FLOW-3D 교육사례

고객 맞춤형 교육

Education Customer List

오시는 길
Predicting solid-state phase transformations during metal additive manufacturing: A case study on electron-beam powder bed fusion of Inconel-738

Predicting solid-state phase transformations during metal additive manufacturing: A case study on electron-beam powder bed fusion of Inconel-738

금속 적층 제조 중 고체 상 변형 예측: Inconel-738의 전자빔 분말층 융합에 대한 사례 연구

Nana Kwabena Adomako a, Nima Haghdadi a, James F.L. Dingle bc, Ernst Kozeschnik d, Xiaozhou Liao bc, Simon P. Ringer bc, Sophie Primig a

Abstract

Metal additive manufacturing (AM) has now become the perhaps most desirable technique for producing complex shaped engineering parts. However, to truly take advantage of its capabilities, advanced control of AM microstructures and properties is required, and this is often enabled via modeling. The current work presents a computational modeling approach to studying the solid-state phase transformation kinetics and the microstructural evolution during AM. Our approach combines thermal and thermo-kinetic modelling. A semi-analytical heat transfer model is employed to simulate the thermal history throughout AM builds. Thermal profiles of individual layers are then used as input for the MatCalc thermo-kinetic software. The microstructural evolution (e.g., fractions, morphology, and composition of individual phases) for any region of interest throughout the build is predicted by MatCalc. The simulation is applied to an IN738 part produced by electron beam powder bed fusion to provide insights into how γ′ precipitates evolve during thermal cycling. Our simulations show qualitative agreement with our experimental results in predicting the size distribution of γ′ along the build height, its multimodal size character, as well as the volume fraction of MC carbides. Our findings indicate that our method is suitable for a range of AM processes and alloys, to predict and engineer their microstructures and properties.

Graphical Abstract

ga1

Keywords

Additive manufacturing, Simulation, Thermal cycles, γ′ phase, IN738

1. Introduction

Additive manufacturing (AM) is an advanced manufacturing method that enables engineering parts with intricate shapes to be fabricated with high efficiency and minimal materials waste. AM involves building up 3D components layer-by-layer from feedstocks such as powder [1]. Various alloys, including steel, Ti, Al, and Ni-based superalloys, have been produced using different AM techniques. These techniques include directed energy deposition (DED), electron- and laser powder bed fusion (E-PBF and L-PBF), and have found applications in a variety of industries such as aerospace and power generation [2][3][4]. Despite the growing interest, certain challenges limit broader applications of AM fabricated components in these industries and others. One of such limitations is obtaining a suitable and reproducible microstructure that offers the desired mechanical properties consistently. In fact, the AM as-built microstructure is highly complex and considerably distinctive from its conventionally processed counterparts owing to the complicated thermal cycles arising from the deposition of several layers upon each other [5][6].

Several studies have reported that the solid-state phases and solidification microstructure of AM processed alloys such as CMSX-4, CoCr [7][8], Ti-6Al-4V [9][10][11]IN738 [6]304L stainless steel [12], and IN718 [13][14] exhibit considerable variations along the build direction. For instance, references [9][10] have reported that there is a variation in the distribution of α and β phases along the build direction in Ti-alloys. Similarly, the microstructure of an L-PBF fabricated martensitic steel exhibits variations in the fraction of martensite [15]. Furthermore, some of the present authors and others [6][16][17][18][19][20] have recently reviewed and reported that there is a difference in the morphology and fraction of nanoscale precipitates as a function of build height in Ni-based superalloys. These non-uniformities in the as-built microstructure result in an undesired heterogeneity in mechanical and other important properties such as corrosion and oxidation [19][21][22][23]. To obtain the desired microstructure and properties, additional processing treatments are utilized, but this incurs extra costs and may lead to precipitation of detrimental phases and grain coarsening. Therefore, a through-process understanding of the microstructure evolution under repeated heating and cooling is now needed to further advance 3D printed microstructure and property control.

It is now commonly understood that the microstructure evolution during printing is complex, and most AM studies concentrate on the microstructure and mechanical properties of the final build only. Post-printing studies of microstructure characteristics at room temperature miss crucial information on how they evolve. In-situ measurements and modelling approaches are required to better understand the complex microstructural evolution under repeated heating and cooling. Most in-situ measurements in AM focus on monitoring the microstructural changes, such as phase transformations and melt pool dynamics during fabrication using X-ray scattering and high-speed X-ray imaging [24][25][26][27]. For example, Zhao et al. [25] measured the rate of solidification and described the α/β phase transformation during L-PBF of Ti-6Al-4V in-situ. Also, Wahlmann et al. [21] recently used an L-PBF machine coupled with X-ray scattering to investigate the changes in CMSX-4 phase during successive melting processes. Although these techniques provide significant understanding of the basic principles of AM, they are not widely accessible. This is due to the great cost of the instrument, competitive application process, and complexities in terms of the experimental set-up, data collection, and analysis [26][28].

Computational modeling techniques are promising and more widely accessible tools that enable advanced understanding, prediction, and engineering of microstructures and properties during AM. So far, the majority of computational studies have concentrated on physics based process models for metal AM, with the goal of predicting the temperature profile, heat transfer, powder dynamics, and defect formation (e.g., porosity) [29][30]. In recent times, there have been efforts in modeling of the AM microstructure evolution using approaches such as phase-field [31], Monte Carlo (MC) [32], and cellular automata (CA) [33], coupled with finite element simulations for temperature profiles. However, these techniques are often restricted to simulating the evolution of solidification microstructures (e.g., grain and dendrite structure) and defects (e.g., porosity). For example, Zinovieva et al. [33] predicted the grain structure of L-PBF Ti-6Al-4V using finite difference and cellular automata methods. However, studies on the computational modelling of the solid-state phase transformations, which largely determine the resulting properties, remain limited. This can be attributed to the multi-component and multi-phase nature of most engineering alloys in AM, along with the complex transformation kinetics during thermal cycling. This kind of research involves predictions of the thermal cycle in AM builds, and connecting it to essential thermodynamic and kinetic data as inputs for the model. Based on the information provided, the thermokinetic model predicts the history of solid-state phase microstructure evolution during deposition as output. For example, a multi-phase, multi-component mean-field model has been developed to simulate the intermetallic precipitation kinetics in IN718 [34] and IN625 [35] during AM. Also, Basoalto et al. [36] employed a computational framework to examine the contrasting distributions of process-induced microvoids and precipitates in two Ni-based superalloys, namely IN718 and CM247LC. Furthermore, McNamara et al. [37] established a computational model based on the Johnson-Mehl-Avrami model for non-isothermal conditions to predict solid-state phase transformation kinetics in L-PBF IN718 and DED Ti-6Al-4V. These models successfully predicted the size and volume fraction of individual phases and captured the repeated nucleation and dissolution of precipitates that occur during AM.

In the current study, we propose a modeling approach with appreciably short computational time to investigate the detailed microstructural evolution during metal AM. This may include obtaining more detailed information on the morphologies of phases, such as size distribution, phase fraction, dissolution and nucleation kinetics, as well as chemistry during thermal cycling and final cooling to room temperature. We utilize the combination of the MatCalc thermo-kinetic simulator and a semi-analytical heat conduction model. MatCalc is a software suite for simulation of phase transformations, microstructure evolution and certain mechanical properties in engineering alloys. It has successfully been employed to simulate solid-state phase transformations in Ni-based superalloys [38][39], steels [40], and Al alloys [41] during complex thermo-mechanical processes. MatCalc uses the classical nucleation theory as well as the so-called Svoboda-Fischer-Fratzl-Kozeschnik (SFFK) growth model as the basis for simulating precipitation kinetics [42]. Although MatCalc was originally developed for conventional thermo-mechanical processes, we will show that it is also applicable for AM if the detailed time-temperature profile of the AM build is known. The semi-analytical heat transfer code developed by Stump and Plotkowski [43] is used to simulate these profile throughout the AM build.

1.1. Application to IN738

Inconel-738 (IN738) is a precipitation hardening Ni-based superalloy mainly employed in high-temperature components, e.g. in gas turbines and aero-engines owing to its exceptional mechanical properties at temperatures up to 980 °C, coupled with high resistance to oxidation and corrosion [44]. Its superior high-temperature strength (∼1090 MPa tensile strength) is provided by the L12 ordered Ni3(Al,Ti) γ′ phase that precipitates in a face-centered cubic (FCC) γ matrix [45][46]. Despite offering great properties, IN738, like most superalloys with high γ′ fractions, is challenging to process owing to its propensity to hot cracking [47][48]. Further, machining of such alloys is challenging because of their high strength and work-hardening rates. It is therefore difficult to fabricate complex INC738 parts using traditional manufacturing techniques like casting, welding, and forging.

The emergence of AM has now made it possible to fabricate such parts from IN738 and other superalloys. Some of the current authors’ recent research successfully applied E-PBF to fabricate defect-free IN738 containing γ′ throughout the build [16][17]. The precipitated γ′ were heterogeneously distributed. In particular, Haghdadi et al. [16] studied the origin of the multimodal size distribution of γ′, while Lim et al. [17] investigated the gradient in γ′ character with build height and its correlation to mechanical properties. Based on these results, the present study aims to extend the understanding of the complex and site-specific microstructural evolution in E-PBF IN738 by using a computational modelling approach. New experimental evidence (e.g., micrographs not published previously) is presented here to support the computational results.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials preparation

IN738 Ni-based superalloy (59.61Ni-8.48Co-7.00Al-17.47Cr-3.96Ti-1.01Mo-0.81W-0.56Ta-0.49Nb-0.47C-0.09Zr-0.05B, at%) gas-atomized powder was used as feedstock. The powders, with average size of 60 ± 7 µm, were manufactured by Praxair and distributed by Astro Alloys Inc. An Arcam Q10 machine by GE Additive with an acceleration voltage of 60 kV was used to fabricate a 15 × 15 × 25 mm3 block (XYZ, Z: build direction) on a 316 stainless steel substrate. The block was 3D-printed using a ‘random’ spot melt pattern. The random spot melt pattern involves randomly selecting points in any given layer, with an equal chance of each point being melted. Each spot melt experienced a dwell time of 0.3 ms, and the layer thickness was 50 µm. Some of the current authors have previously characterized the microstructure of the very same and similar builds in more detail [16][17]. A preheat temperature of ∼1000 °C was set and kept during printing to reduce temperature gradients and, in turn, thermal stresses [49][50][51]. Following printing, the build was separated from the substrate through electrical discharge machining. It should be noted that this sample was simultaneously printed with the one used in [17] during the same build process and on the same build plate, under identical conditions.

2.2. Microstructural characterization

The printed sample was longitudinally cut in the direction of the build using a Struers Accutom-50, ground, and then polished to 0.25 µm suspension via standard techniques. The polished x-z surface was electropolished and etched using Struers A2 solution (perchloric acid in ethanol). Specimens for image analysis were polished using a 0.06 µm colloidal silica. Microstructure analyses were carried out across the height of the build using optical microscopy (OM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with focus on the microstructure evolution (γ′ precipitates) in individual layers. The position of each layer being analyzed was determined by multiplying the layer number by the layer thickness (50 µm). It should be noted that the position of the first layer starts where the thermal profile is tracked (in this case, 2 mm from the bottom). SEM images were acquired using a JEOL 7001 field emission microscope. The brightness and contrast settings, acceleration voltage of 15 kV, working distance of 10 mm, and other SEM imaging parameters were all held constant for analysis of the entire build. The ImageJ software was used for automated image analysis to determine the phase fraction and size of γ′ precipitates and carbides. A 2-pixel radius Gaussian blur, following a greyscale thresholding and watershed segmentation was used [52]. Primary γ′ sizes (>50 nm), were measured using equivalent spherical diameters. The phase fractions were considered equal to the measured area fraction. Secondary γ′ particles (<50 nm) were not considered here. The γ′ size in the following refers to the diameter of a precipitate.

2.3. Hardness testing

A Struers DuraScan tester was utilized for Vickers hardness mapping on a polished x-z surface, from top to bottom under a maximum load of 100 mN and 10 s dwell time. 30 micro-indentations were performed per row. According to the ASTM standard [53], the indentations were sufficiently distant (∼500 µm) to assure that strain-hardened areas did not interfere with one another.

2.4. Computational simulation of E-PBF IN738 build

2.4.1. Thermal profile modeling

The thermal history was generated using the semi-analytical heat transfer code (also known as the 3DThesis code) developed by Stump and Plotkowski [43]. This code is an open-source C++ program which provides a way to quickly simulate the conductive heat transfer found in welding and AM. The key use case for the code is the simulation of larger domains than is practicable with Computational Fluid Dynamics/Finite Element Analysis programs like FLOW-3D AM. Although simulating conductive heat transfer will not be an appropriate simplification for some investigations (for example the modelling of keyholding or pore formation), the 3DThesis code does provide fast estimates of temperature, thermal gradient, and solidification rate which can be useful for elucidating microstructure formation across entire layers of an AM build. The mathematics involved in the code is as follows:

In transient thermal conduction during welding and AM, with uniform and constant thermophysical properties and without considering fluid convection and latent heat effects, energy conservation can be expressed as:(1)��∂�∂�=�∇2�+�̇where � is density, � specific heat, � temperature, � time, � thermal conductivity, and �̇ a volumetric heat source. By assuming a semi-infinite domain, Eq. 1 can be analytically solved. The solution for temperature at a given time (t) using a volumetric Gaussian heat source is presented as:(2)��,�,�,�−�0=33�����32∫0�1������exp−3�′�′2��+�′�′2��+�′�′2����′(3)and��=12��−�′+��2for�=�,�,�(4)and�′�′=�−���′Where � is the vector �,�,� and �� is the location of the heat source.

The numerical integration scheme used is an adaptive Gaussian quadrature method based on the following nondimensionalization:(5)�=��xy2�,�′=��xy2�′,�=��xy,�=��xy,�=��xy,�=���xy

A more detailed explanation of the mathematics can be found in reference [43].

The main source of the thermal cycling present within a powder-bed fusion process is the fusion of subsequent layers. Therefore, regions near the top of a build are expected to undergo fewer thermal cycles than those closer to the bottom. For this purpose, data from the single scan’s thermal influence on multiple layers was spliced to represent the thermal cycles experienced at a single location caused by multiple subsequent layers being fused.

The cross-sectional area simulated by this model was kept constant at 1 × 1 mm2, and the depth was dependent on the build location modelled with MatCalc. For a build location 2 mm from the bottom, the maximum number of layers to simulate is 460. Fig. 1a shows a stitched overview OM image of the entire build indicating the region where this thermal cycle is simulated and tracked. To increase similarity with the conditions of the physical build, each thermal history was constructed from the results of two simulations generated with different versions of a random scan path. The parameters used for these thermal simulations can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that the main purpose of the thermal profile modelling was to demonstrate how the conditions at different locations of the build change relative to each other. Accurately predicting the absolute temperature during the build would require validation via a temperature sensor measurement during the build process which is beyond the scope of the study. Nonetheless, to establish the viability of the heat source as a suitable approximation for this study, an additional sensitivity analysis was conducted. This analysis focused on the influence of energy input on γ′ precipitation behavior, the central aim of this paper. This was achieved by employing varying beam absorption energies (0.76, 0.82 – the values utilized in the simulation, and 0.9). The direct impact of beam absorption efficiency on energy input into the material was investigated. Specifically, the initial 20 layers of the build were simulated and subsequently compared to experimental data derived from SEM. While phase fractions were found to be consistent across all conditions, disparities emerged in the mean size of γ′ precipitates. An absorption efficiency of 0.76 yielded a mean size of approximately 70 nm. Conversely, absorption efficiencies of 0.82 and 0.9 exhibited remarkably similar mean sizes of around 130 nm, aligning closely with the outcomes of the experiments.

Fig. 1

Table 1. A list of parameters used in thermal simulation of E-PBF.

ParameterValue
Spatial resolution5 µm
Time step0.5 s
Beam diameter200 µm
Beam penetration depth1 µm
Beam power1200 W
Beam absorption efficiency0.82
Thermal conductivity25.37 W/(m⋅K)
Chamber temperature1000 °C
Specific heat711.756 J/(kg⋅K)
Density8110 kg/m3

2.4.2. Thermo-kinetic simulation

The numerical analyses of the evolution of precipitates was performed using MatCalc version 6.04 (rel 0.011). The thermodynamic (‘mc_ni.tdb’, version 2.034) and diffusion (‘mc_ni.ddb’, version 2.007) databases were used. MatCalc’s basic principles are elaborated as follows:

The nucleation kinetics of precipitates are computed using a computational technique based on a classical nucleation theory [54] that has been modified for systems with multiple components [42][55]. Accordingly, the transient nucleation rate (�), which expresses the rate at which nuclei are formed per unit volume and time, is calculated as:(6)�=�0��*∙�xp−�*�∙�∙exp−��where �0 denotes the number of active nucleation sites, �* the rate of atomic attachment, � the Boltzmann constant, � the temperature, �* the critical energy for nucleus formation, τ the incubation time, and t the time. � (Zeldovich factor) takes into consideration that thermal excitation destabilizes the nucleus as opposed to its inactive state [54]. Z is defined as follows:(7)�=−12�kT∂2∆�∂�2�*12where ∆� is the overall change in free energy due to the formation of a nucleus and n is the nucleus’ number of atoms. ∆�’s derivative is evaluated at n* (critical nucleus size). �* accounts for the long-range diffusion of atoms required for nucleation, provided that the matrix’ and precipitates’ composition differ. Svoboda et al. [42] developed an appropriate multi-component equation for �*, which is given by:(8)�*=4��*2�4�∑�=1��ki−�0�2�0��0�−1where �* denotes the critical radius for nucleation, � represents atomic distance, and � is the molar volume. �ki and �0� represent the concentration of elements in the precipitate and matrix, respectively. The parameter �0� denotes the rate of diffusion of the ith element within the matrix. The expression for the incubation time � is expressed as [54]:(9)�=12�*�2

and �*, which represents the critical energy for nucleation:(10)�*=16�3�3∆�vol2where � is the interfacial energy, and ∆Gvol the change in the volume free energy. The critical nucleus’ composition is similar to the γ′ phase’s equilibrium composition at the same temperature. � is computed based on the precipitate and matrix compositions, using a generalized nearest neighbor broken bond model, with the assumption of interfaces being planar, sharp, and coherent [56][57][58].

In Eq. 7, it is worth noting that �* represents the fundamental variable in the nucleation theory. It contains �3/∆�vol2 and is in the exponent of the nucleation rate. Therefore, even small variations in γ and/or ∆�vol can result in notable changes in �, especially if �* is in the order of �∙�. This is demonstrated in [38] for UDIMET 720 Li during continuous cooling, where these quantities change steadily during precipitation due to their dependence on matrix’ and precipitate’s temperature and composition. In the current work, these changes will be even more significant as the system is exposed to multiple cycles of rapid cooling and heating.

Once nucleated, the growth of a precipitate is assessed using the radius and composition evolution equations developed by Svoboda et al. [42] with a mean-field method that employs the thermodynamic extremal principle. The expression for the total Gibbs free energy of a thermodynamic system G, which consists of n components and m precipitates, is given as follows:(11)�=∑���0��0�+∑�=1�4���33��+∑�=1��ki�ki+∑�=1�4���2��.

The chemical potential of component � in the matrix is denoted as �0�(�=1,…,�), while the chemical potential of component � in the precipitate is represented by �ki(�=1,…,�,�=1,…,�). These chemical potentials are defined as functions of the concentrations �ki(�=1,…,�,�=1,…,�). The interface energy density is denoted as �, and �� incorporates the effects of elastic energy and plastic work resulting from the volume change of each precipitate.

Eq. (12) establishes that the total free energy of the system in its current state relies on the independent state variables: the sizes (radii) of the precipitates �� and the concentrations of each component �ki. The remaining variables can be determined by applying the law of mass conservation to each component �. This can be represented by the equation:(12)��=�0�+∑�=1�4���33�ki,

Furthermore, the global mass conservation can be expressed by equation:(13)�=∑�=1���When a thermodynamic system transitions to a more stable state, the energy difference between the initial and final stages is dissipated. This model considers three distinct forms of dissipation effects [42]. These include dissipations caused by the movement of interfaces, diffusion within the precipitate and diffusion within the matrix.

Consequently, �̇� (growth rate) and �̇ki (chemical composition’s rate of change) of the precipitate with index � are derived from the linear system of equation system:(14)�ij��=��where �� symbolizes the rates �̇� and �̇ki [42]. Index i contains variables for precipitate radius, chemical composition, and stoichiometric boundary conditions suggested by the precipitate’s crystal structure. Eq. (10) is computed separately for every precipitate �. For a more detailed description of the formulae for the coefficients �ij and �� employed in this work please refer to [59].

The MatCalc software was used to perform the numerical time integration of �̇� and �̇ki of precipitates based on the classical numerical method by Kampmann and Wagner [60]. Detailed information on this method can be found in [61]. Using this computational method, calculations for E-PBF thermal cycles (cyclic heating and cooling) were computed and compared to experimental data. The simulation took approximately 2–4 hrs to complete on a standard laptop.

3. Results

3.1. Microstructure

Fig. 1 displays a stitched overview image and selected SEM micrographs of various γ′ morphologies and carbides after observations of the X-Z surface of the build from the top to 2 mm above the bottom. Fig. 2 depicts a graph that charts the average size and phase fraction of the primary γ′, as it changes with distance from the top to the bottom of the build. The SEM micrographs show widespread primary γ′ precipitation throughout the entire build, with the size increasing in the top to bottom direction. Particularly, at the topmost height, representing the 460th layer (Z = 22.95 mm), as seen in Fig. 1b, the average size of γ′ is 110 ± 4 nm, exhibiting spherical shapes. This is representative of the microstructure after it solidifies and cools to room temperature, without experiencing additional thermal cycles. The γ′ size slightly increases to 147 ± 6 nm below this layer and remains constant until 0.4 mm (∼453rd layer) from the top. At this position, the microstructure still closely resembles that of the 460th layer. After the 453rd layer, the γ′ size grows rapidly to ∼503 ± 19 nm until reaching the 437th layer (1.2 mm from top). The γ′ particles here have a cuboidal shape, and a small fraction is coarser than 600 nm. γ′ continue to grow steadily from this position to the bottom (23 mm from the top). A small fraction of γ′ is > 800 nm.

