MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312568271 · doi:10.1115/msec2022-85323

A Numerical Study on the Powder Flowability, Spreadability, Packing Fraction in Powder Bed Additive Manufacturing

2022· article· en· W4312568271 on OpenAlexaff
Yeasir Mohammad Akib, Ehsan Marzbanrad, Farid Ahmed, Jianzhi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Biomanufacturing; Life Cycle Engineering; Manufacturing Equipment and Automation; Nano/Micro/Meso Manufacturing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceAngle of reposeComposite materialAtomic packing factorDeposition (geology)Powder coatingFusionParticle (ecology)Layer (electronics)Metal powderDiscrete element methodMetallurgyCoatingCrystallographyMechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The powder bed fusion (PBF) process is widely adopted in many manufacturing industries because of its capability to 3D print complex parts with micro-scale precision. In PBF process, a thermal energy source is used to selectively fuse powder particles layer by layer to build a part. The build quality in the PBF process primarily depends on the thermal energy deposition and properties of the powder bed. Powder flowability, powder spreading, and packing fraction are key factors that determine the properties of a powder bed. Therefore, the study of these process parameters is essential to better understand the PBF process. In our study, we developed a two-dimensional powder bed model using the granular package of the LAMMPS molecular dynamics simulator. Cloud-based deposition was adopted for pouring powder particles on the powder bed. The spreading of particles over the substrate was mimicked like a powder bed system. The powder flowability in the proposed study was analyzed by varying the particle size distribution. The simulation results showed that a greater number of larger particles in a power sample results in an increase in the Angle of Repose (AOR) which ultimately affects the flowability. Two different kinds of recoater geometry were considered in this study: circular and rectangular blades. Simulation results showed that depending on the recoater shape there is a change in the packing fraction in the powder bed. Cross-sectional analysis of the power bed showed a significant presence of voids when a greater number of larger particles existed in the powder batch. The packing fraction of the powder bed was found to be a strong function of particle size distribution. These analyses help understand the influence of particle size and recoater shape on the powder bed properties. Findings from this study help to provide a guideline for choosing particle size distribution if the spherical particles are considered. While the present study focuses on the spherical powder particles, the proposed system can also be adapted to the study of powder bed with aspherical particles.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Biomanufacturing; Life Cycle Engineering; Manufacturing Equipment and Automation; Nano/Micro/Meso ManufacturingSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207