Multi-objective optimization to specify optimal selective laser melting process parameters for SS316 L powder

Abstract

PurposeThis paper adopts a modified Taguchi approach to develop empirical relationships to the performance characteristics (output responses) in terms of process variables and demonstrated their validity through comparison of test data. The method suggests a few tests as per the orthogonal array and provides complete information for all combinations of levels and process variables. This method also provides the estimated range of output responses so that the scatter in the repeated tests can be assessed prior to the tests.Design/methodology/approachIn order to obtain defect-free products meeting the required specifications, researchers have conducted extensive experiments using powder bed fusion (PBF) process measuring the performance indicators (namely, relative density, surface roughness and hardness) to specify a set of printing parameters (namely, laser power, scanning speed and hatch spacing). A simple and reliable multi-objective optimization method is considered in this paper for specifying a set of optimal process parameters with SS316 L powder. It was reported that test samples printed even with optimal set of input variables revealed irregular shaped, microscopic porosities and improper melt pool formation.FindingsFinally, based on detailed analysis, it is concluded that it is impossible to express the performance indicators, explicitly in terms of equivalent energy density (E_0ˆ*), which is a combination of multiple sets of selective laser melting (SLM) process parameters, with different performance indicators. Empirical relations for the performance indicators are developed in terms of SLM process parameters. Test data are within/close to the expected range.Practical implicationsBased on extensive analysis of the SS316 L data using modified Taguchi approach, the optimized process parameters are laser power = 298 W, scanning speed = 900 mm/s and hatch distance = 0.075 mm, for which the results of surface roughness = 2.77 Ra, relative density = 99.24%, hardness = 334 Hv and equivalent energy density is 4.062. The estimated data for the same are surface roughness is 3.733 Ra, relative density is 99.926%, hardness is 213.64 Hv and equivalent energy density is 3.677.Originality/valueEven though equivalent energy density represents the energy input to the process, the findings of this paper conclude that energy density should no longer be considered as a dependent process parameter, as it provides multiple results for the specified energy density. This aspect has been successfully demonstrated in this paper using test data.

Untitled

“…Porosity is generally poorly regulated. In the article of R.K. Prasanth Kumar et al (2024) the possibility of influencing the porosity parameters of the material filled with nanocomponents using a magnetic field was proved. The given partial solutions of the diffusion equations do not have a clear possibility of determining the nonlinear diffusion coefficients.…”