Model-based quantification of margins and uncertainties in metal additive manufacturing for process design and qualification

Le résumé fourni par la source

Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) Additive Manufacturing (AM) has the potential to enable the production of components with novel designs and material properties unachievable otherwise. However, process repeatability is a challenge, making qualification ill-defined and greatly reducing the utility of what could be an important manufacturing technology. In this work, a combination of modeling, uncertainty quantification (UQ), and experimentation are used in an effort to predict and bound the range of possible outcomes of the LPBF process. Quantities of interest predicted are melt pool dimensions, microstructure features, and mechanical distortions. A combination of high fidelity thermal-fluid models, microstructure growth models, and reduced fidelity, rapid thermal and mechanical models are used. Uncertainty propagation techniques are used to predict probability distributions of quantities of interest from estimates of process uncertainties. Repeated experiments are done to quantify observed probability distributions and compared to predicted distributions to determine if predictions are precise and accurate. Novel modeling methods are microstrucutre characterization techniques are also discussed. It is found that high fidelity models do a generally good job bounding experimentally observed melt pool morphologies for both bead-on-plate and powder bed cases. Microstructure models are able to bound a number of experimentally observed microstructure statistics, but with low precision due to challenges with calibrating the microstructure growth model parameters. A developed modified inherent strain distortion model does not accurately predict observed distortions. A lumped laser distortion model shows promise in being both accurately and precisely bounding observed outcomes from the deflection comb build, but requires further evaluation on more builds and geometries.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.