]. The calculated Ras of HX was 3.9 m s-1 and is ten times larger than that of the Ni–Nb alloy (approximately 0.4 m s-1[20]. The HX alloy was solidified under R values in the range of 8.2 × 10−2–6.3 × 10−1 m s-1. The theoretically calculated criterion is larger than the evaluated R, and is in agreement with the experiment in which dendritic growth is observed in the melt pool (Fig. 5). In contrast, Karayagiz et al. [20] reported that the R of the Ni–Nb binary alloy under LPBF was as high as approximately 2 m s-1, and planar interface growth was observed to be predominant under the high-growth-rate conditions. These experimentally observed microstructures agree well with the prediction by the Mullins-Sekerka theory about the relationship between the morphology and solidification rates.

In this study, the solidification microstructure formed by the laser-beam irradiation of an HX multicomponent Ni-based superalloy was reproduced by a conventional MPF simulation, in which the system was assumed to be in a quasi-equilibrium condition. Boussinot et al. [24] also suggested that the conventional phase-field model can be applied to simulate the microstructure of an IN718 multicomponent Ni-based superalloy in LPBF. In contrast, Kagayaski et al. [20] suggested that the conventional MPF simulation cannot be applied to the solidification of the Ni-Nb binary alloy system and that the finite interface dissipation model proposed by Steinbach et al. [48][49] is necessary to simulate the high solidification rates observed in LPBF. The difference in the applicability of the conventional MPF method to HX and Ni–Nb binary alloys is presumed to arise from the differences in the non-equilibrium degree of these systems under the high solidification rates of LPBF. The results suggest that Ras can be used as a simple index to apply the conventional MPF model for solidification in LPBF. Solidification becomes a non-equilibrium process as the solidification rate approaches the limit of absolute stability, Ras. In this study, the solidification of the HX multicomponent system occurred under a relatively low solidification rate compared to Ras, and the microstructure of the conventional MPF model was successfully reproduced in the physical experiment. However, note that the limit of absolute stability predicted by the Mullins-Sekerka theory was originally proposed for solidification in a binary alloy system, and further investigation is required to consider its applicability to multicomponent alloy systems. Moreover, the fast solidification, such as in the LPBF process, causes segregation coefficient approaching a value of 1 [20][21][25] corresponds to a diffusion length that is on the order of the atomic interface thickness. When the segregation coefficient approaches 1, solute undercooling disappears; hence, there is no driving force to amplify fluctuations regardless of whether interfacial tension is present. This phenomenon should be further investigated in future studies.

5. Conclusions

We simulated solute segregation in a multicomponent HX alloy under the LPBF process by an MPF simulation using the temperature distributions obtained by a CtFD simulation. We set the parameters of the CtFD simulation to match the melt pool shape formed in the laser-irradiation experiment and found that solidification occurred under high cooling rates of up to 1.6 × 10K s-1.

MPF simulations using the temperature distributions from CtFD simulation could reproduce the experimentally observed PDAS and revealed that significant solute segregation occurred at the interdendritic regions. Equilibrium thermodynamic calculations using the alloy compositions of the segregated regions when considering crack sensitivities suggested a decrease in the solidus temperature and an increase in the amount of carbide precipitation, thereby increasing the susceptibility to liquation and ductility dip cracks in these regions. Notably, these changes were suppressed at the melt-pool boundary region, where re-remelting occurred during the stacking of the layer above. This effect can be used to achieve a novel in-process segregation attenuation.

Our study revealed that a conventional MPF simulation weakly coupled with a CtFD simulation can be used to study the solidification of multicomponent alloys in LPBF, contrary to the cases of binary alloys investigated in previous studies. We discussed the applicability of the conventional MPF model to the LPBF process in terms of the limit of absolute stability, Ras, and suggested that alloys with a high limit velocity, i.e., multicomponent alloys, can be simulated using the conventional MPF model even under the high solidification velocity conditions of LPBF.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Masayuki Okugawa: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Takayoshi Nakano: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Funding acquisition. Yuichiro Koizumi: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Sukeharu Nomoto: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Investigation. Makoto Watanabe: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Funding acquisition. Katsuhiko Sawaizumi: Validation, Software, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Kenji Saito: Visualization, Validation, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Haruki Yoshima: Visualization, Validation, Software, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation.

Declaration of Competing Interest

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

Acknowledgments

This work was partly supported by the Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, Cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program (SIP), “Materials Integration for Revolutionary Design System of Structural Materials,” (funding agency: The Japan Science and Technology Agency), by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 21H05018 and 21H05193, and by CREST Nanomechanics: Elucidation of macroscale mechanical properties based on understanding nanoscale dynamics for innovative mechanical materials (Grant Number: JPMJCR2194) from the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST). The authors would like to thank Mr. H. Kawabata and Mr. K. Kimura for their technical support with the sample preparations and laser beam irradiation experiments.

Appendix A. Supplementary material

Download : Download Word document (654KB)

Supplementary material.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

Schematic diagram of HP-LPBF melting process.

Modeling and numerical studies of high-precision laser powder bed fusion

Yi Wei ;Genyu Chen;Nengru Tao;Wei Zhou
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0191504

In order to comprehensively reveal the evolutionary dynamics of the molten pool and the state of motion of the fluid during the high-precision laser powder bed fusion (HP-LPBF) process, this study aims to deeply investigate the specific manifestations of the multiphase flow, solidification phenomena, and heat transfer during the process by means of numerical simulation methods. Numerical simulation models of SS316L single-layer HP-LPBF formation with single and double tracks were constructed using the discrete element method and the computational fluid dynamics method. The effects of various factors such as Marangoni convection, surface tension, vapor recoil, gravity, thermal convection, thermal radiation, and evaporative heat dissipation on the heat and mass transfer in the molten pool have been paid attention to during the model construction process. The results show that the molten pool exhibits a “comet” shape, in which the temperature gradient at the front end of the pool is significantly larger than that at the tail end, with the highest temperature gradient up to 1.69 × 108 K/s. It is also found that the depth of the second track is larger than that of the first one, and the process parameter window has been determined preliminarily. In addition, the application of HP-LPBF technology helps to reduce the surface roughness and minimize the forming size.

Topics

Heat transferNonequilibrium thermodynamicsSolidification processComputer simulationDiscrete element methodLasersMass transferFluid mechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsMultiphase flows

I. INTRODUCTION

Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) has become a research hotspot in the field of additive manufacturing of metals due to its advantages of high-dimensional accuracy, good surface quality, high density, and high material utilization.1,2 With the rapid development of electronics, medical, automotive, biotechnology, energy, communication, and optics, the demand for microfabrication technology is increasing day by day.3 High-precision laser powder bed fusion (HP-LPBF) is one of the key manufacturing technologies for tiny parts in the fields of electronics, medical, automotive, biotechnology, energy, communication, and optics because of its process characteristics such as small focal spot diameter, small powder particle size, and thin powder layup layer thickness.4–13 Compared with LPBF, HP-LPBF has the significant advantages of smaller focal spot diameter, smaller powder particle size, and thinner layer thickness. These advantages make HP-LPBF perform better in producing micro-fine parts, high surface quality, and parts with excellent mechanical properties.

HP-LPBF is in the exploratory stage, and researchers have already done some exploratory studies on the focal spot diameter, the amount of defocusing, and the powder particle size. In order to explore the influence of changing the laser focal spot diameter on the LPBF process characteristics of the law, Wildman et al.14 studied five groups of different focal spot diameter LPBF forming 316L stainless steel (SS316L) processing effect, the smallest focal spot diameter of 26 μm, and the results confirm that changing the focal spot diameter can be achieved to achieve the energy control, so as to control the quality of forming. Subsequently, Mclouth et al.15 proposed the laser out-of-focus amount (focal spot diameter) parameter, which characterizes the distance between the forming plane and the laser focal plane. The laser energy density was controlled by varying the defocusing amount while keeping the laser parameters constant. Sample preparation at different focal positions was investigated, and their microstructures were characterized. The results show that the samples at the focal plane have finer microstructure than those away from the focal plane, which is the effect of higher power density and smaller focal spot diameter. In order to explore the influence of changing the powder particle size on the characteristics of the LPBF process, Qian et al.16 carried out single-track scanning simulations on powder beds with average powder particle sizes of 70 and 40 μm, respectively, and the results showed that the melt tracks sizes were close to each other under the same process parameters for the two particle-size distributions and that the molten pool of powder beds with small particles was more elongated and the edges of the melt tracks were relatively flat. In order to explore the superiority of HP-LPBF technology, Xu et al.17 conducted a comparative analysis of HP-LPBF and conventional LPBF of SS316L. The results showed that the average surface roughness of the top surface after forming by HP-LPBF could reach 3.40 μm. Once again, it was verified that HP-LPBF had higher forming quality than conventional LPBF. On this basis, Wei et al.6 comparatively analyzed the effects of different laser focal spot diameters on different powder particle sizes formed by LPBF. The results showed that the smaller the laser focal spot diameter, the fewer the defects on the top and side surfaces. The above research results confirm that reducing the laser focal spot diameter can obtain higher energy density and thus better forming quality.

LPBF involves a variety of complex systems and mechanisms, and the final quality of the part is influenced by a large number of process parameters.18–24 Some research results have shown that there are more than 50 factors affecting the quality of the specimen. The influencing factors are mainly categorized into three main groups: (1) laser parameters, (2) powder parameters, and (3) equipment parameters, which interact with each other to determine the final specimen quality. With the continuous development of technologies such as computational materials science and computational fluid dynamics (CFD), the method of studying the influence of different factors on the forming quality of LPBF forming process has been shifted from time-consuming and laborious experimental characterization to the use of numerical simulation methods. As a result, more and more researchers are adopting this approach for their studies. Currently, numerical simulation studies on LPBF are mainly focused on the exploration of molten pool, temperature distribution, and residual stresses.

  1. Finite element simulation based on continuum mechanics and free surface fluid flow modeling based on fluid dynamics are two common approaches to study the behavior of LPBF molten pool.25–28 Finite element simulation focuses on the temperature and thermal stress fields, treats the powder bed as a continuum, and determines the molten pool size by plotting the elemental temperature above the melting point. In contrast, fluid dynamics modeling can simulate the 2D or 3D morphology of the metal powder pile and obtain the powder size and distribution by certain algorithms.29 The flow in the molten pool is mainly affected by recoil pressure and the Marangoni effect. By simulating the molten pool formation, it is possible to predict defects, molten pool shape, and flow characteristics, as well as the effect of process parameters on the molten pool geometry.30–34 In addition, other researchers have been conducted to optimize the laser processing parameters through different simulation methods and experimental data.35–46 Crystal growth during solidification is studied to further understand the effect of laser parameters on dendritic morphology and solute segregation.47–54 A multi-scale system has been developed to describe the fused deposition process during 3D printing, which is combined with the conductive heat transfer model and the dendritic solidification model.55,56
  2. Relevant scholars have adopted various different methods for simulation, such as sequential coupling theory,57 Lagrangian and Eulerian thermal models,58 birth–death element method,25 and finite element method,59 in order to reveal the physical phenomena of the laser melting process and optimize the process parameters. Luo et al.60 compared the LPBF temperature field and molten pool under double ellipsoidal and Gaussian heat sources by ANSYS APDL and found that the diffusion of the laser energy in the powder significantly affects the molten pool size and the temperature field.
  3. The thermal stresses obtained from the simulation correlate with the actual cracks,61 and local preheating can effectively reduce the residual stresses.62 A three-dimensional thermodynamic finite element model investigated the temperature and stress variations during laser-assisted fabrication and found that powder-to-solid conversion increases the temperature gradient, stresses, and warpage.63 Other scholars have predicted residual stresses and part deflection for LPBF specimens and investigated the effects of deposition pattern, heat, laser power, and scanning strategy on residual stresses, noting that high-temperature gradients lead to higher residual stresses.64–67 

In short, the process of LPBF forming SS316L is extremely complex and usually involves drastic multi-scale physicochemical changes that will only take place on a very small scale. Existing literature employs DEM-based mesoscopic-scale numerical simulations to investigate the effects of process parameters on the molten pool dynamics of LPBF-formed SS316L. However, a few studies have been reported on the key mechanisms of heating and solidification, spatter, and convective behavior of the molten pool of HP-LPBF-formed SS316L with small laser focal spot diameters. In this paper, the geometrical properties of coarse and fine powder particles under three-dimensional conditions were first calculated using DEM. Then, numerical simulation models for single-track and double-track cases in the single-layer HP-LPBF forming SS316L process were developed at mesoscopic scale using the CFD method. The flow genesis of the melt in the single-track and double-track molten pools is discussed, and their 3D morphology and dimensional characteristics are discussed. In addition, the effects of laser process parameters, powder particle size, and laser focal spot diameter on the temperature field, characterization information, and defects in the molten pool are discussed.

