A Comparative Study of Rigid Three-Dimensional Image Registration Methods for Powder Bed Fusion with Laser Beam of Metals Using a Gold Standard Approach
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In Additive Manufacturing (AM), precise rigid three-dimensional (3D) image registration between X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) scans and Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models is an important step for the quantification of distortions in produced parts. Given the absence of standardized benchmarks for image registration in AM, we introduce a gold standard for 3D image registration, using a reference base plate beneath the build structure. This gold standard is used to quantify the accuracy of rigid registration, with a proof of concept demonstrated in PBF-LB/M. In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of various rigid 3D registration methods useful for quality assurance of PBF-LB/M parts including feature-based, intensity-based, and point cloud-based approaches. The performance of each registration method is evaluated using measures of alignment accuracy based on the gold standard and computational efficiency. Our results indicate significant differences in the efficacy of these methods, with point cloud based Coherent Point Drift (CPD) showing superior performance in both alignment and computational efficiency. The rigidly registered 3D volumes are used to estimate the deformation field of the printed parts relative to the nominal CAD design using Digital Volume Correlation (DVC). The quality of the estimated deformation field is assessed using the Dice score metric. This study provides insights into methods for enhancing the precision and reliability of AM process.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging · Laser Material Processing Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (56)
Show source-provided references
1. Ulbricht, A., Mohr, G., Altenburg, S.J., Oster, S., Maierhofer, C., Bruno, G.: Can potential defects in LPBF Be healed from the laser exposure of subsequent layers? A Quantitative Study. Metals. (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/met1107101210.3390/met11071012 ↗
2. Serrano-Munoz, I., Mishurova, T., Thiede, T., Sprengel, M., Kromm, A., Nadammal, N., et al.: The residual stress in as-built laser powder bed fusion IN718 alloy as a consequence of the scanning strategy induced microstructure. Sci. Rep. 10(1), 14645 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71112-910.1038/s41598-020-71112-9 ↗
3. Nadammal, N., Mishurova, T., Fritsch, T., Serrano-Munoz, I., Kromm, A., Haberland, C., et al.: Critical role of scan strategies on the development of microstructure, texture, and residual stresses during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 38, 101792 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.10179210.1016/j.addma.2020.101792 ↗
4. Martucci, A., Aversa, A., Bondioli, F., Fino, P., Lombardi, M.: Synergic strategies to improve the PBF-LB\M processability of a cracking-sensitive alloy. Mater. Des. 224, 111396 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.11139610.1016/j.matdes.2022.111396 ↗
5. Hockaday, L.A., Kang, K.H., Colangelo, N.W., Cheung, P.Y., Duan, B., Malone, E., et al.: Rapid 3D printing of anatomically accurate and mechanically heterogeneous aortic valve hydrogel scaffolds. Biofabrication 4(3), 035005 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5082/4/3/03500510.1088/1758-5082/4/3/035005 ↗
6. Chen, R., Imani, F., Reutzel, E., Yang, H.: From design complexity to build quality in additive manufacturing—a sensor-based perspective. IEEE Sens. Letters. 3(1), 1–4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/LSENS.2018.288074710.1109/LSENS.2018.2880747 ↗
7. Şirin, T.B., Kaynak, Y.: Prediction of residual stress and distortion in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing process of Inconel 718 alloy. Procedia CIRP. 99, 330–335 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.03.10210.1016/j.procir.2021.03.102 ↗
8. Afazov, S., Rahman, H., Serjouei, A.: Investigation of the right first-time distortion compensation approach in laser powder bed fusion of a thin manifold structure made of Inconel 718. J. Manuf. Process. 69, 621–629 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.08.01610.1016/j.jmapro.2021.08.016 ↗
9. Taherkhani, K., Sheydaeian, E., Eischer, C., Otto, M., Toyserkani, E.: Development of a defect-detection platform using photodiode signals collected from the melt pool of laser powder-bed fusion. Addit. Manuf. 46, 102152 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.10215210.1016/j.addma.2021.102152 ↗
10. Dragonfly 2022.2 [Computer software]. Comet Technologies Canada Inc. M, Canada; software available at https://www.theobjects.com/dragonfly.
