Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A novel paradigm for feedback control in LPBF: layer-wise correction for overhang structures

  • Published:
Advances in Manufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), it is common practice to select process parameters to achieve high density parts starting from simple geometries such as cubes or cylinders. However, additive manufacturing is usually adopted to produce very complex geometries, where parameters should be tuned locally, depending on the local features to be processed. In fact, geometrical features, such as overhangs, acute corners, and thin walls may lead to over- or under-heating conditions, which may result in geometrical inaccuracy, high roughness, volumetric errors (i.e., porosity) or even job failure due to surface collapse. This work proposes a layer-wise control strategy to improve the geometrical precision of overhanging regions using a coaxial melt pool monitoring system. The melt-pool images acquired at each layer are used in a control-loop to adapt the process parameters locally at the next layer in order to minimize surface defects. In particular, the laser duty cycle is used as a controllable parameter to correct the energy density. This work presents the main architecture of the proposed approach, the control strategy and the experimental procedure that need to be applied to design the control parameters. The layer-wise control strategy was tested on AISI 316L stainless steel using an open LPFB platform. The results showed that the proposed layer-wise control solution results in a constant melt pool observed via the laser heated area size starting from the second layer onward, leading to a significant improvement in the geometrical accuracy of 5 mm-long bridge geometries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Grasso M, Colosimo BM (2017) Process defects and in situ monitoring methods in metal powder bed fusion: a review. Meas Sci Technol 28(4):044005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/aa5c4f

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tapia G, Elwany A (2014) A review on process monitoring and control in metal-based additive manufacturing. J Manuf Sci Eng Trans ASME 136(6):060801. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Pavlov M, Doubenskaia M, Smurov I (2010) Pyrometric analysis of thermal processes in SLM technology. Phys Procedia 5(PART 2):523–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lott P, Schleifenbaum H, Meiners W et al (2011) Design of an optical system for the in situ process monitoring of selective laser melting (SLM). Phys Procedia 12(PART 1):683–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Eschner N, Weiser L, Häfner B et al (2018) Development of an acoustic process monitoring system for selective laser melting (SLM). Solid Free Fabr Symp 2017:2097–2117

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher BA, Lane B, Yeung H et al (2018) Toward determining melt pool quality metrics via coaxial monitoring in laser powder bed fusion. Manuf Lett 15:119–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Colosimo BM, Grossi E, Caltanissetta F et al (2020) Penelope: a novel prototype for in situ defect removal in LPBF. OM 72(3):1332–1339

    Google Scholar 

  8. Caltanissetta F, Grasso M, Petrò S et al (2018) Characterization of in-situ measurements based on layerwise imaging in laser powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 24(8):183–199

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kanko JA, Sibley AP, Fraser JM (2016) In situ morphology-based defect detection of selective laser melting through inline coherent imaging. J Mater Process Technol 231:488–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith RJ, Hirsch M, Patel R et al (2016) Spatially resolved acoustic spectroscopy for selective laser melting. J Mater Process Technol 236:93–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Martin AA et al (2019) Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Nat Commun 10(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Paulson NH, Gould B, Wolff SJ et al (2020) Correlations between thermal history and keyhole porosity in laser powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 34:101213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grasso M, Laguzza V, Semeraro Q et al (2016) In-process monitoring of selective laser melting: spatial detection of defects via image data analysis. J Manuf Sci Eng 139(5):051001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4034715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Finazzi V, Demir AG, Biffi CA et al (2019) Design rules for producing cardiovascular stents by selective laser melting: geometrical constraints and opportunities. Procedia Struct Integr 15:16–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Khairallah SA, Martin AA, Lee JRI et al (2020) Controlling interdependent meso-nanosecond dynamics and defect generation in metal 3D printing. Science 368(6491):660–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Caprio L, Demir AG, Previtali B (2018) Influence of pulsed and continuous wave emission on melting efficiency in selective laser melting. J Mater Process Tech 266:429–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Demir AG, Previtali B (2017) Additive manufacturing of cardiovascular CoCr stents by selective laser melting. Mater Des 119:338–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Demir AG, Colombo P, Previtali B (2017) From pulsed to continuous wave emission in SLM with contemporary fiber laser sources: effect of temporal and spatial pulse overlap in part quality. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(5/8):2701–2714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Demir AG, Mazzoleni L, Caprio L et al (2019) Complementary use of pulsed and continuous wave emission modes to stabilize melt pool geometry in laser powder bed fusion. Opt Laser Technol 113:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hofman JT, Pathiraj B, Van Dijk J et al (2012) A camera based feedback control strategy for the laser cladding process. J Mater Process Tech 212(11):2455–2462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Song L, Mazumder J (2011) Feedback control of melt pool temperature during laser cladding process. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 19(6):1349–1356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Duflou JR, Sichani EF, De Keuster J et al (2009) Developement of a real time monitoring and adaptive control for laser flame cutting. J Laser Appl 2009:527–536

  23. Postma S, Aarts RGKM, Meijer J et al (2018) Penetration control in laser welding of sheet metal using optical sensors. Proc of ICALEO 2001:1083–1092

  24. Kempen KJP, Vrancken B, Thijs L et al (2013) Lowering thermal gradients in selective laser melting by pre-heating the baseplate. Solid Free Fabr Symp Proc 24:131–139