Fig. 2

Besides primary γ′, secondary γ′ with sizes ranging from 5 to 50 nm were also found. These secondary γ′ precipitates, as seen in Fig. 1f, were present only in the bottom and middle regions. A detailed analysis of the multimodal size distribution of γ′ can be found in [16]. There is no significant variation in the phase fraction of the γ′ along the build. The phase fraction is ∼ 52%, as displayed in Fig. 2. It is worth mentioning that the total phase fraction of γ′ was estimated based on the primary γ′ phase fraction because of the small size of secondary γ′. Spherical MC carbides with sizes ranging from 50 to 400 nm and a phase fraction of 0.8% were also observed throughout the build. The carbides are the light grey precipitates in Fig. 1g. The light grey shade of carbides in the SEM images is due to their composition and crystal structure [52]. These carbides are not visible in Fig. 1b-e because they were dissolved during electro-etching carried out after electropolishing. In Fig. 1g, however, the sample was examined directly after electropolishing, without electro-etching.

Table 2 shows the nominal and measured composition of γ′ precipitates throughout the build by atom probe microscopy as determined in our previous study [17]. No build height-dependent composition difference was observed in either of the γ′ precipitate populations. However, there was a slight disparity between the composition of primary and secondary γ′. Among the main γ′ forming elements, the primary γ′ has a high Ti concentration while secondary γ′ has a high Al concentration. A detailed description of the atom distribution maps and the proxigrams of the constituent elements of γ′ throughout the build can be found in [17].

Table 2. Bulk IN738 composition determined using inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Compositions of γ, primary γ′, and secondary γ′ at various locations in the build measured by APT. This information is reproduced from data in Ref. [17] with permission.

at%NiCrCoAlMoWTiNbCBZrTaOthers
Bulk59.1217.478.487.001.010.813.960.490.470.050.090.560.46
γ matrix
Top50.4832.9111.591.941.390.820.440.80.030.030.020.24
Mid50.3732.6111.931.791.540.890.440.10.030.020.020.010.23
Bot48.1034.5712.082.141.430.880.480.080.040.030.010.12
Primary γ′
Top72.172.513.4412.710.250.397.780.560.030.020.050.08
Mid71.602.573.2813.550.420.687.040.730.010.030.040.04
Bot72.342.473.8612.500.260.447.460.500.050.020.020.030.04
Secondary γ′
Mid70.424.203.2314.190.631.035.340.790.030.040.040.05
Bot69.914.063.6814.320.811.045.220.650.050.100.020.11

3.2. Hardness

Fig. 3a shows the Vickers hardness mapping performed along the entire X-Z surface, while Fig. 3b shows the plot of average hardness at different build heights. This hardness distribution is consistent with the γ′ precipitate size gradient across the build direction in Fig. 1Fig. 2. The maximum hardness of ∼530 HV1 is found at ∼0.5 mm away from the top surface (Z = 22.5), where γ′ particles exhibit the smallest observed size in Fig. 2b. Further down the build (∼ 2 mm from the top), the hardness drops to the 440–490 HV1 range. This represents the region where γ′ begins to coarsen. The hardness drops further to 380–430 HV1 at the bottom of the build.

Fig. 3

3.3. Modeling of the microstructural evolution during E-PBF

3.3.1. Thermal profile modeling

Fig. 4 shows the simulated thermal profile of the E-PBF build at a location of 23 mm from the top of the build, using a semi-analytical heat conduction model. This profile consists of the time taken to deposit 460 layers until final cooling, as shown in Fig. 4a. Fig. 4b-d show the magnified regions of Fig. 4a and reveal the first 20 layers from the top, a single layer (first layer from the top), and the time taken for the build to cool after the last layer deposition, respectively.

Fig. 4

The peak temperatures experienced by previous layers decrease progressively as the number of layers increases but never fall below the build preheat temperature (1000 °C). Our simulated thermal cycle may not completely capture the complexity of the actual thermal cycle utilized in the E-PBF build. For instance, the top layer (Fig. 4c), also representing the first deposit’s thermal profile without additional cycles (from powder heating, melting, to solidification), recorded the highest peak temperature of 1390 °C. Although this temperature is above the melting range of the alloy (1230–1360 °C) [62], we believe a much higher temperature was produced by the electron beam to melt the powder. Nevertheless, the solidification temperature and dynamics are outside the scope of this study as our focus is on the solid-state phase transformations during deposition. It takes ∼25 s for each layer to be deposited and cooled to the build temperature. The interlayer dwell time is 125 s. The time taken for the build to cool to room temperature (RT) after final layer deposition is ∼4.7 hrs (17,000 s).

3.3.2. MatCalc simulation

During the MatCalc simulation, the matrix phase is defined as γ. γ′, and MC carbide are included as possible precipitates. The domain of these precipitates is set to be the matrix (γ), and nucleation is assumed to be homogenous. In homogeneous nucleation, all atoms of the unit volume are assumed to be potential nucleation sitesTable 3 shows the computational parameters used in the simulation. All other parameters were set at default values as recommended in the version 6.04.0011 of MatCalc. The values for the interfacial energies are automatically calculated according to the generalized nearest neighbor broken bond model and is one of the most outstanding features in MatCalc [56][57][58]. It should be noted that the elastic misfit strain was not included in the calculation. The output of MatCalc includes phase fraction, size, nucleation rate, and composition of the precipitates. The phase fraction in MatCalc is the volume fraction. Although the experimental phase fraction is the measured area fraction, it is relatively similar to the volume fraction. This is because of the generally larger precipitate size and similar morphology at the various locations along the build [63]. A reliable phase fraction comparison between experiment and simulation can therefore be made.

Table 3. Computational parameters used in the simulation.

Precipitation domainγ
Nucleation site γ′Bulk (homogenous)
Nucleation site MC carbideBulk (Homogenous)
Precipitates class size250
Regular solution critical temperature γ′2500 K[64]
Calculated interfacial energyγ′ = 0.080–0.140 J/m2 and MC carbide = 0.410–0.430 J/m2
3.3.2.1. Precipitate phase fraction

Fig. 5a shows the simulated phase fraction of γ′ and MC carbide during thermal cycling. Fig. 5b is a magnified view of 5a showing the simulated phase fraction at the center points of the top 70 layers, whereas Fig. 5c corresponds to the first two layers from the top. As mentioned earlier, the top layer (460th layer) represents the microstructure after solidification. The microstructure of the layers below is determined by the number of thermal cycles, which increases with distance to the top. For example, layers 459, 458, 457, up to layer 1 (region of interest) experience 1, 2, 3 and 459 thermal cycles, respectively. In the top layer in Fig. 5c, the volume fraction of γ′ and carbides increases with temperature. For γ′, it decreases to zero when the temperature is above the solvus temperature after a few seconds. Carbides, however, remain constant in their volume fraction reaching equilibrium (phase fraction ∼ 0.9%) in a short time. The topmost layer can be compared to the first deposit, and the peak in temperature symbolizes the stage where the electron beam heats the powder until melting. This means γ′ and carbide precipitation might have started in the powder particles during heating from the build temperature and electron beam until the onset of melting, where γ′ dissolves, but carbides remain stable [28].

Fig. 5

During cooling after deposition, γ′ reprecipitates at a temperature of 1085 °C, which is below its solvus temperature. As cooling progresses, the phase fraction increases steadily to ∼27% and remains constant at 1000 °C (elevated build temperature). The calculated equilibrium fraction of phases by MatCalc is used to show the complex precipitation characteristics in this alloy. Fig. 6 shows that MC carbides form during solidification at 1320 °C, followed by γ′, which precipitate when the solidified layer cools to 1140 °C. This indicates that all deposited layers might contain a negligible amount of these precipitates before subsequent layer deposition, while being at the 1000 °C build temperature or during cooling to RT. The phase diagram also shows that the equilibrium fraction of the γ′ increases as temperature decreases. For instance, at 1000, 900, and 800 °C, the phase fractions are ∼30%, 38%, and 42%, respectively.

Fig. 6

Deposition of subsequent layers causes previous layers to undergo phase transformations as they are exposed to several thermal cycles with different peak temperatures. In Fig. 5c, as the subsequent layer is being deposited, γ′ in the previous layer (459th layer) begins to dissolve as the temperature crosses the solvus temperature. This is witnessed by the reduction of the γ′ phase fraction. This graph also shows how this phase dissolves during heating. However, the phase fraction of MC carbide remains stable at high temperatures and no dissolution is seen during thermal cycling. Upon cooling, the γ′ that was dissolved during heating reprecipitates with a surge in the phase fraction until 1000 °C, after which it remains constant. This microstructure is similar to the solidification microstructure (layer 460), with a similar γ′ phase fraction (∼27%).

The complete dissolution and reprecipitation of γ′ continue for several cycles until the 50th layer from the top (layer 411), where the phase fraction does not reach zero during heating to the peak temperature (see Fig. 5d). This indicates the ‘partial’ dissolution of γ′, which continues progressively with additional layers. It should be noted that the peak temperatures for layers that underwent complete dissolution were much higher (1170–1300 °C) than the γ′ solvus.

The dissolution and reprecipitation of γ′ during thermal cycling are further confirmed in Fig. 7, which summarizes the nucleation rate, phase fraction, and concentration of major elements that form γ′ in the matrix. Fig. 7b magnifies a single layer (3rd layer from top) within the full dissolution region in Fig. 7a to help identify the nucleation and growth mechanisms. From Fig. 7b, γ′ nucleation begins during cooling whereby the nucleation rate increases to reach a maximum value of approximately 1 × 1020 m−3s−1. This fast kinetics implies that some rearrangement of atoms is required for γ′ precipitates to form in the matrix [65][66]. The matrix at this stage is in a non-equilibrium condition. Its composition is similar to the nominal composition and remains unchanged. The phase fraction remains insignificant at this stage although nucleation has started. The nucleation rate starts declining upon reaching the peak value. Simultaneously, diffusion-controlled growth of existing nuclei occurs, depleting the matrix of γ′ forming elements (Al and Ti). Thus, from (7)(11), ∆�vol continuously decreases until nucleation ceases. The growth of nuclei is witnessed by the increase in phase fraction until a constant level is reached at 27% upon cooling to and holding at build temperature. This nucleation event is repeated several times.

Fig. 7

At the onset of partial dissolution, the nucleation rate jumps to 1 × 1021 m−3s−1, and then reduces sharply at the middle stage of partial dissolution. The nucleation rate reaches 0 at a later stage. Supplementary Fig. S1 shows a magnified view of the nucleation rate, phase fraction, and thermal profile, underpinning this trend. The jump in nucleation rate at the onset is followed by a progressive reduction in the solute content of the matrix. The peak temperatures (∼1130–1160 °C) are lower than those in complete dissolution regions but still above or close to the γ′ solvus. The maximum phase fraction (∼27%) is similar to that of the complete dissolution regions. At the middle stage, the reduction in nucleation rate is accompanied by a sharp drop in the matrix composition. The γ′ fraction drops to ∼24%, where the peak temperatures of the layers are just below or at γ′ solvus. The phase fraction then increases progressively through the later stage of partial dissolution to ∼30% towards the end of thermal cycling. The matrix solute content continues to drop although no nucleation event is seen. The peak temperatures are then far below the γ′ solvus. It should be noted that the matrix concentration after complete dissolution remains constant. Upon cooling to RT after final layer deposition, the nucleation rate increases again, indicating new nucleation events. The phase fraction reaches ∼40%, with a further depletion of the matrix in major γ′ forming elements.

3.3.2.2. γ′ size distribution

Fig. 8 shows histograms of the γ′ precipitate size distributions (PSD) along the build height during deposition. These PSDs are predicted at the end of each layer of interest just before final cooling to room temperature, to separate the role of thermal cycles from final cooling on the evolution of γ′. The PSD for the top layer (layer 460) is shown in Fig. 8a (last solidified region with solidification microstructure). The γ′ size ranges from 120 to 230 nm and is similar to the 44 layers below (2.2 mm from the top).

Fig. 8

Further down the build, γ′ begins to coarsen after layer 417 (44th layer from top). Fig. 8c shows the PSD after the 44th layer, where the γ′ size exhibits two peaks at ∼120–230 and ∼300 nm, with most of the population being in the former range. This is the onset of partial dissolution where simultaneously with the reprecipitation and growth of fresh γ′, the undissolved γ′ grows rapidly through diffusive transport of atoms to the precipitates. This is shown in Fig. 8c, where the precipitate class sizes between 250 and 350 represent the growth of undissolved γ′. Although this continues in the 416th layer, the phase fractions plot indicates that the onset of partial dissolution begins after the 411th layer. This implies that partial dissolution started early, but the fraction of undissolved γ′ was too low to impact the phase fraction. The reprecipitated γ′ are mostly in the 100–220 nm class range and similar to those observed during full dissolution.

As the number of layers increases, coarsening intensifies with continued growth of more undissolved γ′, and reprecipitation and growth of partially dissolved ones. Fig. 8d, e, and f show this sequence. Further down the build, coarsening progresses rapidly, as shown in Figs. 8d, 8e, and 8f. The γ′ size ranges from 120 to 1100 nm, with the peaks at 160, 180, and 220 nm in Figs. 8d, 8e, and 8f, respectively. Coarsening continues until nucleation ends during dissolution, where only the already formed γ′ precipitates continue to grow during further thermal cycling. The γ′ size at this point is much larger, as observed in layers 361 and 261, and continues to increase steadily towards the bottom (layer 1). Two populations in the ranges of ∼380–700 and ∼750–1100 nm, respectively, can be seen. The steady growth of γ′ towards the bottom is confirmed by the gradual decrease in the concentration of solute elements in the matrix (Fig. 7a). It should be noted that for each layer, the γ′ class with the largest size originates from continuous growth of the earliest set of the undissolved precipitates.

Fig. 9Fig. 10 and supplementary Figs. S2 and S3 show the γ′ size evolution during heating and cooling of a single layer in the full dissolution region, and early, middle stages, and later stages of partial dissolution, respectively. In all, the size of γ′ reduces during layer heating. Depending on the peak temperature of the layer which varies with build height, γ′ are either fully or partially dissolved as mentioned earlier. Upon cooling, the dissolved γ′ reprecipitate.

Fig. 9
Fig. 10

In Fig. 9, those layers that underwent complete dissolution (top layers) were held above γ′ solvus temperature for longer. In Fig. 10, layers at the early stage of partial dissolution spend less time in the γ′ solvus temperature region during heating, leading to incomplete dissolution. In such conditions, smaller precipitates are fully dissolved while larger ones shrink [67]. Layers in the middle stages of partial dissolution have peak temperatures just below or at γ′ solvus, not sufficient to achieve significant γ′ dissolution. As seen in supplementary Fig. S2, only a few smaller γ′ are dissolved back into the matrix during heating, i.e., growth of precipitates is more significant than dissolution. This explains the sharp decrease in concentration of Al and Ti in the matrix in this layer.

The previous sections indicate various phenomena such as an increase in phase fraction, further depletion of matrix composition, and new nucleation bursts during cooling. Analysis of the PSD after the final cooling of the build to room temperature allows a direct comparison to post-printing microstructural characterization. Fig. 11 shows the γ′ size distribution of layer 1 (460th layer from the top) after final cooling to room temperature. Precipitation of secondary γ′ is observed, leading to the multimodal size distribution of secondary and primary γ′. The secondary γ′ size falls within the 10–80 nm range. As expected, a further growth of the existing primary γ′ is also observed during cooling.

Fig. 11
3.3.2.3. γ′ chemistry after deposition

Fig. 12 shows the concentration of the major elements that form γ′ (Al, Ti, and Ni) in the primary and secondary γ′ at the bottom of the build, as calculated by MatCalc. The secondary γ′ has a higher Al content (13.5–14.5 at% Al), compared to 13 at% Al in the primary γ′. Additionally, within the secondary γ′, the smallest particles (∼10 nm) have higher Al contents than larger ones (∼70 nm). In contrast, for the primary γ′, there is no significant variation in the Al content as a function of their size. The Ni concentration in secondary γ′ (71.1–72 at%) is also higher in comparison to the primary γ′ (70 at%). The smallest secondary γ′ (∼10 nm) have higher Ni contents than larger ones (∼70 nm), whereas there is no substantial change in the Ni content of primary γ′, based on their size. As expected, Ti shows an opposite size-dependent variation. It ranges from ∼ 7.7–8.7 at% Ti in secondary γ′ to ∼9.2 at% in primary γ′. Similarly, within the secondary γ′, the smallest (∼10 nm) have lower Al contents than the larger ones (∼70 nm). No significant variation is observed for Ti content in primary γ′.

Fig. 12

4. Discussion

A combined modelling method is utilized to study the microstructural evolution during E-PBF of IN738. The presented results are discussed by examining the precipitation and dissolution mechanism of γ′ during thermal cycling. This is followed by a discussion on the phase fraction and size evolution of γ′ during thermal cycling and after final cooling. A brief discussion on carbide morphology is also made. Finally, a comparison is made between the simulation and experimental results to assess their agreement.

4.1. γ′ morphology as a function of build height

4.1.1. Nucleation of γ′

The fast precipitation kinetics of the γ′ phase enables formation of γ′ upon quenching from higher temperatures (above solvus) during thermal cycling [66]. In Fig. 7b, for a single layer in the full dissolution region, during cooling, the initial increase in nucleation rate signifies the first formation of nuclei. The slight increase in nucleation rate during partial dissolution, despite a decrease in the concentration of γ′ forming elements, may be explained by the nucleation kinetics. During partial dissolution and as the precipitates shrink, it is assumed that the regions at the vicinity of partially dissolved precipitates are enriched in γ′ forming elements [68][69]. This differs from the full dissolution region, in which case the chemical composition is evenly distributed in the matrix. Several authors have attributed the solute supersaturation of the matrix around primary γ′ to partial dissolution during isothermal ageing [69][70][71][72]. The enhanced supersaturation in the regions close to the precipitates results in a much higher driving force for nucleation, leading to a higher nucleation rate upon cooling. This phenomenon can be closely related to the several nucleation bursts upon continuous cooling of Ni-based superalloys, where second nucleation bursts exhibit higher nucleation rates [38][68][73][74].

At middle stages of partial dissolution, the reduction in the nucleation rate indicates that the existing composition and low supersaturation did not trigger nucleation as the matrix was closer to the equilibrium state. The end of a nucleation burst means that the supersaturation of Al and Ti has reached a low level, incapable of providing sufficient driving force during cooling to or holding at 1000 °C for further nucleation [73]. Earlier studies on Ni-based superalloys have reported the same phenomenon during ageing or continuous cooling from the solvus temperature to RT [38][73][74].

4.1.2. Dissolution of γ′ during thermal cycling

γ′ dissolution kinetics during heating are fast when compared to nucleation due to exponential increase in phase transformation and diffusion activities with temperature [65]. As shown in Fig. 9Fig. 10, and supplementary Figs. S2 and S3, the reduction in γ′ phase fraction and size during heating indicates γ′ dissolution. This is also revealed in Fig. 5 where phase fraction decreases upon heating. The extent of γ′ dissolution mostly depends on the temperature, time spent above γ′ solvus, and precipitate size [75][76][77]. Smaller γ′ precipitates are first to be dissolved [67][77][78]. This is mainly because more solute elements need to be transported away from large γ′ precipitates than from smaller ones [79]. Also, a high temperature above γ′ solvus temperature leads to a faster dissolution rate [80]. The equilibrium solvus temperature of γ′ in IN738 in our MatCalc simulation (Fig. 6) and as reported by Ojo et al. [47] is 1140 °C and 1130–1180 °C, respectively. This means the peak temperature experienced by previous layers decreases progressively from γ′ supersolvus to subsolvus, near-solvus, and far from solvus as the number of subsequent layers increases. Based on the above, it can be inferred that the degree of dissolution of γ′ contributes to the gradient in precipitate distribution.

Although the peak temperatures during later stages of partial dissolution are much lower than the equilibrium γ′ solvus, γ′ dissolution still occurs but at a significantly lower rate (supplementary Fig. S3). Wahlmann et al. [28] also reported a similar case where they observed the rapid dissolution of γ′ in CMSX-4 during fast heating and cooling cycles at temperatures below the γ′ solvus. They attributed this to the γ′ phase transformation process taking place in conditions far from the equilibrium. While the same reasoning may be valid for our study, we further believe that the greater surface area to volume ratio of the small γ′ precipitates contributed to this. This ratio means a larger area is available for solute atoms to diffuse into the matrix even at temperatures much below the solvus [81].

4.2. γ′ phase fraction and size evolution

4.2.1. During thermal cycling

In the first layer, the steep increase in γ′ phase fraction during heating (Fig. 5), which also represents γ′ precipitation in the powder before melting, has qualitatively been validated in [28]. The maximum phase fraction of 27% during the first few layers of thermal cycling indicates that IN738 theoretically could reach the equilibrium state (∼30%), but the short interlayer time at the build temperature counteracts this. The drop in phase fraction at middle stages of partial dissolution is due to the low number of γ′ nucleation sites [73]. It has been reported that a reduction of γ′ nucleation sites leads to a delay in obtaining the final volume fraction as more time is required for γ′ precipitates to grow and reach equilibrium [82]. This explains why even upon holding for 150 s before subsequent layer deposition, the phase fraction does not increase to those values that were observed in the previous full γ′ dissolution regions. Towards the end of deposition, the increase in phase fraction to the equilibrium value of 30% is as a result of the longer holding at build temperature or close to it [83].

During thermal cycling, γ′ particles begin to grow immediately after they first precipitate upon cooling. This is reflected in the rapid increase in phase fraction and size during cooling in Fig. 5 and supplementary Fig. S2, respectively. The rapid growth is due to the fast diffusion of solute elements at high temperatures [84]. The similar size of γ′ for the first 44 layers from the top can be attributed to the fact that all layers underwent complete dissolution and hence, experienced the same nucleation event and growth during deposition. This corresponds with the findings by Balikci et al. [85], who reported that the degree of γ′ precipitation in IN738LC does not change when a solution heat treatment is conducted above a certain critical temperature.