II. MODELING

A. 3D powder bed modeling

HP-LPBF is an advanced processing technique for preparing target parts layer by layer stacking, the process of which involves repetitive spreading and melting of powders. In this process, both the powder spreading and the morphology of the powder bed are closely related to the results of the subsequent melting process, while the melted surface also affects the uniform distribution of the next layer of powder. For this reason, this chapter focuses on the modeling of the physical action during the powder spreading process and the theory of DEM to establish the numerical model of the powder bed, so as to lay a solid foundation for the accuracy of volume of fluid (VOF) and CFD.

1. DEM

DEM is a numerical technique for calculating the interaction of a large number of particles, which calculates the forces and motions of the spheres by considering each powder sphere as an independent unit. The motion of the powder particles follows the laws of classical Newtonian mechanics, including translational and rotational,38,68–70 which are expressed as follows:����¨=���+∑��ij,

(1)����¨=∑�(�ij×�ij),

(2)

where �� is the mass of unit particle i in kg, ��¨ is the advective acceleration in m/s2, And g is the gravitational acceleration in m/s2. �ij is the force in contact with the neighboring particle � in N. �� is the rotational inertia of the unit particle � in kg · m2. ��¨ is the unit particle � angular acceleration in rad/s2. �ij is the vector pointing from unit particle � to the contact point of neighboring particle �⁠.

Equations (1) and (2) can be used to calculate the velocity and angular velocity variations of powder particles to determine their positions and velocities. A three-dimensional powder bed model of SS316L was developed using DEM. The powder particles are assumed to be perfect spheres, and the substrate and walls are assumed to be rigid. To describe the contact between the powder particles and between the particles and the substrate, a non-slip Hertz–Mindlin nonlinear spring-damping model71 was used with the following expression:�hz=��������+��[(�����ij−�eff����)−(�����+�eff����)],

(3)

where �hz is the force calculated using the Hertzian in M. �� and �� are the radius of unit particles � and � in m, respectively. �� is the overlap size of the two powder particles in m. ��⁠, �� are the elastic constants in the normal and tangential directions, respectively. �ij is the unit vector connecting the centerlines of the two powder particles. �eff is the effective mass of the two powder particles in kg. �� and �� are the viscoelastic damping constants in the normal and tangential directions, respectively. �� and �� are the components of the relative velocities of the two powder particles. ��� is the displacement vector between two spherical particles. The schematic diagram of overlapping powder particles is shown in Fig. 1.

FIG. 1.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Schematic diagram of overlapping powder particles.

Because the particle size of the powder used for HP-LPBF is much smaller than 100 μm, the effect of van der Waals forces must be considered. Therefore, the cohesive force �jkr of the Hertz–Mindlin model was used instead of van der Waals forces,72 with the following expression:�jkr=−4��0�*�1.5+4�*3�*�3,

(4)1�*=(1−��2)��+(1−��2)��,

(5)1�*=1��+1��,

(6)

where �* is the equivalent Young’s modulus in GPa; �* is the equivalent particle radius in m; �0 is the surface energy of the powder particles in J/m2; α is the contact radius in m; �� and �� are the Young’s modulus of the unit particles � and �⁠, respectively, in GPa; and �� and �� are the Poisson’s ratio of the unit particles � and �⁠, respectively.

2. Model building

Figure 2 shows a 3D powder bed model generated using DEM with a coarse powder geometry of 1000 × 400 × 30 μm3. The powder layer thickness is 30 μm, and the powder bed porosity is 40%. The average particle size of this spherical powder is 31.7 μm and is normally distributed in the range of 15–53 μm. The geometry of the fine powder was 1000 × 400 × 20 μm3, with a layer thickness of 20 μm, and the powder bed porosity of 40%. The average particle size of this spherical powder is 11.5 μm and is normally distributed in the range of 5–25 μm. After the 3D powder bed model is generated, it needs to be imported into the CFD simulation software for calculation, and the imported geometric model is shown in Fig. 3. This geometric model is mainly composed of three parts: protective gas, powder bed, and substrate. Under the premise of ensuring the accuracy of the calculation, the mesh size is set to 3 μm, and the total number of coarse powder meshes is 1 704 940. The total number of fine powder meshes is 3 982 250.

FIG. 2.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Three-dimensional powder bed model: (a) coarse powder, (b) fine powder.

FIG. 3.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Geometric modeling of the powder bed computational domain: (a) coarse powder, (b) fine powder.

B. Modeling of fluid mechanics simulation

In order to solve the flow, melting, and solidification problems involved in HP-LPBF molten pool, the study must follow the three governing equations of conservation of mass, conservation of energy, and conservation of momentum.73 The VOF method, which is the most widely used in fluid dynamics, is used to solve the molten pool dynamics model.

1. VOF

VOF is a method for tracking the free interface between the gas and liquid phases on the molten pool surface. The core idea of the method is to define a volume fraction function F within each grid, indicating the proportion of the grid space occupied by the material, 0 ≤ F ≤ 1 in Fig. 4. Specifically, when F = 0, the grid is empty and belongs to the gas-phase region; when F = 1, the grid is completely filled with material and belongs to the liquid-phase region; and when 0 < F < 1, the grid contains free surfaces and belongs to the mixed region. The direction normal to the free surface is the direction of the fastest change in the volume fraction F (the direction of the gradient of the volume fraction), and the direction of the gradient of the volume fraction can be calculated from the values of the volume fractions in the neighboring grids.74 The equations controlling the VOF are expressed as follows:𝛻����+�⋅(��→)=0,

(7)

where t is the time in s and �→ is the liquid velocity in m/s.

FIG. 4.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Schematic diagram of VOF.

The material parameters of the mixing zone are altered due to the inclusion of both the gas and liquid phases. Therefore, in order to represent the density of the mixing zone, the average density �¯ is used, which is expressed as follows:72�¯=(1−�1)�gas+�1�metal,

(8)

where �1 is the proportion of liquid phase, �gas is the density of protective gas in kg/m3, and �metal is the density of metal in kg/m3.

2. Control equations and boundary conditions

Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of the HP-LPBF melting process. First, the laser light strikes a localized area of the material and rapidly heats up the area. Next, the energy absorbed in the region is diffused through a variety of pathways (heat conduction, heat convection, and surface radiation), and this process triggers complex phase transition phenomena (melting, evaporation, and solidification). In metals undergoing melting, the driving forces include surface tension and the Marangoni effect, recoil due to evaporation, and buoyancy due to gravity and uneven density. The above physical phenomena interact with each other and do not occur independently.

FIG. 5.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Schematic diagram of HP-LPBF melting process.

  1. Laser heat sourceThe Gaussian surface heat source model is used as the laser heat source model with the following expression:�=2�0����2exp(−2�12��2),(9)where � is the heat flow density in W/m2, �0 is the absorption rate of SS316L, �� is the radius of the laser focal spot in m, and �1 is the radial distance from the center of the laser focal spot in m. The laser focal spot can be used for a wide range of applications.
  2. Energy absorptionThe formula for calculating the laser absorption �0 of SS316L is as follows:�0=0.365(�0[1+�0(�−20)]/�)0.5,(10)where �0 is the direct current resistivity of SS316L at 20 °C in Ω m, �0 is the resistance temperature coefficient in ppm/°C, � is the temperature in °C, and � is the laser wavelength in m.
  3. Heat transferThe basic principle of heat transfer is conservation of energy, which is expressed as follows:𝛻𝛻𝛻�(��)��+�·(��→�)=�·(�0����)+��,(11)where � is the density of liquid phase SS316L in kg/m3, �� is the specific heat capacity of SS316L in J/(kg K), 𝛻� is the gradient operator, t is the time in s, T is the temperature in K, 𝛻�� is the temperature gradient, �→ is the velocity vector, �0 is the coefficient of thermal conduction of SS316L in W/(m K), and  �� is the thermal energy dissipation term in the molten pool.
  4. Molten pool flowThe following three conditions need to be satisfied for the molten pool to flow:
    • Conservation of mass with the following expression:𝛻�·(��→)=0.(12)
    • Conservation of momentum (Navier–Stokes equation) with the following expression:𝛻𝛻𝛻𝛻���→��+�(�→·�)�→=�·[−pI+�(��→+(��→)�)]+�,(13)where � is the pressure in Pa exerted on the liquid phase SS316L microelement, � is the unit matrix, � is the fluid viscosity in N s/m2, and � is the volumetric force (gravity, atmospheric pressure, surface tension, vapor recoil, and the Marangoni effect).
    • Conservation of energy, see Eq. (11)
  5. Surface tension and the Marangoni effectThe effect of temperature on the surface tension coefficient is considered and set as a linear relationship with the following expression:�=�0−��dT(�−��),(14)where � is the surface tension of the molten pool at temperature T in N/m, �� is the melting temperature of SS316L in K, �0 is the surface tension of the molten pool at temperature �� in Pa, and σdσ/ dT is the surface tension temperature coefficient in N/(m K).In general, surface tension decreases with increasing temperature. A temperature gradient causes a gradient in surface tension that drives the liquid to flow, known as the Marangoni effect.
  6. Metal vapor recoilAt higher input energy densities, the maximum temperature of the molten pool surface reaches the evaporation temperature of the material, and a gasification recoil pressure occurs vertically downward toward the molten pool surface, which will be the dominant driving force for the molten pool flow.75 The expression is as follows:��=0.54�� exp ���−���0���,(15)where �� is the gasification recoil pressure in Pa, �� is the ambient pressure in kPa, �� is the latent heat of evaporation in J/kg, �0 is the gas constant in J/(mol K), T is the surface temperature of the molten pool in K, and Te is the evaporation temperature in K.
  7. Solid–liquid–gas phase transitionWhen the laser hits the powder layer, the powder goes through three stages: heating, melting, and solidification. During the solidification phase, mutual transformations between solid, liquid, and gaseous states occur. At this point, the latent heat of phase transition absorbed or released during the phase transition needs to be considered.68 The phase transition is represented based on the relationship between energy and temperature with the following expression:�=�����,(�<��),�(��)+�−����−����,(��<�<��)�(��)+(�−��)����,(��<�),,(16)where �� and �� are solid and liquid phase density, respectively, of SS316L in kg/m3. �� and �� unit volume of solid and liquid phase-specific heat capacity, respectively, of SS316L in J/(kg K). �� and ��⁠, respectively, are the solidification temperature and melting temperature of SS316L in K. �� is the latent heat of the phase transition of SS316L melting in J/kg.

3. Assumptions

The CFD model was computed using the commercial software package FLOW-3D.76 In order to simplify the calculation and solution process while ensuring the accuracy of the results, the model makes the following assumptions:

  1. It is assumed that the effects of thermal stress and material solid-phase thermal expansion on the calculation results are negligible.
  2. The molten pool flow is assumed to be a Newtonian incompressible laminar flow, while the effects of liquid thermal expansion and density on the results are neglected.
  3. It is assumed that the surface tension can be simplified to an equivalent pressure acting on the free surface of the molten pool, and the effect of chemical composition on the results is negligible.
  4. Neglecting the effect of the gas flow field on the molten pool.
  5. The mass loss due to evaporation of the liquid metal is not considered.
  6. The influence of the plasma effect of the molten metal on the calculation results is neglected.

It is worth noting that the formulation of assumptions requires a trade-off between accuracy and computational efficiency. In the above models, some physical phenomena that have a small effect or high difficulty on the calculation results are simplified or ignored. Such simplifications make numerical simulations more efficient and computationally tractable, while still yielding accurate results.

4. Initial conditions

The preheating temperature of the substrate was set to 393 K, at which time all materials were in the solid state and the flow rate was zero.

5. Material parameters

The material used is SS316L and the relevant parameters required for numerical simulations are shown in Table I.46,77,78

TABLE I.

SS316L-related parameters.

PropertySymbolValue
Density of solid metal (kg/m3�metal 7980 
Solid phase line temperature (K) �� 1658 
Liquid phase line temperature (K) �� 1723 
Vaporization temperature (K) �� 3090 
Latent heat of melting (⁠ J/kg⁠) �� 2.60×105 
Latent heat of evaporation (⁠ J/kg⁠) �� 7.45×106 
Surface tension of liquid phase (N /m⁠) � 1.60 
Liquid metal viscosity (kg/m s) �� 6×10−3 
Gaseous metal viscosity (kg/m s) �gas 1.85×10−5 
Temperature coefficient of surface tension (N/m K) ��/�T 0.80×10−3 
Molar mass (⁠ kg/mol⁠) 0.05 593 
Emissivity � 0.26 
Laser absorption �0 0.35 
Ambient pressure (kPa) �� 101 325 
Ambient temperature (K) �0 300 
Stefan–Boltzmann constant (W/m2 K4� 5.67×10−8 
Thermal conductivity of metals (⁠ W/m K⁠) � 24.55 
Density of protective gas (kg/m3�gas 1.25 
Coefficient of thermal expansion (/K) �� 16×10−6 
Generalized gas constant (⁠ J/mol K⁠) 8.314 

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

With the objective of studying in depth the evolutionary patterns of single-track and double-track molten pool development, detailed observations were made for certain specific locations in the model, as shown in Fig. 6. In this figure, P1 and P2 represent the longitudinal tangents to the centers of the two melt tracks in the XZ plane, while L1 is the transverse profile in the YZ plane. The scanning direction is positive and negative along the X axis. Points A and B are the locations of the centers of the molten pool of the first and second melt tracks, respectively (x = 1.995 × 10−4, y = 5 × 10−7, and z = −4.85 × 10−5).

FIG. 6.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Schematic diagram of observation position.

A. Single-track simulation

A series of single-track molten pool simulation experiments were carried out in order to investigate the influence law of laser power as well as scanning speed on the HP-LPBF process. Figure 7 demonstrates the evolution of the 3D morphology and temperature field of the single-track molten pool in the time period of 50–500 μs under a laser power of 100 W and a scanning speed of 800 mm/s. The powder bed is in the natural cooling state. When t = 50 μs, the powder is heated by the laser heat and rapidly melts and settles to form the initial molten pool. This process is accompanied by partial melting of the substrate and solidification together with the melted powder. The molten pool rapidly expands with increasing width, depth, length, and temperature, as shown in Fig. 7(a). When t = 150 μs, the molten pool expands more obviously, and the temperature starts to transfer to the surrounding area, forming a heat-affected zone. At this point, the width of the molten pool tends to stabilize, and the temperature in the center of the molten pool has reached its peak and remains largely stable. However, the phenomenon of molten pool spatter was also observed in this process, as shown in Fig. 7(b). As time advances, when t = 300 μs, solidification begins to occur at the tail of the molten pool, and tiny ripples are produced on the solidified surface. This is due to the fact that the melt flows toward the region with large temperature gradient under the influence of Marangoni convection and solidifies together with the melt at the end of the bath. At this point, the temperature gradient at the front of the bath is significantly larger than at the end. While the width of the molten pool was gradually reduced, the shape of the molten pool was gradually changed to a “comet” shape. In addition, a slight depression was observed at the top of the bath because the peak temperature at the surface of the bath reached the evaporation temperature, which resulted in a recoil pressure perpendicular to the surface of the bath downward, creating a depressed region. As the laser focal spot moves and is paired with the Marangoni convection of the melt, these recessed areas will be filled in as shown in Fig. 7(c). It has been shown that the depressed regions are the result of the coupled effect of Marangoni convection, recoil pressure, and surface tension.79 By t = 500 μs, the width and height of the molten pool stabilize and show a “comet” shape in Fig. 7(d).

FIG. 7.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Single-track molten pool process: (a) t = 50  ��⁠, (b) t = 150  ��⁠, (c) t = 300  ��⁠, (d) t = 500  ��⁠.

Figure 8 depicts the velocity vector diagram of the P1 profile in a single-track molten pool, the length of the arrows represents the magnitude of the velocity, and the maximum velocity is about 2.36 m/s. When t = 50 μs, the molten pool takes shape, and the velocities at the two ends of the pool are the largest. The variation of the velocities at the front end is especially more significant in Fig. 8(a). As the time advances to t = 150 μs, the molten pool expands rapidly, in which the velocity at the tail increases and changes more significantly, while the velocity at the front is relatively small. At this stage, the melt moves backward from the center of the molten pool, which in turn expands the molten pool area. The melt at the back end of the molten pool center flows backward along the edge of the molten pool surface and then converges along the edge of the molten pool to the bottom center, rising to form a closed loop. Similarly, a similar closed loop is formed at the front end of the center of the bath, but with a shorter path. However, a large portion of the melt in the center of the closed loop formed at the front end of the bath is in a nearly stationary state. The main cause of this melt flow phenomenon is the effect of temperature gradient and surface tension (the Marangoni effect), as shown in Figs. 8(b) and 8(e). This dynamic behavior of the melt tends to form an “elliptical” pool. At t = 300 μs, the tendency of the above two melt flows to close the loop is more prominent and faster in Fig. 8(c). When t = 500 μs, the velocity vector of the molten pool shows a stable trend, and the closed loop of melt flow also remains stable. With the gradual laser focal spot movement, the melt is gradually solidified at its tail, and finally, a continuous and stable single track is formed in Fig. 8(d).

FIG. 8.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Vector plot of single-track molten pool velocity in XZ longitudinal section: (a) t = 50  ��⁠, (b) t = 150  ��⁠, (c) t = 300  ��⁠, (d) t = 500  ��⁠, (e) molten pool flow.

In order to explore in depth the transient evolution of the molten pool, the evolution of the single-track temperature field and the melt flow was monitored in the YZ cross section. Figure 9(a) shows the state of the powder bed at the initial moment. When t = 250 μs, the laser focal spot acts on the powder bed and the powder starts to melt and gradually collects in the molten pool. At this time, the substrate will also start to melt, and the melt flow mainly moves in the downward and outward directions and the velocity is maximum at the edges in Fig. 9(b). When t = 300 μs, the width and depth of the molten pool increase due to the recoil pressure. At this time, the melt flows more slowly at the center, but the direction of motion is still downward in Fig. 9(c). When t = 350 μs, the width and depth of the molten pool further increase, at which time the intensity of the melt flow reaches its peak and the direction of motion remains the same in Fig. 9(d). When t = 400 μs, the melt starts to move upward, and the surrounding powder or molten material gradually fills up, causing the surface of the molten pool to begin to flatten. At this time, the maximum velocity of the melt is at the center of the bath, while the velocity at the edge is close to zero, and the edge of the melt starts to solidify in Fig. 9(e). When t = 450 μs, the melt continues to move upward, forming a convex surface of the melt track. However, the melt movement slows down, as shown in Fig. 9(f). When t = 500 μs, the melt further moves upward and its speed gradually becomes smaller. At the same time, the melt solidifies further, as shown in Fig. 9(g). When t = 550 μs, the melt track is basically formed into a single track with a similar “mountain” shape. At this stage, the velocity is close to zero only at the center of the molten pool, and the flow behavior of the melt is poor in Fig. 9(h). At t = 600 μs, the melt stops moving and solidification is rapidly completed. Up to this point, a single track is formed in Fig. 9(i). During the laser action on the powder bed, the substrate melts and combines with the molten state powder. The powder-to-powder fusion is like the convergence of water droplets, which are rapidly fused by surface tension. However, the fusion between the molten state powder and the substrate occurs driven by surface tension, and the molten powder around the molten pool is pulled toward the substrate (a wetting effect occurs), which ultimately results in the formation of a monolithic whole.38,80,81

FIG. 9.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Evolution of single-track molten pool temperature and melt flow in the YZ cross section: (a) t = 0  ��⁠, (b) t = 250  ��⁠, (c) t = 300  ��⁠, (d) t = 350  ��⁠, (e) t = 400  ��⁠, (f) t = 450  ��⁠, (g) t = 500  ��⁠, (h) t = 550  ��⁠, (i) t = 600  ��⁠.

The wetting ability between the liquid metal and the solid substrate in the molten pool directly affects the degree of balling of the melt,82,83 and the wetting ability can be measured by the contact angle of a single track in Fig. 10. A smaller value of contact angle represents better wettability. The contact angle α can be calculated by�=�1−�22,

(17)

where �1 and �2 are the contact angles of the left and right regions, respectively.

FIG. 10.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Schematic of contact angle.

Relevant studies have confirmed that the wettability is better at a contact angle α around or below 40°.84 After measurement, a single-track contact angle α of about 33° was obtained under this process parameter, which further confirms the good wettability.

B. Double-track simulation

In order to deeply investigate the influence of hatch spacing on the characteristics of the HP-LPBF process, a series of double-track molten pool simulation experiments were systematically carried out. Figure 11 shows in detail the dynamic changes of the 3D morphology and temperature field of the double-track molten pool in the time period of 2050–2500 μs under the conditions of laser power of 100 W, scanning speed of 800 mm/s, and hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. By comparing the study with Fig. 7, it is observed that the basic characteristics of the 3D morphology and temperature field of the second track are similar to those of the first track. However, there are subtle differences between them. The first track exhibits a basically symmetric shape, but the second track morphology shows a slight deviation influenced by the difference in thermal diffusion rate between the solidified metal and the powder. Otherwise, the other characteristic information is almost the same as that of the first track. Figure 12 shows the velocity vector plot of the P2 profile in the double-track molten pool, with a maximum velocity of about 2.63 m/s. The melt dynamics at both ends of the pool are more stable at t = 2050 μs, where the maximum rate of the second track is only 1/3 of that of the first one. Other than that, the rest of the information is almost no significant difference from the characteristic information of the first track. Figure 13 demonstrates a detailed observation of the double-track temperature field and melts flow in the YZ cross section, and a comparative study with Fig. 9 reveals that the width of the second track is slightly wider. In addition, after the melt direction shifts from bottom to top, the first track undergoes four time periods (50 μs) to reach full solidification, while the second track takes five time periods. This is due to the presence of significant heat buildup in the powder bed after the forming of the first track, resulting in a longer dynamic time of the melt and an increased molten pool lifetime. In conclusion, the level of specimen forming can be significantly optimized by adjusting the laser power and hatch spacing.

FIG. 11.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Double-track molten pool process: (a) t = 2050  ��⁠, (b) t = 2150  ��⁠, (c) t = 2300  ��⁠, (d) t = 2500  ��⁠.

FIG. 12.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Vector plot of double-track molten pool velocity in XZ longitudinal section: (a) t = 2050  ��⁠, (b) t = 2150  ��⁠, (c) t = 2300  ��⁠, (d) t = 2500  ��⁠.

FIG. 13.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Evolution of double-track molten pool temperature and melt flow in the YZ cross section: (a) t = 2250  ��⁠, (b) t = 2300  ��⁠, (c) t = 2350  ��⁠, (d) t = 2400  ��⁠, (e) t = 2450  ��⁠, (f) t = 2500  ��⁠, (g) t = 2550  ��⁠, (h) t = 2600  ��⁠, (i) t = 2650  ��⁠.

In order to quantitatively detect the molten pool dimensions as well as the remolten region dimensions, the molten pool characterization information in Fig. 14 is constructed by drawing the boundary on the YZ cross section based on the isothermal surface of the liquid phase line. It can be observed that the heights of the first track and second track are basically the same, but the depth of the second track increases relative to the first track. The molten pool width is mainly positively correlated with the laser power as well as the scanning speed (the laser line energy density �⁠). However, the remelted zone width is negatively correlated with the hatch spacing (the overlapping ratio). Overall, the forming quality of the specimens can be directly influenced by adjusting the laser power, scanning speed, and hatch spacing.

FIG. 14.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Double-track molten pool characterization information on YZ cross section.

In order to study the variation rule of the temperature in the center of the molten pool with time, Fig. 15 demonstrates the temperature variation curves with time for two reference points, A and B. Among them, the red dotted line indicates the liquid phase line temperature of SS316L. From the figure, it can be seen that the maximum temperature at the center of the molten pool in the first track is lower than that in the second track, which is mainly due to the heat accumulation generated after passing through the first track. The maximum temperature gradient was calculated to be 1.69 × 108 K/s. When the laser scanned the first track, the temperature in the center of the molten pool of the second track increased slightly. Similarly, when the laser scanned the second track, a similar situation existed in the first track. Since the temperature gradient in the second track is larger than that in the first track, the residence time of the liquid phase in the molten pool of the first track is longer than that of the second track.

FIG. 15.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Temperature profiles as a function of time for two reference points A and B.

C. Simulation analysis of molten pool under different process parameters

In order to deeply investigate the effects of various process parameters on the mesoscopic-scale temperature field, molten pool characteristic information and defects of HP-LPBF, numerical simulation experiments on mesoscopic-scale laser power, scanning speed, and hatch spacing of double-track molten pools were carried out.

1. Laser power

Figure 16 shows the effects of different laser power on the morphology and temperature field of the double-track molten pool at a scanning speed of 800 mm/s and a hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. When P = 50 W, a smaller molten pool is formed due to the lower heat generated by the Gaussian light source per unit time. This leads to a smaller track width, which results in adjacent track not lapping properly and the presence of a large number of unmelted powder particles, resulting in an increase in the number of defects, such as pores in the specimen. The surface of the track is relatively flat, and the depth is small. In addition, the temperature gradient before and after the molten pool was large, and the depression location appeared at the biased front end in Fig. 16(a). When P = 100 W, the surface of the track is flat and smooth with excellent lap. Due to the Marangoni effect, the velocity field of the molten pool is in the form of “vortex,” and the melt has good fluidity, and the maximum velocity reaches 2.15 m/s in Fig. 16(b). When P = 200 W, the heat generated by the Gaussian light source per unit time is too large, resulting in the melt rapidly reaching the evaporation temperature, generating a huge recoil pressure, forming a large molten pool, and the surface of the track is obviously raised. The melt movement is intense, especially the closed loop at the center end of the molten pool. At this time, the depth and width of the molten pool are large, leading to the expansion of the remolten region and the increased chance of the appearance of porosity defects in Fig. 16(c). The results show that at low laser power, the surface tension in the molten pool is dominant. At high laser power, recoil pressure is its main role.

FIG. 16.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Simulation results of double-track molten pool under different laser powers: (a) P = 50 W, (b) P = 100 W, (c) P = 200 W.

Table II shows the effect of different laser powers on the characteristic information of the double-track molten pool at a scanning speed of 800 mm/s and a hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. The negative overlapping ratio in the table indicates that the melt tracks are not lapped, and 26/29 indicates the melt depth of the first track/second track. It can be seen that with the increase in laser power, the melt depth, melt width, melt height, and remelted zone show a gradual increase. At the same time, the overlapping ratio also increases. Especially in the process of laser power from 50 to 200 W, the melting depth and melting width increased the most, which increased nearly 2 and 1.5 times, respectively. Meanwhile, the overlapping ratio also increases with the increase in laser power, which indicates that the melting and fusion of materials are better at high laser power. On the other hand, the dimensions of the molten pool did not change uniformly with the change of laser power. Specifically, the depth-to-width ratio of the molten pool increased from about 0.30 to 0.39 during the increase from 50 to 120 W, which further indicates that the effective heat transfer in the vertical direction is greater than that in the horizontal direction with the increase in laser power. This dimensional response to laser power is mainly affected by the recoil pressure and also by the difference in the densification degree between the powder layer and the metal substrate. In addition, according to the experimental results, the contact angle shows a tendency to increase and then decrease during the process of laser power increase, and always stays within the range of less than 33°. Therefore, in practical applications, it is necessary to select the appropriate laser power according to the specific needs in order to achieve the best processing results.

TABLE II.

Double-track molten pool characterization information at different laser powers.

Laser power (W)Depth (μm)Width (μm)Height (μm)Remolten region (μm)Overlapping ratio (%)Contact angle (°)
50 16 54 11 −10 23 
100 26/29 74 14 18 23.33 33 
200 37/45 116 21 52 93.33 28 

2. Scanning speed

Figure 17 demonstrates the effect of different scanning speeds on the morphology and temperature field of the double-track molten pool at a laser power of 100 W and a hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. With the gradual increase in scanning speed, the surface morphology of the molten pool evolves from circular to elliptical. When � = 200 mm/s, the slow scanning speed causes the material to absorb too much heat, which is very easy to trigger the overburning phenomenon. At this point, the molten pool is larger and the surface morphology is uneven. This situation is consistent with the previously discussed scenario with high laser power in Fig. 17(a). However, when � = 1600 mm/s, the scanning speed is too fast, resulting in the material not being able to absorb sufficient heat, which triggers the powder particles that fail to melt completely to have a direct effect on the bonding of the melt to the substrate. At this time, the molten pool volume is relatively small and the neighboring melt track cannot lap properly. This result is consistent with the previously discussed case of low laser power in Fig. 17(b). Overall, the ratio of the laser power to the scanning speed (the line energy density �⁠) has a direct effect on the temperature field and surface morphology of the molten pool.

FIG. 17.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Simulation results of double-track molten pool under different scanning speed: (a)  � = 200 mm/s, (b)  � = 1600 mm/s.

Table III shows the effects of different scanning speed on the characteristic information of the double-track molten pool under the condition of laser power of 100 W and hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. It can be seen that the scanning speed has a significant effect on the melt depth, melt width, melt height, remolten region, and overlapping ratio. With the increase in scanning speed, the melt depth, melt width, melt height, remelted zone, and overlapping ratio show a gradual decreasing trend. Among them, the melt depth and melt width decreased faster, while the melt height and remolten region decreased relatively slowly. In addition, when the scanning speed was increased from 200 to 800 mm/s, the decreasing speeds of melt depth and melt width were significantly accelerated, while the decreasing speeds of overlapping ratio were relatively slow. When the scanning speed was further increased to 1600 mm/s, the decreasing speeds of melt depth and melt width were further accelerated, and the un-lapped condition of the melt channel also appeared. In addition, the contact angle increases and then decreases with the scanning speed, and both are lower than 33°. Therefore, when selecting the scanning speed, it is necessary to make reasonable trade-offs according to the specific situation, and take into account the factors of melt depth, melt width, melt height, remolten region, and overlapping ratio, in order to achieve the best processing results.

TABLE III.

Double-track molten pool characterization information at different scanning speeds.

Scanning speed (mm/s)Depth (μm)Width (μm)Height (μm)Remolten region (μm)Overlapping ratio (%)Contact angle (°)
200 55/68 182 19/32 124 203.33 22 
1600 13 50 11 −16.67 31 

3. Hatch spacing

Figure 18 shows the effect of different hatch spacing on the morphology and temperature field of the double-track molten pool under the condition of laser power of 100 W and scanning speed of 800 mm/s. The surface morphology and temperature field of the first track and second track are basically the same, but slightly different. The first track shows a basically symmetric morphology along the scanning direction, while the second track shows a slight offset due to the difference in the heat transfer rate between the solidified material and the powder particles. When the hatch spacing is too small, the overlapping ratio increases and the probability of defects caused by remelting phenomenon grows. When the hatch spacing is too large, the neighboring melt track cannot overlap properly, and the powder particles are not completely melted, leading to an increase in the number of holes. In conclusion, the ratio of the line energy density � to the hatch spacing (the volume energy density E) has a significant effect on the temperature field and surface morphology of the molten pool.

FIG. 18.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Simulation results of double-track molten pool under different hatch spacings: (a) H = 0.03 mm, (b) H = 0.12 mm.

Table IV shows the effects of different hatch spacing on the characteristic information of the double-track molten pool under the condition of laser power of 100 W and scanning speed of 800 mm/s. It can be seen that the hatch spacing has little effect on the melt depth, melt width, and melt height, but has some effect on the remolten region. With the gradual expansion of hatch spacing, the remolten region shows a gradual decrease. At the same time, the overlapping ratio also decreased with the increase in hatch spacing. In addition, it is observed that the contact angle shows a tendency to increase and then remain stable when the hatch spacing increases, which has a more limited effect on it. Therefore, trade-offs and decisions need to be made on a case-by-case basis when selecting the hatch spacing.

TABLE IV.

Double-track molten pool characterization information at different hatch spacings.

Hatch spacing (mm)Depth (μm)Width (μm)Height (μm)Remolten region (μm)Overlapping ratio (%)Contact angle (°)
0.03 25/27 82 14 59 173.33 30 
0.12 26 78 14 −35 33 

In summary, the laser power, scanning speed, and hatch spacing have a significant effect on the formation of the molten pool, and the correct selection of these three process parameters is crucial to ensure the forming quality. In addition, the melt depth of the second track is slightly larger than that of the first track at higher line energy density � and volume energy density E. This is mainly due to the fact that a large amount of heat accumulation is generated after the first track, forming a larger molten pool volume, which leads to an increase in the melt depth.

D. Simulation analysis of molten pool with powder particle size and laser focal spot diameter

Figure 19 demonstrates the effect of different powder particle sizes and laser focal spot diameters on the morphology and temperature field of the double-track molten pool under a laser power of 100 W, a scanning speed of 800 mm/s, and a hatch spacing of 0.06 mm. In the process of melting coarse powder with small laser focal spot diameter, the laser energy cannot completely melt the larger powder particles, resulting in their partial melting and further generating excessive pore defects. The larger powder particles tend to generate zigzag molten pool edges, which cause an increase in the roughness of the melt track surface. In addition, the molten pool is also prone to generate the present spatter phenomenon, which can directly affect the quality of forming. The volume of the formed molten pool is relatively small, while the melt depth, melt width, and melt height are all smaller relative to the fine powder in Fig. 19(a). In the process of melting fine powders with a large laser focal spot diameter, the laser energy is able to melt the fine powder particles sufficiently, even to the point of overmelting. This results in a large number of fine spatters being generated at the edge of the molten pool, which causes porosity defects in the melt track in Fig. 19(b). In addition, the maximum velocity of the molten pool is larger for large powder particle sizes compared to small powder particle sizes, which indicates that the temperature gradient in the molten pool is larger for large powder particle sizes and the melt motion is more intense. However, the size of the laser focal spot diameter has a relatively small effect on the melt motion. However, a larger focal spot diameter induces a larger melt volume with greater depth, width, and height. In conclusion, a small powder size helps to reduce the surface roughness of the specimen, and a small laser spot diameter reduces the minimum forming size of a single track.

FIG. 19.

VIEW LARGEDOWNLOAD SLIDE

Simulation results of double-track molten pool with different powder particle size and laser focal spot diameter: (a) focal spot = 25 μm, coarse powder, (b) focal spot = 80 μm, fine powder.

Table V shows the maximum temperature gradient at the reference point for different powder sizes and laser focal spot diameters. As can be seen from the table, the maximum temperature gradient is lower than that of HP-LPBF for both coarse powders with a small laser spot diameter and fine powders with a large spot diameter, a phenomenon that leads to an increase in the heat transfer rate of HP-LPBF, which in turn leads to a corresponding increase in the cooling rate and, ultimately, to the formation of finer microstructures.

TABLE V.

Maximum temperature gradient at the reference point for different powder particle sizes and laser focal spot diameters.

Laser power (W)Scanning speed (mm/s)Hatch spacing (mm)Average powder size (μm)Laser focal spot diameter (μm)Maximum temperature gradient (×107 K/s)
100 800 0.06 31.7 25 7.89 
11.5 80 7.11 

IV. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the geometrical characteristics of 3D coarse and fine powder particles were first calculated using DEM and then numerical simulations of single track and double track in the process of forming SS316L from monolayer HP-LPBF at mesoscopic scale were developed using CFD method. The effects of Marangoni convection, surface tension, recoil pressure, gravity, thermal convection, thermal radiation, and evaporative heat dissipation on the heat and mass transfer in the molten pool were considered in this model. The effects of laser power, scanning speed, and hatch spacing on the dynamics of the single-track and double-track molten pools, as well as on other characteristic information, were investigated. The effects of the powder particle size on the molten pool were investigated comparatively with the laser focal spot diameter. The main conclusions are as follows:

  1. The results show that the temperature gradient at the front of the molten pool is significantly larger than that at the tail, and the molten pool exhibits a “comet” morphology. At the top of the molten pool, there is a slightly concave region, which is the result of the coupling of Marangoni convection, recoil pressure, and surface tension. The melt flow forms two closed loops, which are mainly influenced by temperature gradients and surface tension. This special dynamic behavior of the melt tends to form an “elliptical” molten pool and an almost “mountain” shape in single-track forming.
  2. The basic characteristics of the three-dimensional morphology and temperature field of the second track are similar to those of the first track, but there are subtle differences. The first track exhibits a basically symmetrical shape; however, due to the difference in thermal diffusion rates between the solidified metal and the powder, a slight asymmetry in the molten pool morphology of the second track occurs. After forming through the first track, there is a significant heat buildup in the powder bed, resulting in a longer dynamic time of the melt, which increases the life of the molten pool. The heights of the first track and second track remained essentially the same, but the depth of the second track was greater relative to the first track. In addition, the maximum temperature gradient was 1.69 × 108 K/s during HP-LPBF forming.
  3. At low laser power, the surface tension in the molten pool plays a dominant role. At high laser power, recoil pressure becomes the main influencing factor. With the increase of laser power, the effective heat transfer in the vertical direction is superior to that in the horizontal direction. With the gradual increase of scanning speed, the surface morphology of the molten pool evolves from circular to elliptical. In addition, the scanning speed has a significant effect on the melt depth, melt width, melt height, remolten region, and overlapping ratio. Too large or too small hatch spacing will lead to remelting or non-lap phenomenon, which in turn causes the formation of defects.
  4. When using a small laser focal spot diameter, it is difficult to completely melt large powder particle sizes, resulting in partial melting and excessive porosity generation. At the same time, large powder particles produce curved edges of the molten pool, resulting in increased surface roughness of the melt track. In addition, spatter occurs, which directly affects the forming quality. At small focal spot diameters, the molten pool volume is relatively small, and the melt depth, the melt width, and the melt height are correspondingly small. Taken together, the small powder particle size helps to reduce surface roughness, while the small spot diameter reduces the forming size.

