Fig. 6: Schematic diagram of computational domain and deterministic conditions, and verification of the simulation results of the benchmark case (Inconel 718).
a Schematic diagram of computational domain, initial and boundary conditions. The two-dimensional computational domain is a longitudinal section of the three-dimensional geometry, including the powder and the substrate. The notes q-laser, q-conv, and q-rad indicate the heat flux on the gas/metal interfaces induced by power input, convective heat loss, and radiation, respectively. b Comparison of the size (depth and width) of the second-track melt pool of LPBF-ed Inconel 718 between simulation results and reported experimental data68. Since the surface of the printed layer is rather uneven, the quantitative validation is performed using the characteristic melt pool width, depth, and height. c Comparison of experimentally observed and simulated cellular structures, and the distribution of primary dendritic (cellular) arm spacing (PDAS). Solute segregation distribution is used to characterise the microstructure of the printed tracks. Computational grids with the size of 0.25 μm is plotted. d Comparison of experimental data (EPMA-WDS) and simulation results on Nb distribution. e Effect of solute trapping effect on the segregation profile and primary dendritic (cellular) arm spacing. *Fig. 6b is adapted from Lee, Y. S. & Zhang, W. Modelling of heat transfer, fluid flow and solidification microstructure of nickel-base superalloy fabricated by laser powder bed fusion. Addit. Manuf. 12, 178–188, Copyright Elsevier (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.05.003.