  25. Demir AG, Previtali B (2017) Investigation of remelting and preheating in SLM of 18Ni300 maraging steel as corrective and preventive measures for porosity reduction. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93(5):2697–2709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li Z, Xu R, Zhang Z et al (2018) The influence of scan length on fabricating thin-walled components in selective laser melting. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 126:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zeng K, Pal D, Gong HJ et al (2015) Comparison of 3DSIM thermal modelling of selective laser melting using new dynamic meshing method to ANSYS. Mater Sci Technol 31(8):945–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bugatti M, Semeraro Q (2018) Limitations of the inherent strain method in simulating powder bed fusion processes. Addit Manuf 23:329–346

    Google Scholar 

  29. Druzgalski CL, Ashby A, Guss G et al (2020) Process optimization of complex geometries using feed forward control for laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 34:101169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101169

  30. Mazzoleni L, Demir AG, Caprio L et al (2019) Real-time observation of melt pool in selective laser melting: spatial, temporal and wavelength resolution criteria. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 69(4):1179–1190

  31. Renken V, von Freyberg A, Schünemann K et al (2019) In-process closed-loop control for stabilising the melt pool temperature in selective laser melting. Prog Addit Manuf 4:411–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yeung H, Lane BM, Donmez MA et al (2018) Implementation of advanced laser control strategies for powder bed fusion systems. Procedia Manuf 26:871–879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Craeghs T, Bechmann F, Berumen S et al (2010) Feedback control of layerwise laser melting using optical sensors. Phys Proc 5(PART 2):505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Mercelis P, Kruth JP, Van Vaerenbergh J (2007) Feedback control of selective laser melting. Proc 15th Int Symp Electromachining, ISEM 2007, pp 421–426

  35. Hirsch M et al (2017) Assessing the capability of in-situ nondestructive analysis during layer based additive manufacture. Addit Manuf 13:135–142

    Google Scholar 

  36. Demir AG, De Giorgi C, Previtali B (2018) Design and implementation of a multisensor coaxial monitoring system with correction strategies for selective laser melting of a maraging steel. J Manuf Sci Eng 140(4):041003. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4038568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lane B, Heigel J, Ricker RE et al (2020) Measurements of melt pool geometry and cooling rates of individual laser traces on IN625 bare plates. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9(1):16–30

  38. Pacher M, Mazzoleni L, Caprio L et al (2019) Estimation of melt pool size by complementary use of external illumination and process emission in coaxial monitoring of selective laser melting. J Laser Appl 31(2):022305. https://doi.org/10.2351/1.5096117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mazzoleni L, Caprio L, Pacher M et al (2018) External illumination strategies for melt pool geometry monitoring in SLM. JOM 71:928–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Adnan M, Lu Y, Jones A et al (2018) Application of the fog computing paradigm to additive manufacturing process monitoring and control. T Emerg Telecommun T 29(4):1–14

  41. Clijsters S, Craeghs T, Buls S et al (2014) In situ quality control of the selective laser melting process using a high-speed, real-time melt pool monitoring system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 75(5):1089–1101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vasileska E, Demir AG, Colosimo BM et al (2020) Layer-wise control of selective laser melting by means of inline melt pool area measurements. J Laser Appl 32(2):022057. https://doi.org/10.2351/7.0000108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hooper PA (2018) Melt pool temperature and cooling rates in laser powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 22:548–559

    Google Scholar 

  44. Heigel JC, Lane BM (2018) Measurement of the melt pool length during single scan tracks in a commercial laser powder bed fusion process. J Manuf Sci Eng Trans ASME 140(5):051012. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Spierings AB, Levy G (2009) Comparison of density of stainless steel 316L parts produced with selective laser melting using different powder grades. 20th Annu Int Solid Free Fabr Symp SFF, pp 342–353

  46. Lane B, Moylan S, Whitenton EP et al (2016) Thermographic measurements of the commercial laser powder bed fusion process at NIST. Rapid Prototyp J 22(5):778–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sih SS, Barlow JW (2004) The prediction of the emissivity and thermal conductivity of powder beds. Part Sci Technol 22(4):427–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fischer P, Romano V, Weber HP et al (2003) Sintering of commercially pure titanium powder with a Nd: YAG laser source. Acta Mater 51(6):1651–1662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Phillips T, Ricker T, Fish S et al (2020) Design of a laser control system with continuously variable power and its application in additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 34:101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101173

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Matteo Pacher for his help in the image processing phase. The Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research is acknowledged for the support provided through the Project "Department of excellence LIS4.0—lightweight and smart structures for Industry 4.0”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnic University of Milan, Via La Masa 1, 20156, Milan, Italy

    Ema Vasileska, Ali Gökhan Demir, Bianca Maria Colosimo & Barbara Previtali

Authors
  1. Ema Vasileska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Gökhan Demir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bianca Maria Colosimo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Barbara Previtali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ema Vasileska.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vasileska, E., Demir, A.G., Colosimo, B.M. et al. A novel paradigm for feedback control in LPBF: layer-wise correction for overhang structures. Adv. Manuf. 10, 326–344 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-021-00379-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-021-00379-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation