Thermal Modeling of 304L Stainless Steel for Selective Laser Melting: Laser Power Input Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selective Laser Melting (SLM) process is a Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) technique, which has shown significantly growth in the recent years. The demand for this process is justified by the versatility and ease in manufacturing the parts from 3D models as well for the increased complexity of engineered parts generated from topology or shape optimization. Automotive, aerospace, medical and aviation industries are taking great advantage of this process due the unique geometry characteristics found in the components. To enhance the benefits of SLM, a vital task is to analyze the laser power input impact on the temperature distribution through the powder bed, important for posterior residual stresses analysis. The Finite Element Method proposed in this study is a transient thermal model, able to predict temperature distribution through different sections of the powder bed when performing a single track of the laser scanning. Furthermore, the impact of the laser power input is carried out utilizing SS 304L, a low cost Stainless Steel alloy that can be employed in the SLM process, in order to determine the influence on the temperature distribution along the different cross sections.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".