REFERENCES

  1. S. L. Sing and W. Y. Yeong , “ Laser powder bed fusion for metal additive manufacturing: Perspectives on recent developments,” Virtual Phys. Prototyping. 15, 359–370 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2020.1779999
    Google ScholarCrossref
  2. A. M. Khorasani , I. G. Jithin , J. K. Veetil , and A. H. Ghasemi , “ A review of technological improvements in laser-based powder bed fusion of metal printers,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 108, 191–209 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05361-3
    Google ScholarCrossref
  3. Y. Qin , A. Brockett , Y. Ma , A. Razali , J. Zhao , C. Harrison , W. Pan , X. Dai , and D. Loziak , “ Micro-manufacturing: Research, technology outcomes and development issues,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 47, 821–837 (2010).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2411-2
    Google ScholarCrossref
  4. B. Nagarajan , Z. Hu , X. Song , W. Zhai , and J. Wei , “ Development of micro selective laser melting: The state of the art and future perspectives,” Engineering. 5, 702–720 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2019.07.002
    Google ScholarCrossref
  5. Y. Wei , G. Chen , W. Li , Y. Zhou , Z. Nie , J. Xu , and W. Zhou , “ Micro selective laser melting of SS316L: Single tracks, defects, microstructures and thermal/mechanical properties,” Opt. Laser Technol. 145, 107469 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2021.107469
    Google ScholarCrossref
  6. Y. Wei , G. Chen , W. Li , M. Li , Y. Zhou , Z. Nie , and J. Xu , “ Process optimization of micro selective laser melting and comparison of different laser diameter for forming different powder,” Opt. Laser Technol. 150, 107953 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.107953
    Google ScholarCrossref
  7. H. Zhiheng , B. Nagarajan , X. Song , R. Huang , W. Zhai , and J. Wei , “ Formation of SS316L single tracks in micro selective laser melting: Surface, geometry, and defects,” Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 9451406.https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9451406
    Crossref
  8. B. Nagarajan , Z. Hu , S. Gao , X. Song , R. Huang , M. Seita , and J. Wei , “ Effect of in-situ laser remelting on the microstructure of SS316L fabricated by micro selective laser melting,” in Advanced Surface Enhancement, edited by Sho Itoh and Shashwat Shukla , Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ( Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2020), pp. 330–336.
    Google ScholarCrossref
  9. H. Zhiheng , B. Nagarajan , X. Song , R. Huang , W. Zhai , and J. Wei , “ Tailoring surface roughness of micro selective laser melted SS316L by in-situ laser remelting,” in Advanced Surface Enhancement, edited by Sho Itoh and Shashwat Shukla , Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ( Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2020), pp. 337–343.
    Google Scholar
  10. J. Fu , Z. Hu , X. Song , W. Zhai , Y. Long , H. Li , and M. Fu , “ Micro selective laser melting of NiTi shape memory alloy: Defects, microstructures and thermal/mechanical properties,” Opt. Laser Technol. 131, 106374 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2020.106374
    Google ScholarCrossref
  11. E. Abele and M. Kniepkamp , “ Analysis and optimisation of vertical surface roughness in micro selective laser melting,” Surf. Topogr.: Metrol. Prop. 3, 034007 (2015).https://doi.org/10.1088/2051-672X/3/3/034007
    Google ScholarCrossref
  12. S. Qu , J. Ding , J. Fu , M. Fu , B. Zhang , and X. Song , “ High-precision laser powder bed fusion processing of pure copper,” Addit. Manuf. 48, 102417 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102417
    Google ScholarCrossref
  13. Y. Wei , G. Chen , M. Li , W. Li , Y. Zhou , J. Xu , and Z. wei , “ High-precision laser powder bed fusion of 18Ni300 maraging steel and its SiC reinforcement composite materials,” J. Manuf. Process. 84, 750–763 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2022.10.049
    Google ScholarCrossref
  14. B. Liu , R. Wildman , T. Christopher , I. Ashcroft , and H. Richard , “ Investigation the effect of particle size distribution on processing parameters optimisation in selective laser melting process,” in 2011 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium ( University of Texas at Austin, 2011).
    Google Scholar
  15. T. D. McLouth , G. E. Bean , D. B. Witkin , S. D. Sitzman , P. M. Adams , D. N. Patel , W. Park , J.-M. Yang , and R. J. Zaldivar , “ The effect of laser focus shift on microstructural variation of Inconel 718 produced by selective laser melting,” Mater. Des. 149, 205–213 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.04.019
    Google ScholarCrossref
  16. Y. Qian , Y. Wentao , and L. Feng , “ Mesoscopic simulations of powder bed fusion: Research progresses and conditions,” Electromachining Mould 06, 46–52 (2017).https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-279X.2017.06.012
    Google Scholar
  17. J. Fu , S. Qu , J. Ding , X. Song , and M. W. Fu , “ Comparison of the microstructure, mechanical properties and distortion of stainless Steel 316L fabricated by micro and conventional laser powder bed fusion,” Addit. Manuf. 44, 102067 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102067
    Google ScholarCrossref
  18. N. T. Aboulkhair , I. Maskery , C. Tuck , I. Ashcroft , and N. M. Everitt , “ The microstructure and mechanical properties of selectively laser Melted AlSi10Mg: The effect of a conventional T6-like heat treatment,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 667, 139–146 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.04.092
    Google ScholarCrossref
  19. S. Y. Chen , J. C. Huang , C. T. Pan , C. H. Lin , T. L. Yang , Y. S. Huang , C. H. Ou , L. Y. Chen , D. Y. Lin , H. K. Lin , T. H. Li , J. S. C. Jang , and C. C. Yang , “ Microstructure and mechanical properties of open-cell porous Ti-6Al-4V fabricated by selective laser melting,” J. Alloys Compd. 713, 248–254 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.04.190
    Google ScholarCrossref
  20. Y. Bai , Y. Yang , D. Wang , and M. Zhang , “ Influence mechanism of parameters process and mechanical properties evolution mechanism of Maraging steel 300 by selective laser melting,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 703, 116–123 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.06.033
    Google ScholarCrossref
  21. Y. Bai , Y. Yang , Z. Xiao , M. Zhang , and D. Wang , “ Process optimization and mechanical property evolution of AlSiMg0.75 by selective laser melting,” Mater. Des. 140, 257–266 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.045
    Google ScholarCrossref
  22. Y. Liu , M. Zhang , W. Shi , Y. Ma , and J. Yang , “ Study on performance optimization of 316L stainless steel parts by high-efficiency selective laser melting,” Opt. Laser Technol. 138, 106872 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2020.106872
    Google ScholarCrossref
  23. D. Gu , Y.-C. Hagedorn , W. Meiners , G. Meng , R. J. S. Batista , K. Wissenbach , and R. Poprawe , “ Densification behavior, microstructure evolution, and wear performance of selective laser melting processed commercially pure titanium,” Acta Mater. 60, 3849–3860 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2012.04.006
    Google ScholarCrossref
  24. N. Read , W. Wang , K. Essa , and M. M. Attallah , “ Selective laser melting of AlSi10Mg alloy: Process optimisation and mechanical properties development,” Mater. Des. 65, 417–424 (2015).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.09.044
    Google ScholarCrossref
  25. I. A. Roberts , C. J. Wang , R. Esterlein , M. Stanford , and D. J. Mynors , “ A three-dimensional finite element analysis of the temperature field during laser melting of metal powders in additive layer manufacturing,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 49(12–13), 916–923 (2009).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2009.07.004
    Google ScholarCrossref
  26. K. Dai and L. Shaw , “ Finite element analysis of the effect of volume shrinkage during laser densification,” Acta Mater. 53(18), 4743–4754 (2005).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2005.06.014
    Google ScholarCrossref
  27. K. Carolin , E. Attar , and P. Heinl , “ Mesoscopic simulation of selective beam melting processes,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 211(6), 978–987 (2011).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.12.016
    Google ScholarCrossref
  28. F.-J. Gürtler , M. Karg , K.-H. Leitz , and M. Schmidt , “ Simulation of laser beam melting of steel powders using the three-dimensional volume of fluid method,” Phys. Procedia 41, 881–886 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2013.03.162
    Google ScholarCrossref
  29. P. Meakin and R. Jullien , “ Restructuring effects in the rain model for random deposition,” J. Phys. France 48(10), 1651–1662 (1987).https://doi.org/10.1051/jphys:0198700480100165100
    Google ScholarCrossref
  30. J-m Wang , G-h Liu , Y-l Fang , and W-k Li , “ Marangoni effect in nonequilibrium multiphase system of material processing,” Rev. Chem. Eng. 32(5), 551–585 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1515/revce-2015-0067
    Google ScholarCrossref
  31. W. Ye , S. Zhang , L. L. Mendez , M. Farias , J. Li , B. Xu , P. Li , and Y. Zhang , “ Numerical simulation of the melting and alloying processes of elemental titanium and boron powders using selective laser alloying,” J. Manuf. Process. 64, 1235–1247 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.02.044
    Google ScholarCrossref
  32. U. S. Bertoli , A. J. Wolfer , M. J. Matthews , J.-P. R. Delplanque , and J. M. Schoenung , “ On the limitations of volumetric energy density as a design parameter for selective laser melting,” Mater. Des. 113, 331–340 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.10.037
    Google ScholarCrossref
  33. W. E. King , H. D. Barth , V. M. Castillo , G. F. Gallegos , J. W. Gibbs , D. E. Hahn , C. Kamath , and A. M. Rubenchik , “ Observation of keyhole-mode laser melting in laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 214(12), 2915–2925 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.005
    Google ScholarCrossref
  34. L. Cao , “ Numerical simulation of the impact of laying powder on selective laser melting single-pass formation,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 141, 1036–1048 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.07.053
    Google ScholarCrossref
  35. L. Huang , X. Hua , D. Wu , and F. Li , “ Numerical study of keyhole instability and porosity formation mechanism in laser welding of aluminum alloy and steel,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 252, 421–431 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.10.011
    Google ScholarCrossref
  36. K. Q. Le , C. Tang , and C. H. Wong , “ On the study of keyhole-mode melting in selective laser melting process,” Int. J. Therm. Sci. 145, 105992 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2019.105992
    Google ScholarCrossref
  37. J.-H. Cho and S.-J. Na , “ Theoretical analysis of keyhole dynamics in polarized laser drilling,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 40(24), 7638 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/40/24/007
    Google ScholarCrossref
  38. W. Ye , “ Mechanism analysis of selective laser melting and metallurgy process based on base element powder of titanium and boron,” Ph.D. dissertation ( Nanchang University, 2021).
    Google Scholar
  39. R. Ammer , M. Markl , U. Ljungblad , C. Körner , and U. Rüde , “ Simulating fast electron beam melting with a parallel thermal free surface lattice Boltzmann method,” Comput. Math. Appl. 67(2), 318–330 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2013.10.001
    Google ScholarCrossref
  40. H. Chen , Q. Wei , S. Wen , Z. Li , and Y. Shi , “ Flow behavior of powder particles in layering process of selective laser melting: Numerical modeling and experimental verification based on discrete element method,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 123, 146–159 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2017.08.004
    Google ScholarCrossref
  41. F. Verhaeghe , T. Craeghs , J. Heulens , and L. Pandelaers , “ A pragmatic model for selective laser melting with evaporation,” Acta Mater. 57(20), 6006–6012 (2009).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2009.08.027
    Google ScholarCrossref
  42. C. H. Fu and Y. B. Guo , “ Three-dimensional temperature gradient mechanism in selective laser melting of Ti-6Al-4V,” J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 136(6), 061004 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028539
    Google ScholarCrossref
  43. Y. Xiang , Z. Shuzhe , L. Junfeng , W. Zhengying , Y. Lixiang , and J. Lihao , “ Numerical simulation and experimental verification for selective laser single track melting forming of Ti6Al4V,” J. Zhejiang Univ. (Eng. Sci.) 53(11), 2102–2109 + 2117 (2019).https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2019.11.007
    Google Scholar
  44. Q. He , H. Xia , J. Liu , X. Ao , and S. Lin , “ Modeling and numerical studies of selective laser melting: Multiphase flow, solidification and heat transfer,” Mater. Des. 196, 109115 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109115
    Google ScholarCrossref
  45. L. Cao , “ Mesoscopic-scale numerical simulation including the influence of process parameters on SLM single-layer multi-pass formation,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A 51, 4130–4145 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-020-05831-z
    Google ScholarCrossref
  46. L. Cao , “ Mesoscopic-scale numerical investigation including the influence of process parameters on LPBF multi-layer multi-path formation,” Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 126(1), 5–23 (2021).https://doi.org/10.32604/cmes.2021.014693
    Google ScholarCrossref
  47. H. Yin and S. D. Felicelli , “ Dendrite growth simulation during solidification in the LENS process,” Acta Mater. 58(4), 1455–1465 (2010).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2009.10.053
    Google ScholarCrossref
  48. P. Nie , O. A. Ojo , and Z. Li , “ Numerical modeling of microstructure evolution during laser additive manufacturing of a nickel-based superalloy,” Acta Mater. 77, 85–95 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2014.05.039
    Google ScholarCrossref
  49. Z. Liu and H. Qi , “ Effects of substrate crystallographic orientations on crystal growth and microstructure formation in laser powder deposition of nickel-based superalloy,” Acta Mater. 87, 248–258 (2015).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2014.12.046
    Google ScholarCrossref
  50. L. Wei , L. Xin , W. Meng , and H. Weidong , “ Cellular automaton simulation of the molten pool of laser solid forming process,” Acta Phys. Sin. 64(01), 018103–018363 (2015).https://doi.org/10.7498/aps.64.018103
    Google ScholarCrossref
  51. R. Acharya , J. A. Sharon , and A. Staroselsky , “ Prediction of microstructure in laser powder bed fusion process,” Acta Mater. 124, 360–371 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.11.018
    Google ScholarCrossref
  52. M. R. Rolchigo and R. LeSar , “ Modeling of binary alloy solidification under conditions representative of additive manufacturing,” Comput. Mater. Sci. 150, 535–545 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.04.004
    Google ScholarCrossref
  53. S. Geng , P. Jiang , L. Guo , X. Gao , and G. Mi , “ Multi-scale simulation of grain/sub-grain structure evolution during solidification in laser welding of aluminum alloys,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 149, 119252 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.119252
    Google ScholarCrossref
  54. W. L. Wang , W. Q. Liu , X. Yang , R. R. Xu , and Q. Y. Dai , “ Multi-scale simulation of columnar-to-equiaxed transition during laser selective melting of rare earth magnesium alloy,” J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 119, 11–24 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2021.12.029
    Google ScholarCrossref
  55. Q. Xia , J. Yang , and Y. Li , “ On the conservative phase-field method with the N-component incompressible flows,” Phys. Fluids 35, 012120 (2023).https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0135490
    Google ScholarCrossref
  56. Q. Xia , G. Sun , J. Kim , and Y. Li , “ Multi-scale modeling and simulation of additive manufacturing based on fused deposition technique,” Phys. Fluids 35, 034116 (2023).https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0141316
    Google ScholarCrossref
  57. A. Hussein , L. Hao , C. Yan , and R. Everson , “ Finite element simulation of the temperature and stress fields in single layers built without-support in selective laser melting,” Mater. Des. 52, 638–647 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.05.070
    Google ScholarCrossref
  58. J. Ding , P. Colegrove , J. Mehnen , S. Ganguly , P. M. Sequeira Almeida , F. Wang , and S. Williams , “ Thermo-mechanical analysis of wire and arc additive layer manufacturing process on large multi-layer parts,” Comput. Mater. Sci. 50(12), 3315–3322 (2011).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2011.06.023
    Google ScholarCrossref
  59. Y. Du , X. You , F. Qiao , L. Guo , and Z. Liu , “ A model for predicting the temperature field during selective laser melting,” Results Phys. 12, 52–60 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2018.11.031
    Google ScholarCrossref
  60. X. Luo , M. Liu , L. Zhenhua , H. Li , and J. Shen , “ Effect of different heat-source models on calculated temperature field of selective laser melted 18Ni300,” Chin. J. Lasers 48(14), 1402005–1402062 (2021).https://doi.org/10.3788/CJL202148.1402005
    Google ScholarCrossref
  61. J. F. Li , L. Li , and F. H. Stott , “ Thermal stresses and their implication on cracking during laser melting of ceramic materials,” Acta Mater. 52(14), 4385–4398 (2004).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2004.06.005
    Google ScholarCrossref
  62. P. Aggarangsi and J. L. Beuth , “ Localized preheating approaches for reducing residual stress in additive manufacturing,” paper presented at the 2006 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, The University of Texas in Austin on August 14–16, 2006.
  63. K. Dai and L. Shaw , “ Thermal and mechanical finite element modeling of laser forming from metal and ceramic powders,” Acta Mater. 52(1), 69–80 (2004).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2003.08.028
    Google ScholarCrossref
  64. A. H. Nickel , D. M. Barnett , and F. B. Prinz , “ Thermal stresses and deposition patterns in layered manufacturing,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 317(1–2), 59–64 (2001).https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01179-0
    Google ScholarCrossref
  65. M. F. Zaeh and G. Branner , “ Investigations on residual stresses and deformations in selective laser melting,” Prod. Eng. 4(1), 35–45 (2010).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-009-0192-y
    Google ScholarCrossref
  66. P. Bian , J. Shi , Y. Liu , and Y. Xie , “ Influence of laser power and scanning strategy on residual stress distribution in additively manufactured 316L steel,” Opt. Laser Technol. 132, 106477 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2020.106477
    Google ScholarCrossref
  67. B. M. Marques , C. M. Andrade , D. M. Neto , M. C. Oliveira , J. L. Alves , and L. F. Menezes , “ Numerical analysis of residual stresses in parts produced by selective laser melting process,” Procedia Manuf. 47, 1170–1177 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.167
    Google ScholarCrossref
  68. W. Mu , “ Numerical simulation of SLM forming process and research and prediction of forming properties,” MA thesis ( Anhui Jianzhu University, 2022).
    Google Scholar
  69. Y. Zhang , “ Multi-scale multi-physics modeling of laser powder bed fusion process of metallic materials with experiment validation,” Ph.D. dissertation ( Purdue University, 2018).
    Google Scholar
  70. Y. Qian , “ Mesoscopic simulation studies of key processing issues for powder bed fusion technology,” Ph.D. dissertation ( Tsinghua University, 2019).
    Google Scholar
  71. N. V. Brilliantov , S. Frank , J.-M. Hertzsch , and T. Pöschel , “ Model for collisions in granular gases,” Phys. Rev. E 53(5), 5382–5392 (1996).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.53.5382
    Google ScholarCrossref
  72. Z. Xiao , “ Research on microscale selective laser melting process of high strength pure copper specimens,” MA thesis ( Hunan University, 2022).
    Google Scholar
  73. Z. Li , K. Mukai , M. Zeze , and K. C. Mills , “ Determination of the surface tension of liquid stainless steel,” J. Mater. Sci. 40(9–10), 2191–2195 (2005).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-005-1931-x
    Google ScholarCrossref
  74. R. Scardovelli and S. Zaleski , “ Analytical relations connecting linear interfaces and volume fractions in rectangular grids,” J. Comput. Phys. 164(1), 228–237 (2000).https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2000.6567
    Google ScholarCrossref
  75. D.-W. Cho , W.-I. Cho , and S.-J. Na , “ Modeling and simulation of arc: Laser and hybrid welding process,” J. Manuf. Process. 16(1), 26–55 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2013.06.012
    Google ScholarCrossref
    76.Flow3D. Version 11.1.0: User Manual ( FlowScience, Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2015).
  76. Y. Tian , L. Yang , D. Zhao , Y. Huang , and J. Pan , “ Numerical analysis of powder bed generation and single track forming for selective laser melting of ss316l stainless steel,” J. Manuf. Process. 58, 964–974 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.09.002
    Google ScholarCrossref
  77. C. Tang , K. Q. Le , and C. H. Wong , “ Physics of humping formation in laser powder bed fusion,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 149, 119172 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.119172
    Google ScholarCrossref
  78. L. Cao , “ Mesoscopic-scale simulation of pore evolution during laser powder bed fusion process,” Comput. Mater. Sci. 179, 109686 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2020.109686
    Google ScholarCrossref
  79. R. Li , J. Liu , Y. Shi , W. Li , and W. Jiang , “ Balling behavior of stainless steel and nickel powder during selective laser melting process,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 59(9–12), 1025–1035 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3566-1
    Google ScholarCrossref
  80. S. A. Khairallah and A. Anderson , “ Mesoscopic simulation model of selective laser melting of stainless steel powder,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 214(11), 2627–2636 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.001
    Google ScholarCrossref
  81. J. Liu , D. Gu , H. Chen , D. Dai , and H. Zhang , “ Influence of substrate surface morphology on wetting behavior of tracks during selective laser melting of aluminum-based alloys,” J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 19(2), 111–121 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A1700599
    Google ScholarCrossref
  82. L. Li , J. Li , and T. Fan , “ Phase-field modeling of wetting and balling dynamics in powder bed fusion process,” Phys. Fluids 33, 042116 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0046771
    Google ScholarCrossref
  83. X. Nie , Z. Hu , H. Zhu , Z. Hu , L. Ke , and X. Zeng , “ Analysis of processing parameters and characteristics of selective laser melted high strength Al-Cu-Mg alloys: from single tracks to cubic samples,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 256, 69–77 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.01.030
    Google ScholarCrossref
Figure 14. Defects: (a) Unmelt defects(Scheme NO.4);(b) Pores defects(Scheme NO.1); (c); Spattering defect (Scheme NO.3); (d) Low overlapping rate defects(Scheme NO.5).