The increase in coarsening rate (Fig. 8) during thermal cycling can first be ascribed to the high peak temperature of the layers [86]. The coarsening rate of γ′ is known to increase rapidly with temperature due to the exponential growth of diffusion activity. Also, the simultaneous dissolution with coarsening could be another reason for the high coarsening rate, as γ′ coarsening is a diffusion-driven process where large particles grow by consuming smaller ones [78][84][86][87]. The steady growth of γ′ towards the bottom of the build is due to the much lower layer peak temperature, which is almost close to the build temperature, and reduced dissolution activity, as is seen in the much lower solute concentration in γ′ compared to those in the full and partial dissolution regions.

4.2.2. During cooling

The much higher phase fraction of ∼40% upon cooling signifies the tendency of γ′ to reach equilibrium at lower temperatures (Fig. 4). This is due to the precipitation of secondary γ′ and a further increase in the size of existing primary γ′, which leads to a multimodal size distribution of γ′ after cooling [38][73][88][89][90]. The reason for secondary γ′ formation during cooling is as follows: As cooling progresses, it becomes increasingly challenging to redistribute solute elements in the matrix owing to their lower mobility [38][73]. A higher supersaturation level in regions away from or free of the existing γ′ precipitates is achieved, making them suitable sites for additional nucleation bursts. More cooling leads to the growth of these secondary γ′ precipitates, but as the temperature and in turn, the solute diffusivity is low, growth remains slow.

4.3. Carbides

MC carbides in IN738 are known to have a significant impact on the high-temperature strength. They can also act as effective hardening particles and improve the creep resistance [91]. Precipitation of MC carbides in IN738 and several other superalloys is known to occur during solidification or thermal treatments (e.g., hot isostatic pressing) [92]. In our case, this means that the MC carbides within the E-PBF build formed because of the thermal exposure from the E-PBF thermal cycle in addition to initial solidification. Our simulation confirms this as MC carbides appear during layer heating (Fig. 5). The constant and stable phase fraction of MC carbides during thermal cycling can be attributed to their high melting point (∼1360 °C) and the short holding time at peak temperatures [75][93][94]. The solvus temperature for most MC carbides exceeds most of the peak temperatures observed in our simulation, and carbide dissolution kinetics at temperatures above the solvus are known to be comparably slow [95]. The stable phase fraction and random distribution of MC carbides signifies the slight influence on the gradient in hardness.

4.4. Comparison of simulations and experiments

4.4.1. Precipitate phase fraction and morphology as a function of build height

A qualitative agreement is observed for the phase fraction of carbides, i.e. ∼0.8% in the experiment and ∼0.9% in the simulation. The phase fraction of γ′ differs, with the experiment reporting a value of ∼51% and the simulation, 40%. Despite this, the size distribution of primary γ′ along the build shows remarkable consistency between experimental and computational analyses. It is worth noting that the primary γ′ morphology in the experimental analysis is observed in the as-fabricated state, whereas the simulation (Fig. 8) captures it during deposition process. The primary γ′ size in the experiment is expected to experience additional growth during the cooling phase. Regardless, both show similar trends in primary γ′ size increments from the top to the bottom of the build. The larger primary γ’ size in the simulation versus the experiment can be attributed to the fact that experimental and simulation results are based on 2D and 3D data, respectively. The absence of stereological considerations [96] in our analysis could have led to an underestimation of the precipitate sizes from SEM measurements. The early starts of coarsening (8th layer) in the experiment compared to the simulation (45th layer) can be attributed to a higher actual γ′ solvus temperature than considered in our simulation [47]. The solvus temperature of γ′ in a Ni-based superalloy is mainly determined by the detailed composition. A high amount of Cr and Co are known to reduce the solvus temperature, whereas Ta and Mo will increase it [97][98][99]. The elemental composition from our experimental work was used for the simulation except for Ta. It should be noted that Ta is not included in the thermodynamic database in MatCalc used, and this may have reduced the solvus temperature. This could also explain the relatively higher γ′ phase fraction in the experiment than in simulation, as a higher γ′ solvus temperature will cause more γ′ to precipitate and grow early during cooling [99][100].

Another possible cause of this deviation can be attributed to the extent of γ′ dissolution, which is mainly determined by the peak temperature. It can be speculated that individual peak temperatures at different layers in the simulation may have been over-predicted. However, one needs to consider that the true thermal profile is likely more complicated in the actual E-PBF process [101]. For example, the current model assumes that the thermophysical properties of the material are temperature-independent, which is not realistic. Many materials, including IN738, exhibit temperature-dependent properties such as thermal conductivityspecific heat capacity, and density [102]. This means that heat transfer simulations may underestimate or overestimate the temperature gradients and cooling rates within the powder bed and the solidified part. Additionally, the model does not account for the reduced thermal diffusivity through unmelted powder, where gas separating the powder acts as insulation, impeding the heat flow [1]. In E-PBF, the unmelted powder regions with trapped gas have lower thermal diffusivity compared to the fully melted regions, leading to localized temperature variations, and altered solidification behavior. These limitations can impact the predictions, particularly in relation to the carbide dissolution, as the peak temperatures may be underestimated.

While acknowledging these limitations, it is worth emphasizing that achieving a detailed and accurate representation of each layer’s heat source would impose tough computational challenges. Given the substantial layer count in E-PBF, our decision to employ a semi-analytical approximation strikes a balance between computational feasibility and the capture of essential trends in thermal profiles across diverse build layers. In future work, a dual-calibration strategy is proposed to further reduce simulation-experiment disparities. By refining temperature-independent thermophysical property approximations and absorptivity in the heat source model, and by optimizing interfacial energy descriptions in the kinetic model, the predictive precision could be enhanced. Further refining the simulation controls, such as adjusting the precipitate class size may enhance quantitative comparisons between modeling outcomes and experimental data in future work.

4.4.2. Multimodal size distribution of γ′ and concentration

Another interesting feature that sees qualitative agreement between the simulation and the experiment is the multimodal size distribution of γ′. The formation of secondary γ′ particles in the experiment and most E-PBF Ni-based superalloys is suggested to occur at low temperatures, during final cooling to RT [16][73][90]. However, so far, this conclusion has been based on findings from various continuous cooling experiments, as the study of the evolution during AM would require an in-situ approach. Our simulation unambiguously confirms this in an AM context by providing evidence for secondary γ′ precipitation during slow cooling to RT. Additionally, it is possible to speculate that the chemical segregation occurring during solidification, due to the preferential partitioning of certain elements between the solid and liquid phases, can contribute to the multimodal size distribution during deposition [51]. This is because chemical segregation can result in variations in the local composition of superalloys, which subsequently affects the nucleation and growth of γ′. Regions with higher concentrations of alloying elements will encourage the formation of larger γ′ particles, while regions with lower concentrations may favor the nucleation of smaller precipitates. However, it is important to acknowledge that the elevated temperature during the E-PBF process will largely homogenize these compositional differences [103][104].

A good correlation is also shown in the composition of major γ′ forming elements (Al and Ti) in primary and secondary γ′. Both experiment and simulation show an increasing trend for Al content and a decreasing trend for Ti content from primary to secondary γ′. The slight composition differences between primary and secondary γ′ particles are due to the different diffusivity of γ′ stabilizers at different thermal conditions [105][106]. As the formation of multimodal γ′ particles with different sizes occurs over a broad temperature range, the phase chemistry of γ′ will be highly size dependent. The changes in the chemistry of various γ′ (primary, secondary, and tertiary) have received significant attention since they have a direct influence on the performance [68][105][107][108][109]. Chen et al. [108][109], reported a high Al content in the smallest γ′ precipitates compared to the largest, while Ti showed an opposite trend during continuous cooling in a RR1000 Ni-based superalloy. This was attributed to the temperature and cooling rate at which the γ′ precipitates were formed. The smallest precipitates formed last, at the lowest temperature and cooling rate. A comparable observation is evident in the present investigation, where the secondary γ′ forms at a low temperature and cooling rate in comparison to the primary. The temperature dependence of γ′ chemical composition is further evidenced in supplementary Fig. S4, which shows the equilibrium chemical composition of γ′ as a function of temperature.

5. Conclusions

A correlative modelling approach capable of predicting solid-state phase transformations kinetics in metal AM was developed. This approach involves computational simulations with a semi-analytical heat transfer model and the MatCalc thermo-kinetic software. The method was used to predict the phase transformation kinetics and detailed morphology and chemistry of γ′ and MC during E-PBF of IN738 Ni-based superalloy. The main conclusions are:

  • 1.The computational simulations are in qualitative agreement with the experimental observations. This is particularly true for the γ′ size distribution along the build height, the multimodal size distribution of particles, and the phase fraction of MC carbides.
  • 2.The deviations between simulation and experiment in terms of γ′ phase fraction and location in the build are most likely attributed to a higher γ′ solvus temperature during the experiment than in the simulation, which is argued to be related to the absence of Ta in the MatCalc database.
  • 3.The dissolution and precipitation of γ′ occur fast and under non-equilibrium conditions. The level of γ′ dissolution determines the gradient in γ′ size distribution along the build. After thermal cycling, the final cooling to room temperature has further significant impacts on the final γ′ size, morphology, and distribution.
  • 4.A negligible amount of γ′ forms in the first deposited layer before subsequent layer deposition, and a small amount of γ′ may also form in the powder induced by the 1000 °C elevated build temperature before melting.

Our findings confirm the suitability of MatCalc to predict the microstructural evolution at various positions throughout a build in a Ni-based superalloy during E-PBF. It also showcases the suitability of a tool which was originally developed for traditional thermo-mechanical processing of alloys to the new additive manufacturing context. Our simulation capabilities are likely extendable to other alloy systems that undergo solid-state phase transformations implemented in MatCalc (various steels, Ni-based superalloys, and Al-alloys amongst others) as well as other AM processes such as L-DED and L-PBF which have different thermal cycle characteristics. New tools to predict the microstructural evolution and properties during metal AM are important as they provide new insights into the complexities of AM. This will enable control and design of AM microstructures towards advanced materials properties and performances.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Primig Sophie: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Adomako Nana Kwabena: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Software, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Haghdadi Nima: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Conceptualization. Dingle James F.L.: Methodology, Conceptualization, Software, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Kozeschnik Ernst: Writing – review & editing, Software, Methodology. Liao Xiaozhou: Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition. Ringer Simon P: Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This research was sponsored by the Department of Industry, Innovation, and Science under the auspices of the AUSMURI program – which is a part of the Commonwealth’s Next Generation Technologies Fund. The authors acknowledge the facilities and the scientific and technical assistance at the Electron Microscope Unit (EMU) within the Mark Wainwright Analytical Centre (MWAC) at UNSW Sydney and Microscopy Australia. Nana Adomako is supported by a UNSW Scientia PhD scholarship. Michael Haines’ (UNSW Sydney) contribution to the revised version of the original manuscript is thankfully acknowledged.

Appendix A. Supplementary material

Download : Download Word document (462KB)

Supplementary material.

Data Availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.

316-L 스테인리스강의 레이저 분말 베드 융합 중 콜드 스패터 형성의 충실도 높은 수치 모델링

316-L 스테인리스강의 레이저 분말 베드 융합 중 콜드 스패터 형성의 충실도 높은 수치 모델링

M. BAYAT1,* , AND J. H. HATTEL1

  • Corresponding author
    1 Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Building 425, Kgs. 2800 Lyngby, Denmark

ABSTRACT

Spatter and denudation are two very well-known phenomena occurring mainly during the laser powder bed fusion process and are defined as ejection and displacement of powder particles, respectively. The main driver of this phenomenon is the formation of a vapor plume jet that is caused by the vaporization of the melt pool which is subjected to the laser beam. In this work, a 3-dimensional transient turbulent computational fluid dynamics model coupled with a discrete element model is developed in the finite volume-based commercial software package Flow-3D AM to simulate the spatter phenomenon. The numerical results show that a localized low-pressure zone forms at the bottom side of the plume jet and this leads to a pseudo-Bernoulli effect that drags nearby powder particles into the area of influence of the vapor plume jet. As a result, the vapor plume acts like a momentum sink and therefore all nearby particles point are dragged towards this region. Furthermore, it is noted that due to the jet’s attenuation, powder particles start diverging from the central core region of the vapor plume as they move vertically upwards. It is moreover observed that only particles which are in the very central core region of the plume jet get sufficiently accelerated to depart the computational domain, while the rest of the dragged particles, especially those which undergo an early divergence from the jet axis, get stalled pretty fast as they come in contact with the resting fluid. In the last part of the work, two simulations with two different scanning speeds are carried out, where it is clearly observed that the angle between the departing powder particles and the vertical axis of the plume jet increases with increasing scanning speed.

스패터와 denudation은 주로 레이저 분말 베드 융합 과정에서 발생하는 매우 잘 알려진 두 가지 현상으로 각각 분말 입자의 배출 및 변위로 정의됩니다.

이 현상의 주요 동인은 레이저 빔을 받는 용융 풀의 기화로 인해 발생하는 증기 기둥 제트의 형성입니다. 이 작업에서 이산 요소 모델과 결합된 3차원 과도 난류 ​​전산 유체 역학 모델은 스패터 현상을 시뮬레이션하기 위해 유한 체적 기반 상용 소프트웨어 패키지 Flow-3D AM에서 개발되었습니다.

수치적 결과는 플룸 제트의 바닥면에 국부적인 저압 영역이 형성되고, 이는 근처의 분말 입자를 증기 플룸 제트의 영향 영역으로 끌어들이는 의사-베르누이 효과로 이어진다는 것을 보여줍니다.

결과적으로 증기 기둥은 운동량 흡수원처럼 작용하므로 근처의 모든 입자 지점이 이 영역으로 끌립니다. 또한 제트의 감쇠로 인해 분말 입자가 수직으로 위쪽으로 이동할 때 증기 기둥의 중심 코어 영역에서 발산하기 시작합니다.

더욱이 플룸 제트의 가장 중심 코어 영역에 있는 입자만 계산 영역을 벗어날 만큼 충분히 가속되는 반면, 드래그된 나머지 입자, 특히 제트 축에서 초기 발산을 겪는 입자는 정체되는 것으로 관찰됩니다. 그들은 휴식 유체와 접촉하기 때문에 꽤 빠릅니다.

작업의 마지막 부분에서 두 가지 다른 스캔 속도를 가진 두 가지 시뮬레이션이 수행되었으며, 여기서 출발하는 분말 입자와 연기 제트의 수직 축 사이의 각도가 스캔 속도가 증가함에 따라 증가하는 것이 명확하게 관찰되었습니다.

Fig 1. Two different views of the computational domain for the fluid domain. The vapor plume is simulated by a moving momentum source with a prescribed temperature of 3000 K.
Fig 1. Two different views of the computational domain for the fluid domain. The vapor plume is simulated by a moving momentum source with a prescribed temperature of 3000 K.
Fig 2. (a) and (b) are two snapshots taken at an x-y plane parallel to the powder layer plane before and 0.008 seconds after the start of the scanning process. (c) Shows a magnified view of (b) where detailed powder particles' movement along with their velocity magnitude and directions are shown.
Fig 2. (a) and (b) are two snapshots taken at an x-y plane parallel to the powder layer plane before and 0.008 seconds after the start of the scanning process. (c) Shows a magnified view of (b) where detailed powder particles’ movement along with their velocity magnitude and directions are shown.
Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.
Fig 3. Front view of the ejected powder particles due to the plume movement. Powder particles are colored by their respective temperature while trajectory colors show their magnitude at 0.007 seconds.

References

[1] T. DebRoy et al., “Additive manufacturing of metallic components – Process, structure
and properties,” Prog. Mater. Sci., vol. 92, pp. 112–224, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.10.001.
[2] M. Markl and C. Körner, “Multiscale Modeling of Powder Bed–Based Additive
Manufacturing,” Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 93–123, 2016, doi:
10.1146/annurev-matsci-070115-032158.
[3] A. Zinoviev, O. Zinovieva, V. Ploshikhin, V. Romanova, and R. Balokhonov, “Evolution
of grain structure during laser additive manufacturing. Simulation by a cellular automata
method,” Mater. Des., vol. 106, pp. 321–329, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.125.
[4] Y. Zhang and J. Zhang, “Modeling of solidification microstructure evolution in laser
powder bed fusion fabricated 316L stainless steel using combined computational fluid
dynamics and cellular automata,” Addit. Manuf., vol. 28, no. July 2018, pp. 750–765,
2019, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2019.06.024.
[5] A. A. Martin et al., “Ultrafast dynamics of laser-metal interactions in additive
manufacturing alloys captured by in situ X-ray imaging,” Mater. Today Adv., vol. 1, p.
100002, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.mtadv.2019.01.001.
[6] Y. C. Wu et al., “Numerical modeling of melt-pool behavior in selective laser melting
with random powder distribution and experimental validation,” J. Mater. Process.
Technol., vol. 254, no. July 2017, pp. 72–78, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.11.032.
[7] W. Gao, S. Zhao, Y. Wang, Z. Zhang, F. Liu, and X. Lin, “Numerical simulation of
thermal field and Fe-based coating doped Ti,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 92, pp. 83–
90, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.08.082.
[8] A. Charles, M. Bayat, A. Elkaseer, L. Thijs, J. H. Hattel, and S. Scholz, “Elucidation of
dross formation in laser powder bed fusion at down-facing surfaces: Phenomenonoriented multiphysics simulation and experimental validation,” Addit. Manuf., vol. 50,
2022, doi: 10.1016/j.addma.2021.102551.
[9] C. Meier, R. W. Penny, Y. Zou, J. S. Gibbs, and A. J. Hart, “Thermophysical phenomena
in metal additive manufacturing by selective laser melting: Fundamentals, modeling,
simulation and experimentation,” arXiv, 2017, doi:
10.1615/annualrevheattransfer.2018019042.
[10] W. King, A. T. Anderson, R. M. Ferencz, N. E. Hodge, C. Kamath, and S. A. Khairallah,
“Overview of modelling and simulation of metal powder bed fusion process at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory,” Mater. Sci. Technol. (United Kingdom), vol. 31, no. 8,
pp. 957–968, 2015, doi: 10.1179/1743284714Y.0000000728.

참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.

FLOW-3D AM 미세 구조 예측 | 열 응력 해석

미세 구조 예측

냉각 속도 및 온도 구배와 같은 FLOW-3D AM 데이터를 미세 구조 모델에 입력하여 결정 성장 및 수상 돌기 암 간격을 예측할 수 있습니다. 

레이저 파우더 베드 융합으로 제작 된 니켈 기반 초합금의 열전달, 유체 흐름 및 응고 미세 구조 모델링

오하이오 주립 대학의 연구원들은 니켈 기반 초합금의 미세 구조 진화를 예측하기 위해 용융 풀과 고체 / 액체 인터페이스의 적절한 위치에서 열 구배 및 냉각 속도 데이터를 추출했습니다.

참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.
참조 : YS Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion , S2214-8604 (16) 30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma .2016.05.003 , ADDMA 86.

열 응력 | Thermal Stresses

FLOW-3D AM 시뮬레이션의 결과를 ABAQUS 또는 MSC NASTRAN과 같은 FEA 소프트웨어에 입력하여 추가 열 응력 분석을 실행할 수 있습니다. 여기에서 T- 조인트의 레이저 용접 시뮬레이션 결과를 추가 응력 분석을 위해 ABAQUS로 가져 오는 방법을 볼 수 있습니다. 마찬가지로 LPBF 시뮬레이션에서 응고 된 용융 풀 데이터의 결과를 사용하여 다른 FEA 소프트웨어에서 열 응력 및 왜곡 분석을 연구 할 수 있습니다.

Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig1
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig1
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig2
Thermal Stresses Analysis Fig2

Thermal Stresses Case Study

Directed Energy Deposition

DED (Directed Energy Deposition)는 레이저 또는 전자 빔과 같은 에너지 소스를 사용하여 가열 및 융합되는 와이어 또는 분말을 증착하여 부품을 만드는 적층 제조 공정입니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 분말 또는 와이어 이송 속도 및 크기 특성, 레이저 출력 및 스캔 속도와 같은 공정 매개 변수를 고려하여 DED 공정을 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 또한, 기판과 분말 재료의 서로 다른 합금에 대해 독립적 인 열 물리적 재료 특성을 정의하여 다중 재료 DED 프로세스를 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 

레이저 물리학의 구현과 열 전달, 응고, 표면 장력, 차폐 가스 효과 및 반동 압력을 포함한 압력 효과를 통해 연구원은 결과 용접 비드의 강도 및 균일성에 대한 공정 매개 변수의 영향을 정확하게 분석 할 수 있습니다. 또한 이러한 시뮬레이션을 여러 레이어로 확장하여 후속 레이어 간의 융합을 분석 할 수 있습니다. 

FLOW-3D AM

flow3d AM-product
FLOW-3D AM-product

와이어 파우더 기반 DED | Wire Powder Based DED

일부 연구자들은 부품을 만들기 위해 더 넓은 범위의 처리 조건을 사용하여 하이브리드 와이어 분말 기반 DED 시스템을 찾고 있습니다. 예를 들어, 이 시뮬레이션은 다양한 분말 및 와이어 이송 속도를 가진 하이브리드 시스템을 살펴봅니다.

와이어 기반 DED | Wire Based DED

와이어 기반 DED는 분말 기반 DED보다 처리량이 높고 낭비가 적지만 재료 구성 및 증착 방향 측면에서 유연성이 떨어집니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 와이어 기반 DED의 처리 결과를 이해하는데 유용하며 최적화 연구를 통해 빌드에 대한 와이어 이송 속도 및 직경과 같은 최상의 처리 매개 변수를 찾을 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM은 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF), 바인더 제트 및 DED (Directed Energy Deposition)와 같은 적층 제조 공정 ( additive manufacturing )을 시뮬레이션하고 분석하는 CFD 소프트웨어입니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 다중 물리 기능은 공정 매개 변수의 분석 및 최적화를 위해 분말 확산 및 압축, 용융 풀 역학, L-PBF 및 DED에 대한 다공성 형성, 바인더 분사 공정을 위한 수지 침투 및 확산에 대해 매우 정확한 시뮬레이션을 제공합니다.

3D 프린팅이라고도하는 적층 제조(additive manufacturing)는 일반적으로 층별 접근 방식을 사용하여, 분말 또는 와이어로 부품을 제조하는 방법입니다. 금속 기반 적층 제조 공정에 대한 관심은 지난 몇 년 동안 시작되었습니다. 오늘날 사용되는 3 대 금속 적층 제조 공정은 PBF (Powder Bed Fusion), DED (Directed Energy Deposition) 및 바인더 제트 ( Binder jetting ) 공정입니다.  FLOW-3D  AM  은 이러한 각 프로세스에 대한 고유 한 시뮬레이션 통찰력을 제공합니다.

파우더 베드 융합 및 직접 에너지 증착 공정에서 레이저 또는 전자 빔을 열원으로 사용할 수 있습니다. 두 경우 모두 PBF용 분말 형태와 DED 공정용 분말 또는 와이어 형태의 금속을 완전히 녹여 융합하여 층별로 부품을 형성합니다. 그러나 바인더 젯팅(Binder jetting)에서는 결합제 역할을 하는 수지가 금속 분말에 선택적으로 증착되어 층별로 부품을 형성합니다. 이러한 부품은 더 나은 치밀화를 달성하기 위해 소결됩니다.

FLOW-3D AM 의 자유 표면 추적 알고리즘과 다중 물리 모델은 이러한 각 프로세스를 높은 정확도로 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF) 공정 모델링 단계는 여기에서 자세히 설명합니다. DED 및 바인더 분사 공정에 대한 몇 가지 개념 증명 시뮬레이션도 표시됩니다.

레이저 파우더 베드 퓨전 (L-PBF)

LPBF 공정에는 유체 흐름, 열 전달, 표면 장력, 상 변화 및 응고와 같은 복잡한 다중 물리학 현상이 포함되어 공정 및 궁극적으로 빌드 품질에 상당한 영향을 미칩니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 물리적 모델은 질량, 운동량 및 에너지 보존 방정식을 동시에 해결하는 동시에 입자 크기 분포 및 패킹 비율을 고려하여 중규모에서 용융 풀 현상을 시뮬레이션합니다.

FLOW-3D DEM FLOW-3D WELD 는 전체 파우더 베드 융합 공정을 시뮬레이션하는 데 사용됩니다. L-PBF 공정의 다양한 단계는 분말 베드 놓기, 분말 용융 및 응고,이어서 이전에 응고 된 층에 신선한 분말을 놓는 것, 그리고 다시 한번 새 층을 이전 층에 녹이고 융합시키는 것입니다. FLOW-3D AM  은 이러한 각 단계를 시뮬레이션하는 데 사용할 수 있습니다.

파우더 베드 부설 공정

FLOW-3D DEM을 통해 분말 크기 분포, 재료 특성, 응집 효과는 물론 롤러 또는 블레이드 움직임 및 상호 작용과 같은 기하학적 효과와 관련된 분말 확산 및 압축을 이해할 수 있습니다. 이러한 시뮬레이션은 공정 매개 변수가 후속 인쇄 공정에서 용융 풀 역학에 직접적인 영향을 미치는 패킹 밀도와 같은 분말 베드 특성에 어떻게 영향을 미치는지에 대한 정확한 이해를 제공합니다.

다양한 파우더 베드 압축을 달성하는 한 가지 방법은 베드를 놓는 동안 다양한 입자 크기 분포를 선택하는 것입니다. 아래에서 볼 수 있듯이 세 가지 크기의 입자 크기 분포가 있으며, 이는 가장 높은 압축을 제공하는 Case 2와 함께 다양한 분말 베드 압축을 초래합니다.

파우더 베드 분포 다양한 입자 크기 분포
세 가지 다른 입자 크기 분포를 사용하여 파우더 베드 배치
파우더 베드 압축 결과
세 가지 다른 입자 크기 분포를 사용한 분말 베드 압축

입자-입자 상호 작용, 유체-입자 결합 및 입자 이동 물체 상호 작용은 FLOW-3D DEM을 사용하여 자세히 분석 할 수도 있습니다 . 또한 입자간 힘을 지정하여 분말 살포 응용 분야를 보다 정확하게 연구 할 수도 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM  시뮬레이션은 이산 요소 방법 (DEM)을 사용하여 역 회전하는 원통형 롤러로 인한 분말 확산을 연구합니다. 비디오 시작 부분에서 빌드 플랫폼이 위로 이동하는 동안 분말 저장소가 아래로 이동합니다. 그 직후, 롤러는 분말 입자 (초기 위치에 따라 색상이 지정됨)를 다음 층이 녹고 구축 될 준비를 위해 구축 플랫폼으로 펼칩니다. 이러한 시뮬레이션은 저장소에서 빌드 플랫폼으로 전송되는 분말 입자의 선호 크기에 대한 추가 통찰력을 제공 할 수 있습니다.

Melting | 파우더 베드 용해

DEM 시뮬레이션에서 파우더 베드가 생성되면 STL 파일로 추출됩니다. 다음 단계는 CFD를 사용하여 레이저 용융 공정을 시뮬레이션하는 것입니다. 여기서는 레이저 빔과 파우더 베드의 상호 작용을 모델링 합니다. 이 프로세스를 정확하게 포착하기 위해 물리학에는 점성 흐름, 용융 풀 내의 레이저 반사 (광선 추적을 통해), 열 전달, 응고, 상 변화 및 기화, 반동 압력, 차폐 가스 압력 및 표면 장력이 포함됩니다. 이 모든 물리학은 이 복잡한 프로세스를 정확하게 시뮬레이션하기 위해 TruVOF 방법을 기반으로 개발되었습니다.

레이저 출력 200W, 스캔 속도 3.0m / s, 스폿 반경 100μm에서 파우더 베드의 용융 풀 분석.

용융 풀이 응고되면 FLOW-3D AM  압력 및 온도 데이터를 Abaqus 또는 MSC Nastran과 같은 FEA 도구로 가져와 응력 윤곽 및 변위 프로파일을 분석 할 수도 있습니다.

Multilayer | 다층 적층 제조

용융 풀 트랙이 응고되면 DEM을 사용하여 이전에 응고된 층에 새로운 분말 층의 확산을 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 유사하게, 레이저 용융은 새로운 분말 층에서 수행되어 후속 층 간의 융합 조건을 분석 할 수 있습니다.

해석 진행 절차는 첫 번째 용융층이 응고되면 입자의 두 번째 층이 응고 층에 증착됩니다. 새로운 분말 입자 층에 레이저 공정 매개 변수를 지정하여 용융 풀 시뮬레이션을 다시 수행합니다. 이 프로세스를 여러 번 반복하여 연속적으로 응고된 층 간의 융합, 빌드 내 온도 구배를 평가하는 동시에 다공성 또는 기타 결함의 형성을 모니터링 할 수 있습니다.

다층 적층 적층 제조 시뮬레이션

LPBF의 키홀 링 | Keyholing in LPBF

키홀링 중 다공성은 어떻게 형성됩니까? 이것은 TU Denmark의 연구원들이 FLOW-3D AM을 사용하여 답변한 질문이었습니다. 레이저 빔의 적용으로 기판이 녹으면 기화 및 상 변화로 인한 반동 압력이 용융 풀을 압박합니다. 반동 압력으로 인한 하향 흐름과 레이저 반사로 인한 추가 레이저 에너지 흡수가 공존하면 폭주 효과가 발생하여 용융 풀이 Keyholing으로 전환됩니다. 결국, 키홀 벽을 따라 온도가 변하기 때문에 표면 장력으로 인해 벽이 뭉쳐져서 진행되는 응고 전선에 의해 갇힐 수 있는 공극이 생겨 다공성이 발생합니다. FLOW-3D AM 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 공정 모듈은 키홀링 및 다공성 형성을 시뮬레이션 하는데 필요한 모든 물리 모델을 보유하고 있습니다.

바인더 분사 (Binder jetting)

Binder jetting 시뮬레이션은 모세관 힘의 영향을받는 파우더 베드에서 바인더의 확산 및 침투에 대한 통찰력을 제공합니다. 공정 매개 변수와 재료 특성은 증착 및 확산 공정에 직접적인 영향을 미칩니다.

Scan Strategy | 스캔 전략

스캔 전략은 온도 구배 및 냉각 속도에 영향을 미치기 때문에 미세 구조에 직접적인 영향을 미칩니다. 연구원들은 FLOW-3D AM 을 사용하여 결함 형성과 응고된 금속의 미세 구조에 영향을 줄 수 있는 트랙 사이에서 발생하는 재 용융을 이해하기 위한 최적의 스캔 전략을 탐색하고 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM 은 하나 또는 여러 레이저에 대해 시간에 따른 방향 속도를 구현할 때 완전한 유연성을 제공합니다.

Beam Shaping | 빔 형성

레이저 출력 및 스캔 전략 외에도 레이저 빔 모양과 열유속 분포는 LPBF 공정에서 용융 풀 역학에 큰 영향을 미칩니다. AM 기계 제조업체는 공정 안정성 및 처리량에 대해 다중 코어 및 임의 모양의 레이저 빔 사용을 모색하고 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM을 사용하면 멀티 코어 및 임의 모양의 빔 프로파일을 구현할 수 있으므로 생산량을 늘리고 부품 품질을 개선하기 위한 최상의 구성에 대한 통찰력을 제공 할 수 있습니다.

이 영역에서 수행 된 일부 작업에 대해 자세히 알아 보려면 “The Next Frontier of Metal AM”웨비나를 시청하십시오.

Multi-material Powder Bed Fusion | 다중 재료 분말 베드 융합

이 시뮬레이션에서 스테인리스 강 및 알루미늄 분말은 FLOW-3D AM 이 용융 풀 역학을 정확하게 포착하기 위해 추적하는 독립적으로 정의 된 온도 의존 재료 특성을 가지고 있습니다. 시뮬레이션은 용융 풀에서 재료 혼합을 이해하는 데 도움이됩니다.

다중 재료 용접 사례 연구

이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사

GM과 University of Utah의 연구원들은 FLOW-3D WELD 를 사용 하여 레이저 키홀 용접을 통한 이종 금속의 혼합을 이해했습니다. 그들은 반동 압력 및 Marangoni 대류와 관련하여 구리와 알루미늄의 혼합 농도에 대한 레이저 출력 및 스캔 속도의 영향을 조사했습니다. 그들은 시뮬레이션을 실험 결과와 비교했으며 샘플 내의 절단 단면에서 재료 농도 사이에 좋은 일치를 발견했습니다.

이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사
이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사
참조 : Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, 이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사 , Materials & Design, Volume 195, (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056
참조 : Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, 이종 금속의 레이저 키홀 용접에서 금속 혼합 조사 , Materials & Design, Volume 195, (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056

방향성 에너지 증착

FLOW-3D AM 의 내장 입자 모델 을 사용하여 직접 에너지 증착 프로세스를 시뮬레이션 할 수 있습니다. 분말 주입 속도와 고체 기질에 입사되는 열유속을 지정함으로써 고체 입자는 용융 풀에 질량, 운동량 및 에너지를 추가 할 수 있습니다. 다음 비디오에서 고체 금속 입자가 용융 풀에 주입되고 기판에서 용융 풀의 후속 응고가 관찰됩니다.

Simulation Gallery

Simulation Gallery

Simulation Gallery | 시뮬레이션 갤러리

시뮬레이션 비디오 갤러리에서 FLOW-3D  제품군으로 모델링 할 수 있는 다양한 가능성을 살펴보십시오 .

적층 제조 시뮬레이션 갤러리

FLOW-3D AM 은 레이저 파우더 베드 융합, 바인더 제트 및 직접 에너지 증착과 같은 적층 제조 공정을 시뮬레이션하고 분석합니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 다중 물리 기능은 공정 매개 변수의 분석 및 최적화를 위해 분말 확산 및 압축, 용융 풀 역학, L-PBF 및 DED에 대한 다공성 형성, 바인더 분사 공정을 위한 수지 침투 및 확산에 대한 매우 정확한 시뮬레이션을 제공합니다. 

Multi-material Laser Powder Bed Fusion | FLOW-3D AM

Micro and meso scale simulations using FLOW-3D AM help us understand the mixing of different materials in the melt pool and the formation of potential defects such as lack of fusion and porosity. In this simulation, the stainless steel and aluminum powders have independently-defined temperature dependent material properties that FLOW-3D AM tracks to accurately capture the melt pool dynamics. Learn more about FLOW-3D AM’s mutiphysics simulation capabilities at https://www.flow3d.com/products/flow3…

YouTube Gallery로 이동하기

Laser Welding Simulation Gallery

FLOW-3D WELD 는 레이저 용접 공정에 대한 강력한 통찰력을 제공하여 공정 최적화를 달성합니다. 더 나은 공정 제어로 다공성, 열 영향 영역을 최소화하고 미세 구조 진화를 제어 할 수 있습니다. 레이저 용접 공정을 정확하게 시뮬레이션하기 위해 FLOW-3D WELD 는 레이저 열원, 레이저-재료 상호 작용, 유체 흐름, 열 전달, 표면 장력, 응고, 다중 레이저 반사 및 위상 변화를 특징으로 합니다.

Keyhole welding simulation | FLOW-3D WELD

YouTube Gallery로 이동하기

물 및 환경 시뮬레이션 갤러리

FLOW-3D 는 물고기 통로, 댐 파손, 배수로, 눈사태, 수력 발전 및 기타 수자원 및 환경 공학 과제 모델링을 포함하여 유압 산업에 대한 많은 응용 분야를 가지고 있습니다. 엔지니어는 수력 발전소의 기존 인프라 용량을 늘리고, 어류 통로, 수두 손실을 최소화하는 흡입구, 포 이베이 설계 및 테일 레이스 흐름을위한 개선 된 설계를 개발하고, 수세 및 퇴적 및 공기 유입을 분석 할 수 있습니다.

금속 주조 시뮬레이션 갤러리

FLOW-3D CAST  에는 캐스팅을 위해 특별히 설계된 광범위하고 강력한 물리적 모델이 포함되어 있습니다. 이러한 특수 모델에는 lost foam casting, non-Newtonian fluids, and die cycling에 대한 알고리즘이 포함됩니다. FLOW-3D CAST 의 강력한 시뮬레이션 엔진과 결함 예측을 위한 새로운 도구는 설계주기를 단축하고 비용을 절감 할 수 있는 통찰력을 제공합니다.

HPDC |Comparison of slow shot profiles and entrained air during a filling simulation |FLOW-3D CAST

Shown is a video comparing two slow shot profiles. The graphs highlight the shot profiles through time and the difference in entrained air between the slow shots. Note the lack of air entrained in shot sleeve with calculated shot profile which yields a much better controlled flow within the shot sleeve.

YouTube Gallery로 이동하기

Coastal & Maritime Applications | FLOW-3D

FLOW-3D는 선박 설계, 슬로싱 다이내믹스, 파동 충격 및 환기 등 연안 및 해양 애플리케이션에 이상적인 소프트웨어입니다. 연안 애플리케이션의 경우 FLOW-3D는 연안 구조물에 심각한 폭풍과 쓰나미 파장의 세부 정보를 정확하게 예측하고 플래시 홍수 및 중요 구조물 홍수 및 손상 분석에 사용됩니다.

Laser Welding and Additive Manufacturing

Melt Pool Modeling: Innovation in Laser Welding & Additive Manufacturing

Melt Pool Modeling - Innovation in Laser Welding & Additive Manufacturing Webinar

Additive Manufacturing 기술이 새로운 제조 방식을 계속 발전시키면서 CFD 모델링은 공정 개발 및 최적화와, 재료의 변화를 이해하고, 설계 및 연구를 수행하는 매우 유용한 도구가 되었습니다. 이 웨비나에서는 최첨단 CFD 소프트웨어 FLOW-3D AM이 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 및 직접 에너지 증착 공정에서 용융 풀 역학을 모델링하는데 어떻게 사용되는지 살펴볼 것입니다. 그런 다음 유용한 정보를 얻기 위해 모델 데이터의 추출 및 분석에 집중하고 FLOW-3D AM에서 최근에 구현된 기능에 대해 논의합니다. 마지막으로 레이저 용접 및 적층 제조 응용 분야 모두에 적용할 수 있는 관련 산업 사례 연구를 검토하여 산업 응용 분야에 소프트웨어 사용을 보여줍니다.

https://www.facebook.com/FLOW3D.CFD.Software/videos/359103388813376/

Laser Metal Deposition Simulation | FLOW-3D AM | Facebook
Laser Metal Deposition Simulation | FLOW-3D AM | Facebook
FLOW-3D - We'll be presenting and exhibiting at the 2021
FLOW-3D – We’ll be presenting and exhibiting at the 2021

등록 링크https://zoom.us/webinar/register/7516034917241/WN_tik88gXJRzult2_HDNIzPA
산지 표준시(미국 및 캐나다)의 2021년 5월 5일 11:00 오전 (현지 시간)
이벤트 주최: FLOW-3D

발표자

photo of Paree Allu

Paree AlluSenior CFD Engineer @Flow Science, Inc.Paree Allu is a Senior CFD Engineer with Flow Science, where he leads the technical and business strategy for Flow Science’s additive manufacturing and laser welding software solutions. Paree holds a Master’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering from The Ohio State University.

photo of Allyce Jackman

Allyce JackmanCFD Engineer @Flow Science, Inc.Allyce Jackman is a CFD Engineer with Flow Science, where she specializes in laser welding, coating, and complex multiphysics applications. Allyce holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of New Mexico.

Coastal applications using FLOW-3D/연안(해변) FLOW-3D해석사례

배수(Backwaters)이론

  • Air entrainment(공기 혼입 모델)
  • Turbulence(난류 모델)
  • Waves(파동 모델)
  • Sediment scour and deposition(세굴 모델)

하구 매커니즘(Estuarine mechanisms)

  • Air entrainment(공기 혼입 모델)
  • Turbulence(난류 모델)
  • Density Evaluation(밀도 유동 모델)
  • Wind

Wave generation

  • Solitary Wave
  • Linear Wave
  • JONSWAP
  • Pierson-Moskowitz
  • Stokes Wave

Wave 생성하는 모델은 크게 위의 5가지 모델이 있습니다. 아래는 위의 5가지 모델에 대한 해석 사례를 보여줍니다. 이를 참고하시면 해석에 도움이 됩니다.

부두에서 파도 부하 추정, 물리적 모델링 및 수치테스트, 새로운 Wave에 대한 고유 2차원 비선형 접근방식 등의 FLOW-3D결과는 실제 실험 데이터와 잘 일치함을 보여줍니다.

  • Eillott, T., and Fullarton, M., “Cyclone wave loads on wharf structure using the new wave approach”, FLOW-3D Americas User conference, 2014

세굴 모델(Sediment scour and deposition)

  • Critical Shields number definition(임계 Shields 수) : 0.05
  • Bed Load Transport Rate equation : Meyer-Peter & Muller equation
  • Richardson-Zaki coefficient multipller : 1
  • 다음과 같이 Wave와 세굴(Sediment)를 같이 고려해서 해석하는 것을 추천합니다.
    – 퇴적물 탱크의 파동(Solitary wave)
    – 무연탄 및 모래
    – 움직이는 물체 모델을 사용하여 생성된 파도

해석 결과

Electro (&magneto) hydro-dynamics

Electro (&magneto) hydro-dynamics 사례

  • FLOW-3D models
  • Electrophoresis
  • Dielecrophoresis
  • Conductive fluid model
  • Electro-wetting
  • Electro-osmosis
  • Joules heating

Electrophoresis

  • Electric charge / electrophoresis
  • Particle sorting

Electro-wetting

  • Integrates effects of electrophoresis and dielectrophoresis
  • Induced charges manipulate fluid at micro/nano volumes
  • Electrowetting on dielectric (EWOD).

Dielectrophoresis (DEP)

DEP는 particle/fluid의 dielectric 특성이 주변 매체의 dielectric 특성과 다를 때만 발생한다.

Inputs required:

  • Dielectric constant of the fluid and or particles
  • Dielectric constant of any components, that may influence the electric field
  • Define electric potential on the components or on the mesh boundaries
  • Permittivity of vacuum.

섬세한 경계를 가진 두 개의 유체, 표면 장력, electric potential, fluid electric charge, dielectrophoresis, newtonian viscosity

Electro osmosis

Micro-pump example

  • Zeta potential
  • Electric field defined by the electric potential on the components or on the mesh boundaries.
  • Permittivity of vacuum
  • Flow rate control through device

Inputs required:

  • Zeta potential
  • Electric field defined by the electric potential on the components or on the mesh boundaries.
  • Permittivity of vacuum
  • Flow rate control through device

Electro-thermal effects (Joules heating)

  • 전류가 물질을 통해 흐를 때 그 저항성은 물질을 가열하게 하며, 이 효과를 joule heating이라고 한다.
  • 온도 구배 설정 속도 필드 및 장치의 유체 순환

Magneto Hydrodynamics

  • 자력에 의해 입자가 유선으로부터 이탈한다.

Xiaozheng Xue1, Ioannis H. Karampelas1, Chenxu Liu2 and Edward P. Furlani1,2
1 Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering
2 Department of Electrical Engineering
SUNY at Buffalo
FLOW-3D Americas User Conference , Toronto, 2014

Magneto Hydrodynamics

  • 자기 제어로 유체 혼합 사용

Use of magnetic field to align beads

John Wendelbo MEng, MSc.
Senior CFD Engineer, Flow Science
john.wendelbo@flow3d.com

Additive Manufacturing & Welding Bibliography

Additive Manufacturing & Welding Bibliography

다음은 적층 제조 및 용접 참고 문헌의 기술 문서 모음입니다. 이 모든 논문에는 FLOW-3D AM 결과가 나와 있습니다. FLOW-3D AM을 사용하여 적층 제조, 레이저 용접 및 기타 용접 기술에서 발견되는 프로세스를 성공적으로 시뮬레이션하는 방법에 대해 자세히 알아보십시오.

2024년 3월 20일 update

3-24 Kunjie Dai, Xing He, Decheng Kong, Chaofang Dong, Multi-physical field simulation to yield defect-free IN718 alloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, Materials Letters, 355; 135437, 2024. doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2023.135437

2-24 You Wang, Yinkai Xie, Huaixue Li, Caiyou Zeng, Ming Xu, Hongqiang Zhang, In-situ monitoring plume, spattering behavior and revealing their relationship with melt flow in laser powder bed fusion of nickel-based superalloy, Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 177; pp. 44-58, 2024. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2023.07.068

1-24 Yukai Chen, Hongtu Xu, Yu Lu, Yin Wang, Shuangyuzhou Wang, Ke Huang, Qi Zhang, Prediction of microstructure for Inconel 718 laser welding process using multi-scale model, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Technology of Plasticity – Current Trends in the Technology of Plasticity, pp. 713-722, 2024. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41341-4_75

211-23 Giovanni Chianese, Qamar Hayat, Sharhid Jabar, Pasquale Franciosa, Darek Ceglarek, Stanislao Patalano, A multi-physics CFD study to investigate the impact of laser beam shaping on metal mixing and molten pool dynamics during laser welding of copper to steel for battery terminal-to-casing connections, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 322; 118202, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.118202

207-23 Dong Liu, Jiaqi Pei, Hua Hou, Xiaofeng Niu, Yuhong Zhao, Optimizing solidification dendrites and process parameters for laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of GH3536 superalloy by finite volume and phase-field method, Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 27; pp. 3323-3338, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.10.188

206-23 Houshang Yin, Jingfan Yang, Ralf D. Fischer, Zilong Zhang, Bart Prorok, Lang Yuan, Xiaoyuan Lou, Pulsed laser additive manufacturing for 316L stainless steel: a new approach to control subgrain cellular structure, JOM, 75; pp. 5027-5036, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-023-06177-8

205-23 Francis Ogoke, William Lee, Ning-Yu Kao, Alexander Myers, Jack Beuth, Jonathan Malen, Amir Barati Farimani, Convolutional neural networks for melt depth prediction and visualization in laser powder bed fusion, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 129; pp. 3047-3062, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12384-z

202-23 Habib Hamed Zargari, Kazuhiro Ito, Abhay Sharma, Effect of workpiece vibration frequency on heat distribution and material flow in the molten pool in tandem-pulsed gas metal arc welding, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 129; pp. 2507-2522, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12424-8

199-23 Yukai Chen, Yin Wang, Hao Li, Yu Lu, Bin Han, Qi Zhang, Effects of process parameters on the microstructure of Inconel 718 during powder bed fusion based on cellular automata approach, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 18.1; e2251032, 2023. doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2023.2251032

197-23 Qiong Wu, Chuang Qiao, Yuhang Wu, Zhe Liu, Xiaodan Li, Ju Wang, Xizhong An, Aijun Huang, Chao Voon Samuel Lim, Numerical investigation on the reuse of recycled powders in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 77; 103821, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103821

196-23 Daicong Zhang, Chunhui Jing, Wei Guo, Yuan Xiao, Jun Luo, Lehua Qi, Microchannels formed using metal microdroplets, Micromachines, 14.10; 1922, 2023. doi.org/10.3390/mi14101922

195-23 Trong-Nhan Le, Santosh Rauniyar, V.H. Nismath, Kevin Chou, An investigation into the effects of contouring process parameters on the up-skin surface characteristics in laser powder-bed fusion process, Manufacturing Letters, 35; Supplement, pp. 707-716, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2023.08.085

194-23 Kyubok Lee, Teresa J. Rinker, Masoud M. Pour, Wayne Cai, Wenkang Huang, Wenda Tan, Jennifer Bracey, Jingjing Li, A study on cracks and IMCs in laser welding of Al and Cu, Manufacturing Letters, 35; Supplement, pp. 221-231, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2023.08.026

192-23 Kunjie Dai, Xing He, Wei Zhang, Decheng Kong, Rong Guo, Minlei Hu, Ketai He, Chaofang Dong, Tailoring the microstructure and mechanical properties for Hastelloy X alloy by laser powder bed fusion via scanning strategy, Materials & Design, 235; 112386, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2023.112386

191-23 Jun Du, Daqing Wang, Jimiao He, Yongheng Zhang, Zhike Peng, Influence of droplet size and ejection frequency on molten pool dynamics and deposition morphology in TIG-aided droplet deposition manufacturing, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 148; 107075, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2023.107075

188-23 Jin-Hyeong Park, Du-Song Kim, Dae-Won Cho, Jaewoong Kim, Changmin Pyo, Influence of thermal flow and predicting phase transformation on various welding positions, Heat and Mass Transfer, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s00231-023-03429-w

184-23 Lin Gao, Jishnu Bhattacharyya, Wenhao Lin, Zhongshu Ren, Andrew C. Chuang, Pavel D. Shevchenko, Viktor Nikitin, Ji Ma, Sean R. Agnew, Tao Sun, Tailoring material microstructure and property in wire-laser directed energy deposition through a wiggle deposition strategy, Additive Manufacturing, 77; 103801, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103801

182-23 Liping Guo, Hanjie Liu, Hongze Wang, Qianglong Wei, Jiahui Zhang, Yingyan Chen, Chu Lun Alex Leung, Qing Lian, Yi Wu, Yu Zou, Haowei Wang, A high-fidelity comprehensive framework for the additive manufacturing printability assessment, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 105; pp. 219-231, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2023.09.041

172-23 Liping Guo, Hanjie Liu, Hongze Wang, Qianglong Wei, Yakai Xiao, Zijue Tang, Yi Wu, Haowei Wang, Identifying the keyhole stability and pore formation mechanisms in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 321; 118153, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.118153

171-23 Yuhang Wu, Qiong Wu, Meng Li, Ju Wang, Dengzhi Yao, Hao Luo, Xizhong An, Haitao Fu, Hao Zhang, Xiaohong Yang, Qingchuan Zou, Shujun Li, Haibin Ji, Xing Zhang, Numerical investigation on effects of operating conditions and final dimension predictions in laser powder bed fusion of molybdenum, Additive Manufacturing, 76; 103783, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103783

158-23 K. El Abbaoui, I. Al Korachi, M.T. Mollah, J. Spangenberg, Numerical modelling of planned corner deposition in 3D concrete printing, Archives of Materials Science and Engineering, 121.2; pp. 71-79, 2023. doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0053.8488

156-23 Liping Guo, Hanjie Liu, Hongze Wang, Valentino A.M. Cristino, C.T. Kwok, Qianglong Wei, Zijue Tang, Yi Wu, Haowei Wang, Deepening the scientific understanding of different phenomenology in laser powder bed fusion by an integrated framework, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 216; 124596, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124596

154-23 Zhiyong Li, Xiuli He, Shaoxia Li, Xinfeng Kan, Yanjun Yin, Gang Yu, Sulfur-induced transitions of thermal behavior and flow dynamics in laser powder bed fusion of 316L powders, Thermal Science and Engineering Progress, 45; 102072, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2023.102072

149-23 Shardul Kamat, Wayne Cai, Teresa J. Rinker, Jennifer Bracey, Liang Xi, Wenda Tan, A novel integrated process-performance model for laser welding of multi-layer battery foils and tabs, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 320; 118121, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.118121

148-23 Reza Ghomashchi, Shahrooz Nafisi, Solidification of Al12Si melt pool in laser powder bed fusion, Journal of Materials En gineering and Performance, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s11665-023-08502-3

133-23 Hesam Moghadasi, Md Tusher Mollah, Deepak Marla, Hamid Saffari, Jon Spangenberg, Computational fluid dynamics modeling of top-down digital light processing additive manufacturing, Polymers, 15.11; 2459, 2023. doi.org/10.3390/polym15112459

131-23 Luca Santoro, Raffaella Sesana, Rosario Molica Nardo, Francesca Curà, In line defect detection in steel welding process by means of thermography, Experimental Mechanics in Engineering and Biomechanics – Proceedings ICEM20, 19981, 2023.

128-23 Md Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Berin Šeta, Jon Spangenberg, Computational fluid dynamics modelling and experimental analysis of reinforcement bar integration in 3D concrete printing, Cement and Concrete Research, 173; 107263, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2023.107263

123-23 Arash Samaei, Zhongsheng Sang, Jennifer A. Glerum, Jon-Erik Mogonye, Gregory J. Wagner, Multiphysics modeling of mixing and material transport in additive manufacturing with multicomponent powder beds, Additive Manufacturing, 67; 103481, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103481

122-23 Chu Han, Ping Jiang, Shaoning Geng, Lingyu Guo, Kun Liu, Inhomogeneous microstructure distribution and its formation mechanism in deep penetration laser welding of medium-thick aluminum-lithium alloy plates, Optics & Laser Technology, 167; 109783, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109783

111-23 Alexander J. Myers, Guadalupe Quirarte, Francis Ogoke, Brandon M. Lane, Syed Zia Uddin, Amir Barati Farimani, Jack L. Beuth, Jonathan A. Malen, High-resolution melt pool thermal imaging for metals additive manufacturing using the two-color method with a color camera, Additive Manufacturing, 73; 103663, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103663

107-23 M. Mohsin Raza, Yu-Lung Lo, Hua-Bin Lee, Chang Yu-Tsung, Computational modeling of laser welding for aluminum–copper joints using a circular strategy, Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 25; pp. 3350-3364, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.06.122

106-23 H.Z. Lu, L.H. Liu, X. Luo, H.W. Ma, W.S. Cai, R. Lupoi, S. Yin, C. Yang, Formation mechanism of heterogeneous microstructures and shape memory effect in NiTi shape memory alloy fabricated via laser powder bed fusion, Materials & Design, 232; 112107, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2023.112107

105-23 Harun Kahya, Hakan Gurun, Gokhan Kucukturk, Experimental and analytical investigation of the re-melting effect in the manufacturing of 316L by direct energy deposition (DED) method, Metals, 13.6; 1144, 2023. doi.org/10.3390/met13061144

100-23 Dongju Chen, Gang Li, Peng Wang, Zhiqiang Zeng, Yuhang Tang, Numerical simulation of melt pool size and flow evolution for laser powder bed fusion of powder grade Ti6Al4V, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 223; 103971, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2023.103971

97-23 Mahyar Khorasani, Martin Leary, David Downing, Jason Rogers, Amirhossein Ghasemi, Ian Gibson, Simon Brudler, Bernard Rolfe, Milan Brandt, Stuart Bateman, Numerical and experimental investigations on manufacturability of Al–Si–10Mg thin wall structures made by LB-PBF, Thin-Walled Structures, 188; 110814, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2023.110814

95-23 M.S. Serdeczny, Laser welding of dissimilar materials – simulation driven optimization of process parameters, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1281; 012018, 2023. doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1281/1/012018

90-23 Lin Liu, Tubin Liu, Xi Dong, Min Huang, Fusheng Cao, Mingli Qin, Numerical simulation of thermal dynamic behavior and morphology evolution of the molten pool of selective laser melting BN/316L stainless steel composite, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s11665-023-08210-y

89-23 M. P. Serdeczny, A. Jackman, High fidelity modelling of bead geometry in directed energy deposition – simulation driven optimization, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, NOLAMP19, 2023.

88-23 Lu Wang, Shuhao Wang, Yanming Zhang, Wentao Yan, Multi-phase flow simulation of powder streaming in laser-based directed energy deposition, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 212; 124240, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124240

80-23 Mahyar Khorasani, AmirHossein Ghasemi, Martin Leary, David Downing, Ian Gibson, Elmira G. Sharabian, Jithin Kozuthala Veetil, Milan Brandt, Stuart Batement, Bernard Rolfe, Benchmark models for conduction and keyhole modes in laser-based powder bed fusion of Inconel 718, Optics & Laser Technology, 164; 109509, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109509

78-23   Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, Berin Šeta, Jon Spangenberg, Computational analysis of yield stress buildup and stability of deposited layers in material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 71; 103605, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103605

76-23   Asif Ur Rehman, Kashif Azher, Abid Ullah, Celal Sami Tüfekci, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Binder jetting of SS316L: a computational approach for droplet-powder interaction, Rapid Prototyping Journal, 2023. doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-08-2022-0264

75-23   Dengzhi Yao, Ju Wang, Hao Luo, Yuhang Wu, Xizhong An, Thermal behavior and control during multi-track laser powder bed fusion of 316 L stainless steel, Additive Manufacturing, 70; 103562, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103562

61-23   Yaqing Hou, Hang Su, Hao Zhang, Fafa Li, Xuandong Wang, Yazhou He, Dupeng He, An integrated simulation model towards laser powder bed fusion in-situ alloying technology, Materials & Design, 228; 111795, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2023.111795

56-23   Maohong Yang, Guiyi Wu, Xiangwei Li, Shuyan Zhang, Honghong Wang, Jiankang Huang, Influence of heat source model on the behavior of laser cladding pool, Journal of Laser Applications, 35.2; 2023. doi.org/10.2351/7.0000963

45-23   Daniel Martinez, Philip King, Santosh Reddy Sama, Jay Sim, Hakan Toykoc, Guha Manogharan, Effect of freezing range on reducing casting defects through 3D sand-printed mold designs, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11112-x

39-23   Peter S. Cook, David J. Ritchie, Determining the laser absorptivity of Ti-6Al-4V during laser powder bed fusion by calibrated melt pool simulation, Optics & Laser Technology, 162; 109247. 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109247

36-23   Yixuan Chen, Weihao Wang, Yao Ou, Yingna Wu, Zirong Zhai, Rui Yang, Impact of laser power and scanning velocity on microstructure and mechanical properties of Inconel 738LC alloys fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, TMS 2023 152nd Annual Meeting & Exhibition Supplemental Proceedings, pp. 138-149, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22524-6_15

34-23   Chao Kang, Ikki Ikeda, Motoki Sakaguchi, Recoil and solidification of a paraffin droplet impacted on a metal substrate: Numerical study and experimental verification, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 118; 103839, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2023.103839

30-23   Fei Wang, Tiechui Yuan, Ruidi Li, Shiqi Lin, Zhonghao Xie, Lanbo Li, Valentino Cristino, Rong Xu, Bing liu, Comparative study on microstructures and mechanical properties of ultra ductility single-phase Nb40Ti40Ta20 refractory medium entropy alloy by selective laser melting and vacuum arc melting, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 942; 169065, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2023.169065

29-23   Haejin Lee, Yeonghwan Song, Seungkyun Yim, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Byoungsoo Lee, Influence of linear energy on side surface roughness in powder bed fusion electron beam melting process: Coupled experimental and simulation study, Powder Technology, 418; 118292, 2023.

27-23   Yinan Chen, Bo Li, Double-phase refractory medium entropy alloy NbMoTi via selective laser melting (SLM) additive manufacturing, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2419; 012074, 2023. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2419/1/012074

23-23   Yunwei Gui, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Development of macro-defect-free PBF-EB-processed Ti–6Al–4V alloys with superior plasticity using PREP-synthesized powder and machine learning-assisted process optimization, Materials Science and Engineering: A, 864; 144595, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2023.144595

21-23   Tatsuhiko Sakai, Yasuhiro Okamoto, Nozomi Taura, Riku Saito, Akira Okada, Effect of scanning speed on molten metal behaviour under angled irradiation with a continuous-wave laser, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 313; 117866, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.117866

19-23   Gianna M. Valentino, Arunima Banerjee, Alexander lark, Christopher M. Barr, Seth H. Myers, Ian D. McCue, Influence of laser processing parameters on the density-ductility tradeoff in additively manufactured pure tantalum, Additive Manufacturing Letters, 4; 100117, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.addlet.2022.100117

15-23   Runbo Jiang, Zhongshu Ren, Joseph Aroh, Amir Mostafaei, Benjamin Gould, Tao Sun, Anthony D. Rollett, Quantifying equiaxed vs epitaxial solidification in laser melting of CMSX-4 single crystal superalloy, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 54; pp. 808-822, 2023. doi.org/10.1007/s11661-022-06929-2

14-23   Nguyen Thi Tien, Yu-Lung Lo, M. Mohsin Raza, Cheng-Yen Chen, Chi-Pin Chiu, Optimization of processing parameters for pulsed laser welding of dissimilar metal interconnects, Optics & Laser Technology, 159; 109022, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.109022

9-23 Hou Yi Chia, Wentao Yan, High-fidelity modeling of metal additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Technology: Design, Optimization, and Modeling, Ed. Kun Zhou, 2023.

8-23 Akash Aggarwal, Yung C. Shin, Arvind Kumar, Investigation of the transient coupling between the dynamic laser beam absorptance and the melt pool – vapor depression morphology in laser powder bed fusion process, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 201.2; 123663, 2023. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.123663

199-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Numerical predictions of bottom layer stability in material extrusion additive manufacturing, JOM, 74; pp. 1096-1101, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-05035-9

198-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Amirpasha Moetazedian, Andy Gleadall, Jiongyi Yan, Wayne Edgar Alphonso, Raphael Comminal, Berin Seta, Tony Lock, Jon Spangenberg, Investigation on corner precision at different corner angles in material extrusion additive manufacturing: An experimental and computational fluid dynamics analysis, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 2022.

197-22 Md. Tusher Mollah, Marcin P. Serdeczny, Raphaël Comminal, Berin Šeta, Marco Brander, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, A numerical investigation of the inter-layer bond and surface roughness during the yield stress buildup in wet-on-wet material extrusion additive manufacturing, ASPE and euspen Summer Topical Meeting, 77, 2022.

182-22   Chan Kyu Kim, Dae-Won Cho, Seok Kim, Sang Woo Song, Kang Myung Seo, Young Tae Cho, High-throughput metal 3D printing pen enabled by a continuous molten droplet transfer, Advanced Science, 2205085, 2022. doi.org/10.1002/advs.202205085

180-22 Xu Kaikai, Gong Yadong, Zhang Qiang, Numerical simulation of dynamic analysis of molten pool in the process of direct energy deposition, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10271-7

179-22 Yasuhiro Okamoto, Nozomi Taura, Akira Okada, Study on laser drilling process of solid metal on its liquid, International Journal of Electrical Machining, 27; 2022. doi.org/10.2526/ijem.27.35

175-22 Lu Min, Xhi Xiaojie, Lu Peipei, Wu Meiping, Forming quality and wettability of surface texture on CuSn10 fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, AIP Advances, 12.12; 125114, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0122076

174-22 Thinus Van Rhijn, Willie Du Preez, Maina Maringa, Dean Kouprianoff, An investigation into the optimization of the selective laser melting process parameters for Ti6Al4V through numerical modelling, JOM, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-022-05608-2

171-22 Jonathan Yoshioka, Mohsen Eshraghi, Temporal evolution of temperature gradient and solidification rate in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Heat and Mass Transfer, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00231-022-03318-8

170-22 Subin Shrestha and Kevin Chou, Residual heat effect on the melt pool geometry during the laser powder bed fusion process, Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 6.6; 153, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/jmmp6060153

169-22 Aryan Aryan, Obinna Chukwubuzo, Desmond Bourgeois, Wei Zhang, Hardness prediction by incorporating heat transfer and molten pool fluid flow in a mult-pass, multi-layer weld for onsite repair of Grade 91 steel, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information, DOE-OSU-0032067, 2022. doi.org/10.2172/1898594

158-22 Dafan Du, Lu Wang, Anping Dong, Wentao Yan, Guoliang Zhu, Baode Sun, Promoting the densification and grain refinement with assistance of static magnetic field in laser powder bed fusion, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 183; 103965, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.103965

157-22 Han Chu, Jiang Ping, Geng Shaoning, Liu Kun, Nucleation mechanism in oscillating laser welds of 2024 aluminium alloy: A combined experimental and numerical study, Optics & Laser Technology, 158.A; 108812, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.108812

153-22 Zixiang Li, Yinan Cui, Baohua Chang, Guan Liu, Ze Pu, Haoyu Zhang, Zhiyue Liang, Changmeng Liu, Li Wang, Dong Du, Manipulating molten pool in in-situ additive manufacturing of Ti-22Al-25 Nb through alternating dual-electron beams, Additive Manufacturing, 60.A; 103230, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103230

149-22   Qian Chen, Yao Fu, Albert C. To, Multiphysics modeling of particle spattering and induced defect formation mechanism in Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 123; pp. 783-791, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10201-7

146-22   Zixuan Wan, Hui-ping Wang, Jingjing Li, Baixuan Yang, Joshua Solomon, Blair Carlson, Effect of welding mode on remote laser stitch welding of zinc-coated steel with different sheet thickness combinations, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, MANU-21-1598, 2022. doi.org/10.1115/1.4055792

143-22   Du-Rim Eo, Seong-Gyu Chung, JeongHo Yang, Won Tae Cho, Sun-Hong Park, Jung-Wook Cho, Surface modification of high-Mn steel via laser-DED: Microstructural characterization and hot crack susceptibility of clad layer, Materials & Design, 223; 111188, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.111188

142-22   Zichuan Fu, Xiangman Zhou, Bin Luo, Qihua Tian, Numerical simulation study of the effect of weld current on WAAM welding pool dynamic and weld bead morphology, International Conference on Mechanical Design and Simulation, Proceedings, 12261; 122614G, 2022. doi.org/10.1117/12.2639074

132-22   Yiyu Huang, Zhonghao Xie, Wenshu Li, Haoyu Chen, Bin Liu, Bingfeng Wang, Dynamic mechanical properties of the selective laser melting NiCrFeCoMo0.2 high entropy alloy and the microstructure of molten pool, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 927; 167011, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2022.167011

126-22   Jingqi Zhang, Yingang Liu, Gang Sha, Shenbao Jin, Ziyong Hou, Mohamad Bayat, Nan Yang, Qiyang Tan, Yu Yin, Shiyang Liu, Jesper Henri Hattel, Matthew Dargusch, Xiaoxu Huang, Ming-Xing Zhang, Designing against phase and property heterogeneities in additively manufactured titanium alloys, Nature Communications, 13; 4660, 2022. doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32446-2

119-22   Xu Kaikai, Gong Yadong, Zhao Qiang, Numerical simulation on molten pool flow of Inconel718 alloy based on VOF during additive manufacturing, Materials Today Communications, 33; 104147, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.104147

118-22   AmirPouya Hemmasian, Francis Ogoke, Parand Akbari, Jonathan Malen, Jack Beuth, Amir Barati Farimani, Surrogate modeling of melt pool thermal field using deep learning, SSRN, 2022. doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4190835

117-22   Chiara Ransenigo, Marialaura Tocci, Filippo Palo, Paola Ginestra, Elisabetta Ceretti, Marcello Gelfi, Annalisa Pola, Evolution of melt pool and porosity during laser powder bed fusion of Ti6Al4V alloy: Numerical modelling and experimental validation, Lasers in Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s40516-022-00185-3

112-22   Chris Jasien, Alec Saville, Chandler Gus Becker, Jonah Klemm-Toole, Kamel Fezzaa, Tao Sun, Tresa Pollock, Amy J. Clarke, In situ x-ray radiography and computational modeling to predict grain morphology in β-titanium during simulated additive manufacturing, Metals, 12.7; 1217, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/met12071217

110-22   Haotian Zhou, Haijun Su, Yinuo Guo, Peixin Yang, Yuan Liu, Zhonglin Shen, Di Zhao, Haifang Liu, Taiwen Huang, Min Guo, Jun Zhang, Lin Liu, Hengzhi Fu, Formation and evolution mechanisms of pores in Inconel 718 during selective laser melting: Meso-scale modeling and experimental investigations, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 81; pp. 202-213, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2022.06.072

109-22   Yufan Zhao, Huakang Bian, Hao Wang, Aoyagi Kenta, Yamanaka Kenta, Akihiko Chiba, Non-equilibrium solidification behavior associated with powder characteristics during electron beam additive manufacturing, Materials & Design, 221; 110915, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110915

107-22   Dan Lönn, David Spångberg, Study of process parameters in laser beam welding of copper hairpins, Thesis, University of Skövde, 2022.

106-22   Liping Guo, Hongze Wang, Qianglong Wei, Hanjie Liu, An Wang, Yi Wu, Haowei Wang, A comprehensive model to quantify the effects of additional nano-particles on the printability in laser powder bed fusion of aluminum alloy and composite, Additive Manufacturing, 58; 103011, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103011

104-22   Hongjiang Pan, Thomas Dahmen, Mohamad Bayat, Kang Lin, Xiaodan Zhang, Independent effects of laser power and scanning speed on IN718’s precipitation and mechanical properties produced by LBPF plus heat treatment, Materials Science and Engineering: A, 849; 143530, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2022.143530

101-22   Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, A survey on basic influencing factors of solidified grain morphology during electron beam melting, Materials & Design, 221; 110927, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110927

98-22   Jon Spangenberg, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Md. Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Integrating reinforcement with 3D concrete printing: Experiments and numerical modelling, Third RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication, Eds. Ana Blanco, Peter Kinnell, Richard Buswell, Sergio Cavalaro, pp. 379-384, 2022.

93-22   Minglei Qu, Qilin Guo, Luis I. Escano, Samuel J. Clark Kamel Fezzaa, Lianyi Chen, Mitigating keyhole pore formation by nanoparticles during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Letters, 100068, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addlet.2022.100068

86-22   Patiparn Ninpetch, Prasert Chalermkarnnon, Pruet Kowitwarangkul, Multiphysics simulation of thermal-fluid behavior in laser powder bed fusion of H13 steel: Influence of layer thickness and energy input, Metals and Materials International, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-022-01239-z

85-22   Merve Biyikli, Taner Karagoz, Metin Calli, Talha Muslim, A. Alper Ozalp, Ali Bayram, Single track geometry prediction of laser metal deposited 316L-Si via multi-physics modelling and regression analysis with experimental validation, Metals and Materials International, 2022. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-022-01243-3

76-22   Zhichao Yang, Shuhao Wang, Lida Zhu, Jinsheng Ning, Bo Xin, Yichao Dun, Wentao Yan, Manipulating molten pool dynamics during metal 3D printing by ultrasound, Applied Physics Reviews, 9; 021416, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0082461

73-22   Yu Sun, Liqun Li, Yu Hao, Sanbao Lin, Xinhua Tang, Fenggui Lu, Numerical modeling on formation of periodic chain-like pores in high power laser welding of thick steel plate, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 306; 117638, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117638

67-22   Yu Hao, Hiu-Ping Wang, Yu Sun, Liqun Li, Yihan Wu, Fenggui Lu, The evaporation behavior of zince and its effect on spattering in laser overlap welding of galvanized steels, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 306; 117625, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117625

65-22   Yanhua Zhao, Chuanbin Du, Peifu Wang, Wei Meng, Changming Li, The mechanism of in-situ laser polishing and its effect on the surface quality of nickel-based alloy fabricated by selective laser melting, Metals, 12.5; 778, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/met12050778

58-22   W.E. Alphonso, M. Bayat, M. Baier, S. Carmignato, J.H. Hattel, Multi-physics numerical modelling of 316L Austenitic stainless steel in laser powder bed fusion process at meso-scale, 17th UK Heat Transfer Conference (UKHTC2021), Manchester, UK, April 4-6, 2022.

57-22   Brandon Hayes, Travis Hainsworth, Robert MacCurdy, Liquid-solid co-printing of multi-material 3D fluidic devices via material jetting, Additive Manufacturing, in press, 102785, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.102785

55-22   Xiang Wang, Lin-Jie Zhang, Jie Ning, Suck-joo Na, Fluid thermodynamic simulation of Ti-6Al-4V alloy in laser wire deposition, 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, 2022. doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2021.0159

54-22   Junhao Zhao, Binbin Wang, Tong Liu, Liangshu Luo, Yanan Wang, Xiaonan Zheng, Liang Wang, Yanqing Su, Jingjie Guo, Hengzhi Fu, Dayong Chen, Study of in situ formed quasicrystals in Al-Mn based alloys fabricated by SLM, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 909; 164847, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2022.164847

48-22   Yueming Sun, Jianxing Ma, Fei Peng, Konstantin G. Kornev, Making droplets from highly viscous liquids by pushing a wire through a tube, Physics of Fluids, 34; 032119, 2022. doi.org/10.1063/5.0082003

46-22   H.Z. Lu, T. Chen, H. Liu, H. Wang, X. Luo, C.H. Song, Constructing function domains in NiTi shape memory alloys by additive manufacturing, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 17.3; 2022. doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2022.2053821

42-22   Islam Hassan, P. Ravi Selvaganapathy, Microfluidic printheads for highly switchable multimaterial 3D printing of soft materials, Advanced Materials Technologies, 2101709, 2022. doi.org/10.1002/admt.202101709

41-22   Nan Yang, Youping Gong, Honghao Chen, Wenxin Li, Chuanping Zhou, Rougang Zhou, Huifeng Shao, Personalized artificial tibia bone structure design and processing based on laser powder bed fusion, Machines, 10.3; 205, 2022. doi.org/10.3390/machines10030205

31-22   Bo Shen, Raghav Gnanasambandam, Rongxuan Wang, Zhenyu (James) Kong, Multi-Task Gaussian process upper confidence bound for hyperparameter tuning and its application for simulation studies of additive manufacturing, IISE Transactions, 2022. doi.org/10.1080/24725854.2022.2039813

27-22   Lida Zhu, Shuhao Wang, Hao Lu, Dongxing Qi, Dan Wang, Zhichao Yang, Investigation on synergism between additive and subtractive manufacturing for curved thin-walled structure, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 17.2; 2022. doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2022.2029009

24-22   Hoon Sohn, Peipei Liu, Hansol Yoon, Kiyoon Yi, Liu Yang, Sangjun Kim, Real-time porosity reduction during metal directed energy deposition using a pulse laser, Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 116; pp. 214-223. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2021.12.013

18-22   Yaohong Xiao, Zixuan Wan, Pengwei Liu, Zhuo Wang, Jingjing Li, Lei Chen, Quantitative simulations of grain nucleation and growth at additively manufactured bimetallic interfaces of SS316L and IN625, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 302; 117506, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117506

06-22   Amal Charles, Mohamad Bayat, Ahmed Elkaseer, Lore Thijs, Jesper Henri Hattel, Steffen Scholz, Elucidation of dross formation in laser powder bed fusion at down-facing surfaces: Phenomenon-oriented multiphysics simulation and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, 50; 102551, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102551

05-22   Feilong Ji, Xunpeng Qin, Zeqi Hu, Xiaochen Xiong, Mao Ni, Mengwu Wu, Influence of ultrasonic vibration on molten pool behavior and deposition layer forming morphology for wire and arc additive manufacturing, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 130; 105789, 2022. doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2021.105789

150-21   Daniel Knüttel, Stefano Baraldo, Anna Valente, Konrad Wegener, Emanuele Carpanzano, Model based learning for efficient modelling of heat transfer dynamics, Procedia CIRP, 102; pp. 252-257, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.09.043

149-21   T. van Rhijn, W. du Preez, M. Maringa, D. Kouprianoff, Towards predicting process parameters for selective laser melting of titanium alloys through the modelling of melt pool characteristics, Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Natuurwetenskap en Tegnologie, 40.1; 2021. 

148-21   Qian Chen, Multiscale process modeling of residual deformation and defect formation for laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA, 2021. 

147-21   Pareekshith Allu, Developing process parameters through CFD simulations, Lasers in Manufacturing Conference, 2021.

143-21   Asif Ur Rehman, Muhammad Arif Mahmood, Fatih Pitir, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Andrei C. Popescu, Ion N. Mihailescu, Spatter formation and splashing induced defects in laser-based powder bed fusion of AlSi10Mg alloy: A novel hydrodynamics modelling with empirical testing, Metals, 11.12; 2023, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/met11122023

142-21   Islam Hassan, Ponnambalam Ravi Selvaganapathy, A microfluidic printhead with integrated hybrid mixing by sequential injection for multimaterial 3D printing, Additive Manufacturing, 102559, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102559

137-21   Ting-Yu Cheng, Ying-Chih Liao, Enhancing drop mixing in powder bed by alternative particle arrangements with contradictory hydrophilicity, Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 104160, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2021.104160

134-21   Asif Ur Rehman, Muhammad Arif Mahmood, Fatih Pitir, Metin Uymaz Salamci, Andrei C. Popescu, Ion N. Mihailescu, Keyhole formation by laser drilling in laser powder bed fusion of Ti6Al4V biomedical alloy: Mesoscopic computational fluid dynamics simulation versus mathematical modelling using empirical validation, Nanomaterials, 11.2; 3284, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/nano11123284

128-21   Sang-Woo Han, Won-Ik Cho, Lin-Jie Zhang, Suck-Joo Na, Coupled simulation of thermal-metallurgical-mechanical behavior in laser keyhole welding of AH36 steel, Materials & Design, 212; 110275, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.110275

127-21   Jiankang Huang, Zhuoxuan Li, Shurong Yu, Xiaoquan Yu, Ding Fan, Real-time observation and numerical simulation of the molten pool flow and mass transfer behavior during wire arc additive manufacturing, Welding in the World, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s40194-021-01214-z

123-21   Boxue Song, Tianbiao Yu, Xingyu Jiang, Wenchao Xi, Xiaoli Lin, Zhelun Ma, ZhaoWang, Development of the molten pool and solidification characterization in single bead multilayer direct energy deposition, Additive Manufacturing, 102479, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102479

112-21   Kathryn Small, Ian D. McCue, Katrina Johnston, Ian Donaldson, Mitra L. Taheri, Precision modification of microstructure and properties through laser engraving, JOM, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-04959-6

111-21   Yongki Lee, Jason Cheon, Byung-Kwon Min, Cheolhee Kim, Modelling of fume particle behaviour and coupling glass contamination during vacuum laser beam welding, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, 2021. doi.org/10.1080/13621718.2021.1990658

110-21   Menglin Liu, Hao Yi, Huajun Cao, Rufeng Huang, Le Jia, Heat accumulation effect in metal droplet-based 3D printing: Evolution mechanism and elimination strategy, Additive Manufacturing, 48.A; 102413, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102413

108-21   Nozomi Taura, Akiya Mitsunobu, Tatsuhiko Sakai, Yasuhiro Okamoto, Akira Okada, Formation and its mechanism of high-speed micro-grooving on metal surface by angled CW laser irradiation, Journal of Laser Micro/Nanoengineering, 16.2, 2021. doi.org/10.2961/jlmn.2021.02.2006

105-21   Jon Spangenberg, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Raphaël Comminal, Md. Tusher Mollah, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Numerical simulation of multi-layer 3D concrete printing, RILEM Technical Letters, 6; pp. 119-123, 2021. doi.org/10.21809/rilemtechlett.2021.142

104-21   Lin Chen, Chunming Wang, Gaoyang Mi, Xiong Zhang, Effects of laser oscillating frequency on energy distribution, molten pool morphology and grain structure of AA6061/AA5182 aluminum alloys lap welding, Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 15; pp. 3133-3148, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.09.141

101-21   R.J.M. Wolfs, T.A.M. Salet, N. Roussel, Filament geometry control in extrusion-based additive manufacturing of concrete: The good, the bad and the ugly, Cement and Concrete Research, 150; 106615, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106615

89-21   Wenlin Ye, Jin Bao, Jie Lei, Yichang Huang, Zhihao Li, Peisheng Li, Ying Zhang, Multiphysics modeling of thermal behavior of commercial pure titanium powder during selective laser melting, Metals and Materials International, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s12540-021-01019-1

81-21   Lin Chen, Gaoyang Mi, Xiong Zhang, Chunming Wang, Effects of sinusoidal oscillating laser beam on weld formation, melt flow and grain structure during aluminum alloys lap welding, Journals of Materials Processing Technology, 298; 117314, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117314

77-21   Yujie Cui, Yufan Zhao, Haruko Numata, Kenta Yamanaka, Huakang Bian, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Effects of process parameters and cooling gas on powder formation during the plasma rotating electrode process, Powder Technology, 393; pp. 301-311, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2021.07.062

76-21   Md Tusher Mollah, Raphaël Comminal, Marcin P. Serdeczny, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Stability and deformations of deposited layers in material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 46; 102193, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102193

72-21   S. Sabooni, A. Chabok, S.C. Feng, H. Blaauw, T.C. Pijper, H.J. Yang, Y.T. Pei, Laser powder bed fusion of 17–4 PH stainless steel: A comparative study on the effect of heat treatment on the microstructure evolution and mechanical properties, Additive Manufacturing, 46; 102176, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102176

71-21   Yu Hao, Nannan Chena, Hui-Ping Wang, Blair E. Carlson, Fenggui Lu, Effect of zinc vapor forces on spattering in partial penetration laser welding of zinc-coated steels, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 298; 117282, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117282

67-21   Lu Wang, Wentao Yan, Thermoelectric magnetohydrodynamic model for laser-based metal additive manufacturing, Physical Review Applied, 15.6; 064051, 2021. doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.15.064051

61-21   Ian D. McCue, Gianna M. Valentino, Douglas B. Trigg, Andrew M. Lennon, Chuck E. Hebert, Drew P. Seker, Salahudin M. Nimer, James P. Mastrandrea, Morgana M. Trexler, Steven M. Storck, Controlled shape-morphing metallic components for deployable structures, Materials & Design, 208; 109935, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109935

60-21   Mahyar Khorasani, AmirHossein Ghasemi, Martin Leary, William O’Neil, Ian Gibson, Laura Cordova, Bernard Rolfe, Numerical and analytical investigation on meltpool temperature of laser-based powder bed fusion of IN718, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 177; 121477, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121477

57-21   Dae-Won Cho, Yeong-Do Park, Muralimohan Cheepu, Numerical simulation of slag movement from Marangoni flow for GMAW with computational fluid dynamics, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 125; 105243, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2021.105243

55-21   Won-Sang Shin, Dae-Won Cho, Donghyuck Jung, Heeshin Kang, Jeng O Kim, Yoon-Jun Kim, Changkyoo Park, Investigation on laser welding of Al ribbon to Cu sheet: Weldability, microstructure and mechanical and electrical properties, Metals, 11.5; 831, 2021. doi.org/10.3390/met11050831

50-21   Mohamad Bayat, Venkata K. Nadimpalli, Francesco G. Biondani, Sina Jafarzadeh, Jesper Thorborg, Niels S. Tiedje, Giuliano Bissacco, David B. Pedersen, Jesper H. Hattel, On the role of the powder stream on the heat and fluid flow conditions during directed energy deposition of maraging steel—Multiphysics modeling and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, 43;102021, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102021

47-21   Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, An investigation into melting modes in selective laser melting of Inconel 625 powder: single track geometry and porosity, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-07105-3

34-21   Haokun Sun, Xin Chu, Cheng Luo, Haoxiu Chen, Zhiying Liu, Yansong Zhang, Yu Zou, Selective laser melting for joining dissimilar materials: Investigations ofiInterfacial characteristics and in situ alloying, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 52; pp. 1540-1550, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/s11661-021-06178-9

32-21   Shanshan Zhang, Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, On mesoscopic surface formation in metal laser powder-bed fusion process, Supplimental Proceedings, TMS 150th Annual Meeting & Exhibition (Virtual), pp. 149-161, 2021. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65261-6_14

22-21   Patiparn Ninpetch, Pruet Kowitwarangkul, Sitthipong Mahathanabodee, Prasert Chalermkarnnon, Phadungsak Rattanadecho, Computational investigation of thermal behavior and molten metal flow with moving laser heat source for selective laser melting process, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 24; 100860, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.100860

19-21   M.B. Abrami, C. Ransenigo, M. Tocci, A. Pola, M. Obeidi, D. Brabazon, Numerical simulation of laser powder bed fusion processes, La Metallurgia Italiana, February; pp. 81-89, 2021.

16-21   Wenjun Ge, Jerry Y.H. Fuh, Suck Joo Na, Numerical modelling of keyhole formation in selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 62; pp. 646-654, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.01.005

11-21   Mohamad Bayat, Venkata K. Nadimpalli, David B. Pedersen, Jesper H. Hattel, A fundamental investigation of thermo-capillarity in laser powder bed fusion of metals and alloys, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 166; 120766, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120766

10-21   Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, Thermal properties of powder beds in energy absorption and heat transfer during additive manufacturing with electron beam, Powder Technology, 381; pp. 44-54, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2020.11.082

9-21   Subin Shrestha, Kevin Chou, A study of transient and steady-state regions from single-track deposition in laser powder bed fusion, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 61; pp. 226-235, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.023

6-21   Qian Chen, Yunhao Zhao, Seth Strayer, Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Yuichiro Koizumi, Akihiko Chiba, Wei Xiong, Albert C. To, Elucidating the effect of preheating temperature on melt pool morphology variation in Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion via simulation and experiment, Additive Manufacturing, 37; 101642, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101642

04-21   Won-Ik Cho, Peer Woizeschke, Analysis of molten pool dynamics in laser welding with beam oscillation and filler wire feeding, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 164; 120623, 2021. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120623

128-20   Mahmood Al Bashir, Rajeev Nair, Martina M. Sanchez, Anil Mahapatro, Improving fluid retention properties of 316L stainless steel using nanosecond pulsed laser surface texturing, Journal of Laser Applications, 32.4, 2020. doi.org/10.2351/7.0000199

127-20   Eric Riedel, Niklas Bergedieck, Stefan Scharf, CFD simulation based investigation of cavitation cynamics during high intensity ultrasonic treatment of A356, Metals, 10.11; 1529, 2020. doi.org/10.3390/met10111529

126-20   Benjamin Himmel, Material jetting of aluminium: Analysis of a novel additive manufacturing process, Thesis, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany, 2020. 

121-20   Yufan Zhao, Yujie Cui, Haruko Numata, Huakang Bian, Kimio Wako, Kenta Yamanaka, Kenta Aoyagi, Akihiko Chiba, Centrifugal granulation behavior in metallic powder fabrication by plasma rotating electrode process, Scientific Reports, 10; 18446, 2020. doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75503-w

116-20   Raphael Comminal, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Modelling of 3D concrete printing based on computational fluid dynamics, Cement and Concrete Research, 138; 106256, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106256

112-20   Peng Liu, Lijin Huan, Yu Gan, Yuyu Lei, Effect of plate thickness on weld pool dynamics and keyhole-induced porosity formation in laser welding of Al alloy, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 111; pp. 735-747, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05818-5

108-20   Fan Chen, Wentao Yan, High-fidelity modelling of thermal stress for additive manufacturing by linking thermal-fluid and mechanical models, Materials & Design, 196; 109185, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109185

104-20   Yunfu Tian, Lijun Yang, Dejin Zhao, Yiming Huang, Jiajing Pan, Numerical analysis of powder bed generation and single track forming for selective laser melting of SS316L stainless steel, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 58; pp. 964-974, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.09.002

100-20   Raphaël Comminal, Sina Jafarzadeh, Marcin Serdeczny, Jon Spangenberg, Estimations of interlayer contacts in extrusion additive manufacturing using a CFD model, International Conference on Additive Manufacturing in Products and Applications (AMPA), Zurich, Switzerland, September 1-3: Industrializing Additive Manufacturing, pp. 241-250, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54334-1_17

97-20   Paree Allu, CFD simulation for metal Additive Manufacturing: Applications in laser- and sinter-based processes, Metal AM, 6.4; pp. 151-158, 2020.

