4.7 Article

3D multi-layer grain structure simulation of powder bed fusion additive manufacturing

期刊

ACTA MATERIALIA
卷 152, 期 -, 页码 119-126

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2018.04.030

关键词

Grain structure; Cellular automata; Numerical modeling; Grain growth; Crystal growth; Additive manufacturing

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [814, CRC 814]
  2. Erlangen Regional Computing Center (RRZE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In powder bed fusion (PBF) additive manufacturing, powder layers are locally melted with a laser or an electron beam to build a component. Hatching strategies and beam parameters as beam power, scan velocity and line offset significantly affect the grain structure of the manufactured part. While experiments reveal the result of specific parameter combinations, the precise impact of distinct parameters on the resulting grain structure is widely unknown. This knowledge is necessary for a reliable prediction of the microstructure and consequently the mechanical properties of the manufactured part. We introduce the adaption of a three-dimensional model for the prediction of dendritic growth for use with PBF. The heat input is calculated using an analytical solution of the transient heat conduction equation. Massively parallel processing on a high-performance cluster computer allows the computation of the grain structure on the scale of small parts within reasonable times. The model is validated by accurately reproducing experimental grain structures of Inconel 718 test specimens manufactured by selective electron beam melting. The grain selection zone within the first layers as well as the subsequent microstructure in several millimeters build height is modeled in unprecedented level of detail. This model represents the cutting-edge of grain structure simulation in PBF and enables a reliable numerical prediction of appropriate beam parameters for arbitrary applications. (C) 2018 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据