Research Papers

Modeling Particle Spray and Capture Efficiency for Direct Laser Deposition Using a Four Nozzle Powder Injection System

[+] Author and Article Information
Christopher Katinas

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907
e-mail: ckatinas@purdue.edu

Weixiao Shang

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907
e-mail: shangw@purdue.edu

Yung C. Shin

Fellow ASME
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette 47907
e-mail: shin@purdue.edu

Jun Chen

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907
e-mail: junchen@purdue.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received June 12, 2017; final manuscript received January 3, 2018; published online February 14, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Hongqiang Chen.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 140(4), 041014 (Feb 14, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-17-1369; doi: 10.1115/1.4038997 History: Received June 12, 2017; Revised January 03, 2018

Powder capture efficiency is indicative of the amount of material that is added to the substrate during laser additive manufacturing (AM) processes, and thus, being able to predict capture efficiency provides capability of predictive modeling during such processes. The focus of the work presented in this paper is to create a numerical model to understand particle trajectories and velocities, which in turn allows for the prediction of capture efficiency. To validate the numerical model, particle tracking velocimetry (PTV) experiments at two powder flow rates were conducted on free stream particle spray to track individual particles such that particle concentration and velocity fields could be obtained. Results from the free stream comparison showed good agreement to the trends observed in experimental data and were subsequently used in a direct laser deposition (DLD) simulation to assess capture efficiency and temperature profile at steady-state. The simulation was validated against a single track deposition experiment and showed proper correlation of the free surface geometry, molten pool boundary, heat affected zone boundary, and capture efficiency.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Irving, R. , 1999, “ Taking a Powder,” Mech. Eng., 121(9), p. 55.
Keicher, D. M. , and Miller, W. D. , 1998, “ LENS™ Moves Beyond Rp to Direct Fabrication,” Met. Powder Rep., 12(53), pp. 26–28.
Mazumder, J. , 1996, “ Laser Assisted Surface Coatings,” Metallurgical and Ceramic Protective Coatings, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 74–111. [CrossRef]
Partes, K. , 2009, “ Analytical Model of the Catchment Efficiency in High Speed Laser Cladding,” Surf. Coat. Technol., 204(3), pp. 366–371. [CrossRef]
Pinkerton, A. J. , and Li, L. , 2004, “ Modelling Powder Concentration Distribution From a Coaxial Deposition Nozzle for Laser-Based Rapid Tooling,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 126(1), pp. 33–41. [CrossRef]
Lin, J. , 2000, “ Numerical Simulation of the Focused Powder Streams in Coaxial Laser Cladding,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 105(1), pp. 17–23. [CrossRef]
Ibarra-Medina, J. , Vogel, M. , and Pinkerton, A. J. , 2011, “ A CFD Model of Laser Cladding: From Deposition Head to Melt Pool Dynamics,” 30th International Congress on Applications of Lasers and Electro-Optics (ICALEO), Orlando, FL, Oct. 23–27, pp. 23–27. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/33530579/FULL_TEXT.PDF
Yang, N. , 2009, “ Concentration Model Based on Movement Model of Powder Flow in Coaxial Laser Cladding,” Opt. Laser Technol., 41(1), pp. 94–98. [CrossRef]
Lin, J. , and Steen, W. M. , 1997, “ Powder Flow and Catchment During Coaxial Laser Cladding,” Proc. SPIE, 3097, pp. 517–528.
Thakar, Y. D. , Pan, H. , and Liou, F. , 2004, “ Numerical and Experimental Analysis of the Powder Flow Streams in the Laser Aided Material Deposition Process,” 15th Conference on Solid Freeform Fabrication (SFF), Austin, TX, Aug. 2–4, pp. 512–522. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266094673_NUMERICAL_AND_EXPERIMENTAL_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_POWDER_FLOW_STREAMS_IN_THE_LASER_AIDED_MATERIAL_DEPOSITION_PROCESS
Yang, S. , and Evans, J. , 2007, “ Metering and Dispensing of Powder; the Quest for New Solid Freeforming Techniques,” Powder Technol., 178(1), pp. 56–72. [CrossRef]
Wen, S. , and Shin, Y. C. , 2010, “ Modeling of Transport Phenomena During the Coaxial Laser Direct Deposition Process,” J. Appl. Phys., 108(4), p. 044908. [CrossRef]
Zekovic, S. , Dwivedi, R. , and Kovacevic, R. , 2007, “ Numerical Simulation and Experimental Investigation of Gas–Powder Flow From Radially Symmetrical Nozzles in Laser-Based Direct Metal Deposition,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 47(1), pp. 112–123. [CrossRef]
Wen, S. , Shin, Y. , Murthy, J. , and Sojka, P. , 2009, “ Modeling of Coaxial Powder Flow for the Laser Direct Deposition Process,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 52(25), pp. 5867–5877. [CrossRef]
Thompson, S. M. , Bian, L. , Shamsaei, N. , and Yadollahi, A. , 2015, “ An Overview of Direct Laser Deposition for Additive Manufacturing; Part I: Transport Phenomena, Modeling and Diagnostics,” Addit. Manuf., 8, pp. 36–62. [CrossRef]
ANSYS, 2009, “ Fluent 12.0 Theory Guide,” Ansys Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
Launder, B. E. , and Spalding, D. , 1974, “ The Numerical Computation of Turbulent Flows,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 3(2), pp. 269–289. [CrossRef]
Kader, B. , 1981, “ Temperature and Concentration Profiles in Fully Turbulent Boundary Layers,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 24(9), pp. 1541–1544. [CrossRef]
Haider, A. , and Levenspiel, O. , 1989, “ Drag Coefficient and Terminal Velocity of Spherical and Nonspherical Particles,” Powder Technol., 58(1), pp. 63–70. [CrossRef]
Lin, Y. , McHugh, K. M. , Zhou, Y. , and Lavernia, E. J. , 2007, “ Modeling the Spray Forming of H13 Steel Tooling,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 38(7), pp. 1632–1637. [CrossRef]
He, X. , Yu, G. , and Mazumder, J. , 2010, “ Temperature and Composition Profile During Double-Track Laser Cladding of H13 Tool Steel,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 43(1), p. 015502. [CrossRef]
Bergström, D. , Kaplan, A. , and Powell, J. , 2003, “ Mathematical Modelling of Laser Absorption Mechanisms in Metals: A Review,” 16th Meeting on Mathematical Modelling of Materials Processing with Lasers, Igls, Austria, Jan. 20–24, pp. 19–48. http://miun.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A27172&dswid=3962
Putman Publishing Company and OMEGA Press, 1998, “ Emissivities of Common Materials,” Transactions in Measurement and Control, Putman Publishing Company and OMEGA Press LLC, Schaumburg, IL, pp. 72–76.
He, X. , Fuerschbach, P. , and DebRoy, T. , 2003, “ Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow During Laser Spot Welding of 304 Stainless Steel,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 36(12), p. 1388. [CrossRef]
Zhu, G. , Li, D. , Zhang, A. , Pi, G. , and Tang, Y. , 2011, “ The Influence of Standoff Variations on the Forming Accuracy in Laser Direct Metal Deposition,” Rapid Prototyping J., 17(2), pp. 98–106. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Diagram of DLD process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

H13 particle shapes at (a) <45 μm, (b) 45 μm < x < 75 μm, (c) 75 μm < x < 90 μm, and (d) 90 μm < x < 150 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Optomec LENS 750 nozzle geometry—bottom view (left) and side view (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Experimental setup of PTV equipment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Particle velocity field for free stream experimentation at 7.5 rpm hopper speed: (a) individual particles colored by originating nozzle and (b) average overall particle velocity field

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Detail of particle interaction with laser sheet (a) isometric view and (b) side view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Particle concentration for free stream at 9.84 g/min

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Cross section view of single track H13 deposition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Boundary conditions for free stream domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

DPM concentration at nozzle head off-axis slices from 0.0 mm to 2.0 mm at 9.84 g/min powder feed rate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of (a) experimental particle concentration and (b) modeled concentration with extracted concentration contours at two locations (9.84 g/min)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of (a) experimental particle concentration and (b) modeled concentration with extracted concentration contours at two locations (6.55 g/min)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Error quantification of free stream cases—powder feed of 9.84 g/min (a) and 6.55 g/min (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Particle velocity fields for free stream scenario at 9.84 g/min (top) and 6.55 g/min (bottom)powder feed rates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of H13 tool steel DLD simulation results to experimental measurements




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In