Molten pool structure, temperature and velocity
flow in selective laser melting AlCu5MnCdVA alloy

용융 풀 구조, 선택적 온도 및 속도 흐름 레이저 용융 AlCu5MnCdVA 합금

Pan Lu1 , Zhang Cheng-Lin2,6,Wang Liang3, Liu Tong4 and Liu Jiang-lin5
1 Aviation and Materials College, Anhui Technical College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Wuhu Anhui 241000, People’s
Republic of China 2 School of Engineering Science, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei Anhui 230026, People’s Republic of China 3 Anhui Top Additive Manufacturing Technology Co., Ltd., Wuhu Anhui 241300, People’s Republic of China 4 Anhui Chungu 3D Printing Institute of Intelligent Equipment and Industrial Technology, Anhui 241300, People’s Republic of China 5 School of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan Shanxi 030024, People’s Republic of
China 6 Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: ahjdpanlu@126.com, jiao__zg@126.com, ahjdjxx001@126.com,tongliu1988@126.com and liujianglin@tyut.edu.cn

Keywords

SLM, molten pool, AlCu5MnCdVA alloy, heat flow, velocity flow, numerical simulation

Abstract

선택적 레이저 용융(SLM)은 열 전달, 용융, 상전이, 기화 및 물질 전달을 포함하는 복잡한 동적 비평형 프로세스인 금속 적층 제조(MAM)에서 가장 유망한 기술 중 하나가 되었습니다. 용융 풀의 특성(구조, 온도 흐름 및 속도 흐름)은 SLM의 최종 성형 품질에 결정적인 영향을 미칩니다. 이 연구에서는 선택적 레이저 용융 AlCu5MnCdVA 합금의 용융 풀 구조, 온도 흐름 및 속도장을 연구하기 위해 수치 시뮬레이션과 실험을 모두 사용했습니다.

그 결과 용융풀의 구조는 다양한 형태(깊은 오목 구조, 이중 오목 구조, 평면 구조, 돌출 구조 및 이상적인 평면 구조)를 나타냈으며, 용융 풀의 크기는 약 132 μm × 107 μm × 50 μm였습니다. : 용융풀은 초기에는 여러 구동력에 의해 깊이 15μm의 깊은 오목형상이었으나, 성형 후기에는 장력구배에 의해 높이 10μm의 돌출형상이 되었다. 용융 풀 내부의 금속 흐름은 주로 레이저 충격력, 금속 액체 중력, 표면 장력 및 반동 압력에 의해 구동되었습니다.

AlCu5MnCdVA 합금의 경우, 금속 액체 응고 속도가 매우 빠르며(3.5 × 10-4 S), 가열 속도 및 냉각 속도는 각각 6.5 × 107 K S-1 및 1.6 × 106 K S-1 에 도달했습니다. 시각적 표준으로 표면 거칠기를 선택하고, 낮은 레이저 에너지 AlCu5MnCdVA 합금 최적 공정 매개변수 창을 수치 시뮬레이션으로 얻었습니다: 레이저 출력 250W, 부화 공간 0.11mm, 층 두께 0.03mm, 레이저 스캔 속도 1.5m s-1 .

또한, 실험 프린팅과 수치 시뮬레이션과 비교할 때, 용융 풀의 폭은 각각 약 205um 및 약 210um이었고, 인접한 두 용융 트랙 사이의 중첩은 모두 약 65um이었다. 결과는 수치 시뮬레이션 결과가 실험 인쇄 결과와 기본적으로 일치함을 보여 수치 시뮬레이션 모델의 정확성을 입증했습니다.

