Abstract
Direct Metal Deposition (DMD) is an additive manufacturing (AM) process capable of producing large components using a layer by layer deposition of molten powder. DMD is increasingly investigated due to its higher deposition rate and the possibility to produce large structural components specifically for the aerospace industry. During fabrication, a complex thermal history is experienced in different regions of the workpiece, depending on the process parameters and part geometry. The thermal history induces residual stress accumulation in the buildup, which is the main cause of distortions. In order to control the process and enhance the product quality, the understanding of the workpiece temperature is substantial. In this study, two methods to predict temperature evolution during the DMD process are introduced based on analytical and finite element methods. The objective is to compare these methods to experimental results and to provide more insights about their capabilities to predict accurately the temperature gradient, the cooling rate, and the melt pool geometry. A comparison of the computational time is also provided. Based on the results of the investigation, It appears that the analytical method provides an effective and accurate method to understand the influence of the process on the workpiece temperature.
Highlights
Direct metal deposition (DMD) called direct energy deposition (DED) is an advanced additive manufacturing (AM) technology used to repair and rebuild worn or damaged components, to manufacture new components, and to apply wear- and corrosion-resistant coatings [1]
This study aims to develop and compare two methods of predicting the temperature during the Direct Metal Deposition (DMD) process
A numerical and an analytical model to predict the temperature during the DMD additive process are introduced
Summary
Direct metal deposition (DMD) called direct energy deposition (DED) is an advanced additive manufacturing (AM) technology used to repair and rebuild worn or damaged components, to manufacture new components, and to apply wear- and corrosion-resistant coatings [1]. Liu et al [2] demonstrated that the technology is capable of manufacturing large aerospace structural components, achieving substantial economical advantages compared to traditional manufacturing processes. The numerical simulation appears to be the only effective way to achieve an understanding of the DMD process. The in situ technologies offered today are not yet capable of proposing a robust process monitoring for laser processing Thompson et al [4]. Modeling offers a suitable way to define process conditions for the DMD process and to monitor and control it online. The process large thermal gradient (106 K/m) and cooling rate (105 K/s) often generate complex microstructure features as demonstrated by the work of Rai et al [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
