Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Three-Dimensional Prediction of Lack-of-Fusion Porosity Volume Fraction and Morphology for Powder Bed Fusion Additively Manufactured Ti–6Al–4V

  • Technical Article
  • Published:
Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Powder bed fusion (PBF) is an additive manufacturing technique that has experienced widespread growth in recent years due to various process advantages. However, defects such as porosity and the effects that porosity have on the mechanical performance remain a concern for parts manufactured using PBF. This work develops a three-dimensional framework to simulate lack-of-fusion (LoF) porosity during powder bed fusion using the voxel-based lack-of-fusion model. The framework is calibrated and validated against previously reported LoF porosity measurements and maximum equivalent pore diameter. The framework is used to study the influence of laser power, velocity, hatch spacing, and layer thickness on porosity volume fraction and morphology. Power and velocity have a linear relationship to porosity, and power has a stronger effect than velocity on changing porosity. This stronger effect of power versus velocity contributes to high variability when relating energy density to porosity, and a modified energy density metric that weighs power heavier is shown to reduce variability. In contrast to power and velocity, hatch spacing and layer thickness have a more complicated relationship with porosity, especially at their extrema. The influence of hatch spacing and layer thickness on pore equivalent diameter and sphericity is also explored, and four distinct morphological regimes are characterized. A LoF criteria proposed in a previous work are also confirmed. Overall, the framework offers a methodology to simulate porosity quantity and morphology and interfaces with other process–structure–property prediction techniques to support the design and development of reduced-defect powder bed fusion parts.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Specific vendor and manufacturer names are explicitly mentioned only to accurately describe the test hardware. The use of vendor and manufacturer names does not imply an endorsement by the U.S. Government nor does it imply that the specified equipment is the best available.

References

  1. Gong H, Rafi K, Gu H et al (2014) Analysis of defect generation in Ti–6Al–4V parts made using powder bed fusion additive manufacturing processes. Addit Manuf 1–4:87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2014.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mostafaei A, Zhao C, He Y et al (2022) Defects and anomalies in powder bed fusion metal additive manufacturing. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 26:100974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2021.100974

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Biswal R, Syed AK, Zhang X (2018) Assessment of the effect of isolated porosity defects on the fatigue performance of additive manufactured titanium alloy. Addit Manuf 23:433–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.08.024

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Masuo H, Tanaka Y, Morokoshi S et al (2018) Influence of defects, surface roughness and HIP on the fatigue strength of Ti–6Al–4V manufactured by additive manufacturing. Int J Fatigue 117:163–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.07.020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Thompson A, Maskery I, Leach R (2016) X-ray computed tomography for additive manufacturing: A review. Meas Sci Technol 27:072001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/27/7/072001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. du Plessis A, Yadroitsev I, Yadroitsava I, Le Roux SG (2018) X-ray microcomputed tomography in additive manufacturing: a review of the current technology and applications. 3D Print Addit Manuf 5:227–247. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2018.0060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sola A, Nouri A (2019) Microstructural porosity in additive manufacturing: the formation and detection of pores in metal parts fabricated by powder bed fusion. J Adv Manuf Process 1:e10021. https://doi.org/10.1002/amp2.10021

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cunningham R, Narra SP, Ozturk T et al (2016) Evaluating the effect of processing parameters on porosity in electron beam melted Ti–6Al–4V via synchrotron X-ray microtomography. JOM 68:765–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-015-1802-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kasperovich G, Haubrich J, Gussone J, Requena G (2016) Correlation between porosity and processing parameters in TiAl6V4 produced by selective laser melting. Mater Des 105:160–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.070

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cunningham R, Narra SP, Montgomery C et al (2017) Synchrotron-based X-ray microtomography characterization of the effect of processing variables on porosity formation in laser power-bed additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V. JOM 69:479–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-2234-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Neikter M, Forsberg F, Pederson R et al (2018) Defect characterization of electron beam melted Ti–6Al–4V and Alloy 718 with X-ray microtomography. Aeronaut Aerosp Open Access J 2:139–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim FH, Moylan SP, Phan TQ, Garboczi EJ (2020) Investigation of the effect of artificial internal defects on the tensile behavior of laser powder bed fusion 17–4 stainless steel samples: simultaneous tensile testing and X-Ray computed tomography. Exp Mech 60:987–1004. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-020-00604-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Brown A, Zachary J, Tilson W (2017) Classification, effects, and prevention of build defects in powder-bed fusion printed Inconel 718. TMS 2017 annual meeting and exhibition

  15. Zhang B, Ham K, Shao S et al (2017) Effect of Heat treatment and hot isostatic pressing on the morphology and size of pores in additive manufactured Ti–6Al–4V parts. University of Texas at Austin

  16. Du L, Pan X, Qian G et al (2021) Crack initiation mechanisms under two stress ratios up to very-high-cycle fatigue regime for a selective laser melted Ti–6Al–4V. Int J Fatigue 149:106294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cao M, Liu Y, Dunne FPE (2022) A crystal plasticity approach to understand fatigue response with respect to pores in additive manufactured aluminium alloys. Int J Fatigue 161:106917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.106917

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu QC, Elambasseril J, Sun SJ et al (2014) The effect of manufacturing defects on the fatigue behaviour of Ti–6Al–4V specimens fabricated using selective laser melting. AMR 891–892:1519–1524. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891-892.1519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Malefane LB, du Preez W, Maringa M, du Plessis A (2018) Tensile and high cycle fatigue properties of annealed Ti6Al4V (ELI) specimens produced by direct metal laser sintering. S Afr J Ind Eng 29:312–313. https://doi.org/10.7166/29-3-2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Benedetti M, Fontanari V, Bandini M et al (2018) Low- and high-cycle fatigue resistance of Ti–6Al–4V ELI additively manufactured via selective laser melting: Mean stress and defect sensitivity. Int J Fatigue 107:96–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.10.021

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Beretta S, Romano S (2017) A comparison of fatigue strength sensitivity to defects for materials manufactured by AM or traditional processes. Int J Fatigue 94:178–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.06.020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Romano S, Beretta S, Miccoli S, Gschweitl M (2020) probabilistic framework for defect tolerant fatigue assessment of additively manufactured parts applied to a space component. In: Structural integrity of additive manufactured parts. ASTM International, pp 526–539

  23. Kabir M, Richter H (2017) Modeling of processing-induced pore morphology in an additively-manufactured Ti–6Al–4V Alloy. Materials 10:145. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10020145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Yeratapally SR, Lang C, Glaessgen EH (2020) A computational study to investigate the effect of defect geometries on the fatigue crack driving forces in powder-bed AM materials. In: AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL

  25. Tang M, Pistorius PC, Beuth JL (2017) Prediction of lack-of-fusion porosity for powder bed fusion. Addit Manuf 14:39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.12.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mukherjee T, DebRoy T (2018) Mitigation of lack of fusion defects in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. J Manuf Process 36:442–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2018.10.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Promoppatum P, Yao S-C, 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 3:685–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2017.05.023

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Mojumder S, Gan Z, Li Y et al (2023) Linking process parameters with lack-of-fusion porosity for laser powder bed fusion metal additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 68:103500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103500

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Committee on Integrated Computational Materials Engineering, National Materials Advisory Board, Division of Engineering and Physical Sciences, National Research Council of the National Academies (2008) Integrated computational materials engineering: a transformational discipline for improved competitiveness and national security. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  30. Liu PW, Wang Z, Xiao YH et al (2020) Integration of phase-field model and crystal plasticity for the prediction of process–structure–property relation of additively manufactured metallic materials. Int J Plast 128:102670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2020.102670

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Agius D, O’Toole P, Wallbrink C et al (2021) Integrating phase field and crystal plasticity finite element models for simulations of titanium alloy Ti-5553. J Phys Mater 4:044014. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7639/ac194f

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Turner JA, Belak J, Barton N et al (2022) ExaAM: metal additive manufacturing simulation at the fidelity of the microstructure. Int J High Perform Comput Appl 36:13–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/10943420211042558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Irwin J, Reutzel EW, Michaleris P et al (2016) Predicting microstructure from thermal history during additive manufacturing for Ti–6Al–4V. J Manuf Sci Eng 138:111007. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Liu S, Shin YC (2020) Integrated 2D cellular automata-phase field modeling of solidification and microstructure evolution during additive manufacturing of Ti6Al4V. Comput Mater Sci 183:109889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2020.109889

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Yang X, Barrett RA, Tong M et al (2020) Prediction of microstructure evolution for additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V. Procedia Manuf 47:1178–1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sun W, Shan F, Zong N et al (2021) Simulation of solidified β grain for Ti–6Al–4V during wire laser additive manufacturing by three-dimensional cellular automaton method. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 29:065006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-651X/ac0c23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pham M-S, Dovgyy B, Hooper PA et al (2020) The role of side-branching in microstructure development in laser powder-bed fusion. Nat Commun 11:749. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14453-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Karimi P, Sadeghi E, Ålgårdh J et al (2021) Tailored grain morphology via a unique melting strategy in electron beam-powder bed fusion. Mater Sci Eng A 824:141820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2021.141820

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Liu J, Li G, Sun Q et al (2022) Understanding the effect of scanning strategies on the microstructure and crystallographic texture of Ti–6Al–4V alloy manufactured by laser powder bed fusion. J Mater Process Technol 299:117366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Popovich VA, Borisov EV, Popovich AA et al (2017) Functionally graded Inconel 718 processed by additive manufacturing: crystallographic texture, anisotropy of microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater Des 114:441–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.10.075

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kok Y, Tan XP, Wang P et al (2018) Anisotropy and heterogeneity of microstructure and mechanical properties in metal additive manufacturing: a critical review. Mater Des 139:565–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.021

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Balachandramurthi AR, Moverare J, Hansson T, Pederson R (2020) Anisotropic fatigue properties of alloy 718 manufactured by Electron beam powder bed fusion. Int J Fatigue 141:105898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105898

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Yan W, Lin S, Kafka OL et al (2018) Modeling process–structure–property relationships for additive manufacturing. Front Mech Eng 13:482–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-018-0505-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kapoor K, Yoo YSJ, Book TA et al (2018) Incorporating grain-level residual stresses and validating a crystal plasticity model of a two-phase Ti–6Al–4V alloy produced via additive manufacturing. J Mech Phys Solids 121:447–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2018.07.025

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Geng Y, Harrison N (2020) Functionally graded bimodal Ti6Al4V fabricated by powder bed fusion additive manufacturing: crystal plasticity finite element modelling. Mater Sci Eng A 773:138736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.138736

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Yeratapally SR, Lang CG, Cerrone AR et al (2022) Effect of defects on the constant-amplitude fatigue behavior of as-built Ti–6Al–4V alloy produced by laser powder bed fusion process: assessing performance with metallographic analysis and micromechanical simulations. Addit Manuf 52:102639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.102639

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. SPPARKS Kinetic Monte Carlo Simulator. https://spparks.github.io/. Accessed 4 Aug 2022

  48. Plimpton S, Battaile C, Chandross M et al (2009) Crossing the mesoscale no-man’s land via parallel kinetic Monte Carlo

  49. Rodgers TM, Madison JD, Tikare V (2017) Simulation of metal additive manufacturing microstructures using kinetic Monte Carlo. Comput Mater Sci 135:78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2017.03.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rodgers TM, Moser D, Abdeljawad F et al (2021) Simulation of powder bed metal additive manufacturing microstructures with coupled finite difference-Monte Carlo method. Addit Manuf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.101953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Groeber MA, Jackson MA (2014) DREAM.3D: a digital representation environment for the analysis of microstructure in 3D. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 3:56–72. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9772-3-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wadell H (1935) Volume, shape, and roundness of quartz particles. J Geol 43:250–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Dilip JJS, Zhang S, Teng C et al (2017) Influence of processing parameters on the evolution of melt pool, porosity, and microstructures in Ti–6Al–4V alloy parts fabricated by selective laser melting. Prog Addit Manuf 2:157–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-017-0030-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Rosenthal D (1946) The theory of moving sources of heat and its application of metal treatments. Trans ASME 68:849–866

    Google Scholar 

  56. Gordon JV, Narra SP, Cunningham RW et al (2020) Defect structure process maps for laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 36:101552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101552

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Cepeda-Jiménez CM, Potenza F, Magalini E et al (2020) Effect of energy density on the microstructure and texture evolution of Ti–6Al–4V manufactured by laser powder bed fusion. Mater Charact 163:110238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2020.110238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. King WE, Barth HD, Castillo VM et al (2014) Observation of keyhole-mode laser melting in laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing. J Mater Process Technol 214:2915–2925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rubenchik A, Wu S, Mitchell S et al (2015) Direct measurements of temperature-dependent laser absorptivity of metal powders. Appl Opt 54:7230. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.54.007230