11. WS R. ImageJ. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA1997–2015.
12. VGStudio VG. Volume Graphics GmbH (2020)
13. Colosimo, B.M., Grasso, M., Garghetti, F., Rossi, B.: Complex geometries in additive manufacturing: a new solution for lattice structure modeling and monitoring. J. Qual. Technol. 54(4), 392–414 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1080/00224065.2021.192637710.1080/00224065.2021.1926377 ↗
14. Donegan, S.P., Schwalbach, E.J., Groeber, M.A.: Multimodal registration and fusion of in situ and ex situ metal additive manufacturing data. JOM 73(11), 3250–3262 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-04883-910.1007/s11837-021-04883-9 ↗
15. Feng, S., Chen, Z., Bircher, B., Ji, Z., Nyborg, L., Bigot, S.: Predicting laser powder bed fusion defects through in-process monitoring data and machine learning. Mater. Des. 222, 111115 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.11111510.1016/j.matdes.2022.111115 ↗
16. Gaikwad, A., Imani, F., Yang, H., Reutzel, E., Rao, P.: In situ monitoring of thin-wall build quality in laser powder bed fusion using deep learning. Smart and Sustain. Manuf. Syst. 3(1), 98–121 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1520/SSMS2019002710.1520/SSMS20190027 ↗
17. Imani, F., Khanzadeh, M.: Image-guided multi-response modeling and characterization of design defects in metal additive manufacturing (2021).10.1115/IMECE2021-71966 ↗
18. Chen, R., Imani, M., Imani, F.: Joint active search and neuromorphic computing for efficient data exploitation and monitoring in additive manufacturing. J. Manuf. Process. 71, 743–752 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.09.04810.1016/j.jmapro.2021.09.048 ↗
19. Chen, R., Rao, P., Lu, Y., Reutzel, E.W., Yang, H.: Recurrence network analysis of design-quality interactions in additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 39, 101861 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.10186110.1016/j.addma.2021.101861 ↗
20. Lang, A., Ortiz Rios, C., Newkirk, J., Landers, R.G., Castle, J., Bristow, DA.: Image registration and matching error in 2D and 3D for laser powder bed fusion. 2021 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium (2021)
21. Oster, S., Fritsch, T., Ulbricht, A., Mohr, G., Bruno, G., Maierhofer, C., et al.: On the registration of thermographic in situ monitoring data and computed tomography reference data in the scope of defect prediction in laser powder bed fusion. Metals (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/met1206094710.3390/met12060947 ↗
22. Chouhan, G., Gunji, B.: Additive manufacturing TPMS lattice structures: Experimental study on airflow resistivity. Results in Mater. 20, 100478 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinma.2023.10047810.1016/j.rinma.2023.100478 ↗
23. Feng, J., Fu, J., Yao, X., He, Y.: Triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) porous structures: from multi-scale design, precise additive manufacturing to multidisciplinary applications. Int. J. Extrem. Manuf. 4(2), 022001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/2631-7990/ac5be610.1088/2631-7990/ac5be6 ↗
24. Wang, Z., Liao, B., Liu, Y., Liao, Y., Zhou, Y., Li, W.: Influence of structural parameters of 3D-printed triply periodic minimal surface gyroid porous scaffolds on compression performance, cell response, and bone regeneration. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 112(1), e35337 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.3533710.1002/jbm.b.35337 ↗
25. Al-Ketan, O., Rezgui, R., Rowshan, R., Du, H.F., Fang, N.X., Abu Al-Rub, R.K.: Microarchitected stretching-dominated mechanical metamaterials with minimal surface topologies. Adv. Eng. Mater. 20(9), ARTN 1800029 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20180002910.1002/adem.201800029 ↗
26. Salazar EAR.: Design of functionally graded parts for additive manufacturing: methods and tools for variable density triply periodic minimal surfaces. Material chemistry: Université Grenoble Alpes (2022)
27. Nahr, F., Rasch, M., Burkhardt, C., Renner, J., Baumgärtner, B., Hausotte, T., et al.: Geometrical influence on material properties for Ti6Al4V parts in powder bed fusion. J. Manuf. and Mater. Process. 7(3), 82 (2023)
28. Martucci, A., Aversa, A., Lombardi, M.: Ongoing challenges of laser-based powder bed fusion processing of Al alloys and potential solutions from the literature—a review. Materials 16(3), 1084 (2023)10.3390/ma16031084 ↗
29. Ulbricht, A., Altenburg, S.J., Sprengel, M., Sommer, K., Mohr, G., Fritsch, T., et al.: Separation of the formation mechanisms of residual stresses in LPBF 316L. Metals (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/met1009123410.3390/met10091234 ↗
30. Bartscher, M., Hilpert, U., Goebbels, J., Weidemann, G.: Enhancement and proof of accuracy of industrial computed tomography (CT) measurements. CIRP Ann. 56(1), 495–498 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2007.05.11810.1016/j.cirp.2007.05.118 ↗
31. Wenig P.: Examination of the measurement uncertainty on dimensional measurements by X-ray (2006)
32. Lüthi, M., Bircher, B.A., Meli, F., Küng, A., Thalmann, R.: X-ray flat-panel detector geometry correction to improve dimensional computed tomography measurements. Meas. Sci. Technol. 31(3), 035002 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/ab52b110.1088/1361-6501/ab52b1 ↗
33. Rodet, T., Noo, F., Defrise, M.: The cone-beam algorithm of Feldkamp, Davis, and Kress preserves oblique line integrals. Med. Phys. 31(7), 1972–1975 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.175982810.1118/1.1759828 ↗
34. Chand, K., Fritsch, T., Oster, S., Ulbricht, A., Bruno, G.: Review on image registration methods for the quality control in additive manufacturing. Prog. Addit. Manuf. (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-024-00932-210.1007/s40964-024-00932-2 ↗
35. Ahmad, Y.M., Sahran, S., Adam, A., Osman, S.S.: Linear intensity-based image registration. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sc. 9(12), 211–217 (2018). https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2018.09123110.14569/IJACSA.2018.091231 ↗
36. Klein, S., Pluim, J.P.W., Staring, M., Viergever, M.A.: Adaptive stochastic gradient descent optimisation for image registration. Int. J. Comput. Vision 81(3), 227–239 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11263-008-0168-y10.1007/s11263-008-0168-y ↗
37. Azam, M.A., Khan, K.B., Ahmad, M., Mazzara, M.: Multimodal medical image registration and fusion for quality enhancement. Cmc-Comput. Mater. Con. 68(1), 821–840 (2021). https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2021.01613110.32604/cmc.2021.016131 ↗
38. Garyfallidis, E., Brett, M., Amirbekian, B., Rokem, A., van der Walt, S., Descoteaux, M., et al.: Dipy, a library for the analysis of diffusion MRI data. Front. Neuroinform. 8, 8 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2014.0000810.3389/fninf.2014.00008 ↗
39. Rusinkiewicz, S., Levoy, M.: Efficient variants of the ICP algorithm. Proceedings Third International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling. 145–52 (2001)10.1109/IM.2001.924423 ↗
40. Besl, P.J., McKay, N.D.: A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 14(2), 239–256 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1109/34.12179110.1109/34.121791 ↗
41. Myronenko, A., Song, X.: Point set registration: coherent point drift. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 32(12), 2262–2275 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2010.4610.1109/TPAMI.2010.46 ↗
42. Sridharan R. Gaussian mixture models and the EM algorithm. 2014.
43. Zhou, Q.Y., Park, J., Koltun, V.: Open3D: a modern library for 3D data processing. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1801.09847.10.48550/arXiv.1801.09847 ↗
44. Kenta-Tanaka: probreg. https://probreg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ (2019–9–29). Accessed.
45. Rashid, A., Gopaluni, A.: A review of residual stress and deformation modeling for metal additive manufacturing processes. Chinese J. Mech. Eng.: Addit. Manuf. Front. 2(4), 100102 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjmeam.2023.10010210.1016/j.cjmeam.2023.100102 ↗
46. Fritsch, T., Farahbod-Sternahl, L., Serrano-Muñoz, I., Léonard, F., Haberland, C., Bruno, G.: 3D computed tomography quantifies the dependence of bulk porosity, surface roughness, and Re-Entrant features on build angle in additively manufactured IN625 lattice struts. Adv. Eng. Mater. 24(6), 2100689 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20210068910.1002/adem.202100689 ↗
47. Xie, D., Lv, F., Liang, H., Shen, L., Tian, Z., Zhao, J., et al.: Towards a comprehensive understanding of distortion in additive manufacturing based on assumption of constraining force. Vir. and Phys. Prototyp. 16(sup1), S85–S97 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2021.188187310.1080/17452759.2021.1881873 ↗
48. Pluim J, Muenzing S, Eppenhof K, Murphy K. The truth is hard to make: Validation of medical image registration. 2016.10.1109/ICPR.2016.7899978 ↗
49. Fitzpatrick, J.M., Hill, D.L., Shyr, Y., West, J., Studholme, C., Maurer, C.R., Jr.: Visual assessment of the accuracy of retrospective registration of MR and CT images of the brain. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 17(4), 571–585 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1109/42.73040210.1109/42.730402 ↗
50. Murphy, K., van Ginneken, B., Reinhardt, J.M., Kabus, S., Ding, K., Deng, X., et al.: Evaluation of registration methods on thoracic CT: the EMPIRE10 challenge. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 30(11), 1901–1920 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/tmi.2011.215834910.1109/tmi.2011.2158349 ↗
51. Dice, L.R.: Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26(3), 297–302 (1945). https://doi.org/10.2307/193240910.2307/1932409 ↗
52. Wei, H.L., Cao, Y., Liao, W.H., Liu, T.T.: Mechanisms on inter-track void formation and phase transformation during laser powder bed fusion of Ti-6Al-4V. Addit. Manuf. 34, 101221 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.10122110.1016/j.addma.2020.101221 ↗
53. Otsu, N.: A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 9(1), 62–66 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1979.431007610.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076 ↗
54. Wang, C., Li, S., Zeng, D., Zhu, X.: Quantification and compensation of thermal distortion in additive manufacturing: a computational statistics approach. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 375, 113611 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.11361110.1016/j.cma.2020.113611 ↗
55. Chowdhury, S., Anand, S.: Artificial neural network based geometric compensation for thermal deformation in additive manufacturing processes (2016)10.1115/MSEC2016-8784 ↗
56. Stamati, O., Andò, E., Roubin, E., Cailletaud, R., Wiebicke, M., Pinzon, G., et al.: Spam: software for practical analysis of materials. J. Open Sour. Softw. (2020). https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.0228610.21105/joss.02286 ↗