Page 28 - MSAM-1-4
P. 28

Materials Science in Additive Manufacturing                       Process optimization of SEBM IN718 via ML



                           A                                       B










                                                                    C






                                                                     D







            Figure 4. Classification of surface morphology. (A) Processing parameters window of surface morphology. (B–D) Typical surface morphology and
            corresponding cross sections of samples: (B) 15 mA and 2 m/s (top), 25mA and 3m/s (bottom); (C) 15 mA and 4 m/s; and (D) 7.5 mA and 7 m/s.

                           A                                  B

















            Figure 5. Surface morphology analysis. (A) Effect of energy density and beam current on surface morphology. (B) Relationship between energy density,
            relative density and surface morphology.


            characteristics of surface morphology. Low-energy   3.2. Prediction of relative density by machine
            density results in porous surfaces, while high-energy   learning
            density results in uneven surfaces. Despite the same   In this study, SVR and GPR machine learning algorithms
            energy density, it is still easy to get uneven or unformed   were trained to predict the relative density. There were 65
            surfaces when the beam current is too high. The surface   groups of basic data (including six repeated low relative
            morphology  is also  related  with the  relative  density, as   density data), in which 52 data were for training, while 13
            shown in Figure 5B. The porous surface has a low relative   data were for testing, as shown in Figure 3. Training the
            density due to the lack-of-fusion defects mentioned   machine learning model by the method is described in
            above. Samples with even surfaces usually own higher   section 2.2. The appropriate hyper-parameter was selected
            relative density, compared to those with uneven surfaces.   by the Grid-Search method. Hyper-parameter is critical to
            Different from SLM which uses laser as energy source,   machine learning’s performance. SVR has the radial basis
            there was no reduction in relative density due to keyhole   function kernel and hyper-parameters C = 300, γ = 3.5, and
            when the energy density is too high .              GPR has squared exponential kernel and hyper-parameter
                                         [46]

            Volume 1 Issue 4 (2022)                         5                     https://doi.org/10.18063/msam.v1i4.23
   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33