Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 2/2022

12-05-2022 | Technical Article

Multi-fidelity Modeling for Uncertainty Quantification in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing

Authors: Paromita Nath, Matthew Sato, Pranav Karve, Sankaran Mahadevan

Published in: Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation | Issue 2/2022

Login to get access

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Computer simulation of the additive manufacturing (AM) process involves multi-physics, multi-scale models. These sophisticated higher fidelity (HF) AM models, though more accurate, are computationally very expensive. On the other hand, AM process simulation using lower fidelity (LF) analytical models with simplified physics is fast but has significant prediction error. This paper presents a multi-fidelity (MF) modeling approach for constructing a prediction model for an AM process by fusing information from physics-based models of different fidelity and experimental data, thus maximizing the accuracy within the available computational resources. The LF model is corrected in two stages: first using the HF model simulation results and then the experimental data. A Bayesian calibration approach is used to estimate the correction factors and the MF model parameters to account for both process variability as well as model uncertainty. The proposed methodology is demonstrated by constructing a multi-fidelity model to predict the lack-of-fusion porosity in the laser powder bed fusion AM process, by combining an HF multi-physics computational model and an LF Rosenthal equation-based analytical solution. Further, an approach is developed to measure the effectiveness of the method by validating the prediction against experimental data.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Zhang S, Rauniyar S, Shrestha S, Ward A, Chou K (2019) An experimental study of tensile property variability in selective laser melting. J Manuf Process 43:26–35CrossRef Zhang S, Rauniyar S, Shrestha S, Ward A, Chou K (2019) An experimental study of tensile property variability in selective laser melting. J Manuf Process 43:26–35CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kerwien S, Collings S, Liou F, Bytnar M (2013) Measurement science roadmap for metal-based additive manufacturing. NIST Kerwien S, Collings S, Liou F, Bytnar M (2013) Measurement science roadmap for metal-based additive manufacturing. NIST
3.
go back to reference Oliveira JP, LaLonde A, Ma J (2020) Processing parameters in laser powder bed fusion metal additive manufacturing. Mater Des 193:108762CrossRef Oliveira JP, LaLonde A, Ma J (2020) Processing parameters in laser powder bed fusion metal additive manufacturing. Mater Des 193:108762CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Atzeni E, Salmi A (2012) Economics of additive manufacturing for end-usable metal parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 62(9–12):1147–1155CrossRef Atzeni E, Salmi A (2012) Economics of additive manufacturing for end-usable metal parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 62(9–12):1147–1155CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bandyopadhyay A, Traxel KD (2018) Invited review article: Metal-additive manufacturing—modeling strategies for application-optimized designs. Addit Manuf 22:758–774 Bandyopadhyay A, Traxel KD (2018) Invited review article: Metal-additive manufacturing—modeling strategies for application-optimized designs. Addit Manuf 22:758–774
6.
go back to reference Wei H, Mukherjee T, Zhang W, Zuback J, Knapp G, De A, DebRoy T (2021) Mechanistic models for additive manufacturing of metallic components. Prog Mater Sci 116:100703CrossRef Wei H, Mukherjee T, Zhang W, Zuback J, Knapp G, De A, DebRoy T (2021) Mechanistic models for additive manufacturing of metallic components. Prog Mater Sci 116:100703CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bayat M, Mohanty S, Hattel JH (2019) Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution in in 718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF. Int J Heat Mass Transf 139:95–114CrossRef Bayat M, Mohanty S, Hattel JH (2019) Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution in in 718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF. Int J Heat Mass Transf 139:95–114CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Martin AA, Calta NP, Khairallah SA, Wang J, Depond PJ, Fong AY, Thampy V, Guss GM, Kiss AM, Stone KH et al (2019) Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Nat Commun 10(1):1–10CrossRef Martin AA, Calta NP, Khairallah SA, Wang J, Depond PJ, Fong AY, Thampy V, Guss GM, Kiss AM, Stone KH et al (2019) Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Nat Commun 10(1):1–10CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Tang M, Pistorius PC, Beuth JL (2017) Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 14:39–48 Tang M, Pistorius PC, Beuth JL (2017) Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 14:39–48
10.
