John Coleman , Gerald L. Knapp , Benjamin Stump , Matt Rolchigo , Kellis Kincaid , Alex Plotkowski
{"title":"A dynamic volumetric heat source model for laser additive manufacturing","authors":"John Coleman , Gerald L. Knapp , Benjamin Stump , Matt Rolchigo , Kellis Kincaid , Alex Plotkowski","doi":"10.1016/j.addma.2024.104531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Melt pool scale models of laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) offer insights into the process-structure-property relationships in additive manufacturing (AM). These models often neglect physical phenomena such as vapor cavity formation and fluid mechanics to reduce computational demands. Instead, volumetric heat source models are used to represent the effects that these phenomena have on the predicted melt pool dimensions. Generally, the dimensions and effective absorption of the volumetric heat source are calibrated to reproduce melt pool dimensions observed in metallographic cross sections taken from single-track experiments on bare plate. However, the transient nature of LPBF often deviates the melt pool dimensions from the assumed steady-state conditions of single-track experiments, motivating the need for a volumetric heat source model that more generally considers the dynamic relationship between melt pool shape and laser-material interactions. Here, we introduce a two-parameter volumetric heat source model that integrates several existing models into a generalized mathematical expression, providing independent control over the radial heat distribution via the parameter <span><math><mi>k</mi></math></span> and the volumetric shape of the heat source via the parameter <span><math><mi>m</mi></math></span>. This parameterization enables the calibration of melt pool shape predictions through simultaneous adjustment of these parameters, while keeping the radial heat source dimensions consistent with the experimental spot size (D4σ) and constraining the heat source depth and absorption to physically derived expressions for cavities. Consequently, the proposed volumetric heat source model adapts to changes in the local melt pool conditions due to scanning strategy and part geometry by dynamically adjusting the heat source depth and absorption. We demonstrate the capabilities of the proposed model through comparisons with a collection of experiments from the Additive Manufacturing Benchmark (AMBench).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7172,"journal":{"name":"Additive manufacturing","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 104531"},"PeriodicalIF":10.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Additive manufacturing","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214860424005773","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Melt pool scale models of laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) offer insights into the process-structure-property relationships in additive manufacturing (AM). These models often neglect physical phenomena such as vapor cavity formation and fluid mechanics to reduce computational demands. Instead, volumetric heat source models are used to represent the effects that these phenomena have on the predicted melt pool dimensions. Generally, the dimensions and effective absorption of the volumetric heat source are calibrated to reproduce melt pool dimensions observed in metallographic cross sections taken from single-track experiments on bare plate. However, the transient nature of LPBF often deviates the melt pool dimensions from the assumed steady-state conditions of single-track experiments, motivating the need for a volumetric heat source model that more generally considers the dynamic relationship between melt pool shape and laser-material interactions. Here, we introduce a two-parameter volumetric heat source model that integrates several existing models into a generalized mathematical expression, providing independent control over the radial heat distribution via the parameter and the volumetric shape of the heat source via the parameter . This parameterization enables the calibration of melt pool shape predictions through simultaneous adjustment of these parameters, while keeping the radial heat source dimensions consistent with the experimental spot size (D4σ) and constraining the heat source depth and absorption to physically derived expressions for cavities. Consequently, the proposed volumetric heat source model adapts to changes in the local melt pool conditions due to scanning strategy and part geometry by dynamically adjusting the heat source depth and absorption. We demonstrate the capabilities of the proposed model through comparisons with a collection of experiments from the Additive Manufacturing Benchmark (AMBench).
激光粉末床熔融(LPBF)的熔池尺度模型有助于深入了解增材制造(AM)的工艺-结构-性能关系。这些模型通常忽略汽穴形成和流体力学等物理现象,以减少计算需求。取而代之的是使用体积热源模型来表示这些现象对预测熔池尺寸的影响。一般情况下,体积热源的尺寸和有效吸收量经过校准,以再现从裸板单轨实验的金相横截面上观察到的熔池尺寸。然而,LPBF 的瞬态特性往往会使熔池尺寸偏离单轨实验中假定的稳态条件,因此需要一个更广泛地考虑熔池形状和激光与材料相互作用之间动态关系的体积热源模型。在此,我们引入了一个双参数体积热源模型,该模型将多个现有模型整合到一个通用数学表达式中,通过参数 k 提供对径向热分布的独立控制,通过参数 m 提供对热源体积形状的独立控制。这种参数化方法可以通过同时调整这些参数来校准熔池形状预测,同时保持径向热源尺寸与实验光斑尺寸 (D4σ) 一致,并将热源深度和吸收限制在物理推导的空腔表达式中。因此,所提出的体积热源模型可以通过动态调整热源深度和吸收量来适应因扫描策略和零件几何形状而导致的局部熔池条件的变化。我们通过与增材制造基准(AMBench)的一系列实验进行比较,展示了所提模型的功能。
期刊介绍:
Additive Manufacturing stands as a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to delivering high-quality research papers and reviews in the field of additive manufacturing, serving both academia and industry leaders. The journal's objective is to recognize the innovative essence of additive manufacturing and its diverse applications, providing a comprehensive overview of current developments and future prospects.
The transformative potential of additive manufacturing technologies in product design and manufacturing is poised to disrupt traditional approaches. In response to this paradigm shift, a distinctive and comprehensive publication outlet was essential. Additive Manufacturing fulfills this need, offering a platform for engineers, materials scientists, and practitioners across academia and various industries to document and share innovations in these evolving technologies.