M. S. Rahman, P. Schilling, P. Herrington, U. Chakravarty
{"title":"A Comparison of the Thermo-Fluid Properties of Ti-6Al-4V Melt Pools Formed by Laser and Electron-Beam Powder-Bed Fusion Processes","authors":"M. S. Rahman, P. Schilling, P. Herrington, U. Chakravarty","doi":"10.1115/1.4048371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Powder-bed fusion (PBF) process is a subdivision of additive manufacturing (AM) technology where a heat source at a controlled speed selectively fuses regions of a powder-bed material to form three-dimensional (3D) parts in a layer-by-layer fashion. Two of the most commercialized and powerful PBF methods for fabricating full-density metallic parts are the laser PBF (L-PBF) and electron beam PBF (E-PBF) processes. In this study, a multiphysics-based 3D numerical model is developed to compare the thermo-fluid properties of Ti-6Al-4V melt pools formed by the L-PBF and E-PBF processes. The temperature-dependent properties of Ti-6Al-4V alloy and the parameters for the laser and electron beams are incorporated in the model as the user-defined functions (UDFs). The melt-pool geometry and its thermo-fluid behavior are investigated using the finite volume (FV) method, and results for the variations of temperature, thermo-physical properties, velocity, geometry of the melt pool, and cooling rate in the two processes are compared under similar irradiation conditions. For an irradiance level of 26 J/mm3 and a beam interaction time of 1.212 ms, simulation results show that the L-PBF process gives a faster cooling rate (1. 5 K/μs) than that in the E-PBF process (0.74 K/μs). The magnitude of liquid velocity in the melt pool is also higher in L-PBF than that in E-PBF. The numerical model is validated by comparing the simulation results for the melt-pool geometry with the PBF experimental results and comparing the numerical melt-front position with the analytical solution for the classical Stephan problem of melting of a phase-change material (PCM).","PeriodicalId":15700,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology-transactions of The Asme","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology-transactions of The Asme","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4048371","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Abstract
Powder-bed fusion (PBF) process is a subdivision of additive manufacturing (AM) technology where a heat source at a controlled speed selectively fuses regions of a powder-bed material to form three-dimensional (3D) parts in a layer-by-layer fashion. Two of the most commercialized and powerful PBF methods for fabricating full-density metallic parts are the laser PBF (L-PBF) and electron beam PBF (E-PBF) processes. In this study, a multiphysics-based 3D numerical model is developed to compare the thermo-fluid properties of Ti-6Al-4V melt pools formed by the L-PBF and E-PBF processes. The temperature-dependent properties of Ti-6Al-4V alloy and the parameters for the laser and electron beams are incorporated in the model as the user-defined functions (UDFs). The melt-pool geometry and its thermo-fluid behavior are investigated using the finite volume (FV) method, and results for the variations of temperature, thermo-physical properties, velocity, geometry of the melt pool, and cooling rate in the two processes are compared under similar irradiation conditions. For an irradiance level of 26 J/mm3 and a beam interaction time of 1.212 ms, simulation results show that the L-PBF process gives a faster cooling rate (1. 5 K/μs) than that in the E-PBF process (0.74 K/μs). The magnitude of liquid velocity in the melt pool is also higher in L-PBF than that in E-PBF. The numerical model is validated by comparing the simulation results for the melt-pool geometry with the PBF experimental results and comparing the numerical melt-front position with the analytical solution for the classical Stephan problem of melting of a phase-change material (PCM).