go back to reference Bruna-Rosso C, Demir AG, Previtali B (2018) Selective laser melting finite element modeling: validation with high-speed imaging and lack of fusion defects prediction. Mater Des 156:143–153CrossRef Bruna-Rosso C, Demir AG, Previtali B (2018) Selective laser melting finite element modeling: validation with high-speed imaging and lack of fusion defects prediction. Mater Des 156:143–153CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Nath P, Mahadevan S (2021) Probabilistic predictive control of porosity in laser powder bed fusion. J Intell Manuf 10(1115/1):4053184 Nath P, Mahadevan S (2021) Probabilistic predictive control of porosity in laser powder bed fusion. J Intell Manuf 10(1115/1):4053184
12.
go back to reference Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2017) Uncertainty quantification and management in additive manufacturing: current status, needs, and opportunities. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93(5):2855–2874CrossRef Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2017) Uncertainty quantification and management in additive manufacturing: current status, needs, and opportunities. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93(5):2855–2874CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Moges T, Ameta G, Witherell P (2019) A review of model inaccuracy and parameter uncertainty in laser powder bed fusion models and simulations. J Manuf Sci Eng 10(1115/1):4042789 Moges T, Ameta G, Witherell P (2019) A review of model inaccuracy and parameter uncertainty in laser powder bed fusion models and simulations. J Manuf Sci Eng 10(1115/1):4042789
14.
go back to reference Gross DC (1999) Fidelity implementation study group report. No. SISO-REF-002-1999. Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) Gross DC (1999) Fidelity implementation study group report. No. SISO-REF-002-1999. Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO)
15.
go back to reference Peherstorfer B, Willcox K, Gunzburger M (2018) Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization. SIAM Rev 60(3):550–591CrossRef Peherstorfer B, Willcox K, Gunzburger M (2018) Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization. SIAM Rev 60(3):550–591CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Wang L, Chen X, Kang S, Deng X, Jin R (2020) Meta-modeling of high-fidelity fea simulation for efficient product and process design in additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 35:101211 Wang L, Chen X, Kang S, Deng X, Jin R (2020) Meta-modeling of high-fidelity fea simulation for efficient product and process design in additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 35:101211
18.
go back to reference Sarkar S, Mondal S, Joly M, Lynch ME, Bopardikar SD, Acharya R, Perdikaris P (2019) Multifidelity and multiscale bayesian framework for high-dimensional engineering design and calibration. J Mech Des 10(1115/1):4044598 Sarkar S, Mondal S, Joly M, Lynch ME, Bopardikar SD, Acharya R, Perdikaris P (2019) Multifidelity and multiscale bayesian framework for high-dimensional engineering design and calibration. J Mech Des 10(1115/1):4044598
19.
go back to reference Zhou X, Hsieh SJ, Wang JC (2019) Accelerating extrusion-based additive manufacturing optimization processes with surrogate-based multi-fidelity models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 103(9):4071–4083CrossRef Zhou X, Hsieh SJ, Wang JC (2019) Accelerating extrusion-based additive manufacturing optimization processes with surrogate-based multi-fidelity models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 103(9):4071–4083CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Ling Y, Mullins J, Mahadevan S (2014) Selection of model discrepancy priors in Bayesian calibration. J Comput Phys 276:665–680CrossRef Ling Y, Mullins J, Mahadevan S (2014) Selection of model discrepancy priors in Bayesian calibration. J Comput Phys 276:665–680CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Gilks WR (2005) Markov chain Monte Carlo. Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley, New York Gilks WR (2005) Markov chain Monte Carlo. Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley, New York
22.
go back to reference Arulampalam MS, Maskell S, Gordon N, Clapp T (2002) A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian tracking. IEEE Trans Signal Process 50(2):174–188CrossRef Arulampalam MS, Maskell S, Gordon N, Clapp T (2002) A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian tracking. IEEE Trans Signal Process 50(2):174–188CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Sisson W, Mahadevan S, Smarslok BP (2021) Optimization of information gain in multifidelity high-speed pressure predictions. AIAA J 59(8):3096–3105 Sisson W, Mahadevan S, Smarslok BP (2021) Optimization of information gain in multifidelity high-speed pressure predictions. AIAA J 59(8):3096–3105
24.