Selective Laser Melting (SLM) has become one of the most promising technologies in Metal Additive Manufacturing (MAM), which is a complex dynamic non-equilibrium process involving heat transfer, melting, phase transition, vaporization and mass transfer. The characteristics of the molten pool (structure, temperature flow and velocity flow) have a decisive influence on the final forming quality of SLM. In this study, both numerical simulation and experiments were employed to study molten pool structure, temperature flow and velocity field in Selective Laser Melting AlCu5MnCdVA alloy. The results showed the structure of molten pool showed different forms(deep-concave structure, double-concave structure, plane structure, protruding structure and ideal planar structure), and the size of the molten pool was approximately 132 μm × 107 μm × 50 μm: in the early stage, molten pool was in a state of deep-concave shape with a depth of 15 μm due to multiple driving forces, while a protruding shape with a height of 10 μm duo to tension gradient in the later stages of forming. The metal flow inside the molten pool was mainly driven by laser impact force, metal liquid gravity, surface tension and recoil pressure. For AlCu5MnCdVA alloy, metal liquid solidification speed was extremely fast(3.5 × 10−4 S), the heating rate and cooling rate reached 6.5 × 107 K S−1 and 1.6 × 106 K S−1 , respectively. Choosing surface roughness as a visual standard, low-laser energy AlCu5MnCdVA alloy optimum process parameters window was obtained by numerical simulation: laser power 250 W, hatching space 0.11 mm, layer thickness 0.03 mm, laser scanning velocity 1.5 m s−1 . In addition, compared with experimental printing and numerical simulation, the width of the molten pool was about 205 um and about 210 um, respectively, and overlapping between two adjacent molten tracks was all about 65 um. The results showed that the numerical simulation results were basically consistent with the experimental print results, which proved the correctness of the numerical simulation model.

Figure 1. AlCu5MnCdVA powder particle size distribution.
Figure 1. AlCu5MnCdVA powder particle size distribution.
Figure 2. AlCu5MnCdVA powder
Figure 2. AlCu5MnCdVA powder
Figure 3. Finite element model and calculation domains of SLM.
Figure 3. Finite element model and calculation domains of SLM.
Figure 4. SLM heat transfer process.
Figure 4. SLM heat transfer process.
Figure 14. Defects: (a) Unmelt defects(Scheme NO.4);(b) Pores defects(Scheme NO.1); (c); Spattering defect (Scheme NO.3); (d) Low
overlapping rate defects(Scheme NO.5).
Figure 17. Two-pass molten tracks overlapping for Scheme NO.2.
Figure 17. Two-pass molten tracks overlapping for Scheme NO.2.

References

[1] Cuiyun H 2008 Phase diagram determination and thermodynamic study of Al–Cu–Mn, Al–Cu–Si, Al–Mg–Ni and Ni–Ti–Si systems Central South University
[2] Zhanfei Z 2017 Study on theta phase segregation and room temperature properties of high strength cast Al–Cu–Mn alloy Lanzhou University of Technology
[3] Nie X et al 2018 Analysis of processing parameters and characteristics of selective laser melted high strength Al–Cu–Mg alloys: from single tracks to cubic samplesJ. Mater. Process. Technol. 256 69–77
[4] Shenping Y et al 2017 Laser absorptance measurement of commonly used metal materials in laser additive manufacturing technology Aviation Manufacturing Technology 12 23–9
[5] Wenqing W 2007 Relationship between cooling rate and grain size of AlCu5MnCdVA alloy Harbin University of Technology
[6] Majeed M, Vural M, Raja S and Bilal Naim Shaikh M 2019 Finite element analysis of thermal behavior in maraging steel during SLM process Optik 208 113–24
[7] 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 Mater. 108 36–45
[8] Bo C, Zhiyu X, Quanquan Z, Yuanbiao W, Liping W and Jin C 2020 Process optimization and microstructure and properties of SLM forming Cu6AlNiSnInCe imitation gold alloy Chin. J. Nonferr. Met. 30 372–82
[9] Li W 2012 Research on performance of metal parts formed by selective laser melting Huazhong University of Science and Technology
[10] Yu Q 2013 The influence of different laser heat sources on the surface shape of the molten pool in laser cladding Surf. Technol. 42 40–3

[11] Xianfeng J, Xiangchen M, Rongwei S, Xigen Y and Ming Y 2015 Research on the influence of material state change on temperature field
in SLM processing Applied Laser 35 155–9
[12] Körner C, Attar E and Heinl P 2011 Mesoscopic simulation of selective beam melting processesJ. Mater. Process. Technol. 211 978–87
[13] Yadroitsev I, Gusarov A, Yadroitsava I and Smurov I 2010 Single track formation in selective laser melting of metal powdersJ. Mater.
Process. Technol. 210 1624–31
[14] King W, Anderson A T, Ferencz R M, Hodge N E, Kamath C and Khairallah S A 2014 Overview of modelling and simulation of metal
powder bed fusion process at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Mater. Sci. Technol. 31 957–68
[15] Hussein A, Hao L, Yan C and Everson R 2013 Finite element simulation of the temperature and stress fields in single layers built
without-support in selective laser melting Materials & Design (1980–2015) 52 638–47
[16] Qiu C, Panwisawas C, Ward M, Basoalto H C, Brooks J W and Attallah M M 2015 On the role of melt flow into the surface structure and
porosity development during selective laser melting Acta Mater. 96 72–9
[17] Weihao Y, Hui C and Qingsong W 2020 Thermodynamic behavior of laser selective melting molten pool under the action of recoil
pressure Journal of Mechanical Engineering 56 213–9
[18] Weijuan Y 2019 Numerical simulation of melt pool temperature field and morphology evolution during laser selective melting process
Xi’an University of Technology
[19] Genwang W 2017 Research on the establishment of laser heat source model based on energy distribution and its simulation application
Harbin Institute of Technology
[20] FLOW-3D 2017 User Manual (USA: FLOW SCIENCE)
[21] Hirt C and Nichols B 1981 Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundariesJ. Comput. Phys. 39 201–25
[22] Hu Z, Zhang H, Zhu H, Xiao Z, Nie X and Zeng X 2019 Microstructure, mechanical properties and strengthening mechanisms of
AlCu5MnCdVA aluminum alloy fabricated by selective laser melting Materials Science and Engineering: A 759 154–66
[23] Ketai H, Liu Z and Lechang Y 2020 Simulation of temperature field, microstructure and mechanical properties of 316L stainless steel in
selected laser melting Progress in Laser and Optoelectronics 9 1–18
[24] Cao L 2020 Workpiece-scale numerical simulations of SLM molten pool dynamic behavior of 316L stainless steel Comput. Math. Appl.
4 22–34
[25] Dening Z, Yongping L, Tinglu H and Junyi S 2000 Numerical study of fluid flow and heat transfer in molten pool under the condition of
moving heat source J. Met. 4 387–90
[26] Chengyun C, Cui F and Wenlong Z 2018 The effect of Marangoni flow on the thermal behavior and melt flow behavior of laser cladding
Applied Laser 38 409–16
[27] Peiying B and Enhuai Y 2020 The effect of laser power on the morphology and residual stress of the molten pool of metal laser selective
melting Progress in Laser and Optoelectronics 7 1–12 http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/31.1690.TN.20190717.0933.032.html
[28] Zhen L, Dongyun Z, Zhe F and Chengjie W 2017 Numerical simulation of the influence of overlap rate on the forming quality of
Inconel 718 alloy by selective laser melting processing Applied Laser 37 187–93
[29] Wei W, Qi L, Guang Y, Lanyun Q and Xiong X 2015 Numerical simulation of electromagnetic field, temperature field and flowfield of
laser melting pool under the action of electromagnetic stirring China Laser 42 48–55
[30] Hu Y, He X, Yu G and Zhao S 2016 Capillary convection in pulsed—butt welding of miscible dissimilar couple Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.
Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 231 2429–40
[31] Li R 2010 Research on the key basic problems of selective laser melting forming of metal powder Huazhong University of Science and
Technology
[32] Zijue T, Weiwei L, Zhaorui Y, Hao W and Hongchao Z 2019 Study on the shape evolution behavior of metal laser melting deposition
based on molten pool dynamic characteristicsJournal of Mechanical Engineering 55 39–47
[33] Pan L, Cheng-Lin Z, Hai-Yi L, Liang W and Tong L 2020 A new two-step selective laser remelting of 316L stainless steel: process,
density, surface roughness, mechanical properties, microstructure Mater. Res. Express 7 056503
[34] Pan L, Cheng-Lin Z, Hai-Yi L, Jiang H, Tong L and Liang W 2019 The influence and optimization of forming process parameters of
316L stainless steel prepared by laser melting on the density Forging Technology 44 103–9

Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.

316-L 스테인리스강의 레이저 분말 베드 융합 중 콜드 스패터 형성의 충실도 높은 수치 모델링

316-L 스테인리스강의 레이저 분말 베드 융합 중 콜드 스패터 형성의 충실도 높은 수치 모델링

M. BAYAT1,* , AND J. H. HATTEL1

  • Corresponding author
    1 Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Building 425, Kgs. 2800 Lyngby, Denmark

ABSTRACT

Spatter and denudation are two very well-known phenomena occurring mainly during the laser powder bed fusion process and are defined as ejection and displacement of powder particles, respectively. The main driver of this phenomenon is the formation of a vapor plume jet that is caused by the vaporization of the melt pool which is subjected to the laser beam. In this work, a 3-dimensional transient turbulent computational fluid dynamics model coupled with a discrete element model is developed in the finite volume-based commercial software package Flow-3D AM to simulate the spatter phenomenon. The numerical results show that a localized low-pressure zone forms at the bottom side of the plume jet and this leads to a pseudo-Bernoulli effect that drags nearby powder particles into the area of influence of the vapor plume jet. As a result, the vapor plume acts like a momentum sink and therefore all nearby particles point are dragged towards this region. Furthermore, it is noted that due to the jet’s attenuation, powder particles start diverging from the central core region of the vapor plume as they move vertically upwards. It is moreover observed that only particles which are in the very central core region of the plume jet get sufficiently accelerated to depart the computational domain, while the rest of the dragged particles, especially those which undergo an early divergence from the jet axis, get stalled pretty fast as they come in contact with the resting fluid. In the last part of the work, two simulations with two different scanning speeds are carried out, where it is clearly observed that the angle between the departing powder particles and the vertical axis of the plume jet increases with increasing scanning speed.

스패터와 denudation은 주로 레이저 분말 베드 융합 과정에서 발생하는 매우 잘 알려진 두 가지 현상으로 각각 분말 입자의 배출 및 변위로 정의됩니다.

이 현상의 주요 동인은 레이저 빔을 받는 용융 풀의 기화로 인해 발생하는 증기 기둥 제트의 형성입니다. 이 작업에서 이산 요소 모델과 결합된 3차원 과도 난류 ​​전산 유체 역학 모델은 스패터 현상을 시뮬레이션하기 위해 유한 체적 기반 상용 소프트웨어 패키지 Flow-3D AM에서 개발되었습니다.

수치적 결과는 플룸 제트의 바닥면에 국부적인 저압 영역이 형성되고, 이는 근처의 분말 입자를 증기 플룸 제트의 영향 영역으로 끌어들이는 의사-베르누이 효과로 이어진다는 것을 보여줍니다.

결과적으로 증기 기둥은 운동량 흡수원처럼 작용하므로 근처의 모든 입자 지점이 이 영역으로 끌립니다. 또한 제트의 감쇠로 인해 분말 입자가 수직으로 위쪽으로 이동할 때 증기 기둥의 중심 코어 영역에서 발산하기 시작합니다.

더욱이 플룸 제트의 가장 중심 코어 영역에 있는 입자만 계산 영역을 벗어날 만큼 충분히 가속되는 반면, 드래그된 나머지 입자, 특히 제트 축에서 초기 발산을 겪는 입자는 정체되는 것으로 관찰됩니다. 그들은 휴식 유체와 접촉하기 때문에 꽤 빠릅니다.

작업의 마지막 부분에서 두 가지 다른 스캔 속도를 가진 두 가지 시뮬레이션이 수행되었으며, 여기서 출발하는 분말 입자와 연기 제트의 수직 축 사이의 각도가 스캔 속도가 증가함에 따라 증가하는 것이 명확하게 관찰되었습니다.

Fig 1. Two different views of the computational domain for the fluid domain. The vapor plume is simulated by a moving momentum source with a prescribed temperature of 3000 K.
Fig 1. Two different views of the computational domain for the fluid domain. The vapor plume is simulated by a moving momentum source with a prescribed temperature of 3000 K.
Fig 2. (a) and (b) are two snapshots taken at an x-y plane parallel to the powder layer plane before and 0.008 seconds after the start of the scanning process. (c) Shows a magnified view of (b) where detailed powder particles' movement along with their velocity magnitude and directions are shown.
Fig 2. (a) and (b) are two snapshots taken at an x-y plane parallel to the powder layer plane before and 0.008 seconds after the start of the scanning process. (c) Shows a magnified view of (b) where detailed powder particles’ movement along with their velocity magnitude and directions are shown.
Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.
Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.

References

[1] T. DebRoy et al., “Additive manufacturing of metallic components – Process, structure
and properties,” Prog. Mater. Sci., vol. 92, pp. 112–224, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.001.
[2] M. Markl and C. Körner, “Multiscale Modeling of Powder Bed–Based Additive
Manufacturing,” Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 93–123, 2016, doi:
10.1146/annurev-matsci-070115-032158.
[3] A. Zinoviev, O. Zinovieva, V. Ploshikhin, V. Romanova, and R. Balokhonov, “Evolution
of grain structure during laser additive manufacturing. Simulation by a cellular automata
method,” Mater. Des., vol. 106, pp. 321–329, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.125.
[4] Y. Zhang and J. Zhang, “Modeling of solidification microstructure evolution in laser
powder bed fusion fabricated 316L stainless steel using combined computational fluid
dynamics and cellular automata,” Addit. Manuf., vol. 28, no. July 2018, pp. 750–765,
2019, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2019.06.024.
[5] A. A. Martin et al., “Ultrafast dynamics of laser-metal interactions in additive
manufacturing alloys captured by in situ X-ray imaging,” Mater. Today Adv., vol. 1, p.
100002, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.mtadv.2019.01.001.
[6] Y. C. Wu et al., “Numerical modeling of melt-pool behavior in selective laser melting
with random powder distribution and experimental validation,” J. Mater. Process.
Technol., vol. 254, no. July 2017, pp. 72–78, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.11.032.
[7] W. Gao, S. Zhao, Y. Wang, Z. Zhang, F. Liu, and X. Lin, “Numerical simulation of
thermal field and Fe-based coating doped Ti,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 92, pp. 83–
90, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.08.082.
[8] A. Charles, M. Bayat, A. Elkaseer, L. Thijs, J. H. Hattel, and S. Scholz, “Elucidation of
dross formation in laser powder bed fusion at down-facing surfaces: Phenomenonoriented multiphysics simulation and experimental validation,” Addit. Manuf., vol. 50,
2022, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2021.102551.
[9] C. Meier, R. W. Penny, Y. Zou, J. S. Gibbs, and A. J. Hart, “Thermophysical phenomena
in metal additive manufacturing by selective laser melting: Fundamentals, modeling,
simulation and experimentation,” arXiv, 2017, doi:
10.1615/annualrevheattransfer.2018019042.
[10] W. King, A. T. Anderson, R. M. Ferencz, N. E. Hodge, C. Kamath, and S. A. Khairallah,
“Overview of modelling and simulation of metal powder bed fusion process at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory,” Mater. Sci. Technol. (United Kingdom), vol. 31, no. 8,
pp. 957–968, 2015, doi: 10.1179/1743284714Y.0000000728.

Figure 3: 3D temperature contours and 2D melt pool cross-sections where the melt pool is stabilized at x=500 µm from the start of the laser initial location for cases where (a) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (b) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (c) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (d) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (e) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (f) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 18 µm.

MULTI-PHYSICS NUMERICAL MODELLING OF 316L AUSTENITIC STAINLESS STEEL IN LASER POWDER BED FUSION PROCESS AT MESO-SCALE

W.E. Alphonso1, M.Bayat1,*, M. Baier 2, S. Carmignato2, J.H. Hattel1
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Lyngby, Denmark
2Department of Management and Engineering – University of Padova, Padova, Italy

ABSTRACT

L-PBF(Laser Powder Bed Fusion)는 레이저 열원을 사용하여 선택적으로 통합되는 분말 층으로 복잡한 3D 금속 부품을 만드는 금속 적층 제조(MAM) 기술입니다. 처리 영역은 수십 마이크로미터 정도이므로 L-PBF를 다중 규모 제조 공정으로 만듭니다.

기체 기공의 형성 및 성장 및 용융되지 않은 분말 영역의 생성은 다중물리 모델에 의해 예측할 수 있습니다. 또한 이러한 모델을 사용하여 용융 풀 모양 및 크기, 온도 분포, 용융 풀 유체 흐름 및 입자 크기 및 형태와 같은 미세 구조 특성을 계산할 수 있습니다.

이 작업에서는 용융, 응고, 유체 흐름, 표면 장력, 열 모세관, 증발 및 광선 추적을 통한 다중 반사를 포함하는 스테인리스 스틸 316-L에 대한 충실도 다중 물리학 중간 규모 수치 모델이 개발되었습니다. 완전한 실험 설계(DoE) 방법을 사용하는 통계 연구가 수행되었으며, 여기서 불확실한 재료 특성 및 공정 매개변수, 즉 흡수율, 반동 압력(기화) 및 레이저 빔 크기가 용융수지 모양 및 크기에 미치는 영향을 분석했습니다.

또한 용융 풀 역학에 대한 위에서 언급한 불확실한 입력 매개변수의 중요성을 강조하기 위해 흡수율이 가장 큰 영향을 미치고 레이저 빔 크기가 그 뒤를 잇는 주요 효과 플롯이 생성되었습니다. 용융 풀 크기에 대한 반동 압력의 중요성은 흡수율에 따라 달라지는 용융 풀 부피와 함께 증가합니다.

모델의 예측 정확도는 유사한 공정 매개변수로 생성된 단일 트랙 실험과 시뮬레이션의 용융 풀 모양 및 크기를 비교하여 검증됩니다.

더욱이, 열 렌즈 효과는 레이저 빔 크기를 증가시켜 수치 모델에서 고려되었으며 나중에 결과적인 용융 풀 프로파일은 모델의 견고성을 보여주기 위한 실험과 비교되었습니다.

Laser Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) is a Metal Additive Manufacturing (MAM) technology where a complex 3D metal part is built from powder layers, which are selectively consolidated using a laser heat source. The processing zone is in the order of a few tenths of micrometer, making L-PBF a multi-scale manufacturing process. The formation and growth of gas pores and the creation of un-melted powder zones can be predicted by multiphysics models. Also, with these models, the melt pool shape and size, temperature distribution, melt pool fluid flow and its microstructural features like grain size and morphology can be calculated. In this work, a high fidelity multi-physics meso-scale numerical model is developed for stainless steel 316-L which includes melting, solidification, fluid flow, surface tension, thermo-capillarity, evaporation and multiple reflection with ray-tracing. A statistical study using a full Design of Experiments (DoE) method was conducted, wherein the impact of uncertain material properties and process parameters namely absorptivity, recoil pressure (vaporization) and laser beam size on the melt pool shape and size was analysed. Furthermore, to emphasize on the significance of the above mentioned uncertain input parameters on the melt pool dynamics, a main effects plot was created which showed that absorptivity had the highest impact followed by laser beam size. The significance of recoil pressure on the melt pool size increases with melt pool volume which is dependent on absorptivity. The prediction accuracy of the model is validated by comparing the melt pool shape and size from the simulation with single track experiments that were produced with similar process parameters. Moreover, the effect of thermal lensing was considered in the numerical model by increasing the laser beam size and later on the resultant melt pool profile was compared with experiments to show the robustness of the model.

Figure 1: a) Computational domain for single track L-PBF which includes a 200 μm thick substrate and 45 μm powder layer thickness b) 3D temperature contour plot after scanning a single track with melt pool contours at two locations along the scanning direction where the green region indicates the melted regions.
Figure 1: a) Computational domain for single track L-PBF which includes a 200 μm thick substrate and 45 μm powder layer thickness b) 3D temperature contour plot after scanning a single track with melt pool contours at two locations along the scanning direction where the green region indicates the melted regions.
Figure 2: Main effects plot of uncertain parameters: absorptivity, recoil pressure coefficient and laser beam radius on the melt pool dimensions (width and depth)
Figure 2: Main effects plot of uncertain parameters: absorptivity, recoil pressure coefficient and laser beam radius on the melt pool dimensions (width and depth)
Figure 3: 3D temperature contours and 2D melt pool cross-sections where the melt pool is stabilized at x=500 µm from the start of the laser initial location for cases where (a) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (b) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (c) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (d) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (e) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (f) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 18 µm.
Figure 3: 3D temperature contours and 2D melt pool cross-sections where the melt pool is stabilized at x=500 µm from the start of the laser initial location for cases where (a) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (b) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (c) absorptivity = 0.1, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (d) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 1 and laser beam radius = 18 µm, (e) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 12 µm, (f) absorptivity = 0.45, Recoil pressure coefficient B = 20 and laser beam radius = 18 µm.
Figure 4: Validation of Numerical model with Recoil pressure coefficient B= 20, absorptivity = 0.45 and a) laser beam radius = 15 µm b) laser beam radius = 20 µm
Figure 4: Validation of Numerical model with Recoil pressure coefficient B= 20, absorptivity = 0.45 and a) laser beam radius = 15 µm b) laser beam radius = 20 µm

CONCLUSION

In this work, a high-fidelity multi-physics numerical model was developed for L-PBF using the FVM method in Flow-3D. The impact of uncertainty in the input parameters including absorptivity, recoil pressure and laser beam size on the melt pool is addressed using a DoE method. The DoE analysis shows that absorptivity has the highest impact on the melt pool. The recoil pressure and laser beam size only become significant once absorptivity is 0.45. Furthermore, the numerical model is validated by comparing the predicted melt pool shape and size with experiments conducted with similar process parameters wherein a high prediction accuracy is achieved by the model. In addition, the impact of thermal lensing on the melt pool dimensions by increasing the laser beam spot size is considered in the validated numerical model and the resultant melt pool is compared with experiments.

REFERENCES

[1] T. Bonhoff, M. Schniedenharn, J. Stollenwerk, P. Loosen, Experimental and theoretical analysis of thermooptical effects in protective window for selective laser melting, Proc. Int. Conf. Lasers Manuf. LiM. (2017)
26–29. https://www.wlt.de/lim/Proceedings2017/Data/PDF/Contribution31_final.pdf.
[2] L.R. Goossens, Y. Kinds, J.P. Kruth, B. van Hooreweder, On the influence of thermal lensing during selective
laser melting, Solid Free. Fabr. 2018 Proc. 29th Annu. Int. Solid Free. Fabr. Symp. – An Addit. Manuf. Conf.
SFF 2018. (2020) 2267–2274.
[3] J. Shinjo, C. Panwisawas, Digital materials design by thermal-fluid science for multi-metal additive
manufacturing, Acta Mater. 210 (2021) 116825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2021.116825.
[4] Z. Zhang, Y. Huang, A. Rani Kasinathan, S. Imani Shahabad, U. Ali, Y. Mahmoodkhani, E. Toyserkani, 3-
Dimensional heat transfer modeling for laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing with volumetric heat
sources based on varied thermal conductivity and absorptivity, Opt. Laser Technol. 109 (2019) 297–312.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.012.
[5] M. Bayat, A. Thanki, S. Mohanty, A. Witvrouw, S. Yang, J. Thorborg, N.S. Tiedje, J.H. Hattel, Keyholeinduced porosities in Laser-based Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) of Ti6Al4V: High-fidelity modelling and
experimental validation, Addit. Manuf. 30 (2019) 100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100835.
[6] M. Bayat, S. Mohanty, J.H. Hattel, Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution
in IN718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 139 (2019) 95–114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003.
[7] J. Metelkova, Y. Kinds, K. Kempen, C. de Formanoir, A. Witvrouw, B. Van Hooreweder, On the influence
of laser defocusing in Selective Laser Melting of 316L, Addit. Manuf. 23 (2018) 161–169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.08.006.

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

Abstract

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

References

  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.
    [CrossRef]
  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.
    [CrossRef]
  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.
    [CrossRef]
  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.
    [CrossRef]
  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.
    [CrossRef]
  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: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214860420310149#bb8 (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]

Initiating Homogeneous Bubbles in Pure Liquid

Initiating Homogeneous Bubbles in Pure Liquid

  1. Barkhudarov and C.W. Hirt

Flow Science, Inc.

The combined Temperature-Dependent-Cavitation and Homogenous Bubble models work together as a way to simulate the formation and growth of vapor bubbles by locally heating a liquid. The Homogeneous Bubble model is only activated when a bubble has a size that encompasses at least one complete grid cell, i.e., can be resolved as a “bubble” or void region.

The Cavitation model contains a mechanism for the initiation of bubbles, which works in the follow way. At the end of each time cycle of a transient computation every grid cell containing liquid is tested to see if its pressure is less than the saturation pressure corresponding to the temperature in the cell. The saturation pressure is computed from the pressure-temperature saturation relation specified by the user (e.g., usually a Clapeyron relation). If the cell pressure is less than its saturation pressure it is assumed that boiling can begin. The essential assumption is that there exist sufficient impurities or nucleation sites for this to happen. A very simple model nucleation has been incorporated into FLOW-3D®.

Once a cell has been identified for possible boiling it is given a time delay before vaporization begins. For vaporization to occur it is necessary to have at least 1% void fraction in the cell. This small void can be thought of as the nucleation process. The time delay is input as variable CAVRT (denoted as Ccav in the following).