SpringerLink
Log in

Benchmark Study of Melted Track Geometries in Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Inconel 625

  • Thematic Section: Metal Additive Manufacturing Modeling Challenge Series 2020
  • Published:
Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the Air Force Research Laboratory Additive Manufacturing Challenge Series, melted track geometries for a laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF) process of Inconel 625 were used to challenge and validate computational models predicting melting and solidification behavior. The impact of process parameters upon single-track single-layer, multi-track single-layer, and single-track multi-layer L-PBF processes was studied. To accomplish this, a physics-based thermal-fluid model was developed and calibrated using a proper generalized decomposition surrogate model, then compared against the experimental measurements. The thermal-fluid model was enhanced through the usage of an adaptive mesh and residual heat factor (RHF) model, based on the scanning strategy, for improved efficiency and accuracy. It is found that this calibration approach is not only robust and efficient, but it also enables the thermal-fluid model to make predictions which quantitatively agree well with the experimental measurements. The adaptive mesh provides over a 10-times speedup as compared to a uniform mesh. The RHF model improves predictive accuracy by over 60%, particularly near starting and ending points of the melted tracks, which are greatly affected by the thermal behavior of adjacent tracks. Moreover, the thermal-fluid model is shown to potentially predict lack-of-fusion defects and provide insights into the defect generation process in L-PBF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bourell D, Beaman J, Marcus H, Barlow J (1990) Solid freeform fabrication: an advanced manufacturing approach. In: International solid freeform fabrication symposium, pp 1–7

  2. Vojislav P, Juan VHG, Olga JF, Javier DG, Jose RBP, Luis PG (2011) Additive layered manufacturing: sectors of industrial application shown through case studies. Int J Prod Res 49:1061–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yan C, Hussein A, Raymont D (2012) Evaluations of cellular lattice structures manufactured using selective laser melting. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 62:32–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Guo N, Leu MC (2013) Additive manufacturing: technology, applications and research needs. Front Mech Eng 8:215–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bourell D, Leu M, Rosen D (2009) Roadmap for additive manufacturing-Identifying the future of freeform processing. The University of Texas at Austin, Laboratory for Freeform Fabrication, Advanced Manufacturing Center

  6. Liu Y, Li S, Wang H, Hou W, Hao Y, Yang R, Sercombe T, Zhang L (2016) Microstructure, defects and mechanical behavior of beta-type titanium porous structures manufactured by electron beam melting and selective laser melting. Acta Mater 113:56–67

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Witherell P, Feng SC, Martukanitz R, Simpson TW, John DB, Michaleris P, Liu Z-k, Chen L-q (2014) Toward metamodels for composable and reusable additive manufacturing process models. In: 34th computers and information in engineering conference, proceedings of the ASME design engineering technical conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), p 061025

  8. Cunningham R, Narra SP, Montgomery C, Beuth J, Rollett AD (2017) Synchrotron-based x-ray microtomography characterization of the effect of processing variables on porosity formation in laser power-bed additive manufacturing of Ti-6Al-4V. JOM 69:479–484

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Tang M, Postorius PC, Beuth JL (2017) Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 14:39–48

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith J, **ong W, Yan W, Lin S, Cheng P, Kafka OL, Wagner GJ, Cao J, Liu WK (2016) Linking process, structure, property, and performance for metal-based additive manufacturing: computational approaches with experimental support. Comput Mech 57:583–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gan Z, Liu H, Li S, He X, Yu G (2017) Modeling of thermal behavior and mass transport in multi-layer laser additive manufacturing of Ni-based alloy on cast iron. Int J Heat Mass Transf 111:709–722

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ghosh S, Ma L, Levine LE, Ricker RE, Stoudt MR, Heigel JC, Guyer JE (2018) Single-track melt-pool measurements and microstructures in inconel 625. JOM 70:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yan W, Lu Y, Jones K, Yang Z, Fox J, Witherell P, Wagner G, Liu WK (2020) Data-driven characterization of thermal models for powder-bed-fusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 36:101503

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gan Z, Lian Y, Lin SE, Jones KK, Liu WK, Wagner GJ (2019) Benchmark study of thermal behavior, surface topography, and dendritic microstructure in selective laser melting of inconel 625. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 8:178–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Heigel JC, Lane BM (2018) Measurement of the melt pool length during single scan tracks in a commercial laser powder bed fusion process. J Manuf Sci Eng 140:051012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhao C, Fezzaa K, Cunningham RW, Wen H, De Carlo F, Chen L, Rollett AD, Sun T (2017) Real-time monitoring of laser powder bed fusion process using high-speed x-ray imaging and diffraction. Sci Rep 7:3602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fox JC, Lane BM, Yeung H (2017) Measurement of process dynamics through coaxially aligned high speed near-infrared imaging in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. In: Bison P, Burleigh D (Eds.), Thermosense: thermal infrared applications XXXIX, volume 10214, International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE, pp 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2263863

  18. Lane B, Heigel J, Ricker R, Zhirnov I, Khromschenko V, Weaver J, Phan T, Stoudt M, Mekhontsev S, Levine L (2020) Measurements of melt pool geometry and cooling rates of individual laser traces on in625 bare plates. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9:16–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Heigel JC, Lane BM, Levine LE (2020) In situ measurements of melt-pool length and cooling rate during 3d builds of the metal AM-bench artifacts. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9:31–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. America Makes (2019a) America makes and air force research laboratory announce an additive manufacturing modeling challenge series. https://www.americamakes.us/america-makes-and-afrl-announce-am-modeling-challenge/

