Abstract:Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) uses a focused, high power laser to repeatedly scan geometric patterns on thin layers of metal powder, which build up to a final, solid three-dimensional (3D) part. This process is somewhat limited in that the parts tend to have poorer surface finish (compared to machining or grinding) and distortion due to residual stress, as well as multiple other deficiencies. Typical laser scan strategies are relatively simple and use constant laser power levels. This elicits local variations in the melt pool size, shape, or temperature, particularly near sharp geometric features or overhang structures due to the relatively higher thermal conductivity of solid metal compared to metal powder. In this paper, we present a new laser power control algorithm, which scales the laser power to a value called the geometric conductance factor (GCF). The GCF is calculated based on the amount of solid vs. powder material near the melt pool. The algorithm for calculating GCF is presented along with some basic examples for clarification. Then, we detail the hardware and software implementation on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) additive manufacturing metrology testbed (AMMT), which includes co-axial melt pool monitoring using a high-speed camera. Six parts were fabricated out of nickel superalloy 625 (IN625) with the same nominal laser power, but with varying GCF algorithm parameters. We demonstrate the effect of tailored laser power on reducing the variability of melt pool intensity measured throughout the 3D build. Finally, we contrast the difference between the 'optimized' part vs. the standard build parameters, including the deflection of the final part top surface near the overhang and the variation of surface finish on the down-facing surfaces. Ultimately, the improvements to the in-situ process monitoring and part qualities demonstrate the utility and future potential tuning and optimizing more complex laser scan strategies.

Temperature states in Powder Bed Fusion additive manufacturing are structurally controllable and observable

Control-Oriented Modeling and Layer-to-Layer Spatial Control of Powder Bed Fusion Processes

ADDOPT: An Additive Manufacturing Optimal Control Framework Demonstrated in Minimizing Layer-Level Thermal Variance in Electron Beam Powder Bed Fusion

Physics-Based Modeling and Predictive Simulation of Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing Across Length Scales

Part geometry and conduction-based laser power control for powder bed fusion additive manufacturing

Process-structure-property Modeling for Postbuild Heat Treatment of Powder Bed Fusion Ti-6Al-4V

Powder bed fusion process: A brief review

Layer-to-Layer Melt Pool Control in Laser Powder Bed Fusion

Model Predictive Control of Melt Pool Size for the Laser Powder Bed Fusion Process Under Process Uncertainty

Online Monitoring Technology of Metal Powder Bed Fusion Processes: A Review

A Novel Framework of Developing a Predictive Model for Powder Bed Fusion Process

An improved thermomechanical model for the prediction of stress and strain evolution in proximity to the melt pool in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing

Mitigation of lack of fusion defects in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing

High-Efficiency Dynamic Scanning Strategy for Powder Bed Fusion by Controlling Temperature Field of the Heat-Affected Zone

Active Control of Microstructure in Powder-Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing of Ti6Al4V

Analytical Modelling of Scanning Strategy Effect on Temperature Field and Melt Track Dimensions in Laser Powder Bed Fusion

Low Temperature Powder Bed Fusion of Polymers by Means of Fractal Quasi-Simultaneous Exposure Strategies

Laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of metals; physics, computational, and materials challenges

Encoding Stability into Laser Powder Bed Fusion Monitoring Using Temporal Features and Pore Density Modelling

A highly efficient computational approach for fast scan-resolved simulations of metal additive manufacturing processes on the scale of real parts

Analytical Probabilistic Modeling of Additive Manufacturing-Induced Process Defects and Experimental Validation