Amir Reza Ansari Dezfoli, Yi-Jen Huang, Sanaz Hadidchi
{"title":"Toward predictive additive manufacturing: ML-based hardness prediction for Ti–6A1–4 V in laser powder bed fusion","authors":"Amir Reza Ansari Dezfoli, Yi-Jen Huang, Sanaz Hadidchi","doi":"10.1007/s40194-026-02409-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) of Ti–6Al–4 V frequently yields high hardness, but the result is sensitive to coupled process settings. This work investigates whether hardness can be predicted directly from the process parameters to support data-driven process planning. A literature-derived dataset of 136 cases was compiled with laser power, scan speed, layer thickness, hatch distance, and spot size as inputs and Vickers hardness as the output. Five regression models were compared: gradient boosting, random forest, support vector regression (SVR), a feed-forward neural network, and L1-regularized linear regression. The models were assessed using cross-validation and a data split of 85%/15% for training and testing. Ensemble tree methods delivered the most accurate predictions, with gradient boosting achieving the highest explanatory power <span>\\(\\left({R}^{2}=0.705\\right)\\)</span> with low error (RMSE = 22.015 HV; MAE = 13.873 HV; MAPE = 3.834%), followed by random forest (<span>\\({R}^{2}=0.595\\)</span>). The neural network, linear model, and SVR performed substantially worse due to limited capacity or misspecification for the interaction-rich small-sample setting. Distributional analysis showed that the dataset clusters around common LPBF presets (e.g., 30-μm layers, ∼0.1-mm hatch), while hardness was concentrated near ∼380 HV. Overall, the results indicate that ensemble models capture the dominant nonlinearities linking LPBF parameters to hardness and can serve as practical surrogates for predictive design and preliminary optimization of Ti–6Al–4 V builds.\n</p></div>","PeriodicalId":809,"journal":{"name":"Welding in the World","volume":"70 11","pages":"5511 - 5521"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Welding in the World","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40194-026-02409-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"METALLURGY & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) of Ti–6Al–4 V frequently yields high hardness, but the result is sensitive to coupled process settings. This work investigates whether hardness can be predicted directly from the process parameters to support data-driven process planning. A literature-derived dataset of 136 cases was compiled with laser power, scan speed, layer thickness, hatch distance, and spot size as inputs and Vickers hardness as the output. Five regression models were compared: gradient boosting, random forest, support vector regression (SVR), a feed-forward neural network, and L1-regularized linear regression. The models were assessed using cross-validation and a data split of 85%/15% for training and testing. Ensemble tree methods delivered the most accurate predictions, with gradient boosting achieving the highest explanatory power \(\left({R}^{2}=0.705\right)\) with low error (RMSE = 22.015 HV; MAE = 13.873 HV; MAPE = 3.834%), followed by random forest (\({R}^{2}=0.595\)). The neural network, linear model, and SVR performed substantially worse due to limited capacity or misspecification for the interaction-rich small-sample setting. Distributional analysis showed that the dataset clusters around common LPBF presets (e.g., 30-μm layers, ∼0.1-mm hatch), while hardness was concentrated near ∼380 HV. Overall, the results indicate that ensemble models capture the dominant nonlinearities linking LPBF parameters to hardness and can serve as practical surrogates for predictive design and preliminary optimization of Ti–6Al–4 V builds.
ti - 6al - 4v激光粉末床熔合(LPBF)通常具有较高的硬度,但其结果对耦合工艺设置很敏感。这项工作研究了硬度是否可以直接从工艺参数预测,以支持数据驱动的工艺规划。以激光功率、扫描速度、层厚、舱口距离和光斑大小为输入,以维氏硬度为输出,编制了136例病例的文献数据集。比较了梯度增强、随机森林、支持向量回归(SVR)、前馈神经网络和l1正则化线性回归五种回归模型。使用交叉验证和85的数据分割对模型进行评估%/15% for training and testing. Ensemble tree methods delivered the most accurate predictions, with gradient boosting achieving the highest explanatory power \(\left({R}^{2}=0.705\right)\) with low error (RMSE = 22.015 HV; MAE = 13.873 HV; MAPE = 3.834%), followed by random forest (\({R}^{2}=0.595\)). The neural network, linear model, and SVR performed substantially worse due to limited capacity or misspecification for the interaction-rich small-sample setting. Distributional analysis showed that the dataset clusters around common LPBF presets (e.g., 30-μm layers, ∼0.1-mm hatch), while hardness was concentrated near ∼380 HV. Overall, the results indicate that ensemble models capture the dominant nonlinearities linking LPBF parameters to hardness and can serve as practical surrogates for predictive design and preliminary optimization of Ti–6Al–4 V builds.
期刊介绍:
The journal Welding in the World publishes authoritative papers on every aspect of materials joining, including welding, brazing, soldering, cutting, thermal spraying and allied joining and fabrication techniques.