Multiphysics simulation of single pulse laser powder bed fusion: comparison of front capturing and front tracking methods

Abstract

Purpose During thermal laser processes, heat transfer and fluid flow in the melt pool are primary driven by complex physical phenomena that take place at liquid/vapor interface. Hence, the choice and setting of front description methods must be done carefully. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate to what extent front description methods may bias physical representativeness of numerical models of laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) process at melt pool scale. Design/methodology/approach Two multiphysical LPBF models are confronted: a Level-Set (LS) front capturing model based on a C++ code and a front tracking model, developed with COMSOL Multiphysics® and based on Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) method. To do so, two minimal test cases of increasing complexity are defined. They are simplified to the largest degree, but they integrate multiphysics phenomena that are still relevant to LPBF process. Findings LS and ALE methods provide very similar descriptions of thermo-hydrodynamic phenomena that occur during LPBF, providing LS interface thickness is correctly calibrated and laser heat source is implemented with a modified continuum surface force formulation. With these calibrations, thermal predictions are identical. However, the velocity field in the LS model is systematically underestimated compared to the ALE approach, but the consequences on the predicted melt pool dimensions are minor. Originality/value This study fulfils the need for comprehensive methodology bases for modeling and calibrating multiphysical models of LPBF at melt pool scale. This paper also provides with reference data that may be used by any researcher willing to verify their own numerical method.