95-20   Yufan Zhao, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, Akihiko Chiba, Role of operating and environmental conditions in determining molten pool dynamics during electron beam melting and selective laser melting, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101559, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101559

94-20   Yan Zeng, David Himmler, Peter Randelzhofer, Carolin Körner, Processing of in situ Al3Ti/Al composites by advanced high shear technology: influence of mixing speed, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 110; pp. 1589-1599, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05956-w

93-20   H. Hamed Zargari, K. Ito, M. Kumar, A. Sharma, Visualizing the vibration effect on the tandem-pulsed gas metal arc welding in the presence of surface tension active elements, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 161; 120310, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120310

90-20   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Siyuan Xu, Ruwei Geng, Numerical analysis of aluminum alloy fused coating process, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Science and Engineering, 42; 483, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s40430-020-02569-y

85-20   Wenkang Huang, Hongliang Wang, Teresa Rinker, Wenda Tan, Investigation of metal mixing in laser keyhold welding of dissimilar metals, Materials & Design, 195; 109056, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109056

82-20   Pan Lu, Zhang Cheng-Lin, Wang Liang, Liu Tong, Liu Jiang-lin, Molten pool structure, temperature and velocity flow in selective laser melting AlCu5MnCdVA alloy, Materials Research Express, 7; 086516, 2020. doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/abadcf

80-20   Yujie Cui, Yufan Zhao, Haruko Numata, Huakang Bian, Kimio Wako, Kento Yamanaka, Kenta Aoyagi, Chen Zhang, Akihiko Chiba, Effects of plasma rotating electrode process parameters on the particle size distribution and microstructure of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy powder, Powder Technology, 376; pp. 363-372, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2020.08.027

78-20   F.Q. Liu, L. Wei, S.Q. Shi, H.L. Wei, On the varieties of build features during multi-layer laser directed energy deposition, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101491, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101491

75-20   Nannan Chen, Zixuan Wan, Hui-Ping Wang, Jingjing Li, Joshua Solomon, Blair E. Carlson, Effect of Al single bond Si coating on laser spot welding of press hardened steel and process improvement with annular stirring, Materials & Design, 195; 108986, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108986

72-20   Yujie Cui, Kenta Aoyagi, Yufan Zhao, Kenta Yamanaka, Yuichiro Hayasaka, Yuichiro Koizumi, Tadashi Fujieda, Akihiko Chiba, Manufacturing of a nanosized TiB strengthened Ti-based alloy via electron beam powder bed fusion, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101472, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101472

64-20   Dong-Rong Liu, Shuhao Wang, Wentao Yan, Grain structure evolution in transition-mode melting in direct energy deposition, Materials & Design, 194; 108919, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108919

61-20   Raphael Comminal, Wilson Ricardo Leal da Silva, Thomas Juul Andersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Influence of processing parameters on the layer geometry in 3D concrete printing: Experiments and modelling, 2nd RILEM International Conference on Concrete and Digital Fabrication, RILEM Bookseries, 28; pp. 852-862, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49916-7_83

60-20   Marcin P. Serdeczny, Raphaël Comminal, Md. Tusher Mollah, David B. Pedersen, Jon Spangenberg, Numerical modeling of the polymer flow through the hot-end in filament-based material extrusion additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing, 36; 101454, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101454

58-20   H.L. Wei, T. Mukherjee, W. Zhang, J.S. Zuback, G.L. Knapp, A. De, T. DebRoy, Mechanistic models for additive manufacturing of metallic components, Progress in Materials Science, 116; 100703, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100703

55-20   Masoud Mohammadpour, Experimental study and numerical simulation of heat transfer and fluid flow in laser welded and brazed joints, Thesis, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, US; Available in Mechanical Engineering Research Theses and Dissertations, 24, 2020.

48-20   Masoud Mohammadpour, Baixuan Yang, Hui-Ping Wang, John Forrest, Michael Poss, Blair Carlson, Radovan Kovacevica, Influence of laser beam inclination angle on galvanized steel laser braze quality, Optics and Laser Technology, 129; 106303, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2020.106303

34-20   Binqi Liu, Gang Fang, Liping Lei, Wei Liu, A new ray tracing heat source model for mesoscale CFD simulation of selective laser melting (SLM), Applied Mathematical Modeling, 79; pp. 506-520, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2019.10.049

27-20   Xuesong Gao, Guilherme Abreu Farira, Wei Zhang and Kevin Wheeler, Numerical analysis of non-spherical particle effect on molten pool dynamics in laser-powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Computational Materials Science, 179, art. no. 109648, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2020.109648

26-20   Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka and Akihiko Chiba, Isothermal γ → ε phase transformation behavior in a Co-Cr-Mo alloy depending on thermal history during electron beam powder-bed additive manufacturing, Journal of Materials Science & Technology, 50, pp. 162-170, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.11.040

21-20   Won-Ik Cho and Peer Woizeschke, Analysis of molten pool behavior with buttonhole formation in laser keyhole welding of sheet metal, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 152, art. no. 119528, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.119528

06-20  Wei Xing, Di Ouyang, Zhen Chen and Lin Liu, Effect of energy density on defect evolution in 3D printed Zr-based metallic glasses by selective laser melting, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, art. no. 226111, 2020. doi.org/10.1007/s11433-019-1485-8

04-20   Santosh Reddy Sama, Tony Badamo, Paul Lynch and Guha Manogharan, Novel sprue designs in metal casting via 3D sand-printing, Additive Manufacturing, 25, pp. 563-578, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.009

02-20   Dongsheng Wu, Shinichi Tashiro, Ziang Wu, Kazufumi Nomura, Xueming Hua, and Manabu Tanaka, Analysis of heat transfer and material flow in hybrid KPAW-GMAW process based on the novel three dimensional CFD simulation, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 147, art. no. 118921, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118921

01-20   Xiang Huang, Siying Lin, Zhenxiang Bu, Xiaolong Lin, Weijin Yi, Zhihong Lin, Peiqin Xie, and Lingyun Wang, Research on nozzle and needle combination for high frequency piezostack-driven dispenser, International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, 96, 2020. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2019.102453

88-19   Bo Cheng and Charles Tuffile, Numerical study of porosity formation with implementation of laser multiple reflection in selective laser melting, Proceedings Volume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Manufacturing Equipment and Systems; Bio and Sustainable Manufacturing, ASME 2019 14th International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, Erie, Pennsylvania, USA, June 10-14, 2019. doi.org/10.1115/MSEC2019-2891

87-19   Shuhao Wang, Lida Zhu, Jerry Ying His Fuh, Haiquan Zhang, and Wentao Yan, Multi-physics modeling and Gaussian process regression analysis of cladding track geometry for direct energy deposition, Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 127:105950, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2019.105950

78-19   Bo Cheng, Lukas Loeber, Hannes Willeck, Udo Hartel, and Charles Tuffile, Computational investigation of melt pool process dynamics and pore formation in laser powder bed fusion, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 28:11, 6565-6578, 2019. doi.org/10.1007/s11665-019-04435-y

77-19   David Souders, Pareekshith Allu, Anurag Chandorkar, and Ruendy Castillo, Application of computational fluid dynamics in developing process parameters for additive manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing Journal, 9th International Conference on 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing Technologies (AM 2019), Bangalore, India, September 7-9, 2019.

75-19   Raphaël Comminal, Marcin Piotr Serdeczny, Navid Ranjbar, Mehdi Mehrali, David Bue Pedersen, Henrik Stang, Jon Spangenberg, Modelling of material deposition in big area additive manufacturing and 3D concrete printing, Proceedings, Advancing Precision in Additive Manufacturing, Nantes, France, September 16-18, 2019.

73-19   Baohua Chang, Zhang Yuan, Hao Cheng, Haigang Li, Dong Du 1, and Jiguo Shan, A study on the influences of welding position on the keyhole and molten pool behavior in laser welding of a titanium alloy, Metals, 9:1082, 2019. doi.org/10.3390/met9101082

57-19     Shengjie Deng, Hui-Ping Wang, Fenggui Lu, Joshua Solomon, and Blair E. Carlson, Investigation of spatter occurrence in remote laser spiral welding of zinc-coated steels, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 140, pp. 269-280, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.06.009

53-19     Mohamad Bayat, Aditi Thanki, Sankhya Mohanty, Ann Witvrouw, Shoufeng Yang, Jesper Thorborg, Niels Skat Tieldje, and Jesper Henri Hattel, Keyhole-induced porosities in Laser-based Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) of Ti6Al4V: High-fidelity modelling and experimental validation, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 30, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100835

51-19     P. Ninpetch, P. Kowitwarangkul, S. Mahathanabodee, R. Tongsri, and P. Ratanadecho, Thermal and melting track simulations of laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF), International Conference on Materials Research and Innovation (ICMARI), Bangkok, Thailand, December 17-21, 2018. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 526, 2019. doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/526/1/012030

46-19     Hongze Wang and Yu Zou, Microscale interaction between laser and metal powder in powder-bed additive manufacturing: Conduction mode versus keyhole mode, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 142, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.118473

45-19     Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Kenta Yamanaka, and Akihiko Chiba, Manipulating local heat accumulation towards controlled quality and microstructure of a Co-Cr-Mo alloy in powder bed fusion with electron beam, Materials Letters, Vol. 254, pp. 269-272, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.07.078

44-19     Guoxiang Xu, Lin Li, Houxiao Wang, Pengfei Li, Qinghu Guo, Qingxian Hu, and Baoshuai Du, Simulation and experimental studies of keyhole induced porosity in laser-MIG hybrid fillet welding of aluminum alloy in the horizontal position, Optics & Laser Technology, Vol. 119, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2019.105667

38-19     Subin Shrestha and Y. Kevin Chou, A numerical study on the keyhole formation during laser powder bed fusion process, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Vol. 141, No. 10, 2019. doi.org/10.1115/1.4044100

34-19     Dae-Won Cho, Jin-Hyeong Park, and Hyeong-Soon Moon, A study on molten pool behavior in the one pulse one drop GMAW process using computational fluid dynamics, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 139, pp. 848-859, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.038

30-19     Mohamad Bayat, Sankhya Mohanty, and Jesper Henri Hattel, Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution in IN718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 139, pp. 95-114, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003

29-19     Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Daixiu Wei, Kenta Yamanaka, and Akihiko Chiba, Comprehensive study on mechanisms for grain morphology evolution and texture development in powder bed fusion with electron beam of Co–Cr–Mo alloy, Materialia, Vol. 6, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.mtla.2019.100346

28-19     Pareekshith Allu, Computational fluid dynamics modeling in additive manufacturing processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS) 148th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, March 10-14, 2019.

24-19     Simulation Software: Use, Advantages & Limitations, The Additive Manufacturing and Welding Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019

22-19     Hunchul Jeong, Kyungbae Park, Sungjin Baek, and Jungho Cho, Thermal efficiency decision of variable polarity aluminum arc welding through molten pool analysis, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 138, pp. 729-737, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.04.089

07-19   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Ruwei Geng and Siyuan Xu, Numerical analysis of arc driving forces and temperature distribution in pulsed TIG welding, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 60, 2019. doi.org/10.1007/s40430-018-1563-0

04-19   Santosh Reddy Sama, Tony Badamo, Paul Lynch and Guha Manogharan, Novel sprue designs in metal casting via 3D sand-printing, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 25, pp. 563-578, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.009

03-19   Dongsheng Wu, Anh Van Nguyen, Shinichi Tashiro, Xueming Hua and Manabu Tanaka, Elucidation of the weld pool convection and keyhole formation mechanism in the keyhold plasma arc welding, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 131, pp. 920-931, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.11.108

97-18   Wentao Yan, Ya Qian, Wenjun Ge, Stephen Lin, Wing Kam Liu, Feng Lin, Gregory J. Wagner, Meso-scale modeling of multiple-layer fabrication process in Selective Electron Beam Melting: Inter-layer/track voids formation, Materials & Design, 2018. doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.12.031

84-18   Bo Cheng, Xiaobai Li, Charles Tuffile, Alexander Ilin, Hannes Willeck and Udo Hartel, Multi-physics modeling of single track scanning in selective laser melting: Powder compaction effect, Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, pp. 1887-1902, 2018.

81-18 Yufan Zhao, Yuichiro Koizumi, Kenta Aoyagi, Daixiu Wei, Kenta Yamanaka and Akihiko Chiba, Molten pool behavior and effect of fluid flow on solidification conditions in selective electron beam melting (SEBM) of a biomedical Co-Cr-Mo alloy, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 26, pp. 202-214, 2019. doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.002

77-18   Jun Du and Zhengying Wei, Numerical investigation of thermocapillary-induced deposited shape in fused-coating additive manufacturing process of aluminum alloy, Journal of Physics Communications, Vol. 2, No. 11, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/2399-6528/aaedc7

76-18   Yu Xiang, Shuzhe Zhang, Zhengying We, Junfeng Li, Pei Wei, Zhen Chen, Lixiang Yang and Lihao Jiang, Forming and defect analysis for single track scanning in selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V, Applied Physics A, 124:685, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s00339-018-2056-9

74-18   Paree Allu, CFD simulations for laser welding of Al Alloys, Proceedings, Die Casting Congress & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, October 15-17, 2018.

72-18   Hunchul Jeong, Kyungbae Park, Sungjin Baek, Dong-Yoon Kim, Moon-Jin Kang and Jungho Cho, Three-dimensional numerical analysis of weld pool in GMAW with fillet joint, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, Vol. 19, No. 8, pp. 1171-1177, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s12541-018-0138-4

60-18   R.W. Geng, J. Du, Z.Y. Wei and G.X. Zhao, An adaptive-domain-growth method for phase field simulation of dendrite growth in arc preheated fused-coating additive manufacturing, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012077, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012077

59-18   Guangxi Zhao, Jun Du, Zhengying Wei, Ruwei Geng and Siyuan Xu, Coupling analysis of molten pool during fused coating process with arc preheating, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012076, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012076 (Available at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012076/pdf and in shared drive)

58-18   Siyuan Xu, Zhengying Wei, Jun Du, Guangxi Zhao and Wei Liu, Numerical simulation and analysis of metal fused coating forming, IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1063, 012075, 2018. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012075

55-18   Jason Cheon, Jin-Young Yoon, Cheolhee Kim and Suck-Joo Na, A study on transient flow characteristic in friction stir welding with realtime interface tracking by direct surface calculation, Journal of Materials Processing Tech., vol. 255, pp. 621-634, 2018.

54-18   V. Sukhotskiy, P. Vishnoi, I. H. Karampelas, S. Vader, Z. Vader, and E. P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic drop-on-demand liquid metal additive manufacturing: System overview and modeling, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer, Niagara Falls, Canada, June 7 – 9, 2018; Paper no. 155, 2018. doi.org/10.11159/ffhmt18.155

52-18   Michael Hilbinger, Claudia Stadelmann, Matthias List and Robert F. Singer, Temconex® – Kontinuierliche Pulverextrusion: Verbessertes Verständnis mit Hilfe der numerischen Simulation, Hochleistungsmetalle und Prozesse für den Leichtbau der Zukunft, Tagungsband 10. Ranshofener Leichtmetalltage, 13-14 Juni 2018, Linz, pp. 175-186, 2018.

38-18   Zhen Chen, Yu Xiang, Zhengying Wei, Pei Wei, Bingheng Lu, Lijuan Zhang and Jun Du, Thermal dynamic behavior during selective laser melting of K418 superalloy: numerical simulation and experimental verification, Applied Physics A, vol. 124, pp. 313, 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s00339-018-1737-8

19-18   Chenxiao Zhu, Jason Cheon, Xinhua Tang, Suck-Joo Na, and Haichao Cui, Molten pool behaviors and their influences on welding defects in narrow gap GMAW of 5083 Al-alloy, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 126:A, pp.1206-1221, 2018. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.05.132

16-18   P. Schneider, V. Sukhotskiy, T. Siskar, L. Christie and I.H. Karampelas, Additive Manufacturing of Microfluidic Components via Wax Extrusion, Biotech, Biomaterials and Biomedical TechConnect Briefs, vol. 3, pp. 162 – 165, 2018.

09-18   The Furlani Research Group, Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal 3D Printing, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, © University at Buffalo, May 2018.

08-18   Benjamin Himmel, Dominik Rumschöttel and Wolfram Volk, Thermal process simulation of droplet based metal printing with aluminium, Production Engineering, March 2018 © German Academic Society for Production Engineering (WGP) 2018.

07-18   Yu-Che Wu, Cheng-Hung San, Chih-Hsiang Chang, Huey-Jiuan Lin, Raed Marwan, Shuhei Baba and Weng-Sing Hwang, Numerical modeling of melt-pool behavior in selective laser melting with random powder distribution and experimental validation, Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 254 (2018) 72–78.

60-17   Pei Wei, Zhengying Wei, Zhen Chen, Yuyang He and Jun Du, Thermal behavior in single track during selective laser melting of AlSi10Mg powder, Applied Physics A: Materials Science & Processing, 123:604, 2017. doi.org/10.1007/z00339-017-1194-9

51-17   Koichi Ishizaka, Keijiro Saitoh, Eisaku Ito, Masanori Yuri, and Junichiro Masada, Key Technologies for 1700°C Class Ultra High Temperature Gas Turbine, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical Review, vol. 54, no. 3, 2017.

49-17   Yu-Che Wu, Weng-Sing Hwang, Cheng-Hung San, Chih-Hsiang Chang and Huey-Jiuan Lin, Parametric study of surface morphology for selective laser melting on Ti6Al4V powder bed with numerical and experimental methods, International Journal of Material Forming, © Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2017. doi.org/10.1007/s12289-017-1391-2.

37-17   V. Sukhotskiy, I. H. Karampelas, G. Garg, A. Verma, M. Tong, S. Vader, Z. Vader, and E. P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic Drop-on-Demand Liquid Metal 3D Printing, Solid Freeform Fabrication 2017: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium – An Additive Manufacturing Conference

15-17   I.H. Karampelas, S. Vader, Z. Vader, V. Sukhotskiy, A. Verma, G. Garg, M. Tong and E.P. Furlani, Drop-on-Demand 3D Metal Printing, Informatics, Electronics and Microsystems TechConnect Briefs 2017, Vol. 4

14-17   Jason Cheon and Suck-Joo Na, Prediction of welding residual stress with real-time phase transformation by CFD thermal analysis, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 131–132 (2017) 37–51.

91-16   Y. S. Lee and D. F. Farson, Surface tension-powered build dimension control in laser additive manufacturing process, Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2016) 85:1035–1044, doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7974-5.

84-16   Runqi Lin, Hui-ping Wang, Fenggui Lu, Joshua Solomon, Blair E. Carlson, Numerical study of keyhole dynamics and keyhole-induced porosity formation in remote laser welding of Al alloys, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 108 (2017) 244–256, Available online December 2016.

68-16   Dongsheng Wu, Xueming Hua, Dingjian Ye and Fang Li, Understanding of humping formation and suppression mechanisms using the numerical simulation, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Volume 104, January 2017, Pages 634–643, Published online 2016.

39-16   Chien-Hsun Wang, Ho-Lin Tsai, Yu-Che Wu and Weng-Sing Hwang, Investigation of molten metal droplet deposition and solidification for 3D printing techniques, IOP Publishing, J. Micromech. Microeng. 26 (2016) 095012 (14pp), doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/26/9/095012, July 8, 2016

29-16   Scott Vader, Zachary Vader, Ioannis H. Karampelas and Edward P. Furlani, Advances in Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal Jet Printing, Nanotech 2016 Conference & Expo, May 22-25, Washington, DC.

26-16   Y.S. Lee and W. Zhang, Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion, S2214-8604(16)30087-2, doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.05.003, ADDMA 86.

123-15   Koji Tsukimoto, Masashi Kitamura, Shuji Tanigawa, Sachio Shimohata, and Masahiko Mega, Laser welding repair for single crystal blades, Proceedings of International Gas Turbine Congress, pp. 1354-1358, 2015.

122-15   Y.S. Lee, W. Zhang, Mesoscopic simulation of heat transfer and fluid flow in laser powder bed additive manufacturing, Proceedings, 26th Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, Texas, 2015. 

116-15   Yousub Lee, Simulation of Laser Additive Manufacturing and its Applications, Ph.D. Thesis: Graduate Program in Welding Engineering, The Ohio State University, 2015, Copyright by Yousub Lee 2015

103-15   Ligang Wu, Jason Cheon, Degala Venkata Kiran, and Suck-Joo Na, CFD Simulations of GMA Welding of Horizontal Fillet Joints based on Coordinate Rotation of Arc Models, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Available online December 29, 2015

96-15   Jason Cheon, Degala Venkata Kiran, and Suck-Joo Na, Thermal metallurgical analysis of GMA welded AH36 steel using CFD – FEM framework, Materials & Design, Volume 91, February 5 2016, Pages 230-241, published online November 2015

86-15   Yousub Lee and Dave F. Farson, Simulation of transport phenomena and melt pool shape for multiple layer additive manufacturing, J. Laser Appl. 28, 012006 (2016). doi: 10.2351/1.4935711, published online 2015.

63-15   Scott Vader, Zachary Vader, Ioannis H. Karampelas and Edward P. Furlani, Magnetohydrodynamic Liquid Metal Jet Printing, TechConnect World Innovation Conference & Expo, Washington, D.C., June 14-17, 2015

46-15   Adwaith Gupta, 3D Printing Multi-Material, Single Printhead Simulation, Advanced Qualification of Additive Manufacturing Materials Workshop, July 20 – 21, 2015, Santa Fe, NM

25-15   Dae-Won Cho and Suck-Joo Na, Molten pool behaviors for second pass V-groove GMAW, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 88 (2015) 945–956.

21-15   Jungho Cho, Dave F. Farson, Kendall J. Hollis and John O. Milewski, Numerical analysis of weld pool oscillation in laser welding, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 29 (4) (2015) 1715~1722, www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x, doi.org/10.1007/s12206-015-0344-2.

82-14  Yousub Lee, Mark Nordin, Sudarsanam Suresh Babu, and Dave F. Farson, Effect of Fluid Convection on Dendrite Arm Spacing in Laser Deposition, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, August 2014, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 1520-1529

59-14   Y.S. Lee, M. Nordin, S.S. Babu, and D.F. Farson, Influence of Fluid Convection on Weld Pool Formation in Laser Cladding, Welding Research/ August 2014, VOL. 93

18-14  L.J. Zhang, J.X. Zhang, A. Gumenyuk, M. Rethmeier, and S.J. Na, Numerical simulation of full penetration laser welding of thick steel plate with high power high brightness laser, Journal of Materials Processing Technology (2014), doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.03.016.

36-13  Dae-Won Cho,Woo-Hyun Song, Min-Hyun Cho, and Suck-Joo Na, Analysis of Submerged Arc Welding Process by Three-Dimensional Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2013. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.06.017

12-13 D.W. Cho, S.J. Na, M.H. Cho, J.S. Lee, A study on V-groove GMAW for various welding positions, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, April 2013, doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.02.015.

01-13  Dae-Won Cho & Suck-Joo Na & Min-Hyun Cho & Jong-Sub Lee, Simulations of weld pool dynamics in V-groove GTA and GMA welding, Weld World, doi.org/10.1007/s40194-012-0017-z, © International Institute of Welding 2013.

63-12  D.W. Cho, S.H. Lee, S.J. Na, Characterization of welding arc and weld pool formation in vacuum gas hollow tungsten arc welding, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2012.09.024, September 2012.

