Computationally Efficient Prediction of Molten Pool Size in Multi-track Laser Melting via Surrogate Modeling
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This work presents an original surrogate model for the accurate and computationally efficient prediction of molten pool size in multi-track laser melting over a large domain at operating conditions relevant to laser powder bed fusion. While high-fidelity models can accurately predict the molten pool dynamics, the high computational expense limits their application to a few short tracks on small domains. Conduction models, on the other hand, are orders of magnitude cheaper to evaluate but lack the necessary physics for accurate predictions. This research presents a surrogate model that combines the computational efficiency of the conduction model with the accuracy of the high-fidelity model. A conduction model and high-fidelity model are simulated over a small scan pattern to generate training data of the highly transient molten pool depth and width. A data-driven model, consisting of a fuzzy basis function network, is trained with the aforementioned data. The conduction model is then simulated over a larger scan pattern, the results are input into the trained surrogate model, thereby outputting high-fidelity predictions of the molten pool size over a larger scan pattern. Comparison with experimental results shows this surrogate modeling framework provides reasonably accurate predictions of the molten pool depth and width (average error of -5.2% and 4.6%, respectively) and is a valid way to extend computationally intensive high-fidelity models to larger and more industrially relevant scan patterns.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Laser Material Processing Techniques · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Shin YC, Wu B, Lei S, Cheng GJ, Yao YL (2020) Overview of laser applications in manufacturing and materials processing in recent years. J Manuf Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.404839710.1115/1.4048397 ↗
2. DebRoy T, Wei HL, Zuback JS, Mukherjee T, Elmer JW, Milewski JO, Beese AM, Wilson-Heid A, De A, Zhang W (2018) Additive manufacturing of metallic components – process, structure and properties. Prog Mater Sci 92:112–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.001 ↗
3. Wei HL, Mukherjee T, Zhang W, Zuback JS, Knapp GL, De A, DebRoy T (2021) Mechanistic models for additive manufacturing of metallic components. Prog Mater Sci 116:100703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.10070310.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100703 ↗
4. Meier C, Penny RW, Zou Y, Gibbs JS, Hart AJ (2017) Thermophysical phenomena in metal additive manufacturing by selective laser melting: fundamentals, modeling, simulation, and experimentation. Annu Rev Heat Transf 20:241–316. https://doi.org/10.1615/AnnualRevHeatTransfer.201801904210.1615/AnnualRevHeatTransfer.2018019042 ↗
5. Bayat M, Dong W, Thorborg J, To AC, Hattel JH (2021) A review of multi-scale and multi-physics simulations of metal additive manufacturing processes with focus on modeling strategies. Addit Manuf 47:102278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.10227810.1016/j.addma.2021.102278 ↗
6. Cunningham R, Zhao C, Parab N, Kantzos C, Pauza J, Fezzaa K, Sun T, Rollett AD (2019) Keyhole threshold and morphology in laser melting revealed by ultrahigh-speed x-ray imaging. Science 363:849–852. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav468710.1126/science.aav4687 ↗
7. Gan Z, Kafka OL, Parab N, Zhao C, Fang L, Heinonen O, Sun T, Liu WK (2021) Universal scaling laws of keyhole stability and porosity in 3D printing of metals. Nat Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22704-010.1038/s41467-021-22704-0 ↗
8. Kouraytem N, Li X, Cunningham R, Zhao C, Parab N, Sun T, Rollett AD, Spear AD, Tan W (2019) Effect of laser-matter interaction on molten pool flow and keyhole dynamics. Phys Rev Appl 11:064054. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.11.06405410.1103/PhysRevApplied.11.064054 ↗
9. Bayat M, Thanki A, Mohanty S, Witvrouw A, Yang S, Thorborg J, Tiedje NS, Hattel JH (2019) Keyhole-induced porosities in laser-based powder bed fusion (L-PBF) of Ti6Al4V: high-fidelity modelling and experimental validation. Addit Manuf 30:100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.10083510.1016/j.addma.2019.100835 ↗
10. Chen Q, Zhao Y, Strayer S, Zhao Y, Aoyagi K, Koizumi Y, Chiba A, Xiong W, To AC (2021) Elucidating the effect of preheating temperature on melt pool morphology variation in Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion via simulation and experiment. Addit Manuf 37:101642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.10164210.1016/j.addma.2020.101642 ↗
11. Li X, Zhao C, Sun T, Tan W (2020) Revealing transient powder-gas interaction in laser powder bed fusion process through multi-physics modeling and high-speed synchrotron x-ray imaging. Addit Manuf 35:101362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.10136210.1016/j.addma.2020.101362 ↗
12. Mayi YA, Dal M, Peyre P, Bellet M, Fabbro R (2023) Physical mechanisms of conduction-to-keyhole transition in laser welding and additive manufacturing processes. Opt Laser Technol 158:108811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.10881110.1016/j.optlastec.2022.108811 ↗
13. Aggarwal A, Shin YC, Kumar A (2024) Unravelling keyhole instabilities and laser absorption dynamics during laser irradiation of Ti6Al4V: a high-fidelity thermo-fluidic study. Int J Heat Mass Transf 219:124841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.12484110.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124841 ↗
14. Grohol CM, Shin YC (2024) On the predictive accuracy and sensitivity to property variations in the high-fidelity modeling of the molten pool dynamics in laser melting of metals. Int J Heat Mass Transf 232:125894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2024.12589410.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2024.125894 ↗
15. Bayat M, Mohanty S, Hattel JH (2019) 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 139:95–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.00310.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003 ↗
16. Yao D, Wang J, Luo H, Wu Y, An X (2023) Thermal behavior and control during multi-track laser powder bed fusion of 316 L stainless steel. Addit Manuf 70:103562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.10356210.1016/j.addma.2023.103562 ↗
17. Cook PS, Murphy AB (2020) Simulation of melt pool behaviour during additive manufacturing: underlying physics and progress. Addit Manuf 31:100909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.10090910.1016/j.addma.2019.100909 ↗
18. Li E, Zhou Z, Wang L, Zou R, Yu A (2022) Particle scale modelling of powder recoating and melt pool dynamics in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing: a review. Powder Technol 409:117789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2022.11778910.1016/j.powtec.2022.117789 ↗
19. Heigel JC, Lane BM, Levine LE (2020) In situ measurements of melt-pool length and cooling rate during 3D builds of the metal AM-Bench artifacts. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9:31–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-020-00170-810.1007/s40192-020-00170-8 ↗
20. Lane B, Heigel J, Ricker R, Zhirnov I, Khromschenko V, Weaver J, Phan T, Stoudt M, Mekhontsev S, Levine L (2020) Measurements of melt pool geometry and cooling rates of individual laser traces on IN625 bare plates. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9:16–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-020-00169-110.1007/s40192-020-00169-1 ↗
21. Hong K-M, Grohol CM, Shin YC (2021) Comparative assessment of physics-based computational models on the NIST benchmark study of molten pool dimensions and microstructure for selective laser melting of Inconel 625. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 10:58–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-021-00201-y10.1007/s40192-021-00201-y ↗
22. Kollmannsberger S, Carraturo M, Reali A, Auricchio F (2019) Accurate prediction of melt pool shapes in laser powder bed fusion by the non-linear temperature equation including phase changes. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 8:167–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-019-00132-910.1007/s40192-019-00132-9 ↗
23. Zhang Z, Huang Y, Kasinathan AR, Shahabad SI, Ali U, Mahmoodkhani Y, Toyserkani E (2019) 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 109:297–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.01210.1016/j.optlastec.2018.08.012 ↗
24. Pavlíček K, Kotlan V, Doležel I (2019) Applicability and comparison of surrogate techniques for modeling of selected heating problems. Comput Math Appl 78:2897–2910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2019.02.01310.1016/j.camwa.2019.02.013 ↗
25. Tapia G, Khairallah S, Matthews M, King WE, Elwany A (2018) Gaussian process-based surrogate modeling framework for process planning in laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 94:3591–3603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1045-z10.1007/s00170-017-1045-z ↗
26. Gan Z, Jones KK, Lu Y, Liu WK (2021) Benchmark study of melted track geometries in laser powder bed fusion of Inconel 625. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 10:177–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-021-00209-410.1007/s40192-021-00209-4 ↗
27. Al Amin A, Li Y, Lu Y, Xie X, Gan Z, Mojumder S, Wagner GJ, Liu WK (2024) Physics guided heat source for quantitative prediction of IN718 laser additive manufacturing processes. Npj Comput Mater 10:37. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-024-01198-610.1038/s41524-024-01198-6 ↗
28. Moges T, Yang Z, Jones K, Feng S, Witherell P, Lu Y (2021) Hybrid modeling approach for melt-pool prediction in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. J Comput Inf Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.405004410.1115/1.4050044 ↗
29. T. Simpson, F. Mistree, J. Korte, T. Mauery, Comparison of response surface and kriging models for multidisciplinary design optimization. in: 7th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virigina, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-4755.10.2514/6.1998-4755 ↗
30. K. Jones, Z. Yang, H. Yeung, P. Witherell, Y. Lu, Hybrid Modeling of Melt Pool Geometry in Additive Manufacturing Using Neural Networks. in: ASME 2021 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2021-71266.10.1115/DETC2021-71266 ↗
31. Bell FC, Sonon DE (1976) Improved metallographic etching techniques for stainless steel and for stainless steel to carbon steel weldments. Metallography 9:91–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0026-0800(76)90008-210.1016/0026-0800(76)90008-2 ↗
32. Weaver JS, Deisenroth D, Mekhontsev S, Lane BM, Levine LE, Yeung H (2024) Cross-sectional melt pool geometry of laser scanned tracks and pads on nickel alloy 718 for the 2022 additive manufacturing benchmark challenges. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 13:363–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-024-00355-510.1007/s40192-024-00355-5 ↗
33. Weller HG, Tabor G, Jasak H, Fureby C (1998) A tensorial approach to computational continuum mechanics using object-oriented techniques. Comput Phys 12:620. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.16874410.1063/1.168744 ↗
34. Hirt CW, Nichols BD (1981) Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J Comput Phys 39:201–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(81)90145-510.1016/0021-9991(81)90145-5 ↗
35. Kim CS (1975) Thermophysical properties of stainless steels, Argonne. IL (United States). https://doi.org/10.2172/415228710.2172/4152287 ↗
36. Ozawa S, Morohoshi K, Hibiya T (2014) Influence of oxygen partial pressure on surface tension of molten type 304 and 316 stainless steels measured by oscillating droplet method using electromagnetic levitation. ISIJ Int 54:2097–2103. https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.54.209710.2355/isijinternational.54.2097 ↗
37. J.J. Valencia, P.N. Quested, Thermophysical properties, in: ASM Handbook, Vol. 15 Cast., ASM International, 2008: pp. 468–481. https://doi.org/10.1361/asmhba0005240.10.1361/asmhba0005240 ↗
38. Pichler P, Leitner T, Kaschnitz E, Rattenberger J, Pottlacher G (2022) Surface tension and thermal conductivity of NIST SRM 1155a (AISI 316L stainless steel). Int J Thermophys 43:66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-022-02991-510.1007/s10765-022-02991-5 ↗
39. Wang L-X, Mendel JM (1992) Fuzzy basis functions, universal approximation, and orthogonal least-squares learning. IEEE Trans Neural Networks 3:807–814. https://doi.org/10.1109/72.15907010.1109/72.159070 ↗
40. Lee CW, Shin YC (2003) Construction of fuzzy systems using least-squares method and genetic algorithm. Fuzzy Sets Syst 137:297–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(02)00344-510.1016/S0165-0114(02)00344-5 ↗
41. Yeung H, Lane B (2020) A residual heat compensation based scan strategy for powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Manuf Lett 25:56–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2020.07.00510.1016/j.mfglet.2020.07.005 ↗
42. Aggarwal A, Shin YC, Kumar A (2023) Investigation of the transient coupling between the dynamic laser beam absorptance and the melt pool - vapor depression morphology in laser powder bed fusion process. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 201:123663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.12366310.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.123663 ↗
43. Ye J, Khairallah SA, Rubenchik AM, Crumb MF, Guss G, Belak J, Matthews MJ (2019) Energy coupling mechanisms and scaling behavior associated with laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Adv Eng Mater. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20190018510.1002/adem.201900185 ↗
44. Fox JC, Evans CJ, Weaver JS, Redford JK (2023) Surface topography and melt pool behavior in rapid turnaround regions of laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of nickel superalloy 625. CIRP Ann 72:193–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2023.04.02410.1016/j.cirp.2023.04.024 ↗
45. Leonor JP, Gregory JW (2024) GO-MELT: GPU-optimized multilevel execution of LPBF thermal simulations. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 426:116977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2024.11697710.1016/j.cma.2024.116977 ↗
46. Proell SD, Munch P, Kronbichler M, Wall WA, Meier C (2024) A highly efficient computational approach for fast scan-resolved simulations of metal additive manufacturing processes on the scale of real parts. Addit Manuf 79:103921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.10392110.1016/j.addma.2023.103921 ↗