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Boley CD, Mitchell SC, Rubenchik AM, Wu SSQ (2016) Metal powder absorptivity: modeling and experiment. Appl Opt 55:6496. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.55.006496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Yeratapally SR, Cerrone A, Tang M, Glaessgen EH (2020) A 3D model to predict explicit morphologies and volume fraction of lack-of-fusion pores generated in selective laser melting processes. NASA/TM–2020-220579

  62. du Plessis A (2019) Effects of process parameters on porosity in laser powder bed fusion revealed by X-ray tomography. Addit Manuf 30:100871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100871

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Jolley BR, Uchic MD, Sparkman D et al (2021) Application of serial sectioning to evaluate the performance of x-ray computed tomography for quantitative porosity measurements in additively manufactured metals. JOM 73:3230–3239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-021-04863-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Brika SE, Letenneur M, Dion CA, Brailovski V (2020) Influence of particle morphology and size distribution on the powder flowability and laser powder bed fusion manufacturability of Ti–6Al–4V alloy. Addit Manuf 31:100929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100929

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Montalbano T, Briggs BN, Waterman JL et al (2021) Uncovering the coupled impact of defect morphology and microstructure on the tensile behavior of Ti–6Al–4V fabricated via laser powder bed fusion. J Mater Process Technol 294:117113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Jin P, Tang Q, Song J et al (2021) Numerical investigation of the mechanism of interfacial dynamics of the melt pool and defects during laser powder bed fusion. Opt Laser Technol 143:107289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2021.107289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Caiazzo F, Alfieri V, Casalino G (2020) On the relevance of volumetric energy density in the investigation of Inconel 718 laser powder bed fusion. Materials 13:538. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13030538

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Tang M (2017) Inclusions, porosity, and fatigue of AlSi10Mg parts produced by selective laser melting. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University

  69. Bogdanor MJ, Mahadevan S, Oskay C (2013) Uncertainty quantification in damage modeling of heterogeneous materials. JMC. https://doi.org/10.1615/IntJMultCompEng.2013005821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Zhang X, Oskay C (2019) Plastic dissipation sensitivity to mechanical properties in polycrystalline β-HMX subjected to impact loading. Mech Mater 138:103079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.103079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zhang X, Liu Y, Oskay C (2022) Uncertainty quantification for microstructure-sensitive fatigue nucleation and application to titanium alloy, Ti6242. Front Mater 9:897998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Zhang S, Oskay C (2017) Reduced order variational multiscale enrichment method for thermo-mechanical problems. Comput Mech 59:887–907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1380-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Zhang X, Oskay C (2017) Sparse and scalable eigenstrain-based reduced order homogenization models for polycrystal plasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 326:241–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.07.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Zhang X, Liu Y, Oskay C (2022) Multiscale reduced-order modeling of a titanium skin panel subjected to thermomechanical loading. AIAA J 60:302–315. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J060497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Space Technology Research Grants (Early State Innovation Grant No.: 80NSSC20K0294) and the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Transformational Tools and Technologies project. The authors thank Samuel J.A. Hocker (NASA Langley Research Center) and Harold D. Claytor (Analytical Mechanics Associates) for providing Figure 1a. Saikumar R. Yeratapally was sponsored through the NASA Langley Research Center’s cooperative agreement 80LARC17C0004 with the National Institute of Aerospace.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Vamsi Subraveti and Brodan Richter have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA

    Vamsi Subraveti & Caglar Oskay

  2. Langley Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, USA

    Brodan Richter

  3. Science and Technology Corporation, Hampton, VA, USA

    Saikumar R. Yeratapally

Authors
  1. Vamsi Subraveti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brodan Richter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saikumar R. Yeratapally
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Caglar Oskay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Caglar Oskay.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Subraveti, V., Richter, B., Yeratapally, S.R. et al. Three-Dimensional Prediction of Lack-of-Fusion Porosity Volume Fraction and Morphology for Powder Bed Fusion Additively Manufactured Ti–6Al–4V. Integr Mater Manuf Innov (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-024-00347-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-024-00347-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation