materials

Article
Simulation of Laser Heating of Aluminum and
Model Validation via Two-Color Pyrometer and
Shape Assessment
Fabrizia Caiazzo * ID
and Vittorio Alfieri ID

Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, 84084 Fisciano, Italy; valfieri@unisa.it

* Correspondence: f.caiazzo@unisa.it; Tel.: +39-089-964-323




Received: 4 July 2018; Accepted: 20 August 2018; Published: 22 August 2018


Abstract: The modeling of laser-based processes is increasingly addressed in a competitive

environment for two main reasons: Preventing a trial-and-error approach to set the optimum
processing conditions and non-destructive real-time control. In this frame, a thermal model for
laser heating in the form of non-penetrative bead-on-plate welds of aluminum alloy 2024 is proposed
in this paper. A super-Gaussian profile is considered for the transverse optical intensity and a number
of laws for temperature-dependent material properties have been included aiming to improve the
reliability of the model. The output of the simulation in terms of both thermal evolution of the
parent metal and geometry of the fusion zone is validated in comparison with the actual response:
namely, a two-color pyrometer is used to infer the thermal history on the exposed surface around
the scanning path, whereas the shape and size of the fusion zone are assessed in the transverse
cross-section. With an average error of 3% and 4%, the model is capable of predicting the peak
temperature and the depth of the fusion zone upon laser heating, respectively. The model is intended
to offer a comprehensive description of phenomena in laser heating in preparation for a further model
for repairing via additive manufacturing.

Keywords: modeling; laser processing; simulation; pyrometer; aluminum

1. Introduction
Simulation tools are crucial in a competitive environment to prevent a trial-and-error approach
to set the optimum processing conditions at a pre-design stage [1]. Moreover, proper modeling
of an industrial process is the key to introduce closed-loop real-time monitoring where signals are
managed for the purpose of control [2], to correct possible deviations of the main factors with respect
to the intended, simulated response. Therefore, two issues must be addressed: the building of a reliable
model structure and the arranging of effective equipment for real-time monitoring.
Regarding the former, the need for developing simulation tools to predict the transient temperature
fields in laser-based processes has been widely presented in the literature [3]. Indeed, irrespective of
the application and the technology, it has been shown that temperature directly affects the mechanical
properties of the final component.
Some effort has been made in this field and a wide range of applications are reported in the
literature, including but not limited to hardening [4], laser ablation [5], laser cutting [6], laser drilling [7],
laser welding [8,9], and additive manufacturing of metal powder [10,11]. Irrespective of the application,
the prediction of the temperature field is crucial for many purposes, including but not limited to
non-destructive real-time evaluation of the process [2], minimization of residual stresses, and heat
accumulation during additive manufacturing [11,12]. In general, advanced complex models are
required to consider beam attenuation in the laser-induced plasma plume when higher irradiance is

Materials 2018, 11, 1506; doi:10.3390/ma11091506 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2018, 11, 1506 2 of 13

delivered (e.g., in cutting, drilling, and welding). Specific additional references to common assumptions
for modeling will be given in the following relevant sections of the paper.
Once a proper simulation tool has been developed to relate the input parameters on the laser
thermal cycles, signals must be extracted from the process and continuously compared to the intended
output. Therefore, for the purpose of exploiting the transient temperature field in real-time monitoring
and control, a cost-effective, fast, and reliable solution should aim to reduce the error in temperature
measurements. A number of methods and detection sensors have been proposed in the literature:
Thermocouples, photodiodes, and infrared cameras are the main methods that have been tested and
compared [13]. Unfortunately, they are generally unsuitable for laser-based processes in an industrial
environment, since fast measurements at precise locations approaching the laser path are required.
Indeed, sharp temperature gradients as a consequence of fast heating and cooling rates are involved in
laser processing; moreover, the acquisition may be significantly affected by laser radiation and plume
dynamics, depending on the metal to be processed and the operating window [2].
Instead, fiber-optic pyrometers are a valuable method, being contactless and faster, with a response
time in the order of milliseconds [14]. Additional advantages are offered by two-color pyrometers [15]
dealing with the ratio of optical powers at two spectral bands to bypass the dependence of emissivity
on the temperature. A wide theoretical background about detecting with two-color pyrometers is
available in the literature [16].
A model for laser thermal heating in the form of non-penetrative bead-on-plate welds was built
in COMSOL Multiphysics in this study, aiming to simulate the creation of the melting pool due to
laser heating, in preparation for a further model where impinging metal would be fed for repair via
additive manufacturing. Although some effort has been made in the literature to model the process of
material deposition for the purpose of additive manufacturing [17,18], many simplifying assumptions
are usually made in terms of material properties and boundary conditions, given that many complex
phenomena are involved; in this frame, this paper specifically aimed to build a comprehensive model
via a methodical approach contemplating several items. The validation of the process of simulating
mere thermal heating (i.e., bead-on-plate welds) and the creation of a melting pool was required
before moving to a more complex model; with this respect, the results are discussed in this paper.
Namely, aluminum alloy (AA) 2024-T3 was chosen as a base metal, as it is widely used in the aerospace
and automotive industries for high price-sensitive parts requiring maintenance via focused heat
sources, such as laser beams. The reliability of the simulation was assessed in comparison with the
experimental data, i.e., the thermal history around the scanning path and the geometrical response
in the fusion zone upon cross-cutting. Namely, a fiber-optic two-color pyrometer was used to obtain
temperature measurements.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Thermal Modeling

2.1.1. Heat Equations

Heat generated by a laser beam above a metal surface is dissipated by means of conduction,
convection, and radiation. The theoretical approach to modeling is provided in the literature [11].
Namely, the heat transport equation can be given as:

∂T
ρc = ∇·(k∇ T ) + αQ (1)
∂t
where ρ is the density, c is the heat capacity, T is the temperature, t is the time, k is the thermal
conductivity, α is the absorption coefficient, and Q is the laser heat generation. In addition, convection
and radiation losses qc and qr are given as:

qc = h( T∞ − T ) (2)
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 3 of 13

 
4
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
qr = εσ Troom − T4 3 of 13
(3)

where h is the heat convection coefficient, ε is the emissivity, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, and
T ∞ and Troom are the gas medium and room 𝑞r = temperature,
𝜀𝜎 𝑇room − 𝑇 respectively. In the following sections, losses
(3)
willwhere
be provided in form of boundary conditions, depending on the domain of interest; both T and
h is the heat convection coefficient, ε is the emissivity, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant,∞and
Troom will Tbe assumed as 22 C.◦
T∞ and room are the gas medium and room temperature, respectively. In the following sections, losses

will be provided in form of boundary conditions, depending on the domain of interest; both T∞ and
2.1.2. Heat Source
Troom will be assumed as 22 °C.
The first step to address is a proper description of the laser heat generation. The fundamental
mode of Heat
2.1.2. Source beam [19] is generally preferred [11,20] and a Gaussian heat source is provided,
a Gaussian
accordingly. It isstep
The first worth noting that
to address although
is a proper a lean description
description of the laserisheatgained, the assumption
generation. of a true
The fundamental
Gaussian
mode ofbeam is not beam
a Gaussian suitable
[19]in general, unless
is generally preferred high-quality
[11,20] and laser beamsheat
a Gaussian aresource
considered. Other
is provided,
theoretical
accordingly.formulations
It is worthare hence
noting thatproposed
althoughin the literature,
a lean descriptionincluding
is gained, athe double-ellipsoid
assumption of apower true
Gaussian
density beam is [17]
distribution not suitable
based on in general,
the original unless high-quality
model suggested laserbybeams
Goldak are [21],
considered. Other
and a flat-top
beamtheoretical
[19]. The formulations are henceinproposed
latter is considered this paper; in the literature,
namely, including
the heat a double-ellipsoid
generated power
by a super-Gaussian
density
profile (i.e.,distribution
a smoothed[17] basedprofile)
flat-top on the original
of transversemodeloptical
suggested by Goldak
intensity of order[21],n and
can abeflat-top
given as:beam
[19]. The latter is considered in this paper; namely, the heat generated by a super-Gaussian profile
  n 
(i.e., a smoothed flat-top profile) of transverse optical intensity r of order n can be given as:
Q(r ) = Q0 exp −2 (4)
w
𝑟 0
𝑄 𝑟 = 𝑄 exp −2 (4)
𝑤
where Q0 is the peak intensity, w0 is the beam radius over the incident surface, and r is the radial
wherefrom
distance Q0 isthethepropagation
peak intensity, w0 A
axis. is conventional
the beam radius over theprofile
Gaussian incident surface,
results fromand r is the radial
a super-Gaussian
distance from the propagation axis. A conventional Gaussian profile results
one of order two; the higher the order, the steeper the edges of the profile. A super-Gaussian intensity from a super-Gaussian
one of
profile of order
ordertwo; the higher
20 was the order,inthe
implemented thesteeper
paperthe edges of
(Figure 1),the profile.
based on A super-Gaussian
actual intensity
data acquisition via
beamprofile of order
profiler. Under 20 this
was assumption
implementedand in the
for paper (Figure
P denoting the1),operating
based onpower,
actual data acquisition
the peak intensityviain
beam profiler.
Equation Under this assumption and for P denoting the operating power, the peak intensity in
(4) approaches:
Equation (4) approaches: P
Q0 = (5)
𝑃πw02
𝑄 = (5)
𝜋𝑤
Moreover, since the model is aimed to simulate an application of repairing via metal addition
where a Moreover,
defocusedsince beamthe model
must is aimed
be used [22], tothesimulate
laser beam an application
was defocused of repairing via metaldiameter
to a processing additionof
where a defocused beam must be used [22], the laser beam was defocused to a processing diameter
3 mm.
ofWith
3 mm. x0 and y0 being the coordinates of the starting point of the beam path, s the traveling speed
Withbeam
of the laser x0 andalong
y0 being
thethe coordinates
x-direction, andof the
t the starting
time; point
a movingof theheat
beam path, swas
source the traveling
implemented speedin
of the laser beam along the x-direction,
a Cartesian coordinate system, hence Equation (4) yielding: and t the time; a moving heat source was implemented in a
Cartesian coordinate system, hence Equation (4) yielding:
   
P 2 𝑥 − 𝑥 2[( x −+ x0 )20 +(y−y0 )20 ] 2[(s t− x0 )20 +(y−y0 )20 ]
𝑃
Q( x, y) = πw2 exp − 𝑦 − 𝑦 𝑃 P
= 2 exp − 2 𝑠 𝑡 − 𝑥 + 𝑦 − 𝑦 (6)
𝑄 𝑥, 𝑦 = exp −0 w020 = πwexp − w020 (6)
𝜋𝑤 𝑤 𝜋𝑤 0 𝑤

Figure
Figure 1. Distribution
1. Distribution ofof transverseoptical
transverse opticalintensity:
intensity: Super-Gaussian
Super-Gaussian profile
profileof
oforder
order20.
20.
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13

2.1.3. Material Properties

Including temperature-dependent material properties in the model is the key to a reliable
prediction of 11,
Materials 2018, the temperature
1506 field. For this purpose, based on the available literature 4on the
of 13
characterization of pure aluminum and its alloys, a number of laws have been included in the
background for the properties involved in conduction, convection, and radiation equations. AA 2024
2.1.3. Material Properties
of typical composition [23] for wrought products is used; solidus and liquidus temperature of 775
and 911Including temperature-dependent
K, respectively, are given. material properties in the model is the key to a reliable
prediction of the temperature field. For this purpose,
At first, a functional form for density (kg·m based [24],
−3) is borrowed on the available on
depending literature on the
the aggregation
characterization of pure aluminum and its alloys, a number of laws have been included in the
status:
background for the properties involved in conduction, convection, and radiation equations. AA 2024
𝜌of typical
𝑇 =composition
2813 + 0.03[23]𝑇for
− wrought
7.4 10 products
𝑇 +is10 𝑇 − 5.7
used; solidus and 10
liquidus 𝑇 𝑇 of775
temperature 775Kand
911 K, respectively, are given. (7)
𝜌 𝑇 = 2725 − 0.32 𝑇 𝑇 911 K − 3
At first, a functional form for density (kg·m ) is borrowed [24], depending on the
aggregation
Within the status:
solidification range between solidus and liquidus temperature, a general rule of
mixtures
( (i.e., a two-phase model) is implemented:
ρsolid ( T ) = 2813 + 0.03 × T − 7.4 × 10−4 × T 2 + 10−6 × T 3 − 5.7 × 10−10 × T 4 T ≤ 775 K
(7)
𝜌=−
ρliquid ( T ) = 2725 𝜃 0.32𝜌× T + 1T−≥ 𝜃911 K 𝜌 775 𝑇 911 K (8)
with θsolid
Within denoting the solid volume
the solidification fraction.solidus
range between Regarding the heattemperature,
and liquidus capacity (J·kg−1·K−1), a similar
a general rule of
approach is taken [25,26]:
mixtures (i.e., a two-phase model) is implemented:
𝑐 𝑇 = 199 + 3.9 𝑇 − 7.4 10 𝑇 + 5.2 10 𝑇 𝑇 775 K (9)
ρ = θsolid ρsolid + (1 − θsolid )ρliquid 775 < T < 911 K (8)
Constant extrapolation has been set to extend this law beyond the solidus temperature. An
−1 −1 ), a similar
with
evolution of denoting
θ solid the solid volume
thermal conductivity (W·mfraction.
−1·K−1) as Regarding
a function the in(Ja·kg
heat capacity
of temperature solid·K
state is available
approach
in the literatureis taken
[26].[25,26]:
Based on this, a functional form has been extracted and implemented:
𝑘
csolid ( T𝑇) ==199
137++3.9
2.9
× T 10
− 7.4 ×𝑇10+−31.3
× T 210
+ 5.2 ×𝑇10−6 × T𝑇3 775
T ≤K775 K (10)
(9)
Linear extrapolation has been set to extend this law beyond the solidus temperature.
Constant extrapolation has been set to extend this law beyond the solidus temperature.
For an opaque material, the absorption coefficient α is complementary to the reflection
An evolution of thermal conductivity (W·m−1 ·K−1 ) as a function of temperature in a solid state
coefficient (1–α).
is available in theSince reflection
literature is oneonofthis,
[26]. Based theamain factors
functional affecting
form has beenthe coupling
extracted andefficiency when
implemented:
processing metals [27], the trend of reflectivity vs. temperature is required: although constant average
absorption has beenk solidproposed by +
( T ) = 137 some 10−4 × in
2.9 ×authors T+ the × 10−6 ×[11,18],
1.3literature T2 Tthe
≤ reflectivity
775 K of aluminum
(10)
in solid state may decrease from 95 to as low as 60% [28]. Given this, a functional form for reflectivity,
Linear
for a given extrapolation
operating has been set of
laser wavelength to extend
a doped this
YAG law(Yttrium
beyond the solidus temperature.
Aluminum Garnet) active gain, has
been inferred (Figure 2), based on two main assumptions: a reduction oftoreflectivity
For an opaque material, the absorption coefficient α is complementary the reflection coefficient
and, hence, an
(1–α). Since reflection is one of the main factors affecting the coupling efficiency
increase of absorption, in turn, is reported for increasing temperature [28]; a sharp drop at a measure when processing
metals
of 5% [27], theattrend
is noticed phaseof transition
reflectivity[29]
vs. temperature is required: although constant average absorption
for pure aluminum.
has been proposed by some authors in the literature [11,18], the reflectivity of aluminum in solid state
In the assumption of natural convection, a constant heat convection coefficient h = 10 W·m−2·K−1
may decrease from 95 to as low as 60% [28]. Given this, a functional form for reflectivity, for a given
was fed to the model [17,20]. In the operating range of laser heating, even the dependence of
operating laser wavelength of a doped YAG (Yttrium Aluminum Garnet) active gain, has been inferred
emissivity on the temperature is mild: a constant value ε = 0.15 [30] was set. Eventually, generation
(Figure 2), based on two main assumptions: a reduction of reflectivity and, hence, an increase of
of plasma, and, hence, beam attenuation, can be neglected since vaporization is prevented in this
absorption, in turn, is reported for increasing temperature [28]; a sharp drop at a measure of 5% is
application [28].
noticed at phase transition [29] for pure aluminum.

Figure 2.2.Aluminum
Figure Aluminumreflectivity
reflectivitycoefficient as aa function
coefficient as functionofoftemperature.
temperature.
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 5 of 13
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13

In the
2.1.4. assumption
Virtual Specimenofand natural
Meshing convection, a constant heat convection coefficient h = 10 W·m−2 ·K−1
2.1.4. Virtual Specimen and Meshing
was fedLaser
to theheating
Materials model
2018, 11, x[17,20].
FOR PEERIn
was modeled the
REVIEW
over operating
a virtual range
specimen, of laser
80 mmheating,
long, 60 evenmmthe wide, dependence
10 mm thick,
5ofofemissivity
13
this
on being Laser
the temperature heating was modeled over a virtual specimen, 80 mm long, 60 mm wide, 10 mm thick, ofthis
the size
2.1.4. of theisplatemild: a constant
in the experimentalvalueprocedure
ε = 0.15 [30] was set. Eventually,
for validation. For the purpose generation
of improving plasma,
being theVirtual
size ofSpecimen
the plate and in theMeshing
experimental procedure for validation. For the purpose of improving
and,thehence, beam of
consistency attenuation,
the model, can the be neglected
specimen wassincedivided vaporization is prevented
into two domains of interestin this application
(Figure 3): a [28].
the consistency of thewas model, the over
specimen was divided80 into
mmtwo domains of interest
10 mm(Figure 3): a
central, 10Lasermm heating
wide, 0.4 mmmodeled
deep slot a virtual
for the laserspecimen,
path (domain long,
1, D160 mmthe
) and wide, remaining thick,
(domainthis
central,
being10 themm sizewide, 0.4 mm deep slot for theprocedure
laser pathfor (domain 1, DFor1) and the remaining (domain
2.1.4.
2, DVirtual
2). Indeed, it isofworth
Specimen theandplate in the
Meshing
noting experimental
that the main issue in the validation.
modeling of athe purpose
laser-based of improving
process is a
2, Dthe
2). consistency
Indeed, it isofworth noting
the model, thethat the main
specimen wasissue in the
divided intomodeling
two domains of a of
laser-based process
interest (Figure 3): isa a
reliable implementation of a processing diameter in the order of tenths of millimeters [19]. As a
Laser
reliable heating
central, 10 mm was
implementation wide, modeled
ofmm
0.4 over
a processing a virtual
deep slot thespecimen,
diameter
for laserin 80
the(domain
path mmof1,long,
order tenths
D1) and60of mm wide, 10(domain
themillimeters
remaining mm As
[19]. thick,
a this
consequence of this, an ultrafine mesh must be set along the laser path, whereas a coarser mesh is
beingconsequence
2, D
the size of this,
2). Indeed,
of the it isan
plate ultrafine
worth
in thenoting mesh
that must
experimental the mainbe set along
issue
procedure themodeling
in for
the laser path,
validation. of awhereas
laser-based
For a coarser
the purpose process mesh
of is a is
improving
allowed for the purpose of reducing the simulation time: a triangle mesh of variable size was applied,
reliable
allowed
theaccordingly
consistency forimplementation
the
ofpurpose
the of the
a processing
of reducing diameter
the simulation in the
time: order
a triangle ofmesh
tenths ofof millimeters
variable size [19].applied,
was As a
consequence
(Figure 4),model,
of this,
the
an
edges
ultrafine
specimen
being 0.15
mesh0.15
mmwas
mustmm be set
divided
in size within
along
into two
D1 then
the laser
domains
ranging
path,ranging
whereasup
upatoof interest
10 mmmesh
coarser
(Figure
across is
3):
accordingly
a central, 10 mm (Figure
wide, 4),
0.4 the
mm edges
deep being
slot for the laserin size
path within
(domainD 1 then
1, D ) and the to 10
remainingmm across
(domain 2,
D2 (Figure
allowed 5).for the purpose of reducing the simulation time: a triangle mesh of variable size was applied,
1
D2 (Figure 5).
D2 ). Indeed,
Boundary it
accordingly
is worth
and initial noting that
4),conditions
the main
are given issue in
for each the modeling
domain. of
within Regarding
a laser-based
D1, laser process
heat generationis a reliable
Boundary (Figure and initial the edges being
conditions 0.15 mm
are given forineach
size domain. DRegarding
1 then ranging D1, uplaserto 10 mm
heat across
generation
implementation
Q is provided
D 2 (Figure of
along
5). a processing
the processing diameter in the order
path; convection of tenthslosses
and radiation of millimeters
are experienced [19]. atAsthea consequence
upper
Q is provided along the processing path; convection and radiation losses are experienced at the upper
surface.
of this, an Regarding
ultrafine
Boundary D
mesh
and2, convection
must
initial be and
set
conditions radiation
along
are the
given losses
laser
for are experienced
path,
each whereas
domain. at
a
Regarding each
coarser
D 1surface;
, mesh
laser a condition
heat is allowed
generation of for the
surface. Regarding D2, convection and radiation losses are experienced at each surface; a condition of
thermal
purpose Qof iscontinuity
provided
reducing isthe
along given
the with respect
processing
simulation to convection
path;
time: D
a 1 for eachand
triangle shared
mesh surface.
radiation
of The
losses
variable areinitial temperature
experienced
size was of
at the upper
applied, the
accordingly
thermal continuity is given with respect to D1 for each shared surface. The initial temperature of the
domains
(Figure is assumed
surface.
4), the Regarding as Droom temperature.
2, convection and radiation
withinlosses are experienced
D1 then at each
to 10surface; a condition of
D2 (Figure
domains is edges
assumed being 0.15
as room mm in
temperature.size ranging up mm across 5).
thermal continuity is given with respect to D1 for each shared surface. The initial temperature of the
domains is assumed as room temperature.

Figure 3. Domains of interest: central slot (blue domain, D1), and remaining (grey domain, D2).
Figure
Figure 3. Domains
3. Domains of of interest:central
interest: centralslot
slot (blue
(blue domain,
domain,DD
1), and remaining
1 ), and (grey
remaining domain,
(grey D2). D2 ).
domain,
Figure 3. Domains of interest: central slot (blue domain, D1), and remaining (grey domain, D2).

Figure 4. Triangle
Figure Trianglemesh
meshofof
variable sizesize
variable on the virtual
on the specimen.
virtual specimen.
Figure 4. Triangle mesh of variable size on the virtual specimen.
Figure 4. Triangle mesh of variable size on the virtual specimen.

Figure
Figure 5. Mesh
5. Mesh detail
detail at the
at the interface
interface with
with thecentral
the centralslot.
slot.
Figure
Figure 5.5.Mesh
Meshdetail
detail at
at the
theinterface
interfacewith
withthethe
central slot.slot.
central

Boundary and initial conditions are given for each domain. Regarding D1 , laser heat generation
Q is provided along the processing path; convection and radiation losses are experienced at the upper
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 6 of 13

surface. Regarding D2 , convection and radiation losses are experienced at each surface; a condition of
thermal continuity is given with respect to D1 for each shared surface. The initial temperature of the
domains is assumed as room temperature.
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13
2.2. Experimental Procedure
2.2. Experimental Procedure
Laser heating in the form of bead-on-plate tests was performed. The operating window to achieve
Laser heatingininthe
effective penetration thecross-section
form of bead-on-plate
was borrowed tests was
from performed.
previous Theworksoperating window
on the same to [22],
alloy
achieve effective penetration in the cross-section was borrowed from previous
even aiming for non-penetrative bead-on-plate welds to prevent porosity [31]; traveling speed and works on the same
alloy [22], even aiming for non-penetrative bead-on-plate welds to prevent porosity [31]; traveling
power were considered, and the results of six testing conditions have been found (Table 1). For the
speed and power were considered, and the results of six testing conditions have been found (Table
purpose of an easier comparison of the responses, the length of the scanning path was conveniently set
1). For the purpose of an easier comparison of the responses, the length of the scanning path was
in order to result in 10 s heating, irrespective of the traveling speed.
conveniently set in order to result in 10 s heating, irrespective of the traveling speed.
A thin-disc laser
A thin-disc source
laser source was
wasused
used(Table
(Table2).2). Defocusing
Defocusing ofofthe the laser
laser beam
beam waswas setorder
set in in order
to getto get
a processing diameter of 3 mm on the top surface. Moreover, a tilting angle of 4 ◦ was given to the laser
a processing diameter of 3 mm on the top surface. Moreover, a tilting angle of 4° was given to the
head,laser
in agreement with common
head, in agreement withpractice
commonforpractice
highly for
reflective
highly metals, to prevent
reflective metals, to back-reflections
prevent back- from
reflections
entering fromtrain
the optics entering
[27];the optics train
although [27]; although
reflectivity reflectivity
depends on thedepends
angle ofonincidence
the angle and
of incidence
the plane of
and the plane
polarization of theoflaser
polarization
beam, of thethe laser can
effect beam,bethe effect canatbethis
neglected neglected
angle at this[28].
size angle
Thesizescheme
[28]. Theof the
schemeset-up
processing of the processing
was composed set-upofwas composed
a laser head,of a laser head,
a clamping a clamping
device, and adevice, and a (Figure
pyrometer pyrometer 6).
(Figure 6).
Table 1. Processing conditions for laser heating.
Table 1. Processing conditions for laser heating.

Speed
Speed (mm/s)
(mm/s) Power
Power (W)
(W) Scanning
Scanninglength (mm)
length (mm)
4 4 2000
2000 4040
4 4 2500
2500 4040
4 4 3000
3000 4040
6 6 2000
2000 60
60
6 2500 60
6 6 2500
3000 60
60
6 3000 60

Table 2. Main technical features of the laser source.

Table 2. Main technical features of the laser source.

Parameter
Parameter Value
Value
Maximum output power
Maximum output power (kW) (kW) 4.0
4.0
Operating
Operating nominal
nominal wavelength
wavelength (nm)(nm) 1030
1030
Beam
Beam Parameter
Parameter Product
Product (mm × mrad)
(mm × mrad) 8.0
8.0
MM2 quality factor
2 quality 24.3
factor 24.3
Core
Corediameter
diameterof the delivering
of the fiberfiber
delivering (µm)(µm) 300
300
Spot size of the laser beam on the surface (mm) 3.0
Spot size of the laser beam on the surface (mm) 3.0

4°

TRAVELLING DIRECTION
PYROMETER

LASER BEAM

CLAMPING CLAMPING

STANDING ARGON

STANDING ARGON

Figure 6. Scheme of the processing set-up; components are not to scale.

Figure 6. Scheme of the processing set-up; components are not to scale.
Moreover, to prevent oxidation of the base metal, resulting in defects and additional heating as
Moreover, to prevent
a consequence of energyoxidation of the
release, argon for base metal, resulting
inert shielding in defects
was supplied to the and additional
working heating as
area; a steady
shielding atmosphere resulted, giving grounds to the assumptions of natural convection in modeling.
a consequence of energy release, argon for inert shielding was supplied to the working area; a steady
The plate was clamped at the edges, so that convection in standing argon was experienced and one
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 7 of 13

shielding atmosphere resulted, giving grounds to the assumptions of natural convection in modeling.
Materials
The plate was2018, 11, x FOR PEER
clamped at theREVIEW
edges, so that convection in standing argon was experienced 7 ofand
13 one

may assume conduction is negligible to the purpose of simulating the thermal history at the laser path.
may assume conduction is negligible to the purpose of simulating the thermal history at the laser
Temperature
Materials 2018, 11,model
x FOR PEERvalidations
REVIEW were performed by means of a fiber-optic two-color7 pyrometer of 13
path.
which was calibrated in a 290–610 ◦ C (i.e., 563–883 K) temperature span to the specific purpose of
Temperature model validations were performed by means of a fiber-optic two-color pyrometer
may assume
monitoring
which conduction
AA calibrated
was 2024; ais290–610
negligible
as ainconsequence to
°Cof the563–883
this,
(i.e., purpose K)oftemperature
underflow simulating the
and overflow thermal
span may history
to theresult atpurpose
the and
below
specific laserofabove
path.
the lower and higher span
monitoring AA 2024; as alimits, respectively.
consequence For each given
of this, underflow testingmay
and overflow condition, the pyrometer
result below and above was
Temperature model validations were performed by means of a fiber-optic two-color pyrometer
focused halfway in the processing path, 2 mm from the scanning line (Figure 7). The site ofwas
the lower and higher span limits, respectively. For each given testing condition, the pyrometer interest
which was calibrated in a 290–610 °C (i.e., 563–883 K) temperature span to the specific purpose of
focused
to focus the halfway in the
pyrometer is processing path,
suggested by the2 mmneed from
to the scanning
acquire a line (Figure
response 7). The
within the site of interestrange
calibration
monitoring AA 2024; as a consequence of this, underflow and overflow may result below and above
of thetothe
focus the
device;
loweras
pyrometer
and a consequence,is suggested
higher span limits, direct byacquisition
the need to acquire
respectively. For of
eachthe a response
thermal
given testing
withinalong
history the calibration
condition, the the laserrange
pyrometer path of
was is not
the device; as a consequence, direct acquisition of the thermal history along the laser 5path is not
feasible. A 0.1halfway
focused ms time stepprocessing
in the was set for temperature
path, 2 mm from the acquisition,
scanning linethus resulting
(Figure 7). Theinsite
10 ofsample
interestpoints
feasible. A 0.1 ms time step was set for temperature acquisition, thus resulting in 105 sample points
overall, giventhe
to focus a 10 s periodisof
pyrometer total heating.
suggested A post-acquisition
by the need to acquire a responsesmoothing algorithm
within the calibrationwith
rangea 50-point
of
overall, given a 10 s period of total heating. A post-acquisition smoothing algorithm with a 50-point
the device; as
moving-average wasa consequence,
implemented direct
in acquisition
order to of noise
filter the thermal
from history
the along the laser path is not
output.
moving-average was implemented in order to filter noise from the output.
feasible. A 0.1 ms time step was set for temperature acquisition, thus resulting in 105 sample points
overall, given a 10 s period of total heating. A post-acquisition smoothing algorithm with a 50-point
Y
moving-average was implemented in order to filter noise from the output.
AA 2024 PLATE
2 mm
Y
X
AA 2024 PLATE
2 mm

X SCANNING LINE
60 mm

SITE OF INTEREST
SCANNING LINE
60 mm

SITE OF INTEREST

80 mm

Figure 7. Location and detail of the site of interest (x = 32 mm, y = 40 mm, z = 10 mm) for thermal
Figure 7. Location and detail of the site of interest (x = 32 mm, y = 40 mm, z = 10 mm) for
80 mm
monitoring.
thermal monitoring.
Figure 7. Location and detail of the site of interest (x = 32 mm, y = 40 mm, z = 10 mm) for thermal
Further data for model validation were obtained in the transverse cross-section (i.e., parallel to
monitoring.
the xz plane).
Further data forTomodel
this purpose,
validation thewere
specimens
obtained resulting from laser cross-section
in the transverse heating were(i.e., cross-cut,
parallel to
mechanically
Further ground,
data for and
model polished
validation to a
were mirror
obtainedfinish,
in theand chemically
transverse etched
cross-section with
(i.e.,
the xz plane). To this purpose, the specimens resulting from laser heating were cross-cut, mechanically a solution
parallel to
the xz plane).
consisting of 10%To this purpose,
hydrofluoric acid,the
15%specimens
nitric acid, resulting
and waterfrom laser
at room heating were
temperature [23]. cross-cut,
The actual
ground, and polished to a mirror finish, and chemically etched with a solution consisting of 10%
mechanically
size ground,
of the fusion andeventually
zone was polished to a mirrorviafinish,
measured and
optical chemically
microscopy etched
(Figure 8) with a solutionto
and compared
hydrofluoric
consisting
acid, 15%
of the
nitric acid, and water at room temperature [23]. The actual size of the fusion
10%simulation.
hydrofluoric acid, 15% nitric acid, and water at room temperature [23]. The actual
the output of
zone was
size ofeventually measured
the fusion zone via optical
was eventually microscopy
measured (Figure
via optical 8) and
microscopy compared
(Figure to the output
8) and compared to of
the simulation.
the output of the simulation.

Figure 8. Width and depth of the fusion zone, macrograph resulting at speed of 6 mm/s, power of
2000 W.
Figure 8. Width and depth of the fusion zone, macrograph resulting at speed of 6 mm/s, power of
8. Width and depth of the fusion zone, macrograph resulting at speed of 6 mm/s, power of
Figure2000
3. Results W.
and Discussion
2000 W.
3. Results
3.1. and Discussion
Local Thermal Cycle
3. Results and Discussion
The thermal
3.1. Local Thermal history
Cycle at the site of interest during laser heating is a function of the processing
parameters
3.1. Local Thermal (Figure 9); depending on these, fusion may be experienced at the site of interest. The time-
Cyclehistory
The thermal at the site of interest during laser heating is a function of the processing
scale is started at laser switch-on: since the process duration is dependent on the traveling speed, the
parameters (Figure 9); depending on these, fusion may be experienced at the site of interest. The time-
The
time thermal
to get the history at the siteatof
peak temperature theinterest during(i.e.,
site of interest laser heating
to cover halfis
thea distance)
functionisof5 s.
the processing
scale is started at laser switch-on: since the process duration is dependent on the traveling speed, the
parameters (Figure 9); depending on these, fusion may be experienced at the site of interest. The time-
time to get the peak temperature at the site of interest (i.e., to cover half the distance) is 5 s.
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 8 of 13

scale is started at laser switch-on: since the process duration is dependent on the traveling speed,
the time to get
Materials 2018,the
11, xpeak temperature
FOR PEER REVIEW at the site of interest (i.e., to cover half the distance) is8 5ofs.13

Figure 9. Thermal history of the site of interest as pyrometer output.

Figure 9. Thermal history of the site of interest as pyrometer output.
A recurring shape was found for the temperature profile: namely, a settling period, resulting in
aAleading
recurringthermal
shape spike,
waswasfoundrequired
for thebytemperature
the device when entering
profile: the window
namely, a settlingof calibration (i.e.,
period, resulting in
the operating range of acquisition); a trailing noise was found at the end of the acquisition, due to the
a leading thermal spike, was required by the device when entering the window of calibration (i.e., the
air and argon overheating over the site of interest, instead. The thermal evolution shifted below or
operating range of acquisition); a trailing noise was found at the end of the acquisition, due to the
above the calibration limits under extreme conditions of processing, thus resulting in underflow or
air and argon respectively.
overflow, overheating over the site of interest, instead. The thermal evolution shifted below or
above theFor calibration limitscondition,
each processing under extreme conditions
the thermal ofofprocessing,
evolution thus resulting
the site of interest in underflow
was simulated (Figure or
overflow, respectively.
10) and compared with the acquisition. The peak temperature (Tp) acquired by the pyrometer focus
For extracted
was each processing
and comparedcondition,
with thethe thermal
predicted evolution
peak temperatureof in
the sitetoofquantitatively
order interest was simulated
validate
the 10)
(Figure thermal
and model
compared(Table 3); the
with thepercentage difference
acquisition. between
The peak acquisition
temperature andacquired
(Tp) simulationbywas
thegiven.
pyrometer
focusAn agreement
was extractedin aand
measure of 2.7%,
compared absolute,
with on average,
the predicted wastemperature
peak found in termsinoforderpeak temperature;
to quantitatively
validate the thermal model (Table 3); the percentage difference between acquisition and simulation
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 9 of 13

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 13

was given. An agreement in a measure of 2.7%, absolute, on average, was found in terms of peak
as regarding the
temperature; conditionsthe
as regarding of conditions
underflowofand overflow,and
underflow theoverflow,
simulatedthe
thermal evolution
simulated was
thermal actually
evolution
outside
was of theoutside
actually calibration
of thewindow of the
calibration device.of the device.
window

Speed 4 mm/s, power 2000 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 2000 W

Speed 4 mm/s, power 2500 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 2500 W

Speed 4 mm/s, power 3000 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 3000 W

Figure 10. Simulated thermal history of the site of interest for each processing condition.
Figure 10. Simulated thermal history of the site of interest for each processing condition.

Table 3. Peak temperatures, actual vs. predicted.

Table 3. Peak temperatures, actual vs. predicted.
Tp (K)
Speed (mm/s) Power (W) Tp (K)
Speed (mm/s) Power (W) Actual Simulated Difference
4 2000 Actual803 Simulated
815 Difference
1.5%
4 4 2000 2500 803 848 828
815 −2.4%
1.5%
4 4 2500 3000 848
overflow 828
990 − 2.4%
n/a
4 3000 overflow 990 n/a
6 2000 underflow 543 n/a
6 2000 underflow 543 n/a
6 6 2500 2500 753 753 728
728 −3.3%
−3.3%
6 6 3000 3000 851 851 821
821 −3.5%
−3.5%
Materials 2018,
Materials 11,11,
2018, 1506
x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 13
10 of of 13

3.2. Geometry of the Fusion Zone

3.2. Geometry of the Fusion Zone
Since the overall size of the fusion zone depends on the thermal history, further information to
Since the
validate the overall sizegathered
model was of the fusion
uponzone depends
inspections in on the thermal
a transverse history, further
cross-section information
with respect to the to
validate
traveling direction of the laser beam (Figure 8). An indirect measurement of the simulated depthtoofthe
the model was gathered upon inspections in a transverse cross-section with respect
traveling direction
the fusion of the
zone had laser
to be beam (Figure
conducted: 8). An
namely, indirect measurement
a transverse of the was
plane at half-length simulated depthwith
considered of the
fusion zone had to be conducted: namely, a transverse plane at half-length was considered with
respect to the traveling direction, then thermal contour lines are drawn (Figure 11). As expected, anyrespect
to the traveling
increase direction,
in the thenpeak
experienced thermal contour lines
temperature are adrawn
yielded (Figure increase
proportional 11). As expected, any of
in the extent increase
the
in the experienced
fusion zone. peak temperature yielded a proportional increase in the extent of the fusion zone.

Speed 4 mm/s, power 2000 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 2000 W

Speed 4 mm/s, power 2500 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 2500 W

Speed 4 mm/s, power 3000 W Speed 6 mm/s, power 3000 W

Figure 11. Contour lines to define the extent of the fusion zone for each processing condition.
Figure 11. Contour lines to define the extent of the fusion zone for each processing condition.
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 11 of 13

Based on the solidification range of the parent alloy, depth and width of the fusion zone were
inferred. Indeed, since 775 K is the lower limit of the solidification range, fusion was experienced by
any point above this temperature limit. For each given processing condition, the depth and width
were compared to the corresponding actual geometry (Table 4). An agreement of 3.7% and 16.3%,
absolute, on average, was found for depth and width, respectively. In order to improve the reliability
of the model in predicting the width of the fusion zone, further investigation must be made and the
dependence of the reflectivity on the starting roughness or oxide amount at the exposed surface should
be considered.

Table 4. Depth and width of the fusion zone, actual vs. predicted.

Depth of Fusion (mm) Width of Fusion (mm)

Speed (mm/s) Power (W)
Actual Simulated Difference Actual Simulated Difference
4 2000 1.55 1.42 −8.3% 5.17 4.22 −18.4%
4 2500 1.71 1.72 2.8% 5.45 4.53 −16.9%
4 3000 2.11 2.19 1.1% 6.81 5.55 −18.5%
6 2000 1.06 1.09 3.3% 4.06 3.57 −12.1%
6 2500 1.55 1.60 4.2% 5.13 4.38 −14.6%
6 3000 1.95 2.00 2.6% 6.21 5.10 −17.9%

4. Conclusions
A model to simulate laser heating was built and validated. The main elements were discussed
and presented, aiming to offer a comprehensive description of the involved variables and phenomena.
A super-Gaussian beam profile was implemented as an external thermal source; losses for radiation
and convection were considered, whereas losses for plasma attenuation were neglected.
Under these assumptions, with an average error below 3%, the model is capable of predicting
the peak temperature upon laser heating in a processing window ranging from 2 to 3 kW power
and 4 to 6 mm/s speed, which is suitable to produce a melting pool where metal must be fed in
additive manufacturing. With an average error below 4%, the model has been capable of predicting
the depth of the fusion zone. Larger errors, of up to 16%, were found for the bead width instead;
these will be addressed in future adjustments of the simulation; indeed, the dependence of the
reflectivity on the starting roughness or oxide amount at the exposed surface should be considered.
Furthermore, the model must be conveniently upgraded with powder or wire feeding to simulate
layer-by-layer fabrication.
Interestingly, an industrial environment where a pyrometer output is used in real-time monitoring
to match the intended thermal history, and, hence, the intended geometry, can be conceived.
Nevertheless, proper actions both at software and hardware stages, must be taken to filter noise
from the pyrometer output, depending on the system set-up, the metal to be processed, and the
laser wavelength.

Author Contributions: Conceptualizationand Methodology, F.C.; Software, V.A.; Validation, Formal Analysis,
Investigation, Data Curation, Writing-Original Draft Preparation, Writing-Review & Editing, F.C. and V.A.; Project
Administration, F.C.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: The Authors gratefully acknowledge Eng. Antonio Criscitiello for his valuable support in
programming the simulation tool.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Thomas, P. Simulation of Industrial Processes for Control Engineers; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 1999.
2. Muvvala, G.; Karmakar, D.P.; Nath, A.K. Online monitoring of thermo-cycles and its correlation with
microstructure in laser cladding of nickel based super alloy. Opt. Laser Eng. 2017, 88, 139–152. [CrossRef]
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 12 of 13

3. Mackwood, A.P.; Crafer, R.C. Thermal modelling of laser welding and related processes: A literature review.
Opt. Laser Technol. 2005, 37, 99–115. [CrossRef]
4. Lusquinos, F.; Conde, J.; Bonss, S.; Riveiro, A.; Guintero, F.; Comesana, F.; Pou, T. Theoretical and
experimental analysis of high power diode laser (HPDL) hardening of AISI 1045 steel. Appl. Surf. Sci.
2007, 254, 948–954. [CrossRef]
5. Ohkubo, T.; Sato, Y.; Matsunaga, E.; Tsukamoto, M. Three-dimensional numerical simulation during laser
processing of CFRP. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017, 417, 104–107. [CrossRef]
6. Yilbas, B. Laser cutting quality assessment and numerical methods for modeling of cutting. In The Laser
Cutting Process—Analysis and Applications; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 149–203.
7. Abidou, D.; Yusoff, N.; Nazri, N.; Awang, M.; Hassan, M.; Sarhan, A.A. Numerical simulation of metal
removal in laser drilling using radial point interpolation method. Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 2017, 77, 89–96.
[CrossRef]
8. Chen, G.; Zhang, M.; Zhao, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Li, S.S. Measurements of laser-induced plasma temperature field
in deep penetration laser welding. Opt. Laser Technol. 2013, 45, 551–557. [CrossRef]
9. Pocorni, J.; Han, S.; Cheon, J.; Na, S.; Kaplan, A.; Bang, H. Numerical simulation of laser ablation driven
melt waves. J. Manuf. Process. 2017, 30, 303–312. [CrossRef]
10. Leitz, K.; Singer, P.; Plankensteiner, A.; Tabernig, B.; Kestler, H.; Sigl, L. Multi-physical simulation of selective
laser melting. Met. Powder Rep. 2017, 72, 5. [CrossRef]
11. Kundakcioglu, E.; Lazoglu, I.; Rawal, S. Transient thermal modeling of laser-based additive manufacturing
for 3D freeform structures. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tech. 2016, 85, 493–501. [CrossRef]
12. Vastola, G.; Zhang, G.; Pei, Q.; Zhang, Y. Controlling of residual stress in additive manufacturing of Ti6Al4V
by finite element modeling. Addit. Manuf. 2016, 12, 231–239. [CrossRef]
13. Bi, G.; Gasser, A.; Wissenbach, K.; Drenker, A.; Poprawe, R. Identification and qualification of temperature
signal for monitoring and control in laser cladding. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2006, 12, 1348–1359. [CrossRef]
14. Doubenskaia, M.; Bertrand, P.; Smurov, I. Pyrometry in laser surface treatment. Surf. Coat. Tech. 2006, 201,
1955–1961. [CrossRef]
15. Yu, J.; Lin, X.; Wang, J.; Chen, J.; Huang, W. Mechanics and energy analysis on molten pool spreading during
laser solid forming. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2010, 256, 4612–4620. [CrossRef]
16. Tapetado, A.; Diaz-Alvarez, J.; Miguelez, M.; Vazquez, C. Two-color pyrometer for process temeprature
measurement during machining. J. Lightwave Technol. 2016, 34, 4. [CrossRef]
17. Heigel, J.; Michaleris, P.; Reutzel, E. Thermo-mechanical model development and validation of directed
energy deposition additive manufacturing of Ti-6Al-4V. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 5, 9–19. [CrossRef]
18. Fan, Z.; Frank, L. Numerical modeling of the additive manufacturing (AM) process of titanium alloy.
In Titanium Alloys—Towards Achieving Enhanced Properties for Diversified Applications; Nurul Amin, A.K.M.,
Ed.; InTech: Hong Kong, China, 2012; pp. 3–28.
19. Paschotta, R. Encyclopedia of Laser Physics and Technology; Wiley-VCH: Berlin, Germany, 2008.
20. Suresh Kumar, K.; Sparks, T.; Liou, F. Parameter determination and experimental validation of a wire feed
Additive Manufacturing model. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication
Symposium—An Additive Manufacturing Conference, Austin, TX, USA, 13–15 August 2015.
21. Goldak, J.; Chakravarti, A.; Bibby, M. A new finite element model for welding heat sources. Metall. Trans. B
1984, 15, 299–305. [CrossRef]
22. Caiazzo, F.; Alfieri, V.; Argenio, P.; Sergi, V. Additive manufacturing by means of laser-aided directed metal
deposition of 2024 aluminium powder: Investigation and optimization. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2017, 9, 1–12.
[CrossRef]
23. Davis, J.R. Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys; ASM International: Geauga County, OH, USA, 1993.
24. Kurochkin, A.; Popel, P.; Yagodin, D.; Borisenko, A.; Okhapkin, A. Density of copper–aluminum alloys
at temperatures up to 1400 ◦ C determined by the gamma ray technique. High Temp. 2013, 51, 197–205.
[CrossRef]
25. Sarmast, A.; Serajzadeh, S.; Kokabi, A. A study on thermal responses, microstructural issues, and natural
aging in gas tungsten arc welding of AA2024-T4. J. Eng. Manuf. 2013, 228, 413–421. [CrossRef]
26. Hrbek, J. Induction heating of thin nonmagnetic sheets in transverse time-variable magnetic field. Acta Tech.
2015, 60, 15–29.
Materials 2018, 11, 1506 13 of 13

27. Alfieri, V.; Caiazzo, F.; Sergi, V. Autogenous laser welding of AA2024 aluminium alloy: Process issues and
bead features. Procedia CIRP 2015, 33, 406–411. [CrossRef]
28. Steen, W.; Mazumder, J. Laser Material Processing; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2010.
29. Marla, D.; Bhandarkar, U.V.; Joshi, S.S; Marla, D.; Bhandarkar, U.V.; Joshi, S.S. Models for predicting
temperature dependence of material properties of aluminum. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 10, 1–13. [CrossRef]
30. Wen, C.; Mudawar, I. Experimental investigation of emissivity of aluminum alloys and temperature
determination using multispectral radiation thermometry (MRT) algorithms. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2002, 11,
551–562. [CrossRef]
31. Alfieri, V.; Cardaropoli, F.; Caiazzo, F.; Sergi, V. Investigation on porosity content in 2024 aluminum alloy
welding by Yb:YAG disk laser. Adv. Mater. Res. 2012, 383, 6265–6269. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).