  21. America Makes (2019b) Air force research laboratory (AFRL) additive manufacturing modeling challenge series. https://www.americamakes.us/am-modeling-challenge-series/

  22. Edwin MAG, Schwalbach J, Chapman Michael G (2021) AFRL additive manufacturing modeling series: challenge 2—microscale process to structure data description. In review

  23. Lu Y, Blal N, Gravouil A (2018) Adaptive sparse grid based HOPGD: toward a nonintrusive strategy for constructing space-time welding computational vademecum. Int J Numer Methods Eng 114:1438–1461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lu Y, Blal N, Gravouil A (2019) Datadriven HOPGD based computational vademecum for welding parameter identification. Comput Mech 64:47–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gan Z, Yu G, He X, Li S (2017) Numerical simulation of thermal behavior and multicomponent mass transfer in direct laser deposition of co-base alloy on steel. Int J Heat Mass Transf 104:28–38

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lian Y, Gan Z, Yu C, Kats D, Liu WK, Wagner GJ (2019) A cellular automaton finite volume method for microstructure evolution during additive manufacturing. Mater Des 169:107672

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ye J, Khairallah SA, Rubenchik AM, Crumb MF, Guss G, Belak J, Matthews MJ (2019) Energy coupling mechanisms and scaling behavior associated with laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Adv Eng Mater 21:1900185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fabbro R, Dal M, Peyre P, Coste F, Schneider M, Gunenthiram V (2018) Analysis and possible estimation of keyhole depths evolution, using laser operating parameters and material properties. J Laser Appl 30:032410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Capriccioli A, Frosi P (2009) Multipurpose ansys fe procedure for welding processes simulation. In: Fusion engineering and design 84 546–553. Proceeding of the 25th symposium on fusion technology

  30. America Makes (2019) Air force research laboratory (AFRL) additive manufacturing modeling challenge series 2. https://materials-data-facility.github.io/MID3AS-AM-Challenge/Challenge2ProblemStatement_2019Release.pdf

  31. Pawel R, Williams R (1985) Survey of physical property data for several alloys. Technical Report, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

  32. Valencia JJ, Quested PN (2013) Thermophysical properties

  33. Yeung H, Lane B (2020) A residual heat compensation based scan strategy for powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Manuf Lett 25:56–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Whitley D (1994) A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat Comput 4:65–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lu Y, Blal N, Gravouil A (2018) Multi-parametric space-time computational vademecum for parametric studies: application to real time welding simulations. Finite Elements Anal Des 139:62–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lu Y, Blal N, Gravouil A (2018) Space-time pod based computational vademecums for parametric studies: application to thermo-mechanical problems. Adv Model Simul Eng Sci 5:1–27

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Ammar A, Mokdad B, Chinesta F, Keunings R (2006) A new family of solvers for some classes of multidimensional partial differential equations encountered in kinetic theory modeling of complex fluids. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 139:153–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Néron D, Ladevèze P (2010) Proper generalized decomposition for multiscale and multiphysics problems. Arch Comput Methods Eng 17:351–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Modesto D, Zlotnik S, Huerta A (2015) Proper generalized decomposition for parameterized helmholtz problems in heterogeneous and unbounded domains: Application to harbor agitation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 295:127–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ghnatios C, Masson F, Huerta A, Leygue A, Cueto E, Chinesta F (2012) Proper generalized decomposition based dynamic data-driven control of thermal processes. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 213:29–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Saha S, Kafka OL, Lu Y, Yu C, Liu WK (2021) Microscale structure to property prediction for additively manufactured in625 through advanced material model parameter identification. Integr Mater Manuf Innov. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-021-00208-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mukherjee T, Wei H, De A, DebRoy T (2018) Heat and fluid flow in additive manufacturing–part i: modeling of powder bed fusion. Comput Mater Sci 150:304–313

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Martin AA, Calta NP, Khairallah SA, Wang J, Depond PJ, Fong AY, Thampy V, Guss GM, Kiss AM, Stone KH et al (2019) Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Nat Commun 10:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Coeck S, Bisht M, Plas J, Verbist F (2019) Prediction of lack of fusion porosity in selective laser melting based on melt pool monitoring data. Addit Manuf 25:347–356

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Yakout M, Elbestawi M, Veldhuis SC (2018) A study of thermal expansion coefficients and microstructure during selective laser melting of Invar 36 and stainless steel 316L. Addit Manuf 24:405–418

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

W. K. Liu acknowledges the support by the Center for Hierarchical Materials Design (CHiMaD) under Grant No. 70NANB14H012 and NSF Grant CMMI-1934367. Z. Gan and Y. Lu acknowledge the partial support of NSF Grants CMMI-1934367 and 1762035. K. Jones acknowledges the support by the Murphy Fellowship from Northwestern University and NSF Grant CMMI-1934367. We extend our appreciation to Dr. Edwin Schwalbach, Marie Cox, and the AM Challenge Series committee for their work and leadership in providing this valuable forum for the AM research community.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Zhengtao Gan and Kevontrez K. Jones have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, 60208, IL, USA

    Zhengtao Gan, Kevontrez K. Jones, Ye Lu & Wing Kam Liu

Authors
  1. Zhengtao Gan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevontrez K. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ye Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wing Kam Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Zhengtao Gan or Wing Kam Liu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 882 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gan, Z., Jones, K.K., Lu, Y. et al. Benchmark Study of Melted Track Geometries in Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Inconel 625. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 10, 177–195 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-021-00209-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-021-00209-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation