MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209002810 · doi:10.3389/fmats.2021.753040

An Efficient Track-Scale Model for Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing: Part 1- Thermal Model

2021· article· en· W3209002810 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Tangestani, Trevor Sabiston, Apratim Chakraborty, Waqas Muhammad, Lang Yuan, Étienne Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Materials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFusionMaterials scienceSuperalloyHeat transferLaserThermalScale (ratio)Exponential functionMechanicsBiological systemOpticsComposite materialPhysicsThermodynamicsMathematicsMicrostructureMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the first of two manuscripts that presents a computationally efficient full field deterministic model for laser powder bed fusion (LPBF). A new Hybrid Line (HL) heat input model integrates an exponentially decaying (ED) heat input over a portion of a laser path to significantly reduce the computational time. Experimentally measured properties of the high gamma prime nickel-based superalloy RENÉ 65 are implemented in the model to predict the in-process temperature distribution, stresses, and distortions. The model accounts for specific properties of the material as different phases. The first manuscript presents the HL heat transfer model, which is compared with the beam-scale exponentially decaying model, along with the melt pool geometry obtained experimentally by varying the laser parameters. The predicted melt pool geometry of the beam-scale ED model is shown to have good agreement with experimental measurements. While the proposed HL model exhibits lesser accuracy in predicting the melt pool geometries, it can predict the cooling rates and nodal temperatures as accurately as to the ED model. Moreover, under large time integration steps, the HL model becomes more than 1,500 times faster than the ED model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MaterialsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207