MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025784762 · doi:10.1115/imece2007-42150

Process Parameters Optimization in Multilayer Laser Solid Freeform Fabrication Process Using a 3D Transient Numerical Model

2007· article· en· W2025784762 on OpenAlexafffund
Masoud Alimardani, Ehsan Toyserkani, C. P. Paul

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsMaterials scienceFabricationProcess (computing)Transient (computer programming)ControllabilityProcess variableLaser power scalingThermalStress (linguistics)Deposition (geology)LaserMechanical engineeringComposite materialOpticsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a 3D transient numerical approach for thermal and strain/stress modeling of the multilayer laser solid freeform fabrication process, by which correlations between the main process parameters and their effects on the final build-up properties can be studied. This model can be used to optimize the process parameters to increase the controllability of the geometrical and metallurgical variations resulted from the thermal and stress fields. Using this modeling approach, the geometry of the material deposited as well as temperature and thermal stress distributions across the process domain can be predicted based on the process parameters such as powder feed rate, process speed and laser power, assuming the interaction between the laser beam and powder stream is decoupled. The main process parameters affected by a multilayer deposition due to the formation of non-planar surfaces such as powder catchment are also incorporated into the modeling approach. To verify the proposed method, fabrication of a four-layer thin wall of stainless steel AISI 304L on a low carbon steel substrate is modeled with the same process parameters throughout the build-up process. The results show that the temperature and stress slightly increase at the end-points of layers 2, 3, and 4 which cause over deposited materials and micro-crack formations at these regions. The results are then used to discuss optimum process parameters which can be used to have a buildup with better geometrical and physical qualities. The reliability and accuracy of the model are experimentally verified.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207