go back to reference Bandler JW, Biernacki RM, Chen SH, Grobelny PA, Hemmers RH (1994) Space mapping technique for electromagnetic optimization. IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech 42(12):2536–2544CrossRef Bandler JW, Biernacki RM, Chen SH, Grobelny PA, Hemmers RH (1994) Space mapping technique for electromagnetic optimization. IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech 42(12):2536–2544CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Nath P, Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2019) Uncertainty quantification of grain morphology in laser direct metal deposition. Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng 27(4):044003CrossRef Nath P, Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2019) Uncertainty quantification of grain morphology in laser direct metal deposition. Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng 27(4):044003CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Sobol IM (2001) Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math Comput Simul 55(1–3):271–280CrossRef Sobol IM (2001) Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math Comput Simul 55(1–3):271–280CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Saltelli A, Ratto M, Andres T, Campolongo F, Cariboni J, Gatelli D, Saisana M, Tarantola S (2008) Global sensitivity analysis: the primer. Wiley, New York Saltelli A, Ratto M, Andres T, Campolongo F, Cariboni J, Gatelli D, Saisana M, Tarantola S (2008) Global sensitivity analysis: the primer. Wiley, New York
28.
go back to reference Sudret B (2008) Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93(7):964–979CrossRef Sudret B (2008) Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93(7):964–979CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Sparkman D, Millwater HR, Garza J, Smarslok BP (2016) Importance sampling-based post-processing method for global sensitivity analysis. In: Proceedings of the 18th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference, p 1440 Sparkman D, Millwater HR, Garza J, Smarslok BP (2016) Importance sampling-based post-processing method for global sensitivity analysis. In: Proceedings of the 18th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference, p 1440
30.
go back to reference Li C, Mahadevan S (2016) An efficient modularized sample-based method to estimate the first-order Sobol’ index. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 153:110–121CrossRef Li C, Mahadevan S (2016) An efficient modularized sample-based method to estimate the first-order Sobol’ index. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 153:110–121CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2019) Probability models for data-driven global sensitivity analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 187:40–57CrossRef Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2019) Probability models for data-driven global sensitivity analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 187:40–57CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Williams CK, Rasmussen CE (2006) Gaussian processes for machine learning, vol 2. MIT Press, Cambridge Williams CK, Rasmussen CE (2006) Gaussian processes for machine learning, vol 2. MIT Press, Cambridge
33.
go back to reference Kleijnen JP (2009) Kriging metamodeling in simulation: A review. Eur J Oper Res 192(3):707–716CrossRef Kleijnen JP (2009) Kriging metamodeling in simulation: A review. Eur J Oper Res 192(3):707–716CrossRef
34.
go back to reference C Montgomery D (1997) Montgomery design and analysis of experiments C Montgomery D (1997) Montgomery design and analysis of experiments
35.
go back to reference Pronzato L (2017) Minimax and maximin space-filling designs: some properties and methods for construction. Journal de la Société Française de Statistique 158(1):7–36 Pronzato L (2017) Minimax and maximin space-filling designs: some properties and methods for construction. Journal de la Société Française de Statistique 158(1):7–36
36.
go back to reference Husslage BG, Rennen G, Van Dam ER, Den Hertog D (2011) Space-filling Latin hypercube designs for computer experiments. Optim Eng 12(4):611–630CrossRef Husslage BG, Rennen G, Van Dam ER, Den Hertog D (2011) Space-filling Latin hypercube designs for computer experiments. Optim Eng 12(4):611–630CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Bichon BJ, Eldred MS, Swiler LP, Mahadevan S, McFarland JM (2008) Efficient global reliability analysis for nonlinear implicit performance functions. AIAA J 46(10):2459–2468CrossRef Bichon BJ, Eldred MS, Swiler LP, Mahadevan S, McFarland JM (2008) Efficient global reliability analysis for nonlinear implicit performance functions. AIAA J 46(10):2459–2468CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Echard B, Gayton N, Lemaire M (2011) AK-MCS: an active learning reliability method combining Kriging and Monte Carlo simulation. Struct Saf 33(2):145–154CrossRef Echard B, Gayton N, Lemaire M (2011) AK-MCS: an active learning reliability method combining Kriging and Monte Carlo simulation. Struct Saf 33(2):145–154CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Saltelli A, Tarantola S (2002) On the relative importance of input factors in mathematical models: safety assessment for nuclear waste disposal. J Am Stat Assoc 97(459):702–709CrossRef Saltelli A, Tarantola S (2002) On the relative importance of input factors in mathematical models: safety assessment for nuclear waste disposal. J Am Stat Assoc 97(459):702–709CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Zadeh FK, Nossent J, Sarrazin F, Pianosi F, Van Griensven A, Wagener T, Bauwens W (2017) Comparison of variance-based and moment-independent global sensitivity analysis approaches by application to the SWAT model. Environ Model Softw 91:210–222CrossRef Zadeh FK, Nossent J, Sarrazin F, Pianosi F, Van Griensven A, Wagener T, Bauwens W (2017) Comparison of variance-based and moment-independent global sensitivity analysis approaches by application to the SWAT model. Environ Model Softw 91:210–222CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Andres T (1997) Sampling methods and sensitivity analysis for large parameter sets. J Stat Comput Simul 57(1–4):77–110CrossRef Andres T (1997) Sampling methods and sensitivity analysis for large parameter sets. J Stat Comput Simul 57(1–4):77–110CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Sarrazin F, Pianosi F, Wagener T (2016) Global sensitivity analysis of environmental models: convergence and validation. Environ Model Softw 79:135–152CrossRef Sarrazin F, Pianosi F, Wagener T (2016) Global sensitivity analysis of environmental models: convergence and validation. Environ Model Softw 79:135–152CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Jeffreys H (1946) An invariant form for the prior probability in estimation problems. Proc R Soc Lond A 186(1007):453–461CrossRef Jeffreys H (1946) An invariant form for the prior probability in estimation problems. Proc R Soc Lond A 186(1007):453–461CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Ling Y, Mahadevan S (2013) Quantitative model validation techniques: new insights. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 111:217–231CrossRef Ling Y, Mahadevan S (2013) Quantitative model validation techniques: new insights. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 111:217–231CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Rebba R, Mahadevan S (2008) Computational methods for model reliability assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93(8):1197–1207CrossRef Rebba R, Mahadevan S (2008) Computational methods for model reliability assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93(8):1197–1207CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Li C, Mahadevan S (2016) Role of calibration, validation, and relevance in multi-level uncertainty integration. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 148:32–43CrossRef Li C, Mahadevan S (2016) Role of calibration, validation, and relevance in multi-level uncertainty integration. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 148:32–43CrossRef
47.
go back to reference Mullins J, Ling Y, Mahadevan S, Sun L, Strachan A (2016) Separation of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in probabilistic model validation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 147:49–59CrossRef Mullins J, Ling Y, Mahadevan S, Sun L, Strachan A (2016) Separation of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in probabilistic model validation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 147:49–59CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Reitermanova Z, et al. (2010) Data splitting. In: Proceedings of the WDS, vol. 10, pp 31–36 Reitermanova Z, et al. (2010) Data splitting. In: Proceedings of the WDS, vol. 10, pp 31–36
49.
go back to reference Rosenthal D (1941) Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and cutting. Weld J 20:220–234 Rosenthal D (1941) Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and cutting. Weld J 20:220–234
50.
go back to reference Promoppatum P, Yao SC, Pistorius PC, Rollett AD (2017) A comprehensive comparison of the analytical and numerical prediction of the thermal history and solidification microstructure of Inconel 718 products made by laser powder-bed fusion. Engineering 3(5):685–694CrossRef Promoppatum P, Yao SC, Pistorius PC, Rollett AD (2017) A comprehensive comparison of the analytical and numerical prediction of the thermal history and solidification microstructure of Inconel 718 products made by laser powder-bed fusion. Engineering 3(5):685–694CrossRef
52.
go back to reference Fouda YM, Bayly AE (2020) A DEM study of powder spreading in additive layer manufacturing. Granular Matter 22(1):1–18CrossRef Fouda YM, Bayly AE (2020) A DEM study of powder spreading in additive layer manufacturing. Granular Matter 22(1):1–18CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Lee Y, Zhang W (2016) Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 12:178–188 Lee Y, Zhang W (2016) Modeling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 12:178–188
Metadata
Title
Multi-fidelity Modeling for Uncertainty Quantification in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing
Authors
Paromita Nath
Matthew Sato
Pranav Karve
Sankaran Mahadevan
Publication date
12-05-2022
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation / Issue 2/2022
Print ISSN: 2193-9764
Electronic ISSN: 2193-9772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-022-00260-9

Other articles of this Issue 2/2022

Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 2/2022 Go to the issue

Premium Partners