77-10  Lim, Y. C.; Yu, X.; Cho, J. H.; et al., Effect of magnetic stirring on grain structure refinement Part 1-Autogenous nickel alloy welds, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 15 Issue: 7, Pages: 583-589, doi.org/10.1179/136217110X12720264008277, October 2010

18-10 K Saida, H Ohnishi, K Nishimoto, Fluxless laser brazing of aluminium alloy to galvanized steel using a tandem beam–dissimilar laser brazing of aluminium alloy and steels, Welding International, 2010

58-09  Cho, Jung-Ho; Farson, Dave F.; Milewski, John O.; et al., Weld pool flows during initial stages of keyhole formation in laser welding, Journal of Physics D-Applied Physics, Volume: 42 Issue: 17 Article Number: 175502 ; doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/42/17/175502, September 2009

57-09  Lim, Y. C.; Farson, D. F.; Cho, M. H.; et al., Stationary GMAW-P weld metal deposit spreading, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 14 Issue: 7 ;Pages: 626-635, doi.org/10.1179/136217109X441173, October 2009

1-09 J.-H. Cho and S.-J. Na, Three-Dimensional Analysis of Molten Pool in GMA-Laser Hybrid Welding, Welding Journal, February 2009, Vol. 88

52-07   Huey-Jiuan Lin and Wei-Kuo Chang, Design of a sheet forming apparatus for overflow fusion process by numerical simulation, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 353 (2007) 2817–2825.

50-07  Cho, Min Hyun; Farson, Dave F., Understanding bead hump formation in gas metal arc welding using a numerical simulation, Metallurgical and Mateials Transactions B-Process Metallurgy and Materials Processing Science, Volume: 38, Issue: 2, Pages: 305-319, doi.org/10.1007/s11663-007-9034-5, April 2007

49-07  Cho, M. H.; Farson, D. F., Simulation study of a hybrid process for the prevention of weld bead hump formation, Welding Journal Volume: 86, Issue: 9, Pages: 253S-262S, September 2007

48-07  Cho, M. H.; Farson, D. F.; Lim, Y. C.; et al., Hybrid laser/arc welding process for controlling bead profile, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Volume: 12 Issue: 8, Pages: 677-688, doi.org/10.1179/174329307X236878, November 2007

47-07   Min Hyun Cho, Dave F. Farson, Understanding Bead Hump Formation in Gas Metal Arc Welding Using a Numerical Simulation, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 305-319, April 2007

36-06  Cho, M. H.; Lim, Y. C.; Farson, D. F., Simulation of weld pool dynamics in the stationary pulsed gas metal arc welding process and final weld shape, Welding Journal, Volume: 85 Issue: 12, Pages: 271S-283S, December 2006

Products

What's New in FLOW-3D 2023R2
What's New in FLOW-3D 2023R2
What's New in FLOW-3D HYDRO 2023R2
What's New in FLOW-3D CAST 2023R2
What's New in FLOW-3D POST 2023R2
What's New in FLOW-3D POST 2023R2
FLOW-3D WELD
FLOW-3D WELD
FLOW-3D AM
FLOW-3D AM

FLOW-3D 제품 소개

STI C&D 에서 공급하는 CFD 프로그램은 미국 Flow Science 에서 개발된 FLOW-3D solver 를 기반으로 한 매우 강력하고 정확한 열유동 수치해석 프로그램 입니다. 귀하의 업무에 적합한 제품군을 찾고자 하시면 당사의 솔루션팀으로 문의 주시기 바랍니다.

FLOW-3D 는 유체의 동적 거동을 연구하는 개발 및 설계 엔지니어에게 꼭 필요한 유동 시뮬레이션 솔루션을 제공합니다. FLOW-3D는 1, 2, 3차원의 자유 표면 해석, 시간에 따른 유체의 유동해석, 제한된 유체의 흐름, 정상 상태의 문제들을 완벽하게 해결 할 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D Hydro

FLOW-3D HYDRO는 토목 및 환경 엔지니어링 산업을 위한 완벽한 3D CFD 모델링 솔루션입니다. FLOW-3D HYDRO는 토목 또는 환경 엔지니어의 요구에 맞는 확장된 교육 자료를 제공합니다. 업계 최고의 FLOW-3D 솔버 엔진으로 구동되는 FLOW-3D HYDRO는 수처리, 광산 광미, 다상 흐름 및 천수(shallow water) 모델에 대한 지속적인 개발과 함께 사용자에게 탁월한 시뮬레이션 기능을 제공합니다.

FLOW-3D/CAST 는 금속 주조 공정 시뮬레이션을 위해 특별히 설계된 FLOW-3D의 특별 버전입니다. 본 제품은 FLOW-3D의 강력한 해석기능을 주조분야 설계자가 쉽게 사용할 수 있는 쉬운 인터페이스를 제공합니다.

FLOW-3D HPC 는 흔히 슈퍼컴퓨터 또는 클러스터 컴퓨터를 이용하여 고성능 컴퓨팅(HPC, High-Performance Computing)을 할 수 있는 제품으로 대규모 또는 장시간 계산이 필요한 문제를 효과적으로 해결할 수 있도록 뛰어난 성능을 제공합니다. FLOW-3D HPC 는 초대형 컴퓨팅 시스템부터 조립 클러스터까지 쉽게 고성능 컴퓨팅 클러스터를 활용할 수 있습니다.

FLOW Weld 는 용접 해석에 필요한 모델을 FLOW-3D 에 추가하는 추가 모듈입니다.  FLOW-3D 표면 장력 자유 표면 분석, 용융 · 응고 · 증발 상 변화 모델 등의 기본 기능을 응용하여 각종 용접 현상을 분석 할 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D AM 은 레이저 파우더 베드 융합 (L-PBF), 바인더 제트 및 DED (Directed Energy Deposition)와 같은 적층 제조 공정 ( additive manufacturing )을 시뮬레이션하고 분석하는 CFD 소프트웨어입니다. FLOW-3D AM 의 다중 물리 기능은 공정 매개 변수의 분석 및 최적화를 위해 분말 확산 및 압축, 용융 풀 역학, L-PBF 및 DED에 대한 다공성 형성, 바인더 분사 공정을위한 수지 침투 및 확산에 대한 매우 정확한 시뮬레이션을 제공합니다.

<제품 브로셔 다운로드>

 
flow3dflow3dmphydraulicsmaritimeaerospace
 microfluidicsinkjetscoatingcastinghpdc

 

 

 

FLOW-3D 제품소개

About FLOW-3D


FLOW-3D 2022R2
FLOW-3D 2022R2

FLOW-3D 개발 회사

Flow Science Inc Logo Green.svg
IndustryComputational Fluid Dynamics Software
Founded1980
FounderDr. C.W. “Tony” Hirt
Headquarters
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
United States
Key people
Dr. Amir Isfahani, President & CEO
ProductsFLOW-3D, FLOW-3D CAST, FLOW-3D AM, FLOW-3D CLOUD, FlowSight
ServicesCFD consultation and services

FLOW-3D 개요

FLOW-3D는 미국 뉴멕시코주(New Mexico) 로스알라모스(Los Alamos)에 있는 Flow Scicence, Inc에서 개발한 범용 전산유체역학(Computational Fluid Dynamics) 프로그램입니다. 로스알라모스 국립연구소의 수치유체역학 연구실에서 F.Harlow, B. Nichols 및 T.Hirt 등에 의해 개발된 MAC(Marker and Cell) 방법과 SOLA-VOF 방식을 기초로 하여, Hirt 박사가 1980년에 Flow Science, Inc사를 설립하여 계속 프로그램을 발전시켰으며 1985년부터 FLOW-3D를 전세계에 배포하였습니다.

유체의 3차원 거동 해석을 수행하는데 사용되는 CFD모형은 몇몇 있으나, 유동해석에 적용할 물리모델 선정은 해석의 정밀도와 밀접한 관계가 있으므로, 해석하고자 하는 대상의 유동 특성을 분석하여 신중하게 결정하여야 합니다.

FLOW-3D는 자유표면(Free Surface) 해석에 있어서 매우 정확한 해석 결과를 제공합니다. 해석방법은 자유표면을 포함한 비정상 유동 상태를 기본으로 하며, 연속방정식, 3차원 운동량 보전방정식(Navier-Stokes eq.) 및 에너지 보존방정식 등을 적용할 수 있습니다.

FLOW-3D는 유한차분법을 사용하고 있으며, 유한요소법(FEM, Finite Element Method), 경계요소법(Boundary Element Method)등을 포함하여 자유표면을 포함하는 유동장 해석(Fluid Flow Analysis)에서 공기와 액체의 경계면을 정밀하게 표현 가능합니다.

유체의 난류 해석에 대해서는 혼합길이 모형, 난류 에너지 모형, RNG(Renormalized Group Theory)  k-ε 모형, k-ω 모형, LES 모형 등 6개 모형을 적용할 수 있으며, 자유표면 해석을 위하여 VOF(Volume of Fluid) 방정식을 사용하고, 격자 생성시 사용자가 가장 쉽게 만들 수 있는 직각형상격자는 형상을 더욱 정확하게 표현하기 위해 FAVOR(Fractional Area Volume Obstacle Representation) 기법을 각 방정식에 적용하고 있습니다.

FLOW-3D는 비압축성(Incompressible Fluid Flow), 압축성 유체(Compressible Fluid Flow)의 유동현상 뿐만 아니라 고체와의 열전달 현상을 해석할 수 있으며, 비정상 상태의 해석을 기본으로 합니다.

FLOW-3D v12.0은 모델 설정을 간소화하고 사용자 워크 플로우를 개선하는 GUI(그래픽 사용자 인터페이스)의 설계 및 기능에 있어 중요한 변화를 가져왔습니다. 최첨단 Immersed Boundary Method는 FLOW-3Dv12.0솔루션의 정확도를 높여 줍니다. 다른 특징적인 주요 개발에는 슬러지 안착 모델, 2-유체 2-온도 모델, 사용자가 자유 표면 흐름을 훨씬 더 빠르게 모델링 할 수 있는 Steady State Accelerator등이 있습니다.

물리 및 수치 모델

Immersed Boundary Method

힘과 에너지 손실에 대한 정확한 예측은 솔리드 바디 주변의 흐름과 관련된 많은 엔지니어링 문제를 모델링하는 데 중요합니다. FLOW-3D v12.0의 릴리스에는 이러한 문제 해결을 위해 설계된 새로운 고스트 셀 기반 Immersed Boundary Method (IBM)가 포함되어 있습니다. IBM은 내부 및 외부 흐름을 위해 벽 근처 해석을 위해 보다 정확한 솔루션을 제공하여 드래그 앤 리프트 힘의 계산을 개선합니다.

Two-field temperature for the two-fluid model

2유체 열 전달 모델은 각 유체에 대한 에너지 전달 공식을 분리하도록 확장되었습니다. 이제 각 유체에는 고유한 온도 변수가 있어 인터페이스 근처의 열 및 물질 전달 솔루션의 정확도를 향상시킵니다. 인터페이스에서의 열 전달은 시간의 표 함수가 될 수 있는 사용자 정의 열 전달 계수에 의해 제어됩니다.

슬러지 침전 모델 / Sludge settling model

중요 추가 기능인 새로운 슬러지 침전 모델은 도시 수처리 시설물 응용 분야에 사용하면 수처리 탱크 및 정화기의 고형 폐기물 역학을 모델링 할 수 있습니다. 침전 속도가 확산된 위상의 방울 크기에 대한 함수인 드리프트-플럭스 모델과 달리, 침전 속도는 슬러지 농도의 함수이며 기능적인 형태와 표 형태로 모두 입력 할 수 있습니다.

Steady-state accelerator for free surface flows

이름이 암시하듯이, 정상 상태 가속기는 안정된 상태의 솔루션에 대한 접근을 가속화합니다. 이는 작은 진폭의 중력과 모세관 현상을 감쇠하여 이루어지며 자유 표면 흐름에만 적용됩니다.

꾸준한 상태 가속기

Void particles

보이드 입자가 버블 및 위상 변경 모델에 추가되었습니다. 보이드 입자는 항력과 압력 힘을 통해 유체와 상호 작용하는 작은 기포의 역할을 하는 붕괴된 보이드 영역을 나타냅니다. 주변 유체 압력에 따라 크기가 변경되고 시뮬레이션이 끝난 후 최종 위치는 공기 침투 가능성을 나타냅니다.

Sediment scour model

침전물의 정확성과 안정성을 향상시키기 위해 침전물의 운반과 침식 모델을 정밀 조사하였다. 특히, 침전물 종에 대한 질량 보존이 크게 개선되었습니다.

Outflow pressure boundary condition

고정 압력 경계 조건에는 이제 압력 및 유체 비율을 제외한 모든 유량이 해당 경계의 상류에 있는 흐름 조건을 반영하는 ‘유출’ 옵션이 포함됩니다. 유출 압력 경계 조건은 고정 압력 및 연속성 경계 조건의 혼합입니다.

Moving particle sources

시뮬레이션 중에 입자 소스는 이동할 수 있습니다. 시간에 따른 변환 및 회전 속도는 표 형식으로 정의됩니다. 입자 소스의 운동은 소스에서 방출 된 입자의 초기 속도에 추가됩니다.

Variable center of gravity

중력 및 비 관성 기준 프레임 모델에서 시간 함수로서의 무게 중심의 위치는 외부 파일의 표로 정의할 수 있습니다. 이 기능은 연료를 소모하는 로켓을 모델링하고 단계를 분리할 때 유용합니다.

공기 유입 모델

가장 간단한 부피 기반 공기 유입 모델 옵션이 기존 질량 기반 모델로 대체되었습니다.  질량 기반 모델은 부피와 달리 주변 유체 압력에 따라 부피가 변화하는 동안 흡입된 공기량이 보존되기 때문에 물리학적 모델입니다.

Air entrainment model in FLOW-3D v12.0

Tracer diffusion / 트레이서 확산

유동 표면에서 생성된 추적 물질은 분자 및 난류 확산 과정에 의해 확산될 수 있으며, 예를 들어 실제 오염 물질의 거동을 모방합니다.

모델 설정

시뮬레이션 단위

이제 온도를 포함하여 단위계 시스템을 완전히 정의해야 합니다. 표준 단위 시스템이 제공됩니다. 또한 사용자는 선택한 옵션에서 질량, 시간 및 길이 단위를 정의하여 편리하며, 사용자 정의된 단위를 사용할 수 있습니다. 사용자는 또한 압력이 게이지 단위로 정의되는지 절대 단위로 정의되는지 여부를 지정해야 합니다. 기본 시뮬레이션 단위는 Preferences(기본 설정)에서 설정할 수 있습니다. 단위를 완벽하게 정의하면 FLOW-3D는 물리적 수량에 대한 기본 값을 정의하고 범용 상수를 설정할 수 있으므로 사용자가 필요로 하는 작업량을 최소화할 수 있습니다.

Shallow water model

천수(shallow water) 모델에서 매닝의 거칠기

Manning의 거칠기 계수는 지형 표면의 전단 응력 평가를 위해 천수(shallow water) 모델에서 구현되었습니다. 표면 결함의 크기를 기반으로 기존 거칠기 모델을 보완하며이 모델과 함께 사용할 수 있습니다. 표준 거칠기와 마찬가지로 매닝 계수는 구성 요소 또는 하위 구성 요소의 속성이거나 지형 래스터 데이터 세트에서 가져올 수 있습니다.

메시 생성

하단 및 상단 경계 좌표의 정의만으로 수직 방향의 메시 설정이 단순화되었습니다.

구성 요소 변환

사용자는 이제 여러 하위 구성 요소로 구성된 구성 요소에 회전, 변환 및 스케일링 변환을 적용하여 복잡한 형상 어셈블리 설정 프로세스를 단순화 할 수 있습니다. GMO (General Moving Object) 구성 요소의 경우, 이러한 변환을 구성 요소의 대칭 축과 정렬되도록 신체에 맞는 좌표계에 적용 할 수 있습니다.

런타임시 스레드 수 변경

시뮬레이션 중에 솔버가 사용하는 스레드 수를 변경하는 기능이 런타임 옵션 대화 상자에 추가되어 사용 가능한 스레드를 추가하거나 다른 태스크에 자원이 필요한 경우 스레드 수를 줄일 수 있습니다.

프로브 제어 열원

활성 시뮬레이션 제어가 형상 구성 요소와 관련된 heat sources로 확장되었습니다.  history probes로 열 방출을 제어 할 수 있습니다.

소스에서 시간에 따른 온도

질량 및 질량/모멘트 소스의 유체 온도는 이제 테이블 입력을 사용하여 시간의 함수로 정의 할 수 있습니다.

방사율 계수

공극으로의 복사 열 전달을위한 방사율 계수는 이제 사용자가 방사율과 스테판-볼츠만 상수를 지정하도록 요구하지 않고 직접 정의됩니다. 후자는 이제 단위 시스템을 기반으로 솔버에 의해 자동으로 설정됩니다.

Output

  • 등속 필드 솔버 옵션을 사용할 때 유량 속도를 선택한 데이터로 출력 할 수 있습니다.
  • 벽 접착력으로 인한 지오메트리 구성 요소의 토크는 기존 벽 접착력 출력과 함께 별도의 수량으로 일반 이력 데이터에 출력됩니다.
  • 난류 모델 출력이 요청 될 때 난류 에너지 및 소산과 함께 전단 속도 및 y +가 선택된 데이터로 자동 출력됩니다.
  • 공기 유입 모델 출력에 몇 가지 수량이 추가되었습니다. 자유 표면을 포함하는 모든 셀에서 혼입 된 공기 및 빠져 나가는 공기의 체적 플럭스가 재시작 및 선택된 데이터로 출력되어 사용자에게 공기가 혼입 및 탈선되는 위치 및 시간에 대한 자세한 정보를 제공합니다. 전체 계산 영역 및 각 샘플링 볼륨 에 대해이 두 수량의 시간 및 공간 통합 등가물이 일반 히스토리 로 출력됩니다.
  • 솔버의 출력 파일 flsgrf 의 최종 크기는 시뮬레이션이 끝날 때 보고됩니다.
  • 2 유체 시뮬레이션의 경우, 기존의 출력 수량 유체 체류 시간 및 유체 가 이동 한 거리는 이제 유체 # 1 및 # 2와 유체의 혼합물에 대해 별도로 계산됩니다.
  • 질량 입자의 경우, 각 종의 총 부피 및 질량이 계산되어 전체 계산 영역, 샘플링 볼륨 및 플럭스 표면에 대한 일반 히스토리 로 출력되어 입자 종 수에 대한 현재 출력을 보완합니다.
  • 최종 로컬 가스 압력 은 사용자가 가스 포획을 식별하고 연료 탱크의 배기 시스템 설계를 지원하는 데 도움이되는 선택적 출력량으로 추가되었습니다. 이 양은 유체로 채워지기 전에 셀의 마지막 공극 압력을 기록하며 단열 버블 모델과 함께 사용됩니다.

새로운 맞춤형 소스 루틴

새로운 사용자 정의 가능 소스 루틴이 추가되었으며 사용자의 개발 환경에서 액세스 할 수 있습니다.

소스 루틴 이름기술
cav_prod_calCavitation 생성과 소산 비율
sldg_uset슬러지 침전 속도
phchg_mass_flux증발 및 응축으로 인한 질량 플럭스
flhtccl유체 # 1과 # 2 사이의 열전달 계수
dsize_cal2 상 흐름에서 동적 액적 크기 모델의 응집 및 분해 속도
elstc_custom점탄성 유체에 대한 응력 방정식의 Source Terms

새로운 사용자 인터페이스

FLOW-3D 사용자 인터페이스는 완전히 새롭게 디자인되어 현대적이고 평평한 구조로 사용자의 작업 흐름을 획기적으로 간소화합니다.

Setup dock widgets

Physics, Fluids, Mesh 및 FAVOR ™를 포함한 모든 설정 작업이 지오 메트리 윈도우 주변에서 독 위젯으로 변환되어 모델 설정을 단일 탭으로 요약할 수 있습니다. 이러한 전환으로 인해 이전 버전의 복잡한 접이식 트리가 훨씬 깨끗하고 효율적인 메뉴 프레젠테이션으로 대체되어 사용자는 ModelSetup탭을 떠나지 않고도 모든 매개 변수에 쉽게 액세스 할 수 있습니다.

New Model Setup icons

새로운 모델 설정 디자인에는 설정 프로세스의 각 단계를 나타내는 새로운 아이콘이 있습니다.

Model setup icons - FLOW-3D v12.0

New Physics icons

RSS feed

새 RSS 피드부터 FLOW-3D v12.0의 시뮬레이션 관리자 탭이 개선되었습니다. FLOW-3D 를 시작하면 사용자에게 Flow Science의 최신 뉴스, 이벤트 및 블로그 게시물이 표시됩니다.

RSS feed - FLOW-3D

Configurable simulation monitor

시뮬레이션을 실행할 때 중요한 작업은 모니터링입니다. FLOW-3Dv1.0에서는 사용자가 시뮬레이션을 더 잘 모니터링할 수 있도록 SimulationManager의 플로팅 기능이 향상되었습니다. 사용자는 시뮬레이션 런타임 그래프를 통해 모니터링할 사용 가능한 모든 일반 기록 데이터 변수를 선택하고 각 그래프에 여러 변수를 추가할 수 있습니다. 이제 런타임에서 사용할 수 있는 일반 기록 데이터는 다음과 같습니다.

  • 최소/최대 유체 온도
  • 프로브 위치의 온도
  • 유동 표면 위치에서의 유량
  • 시뮬레이션 진단(예:시간 단계, 안정성 한계)
출입문에 유동 표면이 있는 대형 댐
Runtime plots of the flow rate at the gates of the large dam

Conforming 메쉬 시각화

용자는 이제 새로운 FAVOR ™ 독 위젯을 통해 적합한 메쉬 블록을 시각화 할 수 있습니다.Visualize conforming mesh blocks

Large raster and STL data

데이터를 처리하는 데 걸리는 시간 때문에 큰 지오 메트리 데이터를 처리하는 것은 수고스러울 수 있습니다. 대형 지오 메트리 데이터를 처리하는 데는 여전히 상당한 시간이 걸릴 수 있지만, FLOW-3D는 이제 이러한 대규모 데이터 세트를 백그라운드 작업으로 로드하여 사용자가 데이터를 처리하는 동안 완전히 응답하고 중단 없는 인터페이스에서 작업을 계속할 수 있습니다

FLOW-3D 제품 기능 문의 / 구매 문의

제품 기능 문의 / 구매 문의

연락처 : 02-2026-0442
이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr


엔지니어링 프로그램 개발 문의

연락처 : 02-2026-0451
이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr


평가 라이선스  요청

신청서 다운로드 : < 다운로드 >

연락처 : 02-2026-0455
이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr