19 Intro SanJose Part2

Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD
Relevance of Modeling
Laser-Material Interactions
in the Industrial Context
© Fraunhofer ILT
Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD 2
Story:
Laser and Flame
as technical tools for processing
Technical success is based on robustness !
Does robustness implies simplicity ?
RQ:
What is the most important difference between
Laser and Flame
for material processing?
13
Research Question:
Why model reduction is important
?
LASER
Research Hypothesis:
• Physical extreme values reachable – Entropy Machine

• Know-how intensive technology, requires knowledge – Mathematical-Physics
• Reduction of apparent complexity necessary – Model Reduction
Story:
Laser and Flame
energy density flow of the source
transferred to the material surface and after absorption named heat flux q
𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦
𝑞𝐴 = ∙ 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 =
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 ∙ 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
Laser
”preset” heat source
with intensity 𝐼 𝑊𝑚−2
𝑆=𝐼𝑠 Poynting vector
𝑞𝐴 = 𝜇𝐴 𝜇 𝐼
absorbed
heat flux 𝜇 ≔ cos 𝜗 projection
𝐴 𝜇 = 1 − 𝑅 𝜇 degree of absoprtion
Flame
”self-adaptive” heat source/sink
with flame temperature 𝑇𝑓𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒 [K]
𝑞𝐴 = 𝛼 𝑇𝑓𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒 − 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
absorbed temperature
heat flux difference
What is the most important difference for material processing?
Laser Flame
𝑞𝐴 = 𝜇𝐴 𝜇 𝐼 𝑞𝐴 = 𝛼 𝑇𝑓𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒 − 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
• physical extreme values reachable • limited values reachable

• Know-how intensive, requires knowledge
• Reduction of apparent complexity necessary • Simplicity by self-adapting dynamics
Find robust parameter ranges Robust by birth

Story:
Laser and Flame
as technical tools for processing
Technical success is based on robustness !
Does robustness implies simplicity ?
RQ:
What is the reasoning to search for simplicity
by model reduction?
 Why m odel reduction is im portant?

Make implicit knowledge explicit – sparse, dense and continuous data
Laser and Flame – how to cope with physically extreme properties
Inertial Manifold – robustness and simplicity
Our way of thinking – Buckingham and Principal Component Decomposition
Relevant parameters – Variational Principles Glass cutting
 What are y our interes ts ?

Competence Map – model galery
 Virtual Production – Res earch Focus
Meta-Modelling and Customer Simulation App‘s
Morse-Smale Complex
significant pathes
single beam ps-ablation - metal foil
Precision and Productivity – multi-beam ps-laser

Customer
Drilling Reference
Simulation App
turbine components Model
Story:
Inertial Manifold
is a finite-dimensional, smooth, invariant manifolds

that contain the global attractor and all solutions exponentially quickly attracted
Infinite dimensional PDE – diffusion
𝜕𝜃 𝜕 2 𝜃
= , 𝜃 = 𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 , 𝑥 ∈ 0, ℎ , 𝑡 > 0
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 2
𝑥
ℎ
spectral amplitude 𝜃 = 0, 𝜃 = 1, 𝜃 = 𝑓(𝑥)
𝑥=0 𝑥=ℎ 𝑡=0
𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝜃0 (𝑥)+𝜃1 (𝑥, 𝑡)
spectral number
𝑘
R. Temam. Inertial manifolds. Mathematical Intelligencer, 12:68–74, 1990

General solution – fast collapsing part
𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝜃0 (𝑥)+𝜃1 (𝑥, 𝑡)
𝜕𝜃1 𝜕 2 𝜃1
= , 𝜃1 = 𝜃1 𝑥, 𝑡 , 𝑥 ∈ 0, ℎ , 𝑡 > 0
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 2
𝜃1 =0, 𝜃1 = 0, 𝜃1 = 𝑓 𝑥 − 𝜃0 (𝑥)
𝑥=0 𝑥=ℎ 𝑡=0
𝜃1 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝑢 𝑡 𝑣 𝑥 ,
𝑢 𝑡 ∝ 𝑒 −𝜆𝑘 𝑡 , 𝑣 𝑥 ∝ sin 𝜆𝑘 𝑥 ,
𝜆𝑘 ℎ = 𝜋𝑘 , 𝑘 = {0,1, … }
General solution – fast collapsing part
𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝜃0 (𝑥)+𝜃1 (𝑥, 𝑡)
𝜕𝜃1 𝜕 2 𝜃1
= , 𝜃1 = 𝜃1 𝑥, 𝑡 , 𝑥 ∈ 0, ℎ , 𝑡 > 0
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 2
𝜃1 =0, 𝜃1 = 0, 𝜃1 = 𝑓 𝑥 − 𝜃0 (𝑥)
𝑥=0 𝑥=ℎ 𝑡=0
𝜃1 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝒖 𝒕 𝑣 𝑥 ,
𝒖 𝒕 ∝ 𝒆−𝝀𝒌 𝒕 , 𝑣 𝑥 ∝ sin 𝜆𝑘 𝑥 ,
𝜆𝑘 ℎ = 𝜋𝑘 , 𝑘 = {0,1, … }
Diffusion
𝜕𝜃 𝜕 2 𝜃
= , 𝜃 = 𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 , 𝑥 ∈ 0, ℎ , 𝑡 > 0
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑥 2
𝜃 =0, 𝜃 =1, 𝜃 =𝑓 𝑥
𝑥=0 𝑥=ℎ 𝑡=0
∞
𝑥
𝜃 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝜃0 (𝑥)+𝜃1 (𝑥, 𝑡) = + 𝑎𝑘 𝑒 −𝜆𝑘 𝑡 sin 𝜆𝑘 𝑥
ℎ
𝑘=1
𝑎𝑘
𝜃 2
𝜋𝑘
𝜆𝑘 =
ℎ
𝑥 𝑘
ℎ


Morse-Smale Complex
significant pathes

Customer
Drilling Reference
Simulation App
14
Free moving boundaries

step response on increasing laser power
Methods for Model Reduction
the key for

fast and frugal simulations
Dilemma
by
to be solved enriching sparse, real data Hypothesis
1. Phenomenological Model Reduction

applicability – specialized
method – strong, fast, frugal, economic
• Experience suggesting parametric relations

method – weak, uneconomic, unexplored
Paramatric Interpolation
2. Mathematical Model Reduction
„ Digital Guess“
of sparse data
•
Applicability
Inertial Manifolds / Central Manifolds

Strength
• Singular Perturbation
3. Numerical Model Reduction

applicability – general
• Proper Orthogonal Decomposition POD

• Chimera Techniques – Multi-Grid Methods
4. Data Driven Model Reduction

• Meta-Modelling – data interpolation for fast exploration
• „Digital Guess“ – Interpolation of sparse data
• Design of Experiment DoE
Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD
Our way of thinking – Model Reduction is essential
S im ulation underly ing fundam ental concepts

Simulation involves fundamental concepts
i.e. truth, error, reality, uncertainty, prediction, proof, …
developed in philosophy and science during more than 2 millennia
From a s cientific pers pectiv e:
“All m odels are w rong,

but s om e are us eful”
George E.P. Box

"one of the great statistical
minds of the 20th century"

“Truth is ever to be found in simplicity,
and not in multiplicity and confusion of things.
As the world, which to the naked eye

exhibits the greatest variety of objects,
appears very simple in its internal constitution
when surveyed by a philosophical understanding,
and so much the simpler by how much the better it is understood.”
Model Reduction
Buckingham‘s Pi-Theorem
Time scale separation – Inertial Manifold / Central Manifold
Singular perturbation theory
Principal Component Analysis PCA
Proper Orthogonal Decomposition POD
Don‘t forget about Phenomenology:

much stronger than apparently comprehensive physics
Buckingham‘s 𝚷-Theorem
Example Pendulum
𝚽 𝑹𝟏 , … , 𝑹𝒏 = 𝟎 𝚿 𝚷𝟏 , … , 𝜫𝒑 = 𝟎 , 𝒑 ≤ 𝒏
𝒈 𝑻𝟐 𝒄
𝚽 𝑻, 𝑴, 𝑳, 𝒈 = 𝟎 , 𝒏 = 𝟒 𝚿 𝚷𝟏 = 𝟎 , 𝒑 = 𝟏 , 𝚷𝟏 = ( 𝑳 )
𝑇 oscillation period
Edgar Buckingham
Ψ 𝛱1 = 0 discrete zero‘s
𝐿
𝑳
𝑻 = 𝒂𝒎 , 𝑎𝑚 = 2𝜋 by calibration
𝑀 𝒈
𝑔
Pow er los s es 𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 in s heet m etal cutting

Pow er los s es 𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 in s heet m etal cutting

𝑅𝑗 𝒗(𝑅𝑗 ) [𝑅𝑗 ]
𝑛 = 10 physical parameters
𝑅1 𝑟0 𝑚
4 physical base units
𝑅2 𝑣0 𝑚𝑠 −1
𝑅3 𝜅 𝑚2 𝑠 −1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
1 1 2 −2 1 −3 2 0 0 1
𝑅4 𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑘𝑔 𝑚2 𝑠 −3 𝑎𝑖𝑗 =
0 −1 −1 −3 0 0 −2 0 0 −3
𝑅5 𝑑 𝑚
0 0 0 0 0 0 −1 1 1 1
𝑅6 𝜌 𝑘𝑔 𝑚−3
𝑅7 𝑐 𝑚2 𝑠 −2 𝐾 −1 𝑟 = 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑎𝑖𝑗 = 4
𝑅8 𝑇𝑚 𝐾 𝑝 = 𝑛 − 𝑟 = 10 − 4 = 6
𝑅9 𝑇𝑎 𝐾 𝑝 = 6 independent non-dimensional groups
𝑅10 𝜆 𝑘𝑔 𝑚 𝑠 −2 𝐾 −1
Unit 𝑭𝒊 [𝑭𝒊 ]
More ex pertis e?
Mass 𝐹1 𝑘𝑔 More unders tading?
Length 𝐹2 𝑚
Time 𝐹3 𝑠
Temperature 𝐹4 𝐾
Buckingham – revised by knowledge: power scaling 𝑂 𝑑 𝜆∆𝑇
𝑅𝑗 𝒗(𝑅𝑗 ) [𝑅𝑗 ]
0 0 0 1 1
𝑅1 𝑟0 𝑚 1 1 2 −2 −2
𝑎𝑖𝑗 =
𝑅2 𝑣0 𝑚𝑠 −1 0 −1 −1 −3 −3
𝑅3 𝜅 𝑚2 𝑠 −1 0 0 0 0 0
𝑅4 𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑘𝑔 𝑚2 𝑠 −3 𝑟 = 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 𝑎𝑖𝑗 = 3
𝑅5 𝑃𝑠𝑑 = 𝑑 𝜆 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 2 −3
𝑘𝑔 𝑚 𝑠 𝑝=𝑛−𝑟 =5−3=2
𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑟0 𝑣0
Π1 , Π2 = , 𝑃𝑒 , 𝑃𝑒 =
𝑑 𝜆 𝑇𝑚 −𝑇𝑎 𝜅
𝜸
𝑷𝒆
𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 = 𝑷𝒔𝒅 , 𝜸 = 𝟎. 𝟑
𝟐
Buckingham – revealing impact of gas cooling / dross
coverage dross Buckingham

𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑟0 𝑣0
Π1 , Π2 = ,
𝑑 𝜆 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 𝜅
𝑟0 𝑣0
𝑷𝒔𝒅 = 𝑑 𝜆 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 , 𝑷𝒆 =
𝜅
𝜸
𝑷𝒆
𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 = 𝑷𝒔𝒅 , 𝜸 = 𝟎. 𝟑
𝟐
Schulz et al., Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, Volume 26, Number 9

Buckingham‘s Theorem – Principal Component Decomposition PCA

highest persistance level
the extremal path
Meta-Modelling
analysis
visualization 1
tp
exploration 0
1
Morse-Smale PL
0
Complex 1
z0
significant pathes 0
1
w0
0
1
zR
WidthRatio norm
0
Reference
Model
P1 0 1
WidthRatio
P2
Sparse Raw Data Dense Raw Data Significant Pathes Principal Components
Machine Data Digitial Guess „spidernet“ in 𝑃1 , 𝑃2 of Morse Smale Complex
Comprehensive Simulation Data Interpolation high dimensional parameter space highest persistance level
Hasso Plattner
Institute of Design at Stanford
Take a sheet of paper and write down your observations!
?
empathize and define
Karl Popper, Wir sind alle Entdecker

We are all discoverer
The Karl Popper Story
Platon Hegel Marx
totalitarian systems To gain knowledge about nature

theoretically founded and
practically advanced needs knowledge about human brain
* 28. Juli 1902 in Wien

† 17. September 1994 in London
Clos ed planned s ociety Open error-corrected s ociety

Ev olutionary s ociety
1. Theory and experiment – define and ideate - avoid heuristics

2. Discrepancy and gaining knowledge – iterate - avoid comprehension
3. Transparency and communication – prototype and testing - avoid immunization
Karl Popper, Wir sind alle Entdecker

We are all discoverer
Methods for Model Reduction
the key for

fast and frugal simulations
Dilemma
by
to be solved enriching sparse, real data Hypothesis
1. Phenomenological Model Reduction

applicability – specialized
method – strong, fast, frugal, economic
Strength
• Experience suggesting parametric relations
Paramatric Interpolation
2. Mathematical Model Reduction
„ Digital Guess“
of sparse data
applicability – uneconomic, unexplored
• Inertial Manifolds / Central Manifolds

• Singular Perturbation
3. Numerical Model Reduction

method – general weak
• Proper Orthogonal Decomposition POD

• Chimera Techniques – Multi-Grid Methods
Applicability
4. Data Driven Model Reduction

• Meta-Modelling – data interpolation for fast exploration
• „Digital Guess“ – Interpolation of sparse data
• Design of Experiment DoE


Morse-Smale Complex
significant pathes

Customer
Drilling Reference
Simulation App
20
II Applications – How Las er Works Value Out
sheet metal cutting

Phenomena and Scales in sheet metal cutting
20 µm 80 µm 200 µm 8 mm length
gas liquid solid scales
2 µs 100 µs 1 ms time
gas liquid solid scales

Free moving boundaries
Ripple formation – Fresnel number Nf>10

Free Boundary Value Problem – the One Phase Problem
𝜕𝑇
= 𝜅∆𝑇 , 𝑇 = 𝑇 𝑥, 𝑡 , 𝑥 ∈ Ω(𝑡)
𝜕𝑡
𝐼 𝑥, 𝑡 = 𝐼0 𝑡 𝑓 𝑥 − 𝑣𝑡, 𝑡
0<𝑓<1 melting front Γ𝑚 (t):
𝑞𝐴 − 𝜆𝛻𝑇 = 𝜌𝐻𝑚 𝑣𝑏 , 𝑥 ∈ Γ𝑚 (t)
𝑇 = 𝑇𝑚 , 𝑥 ∈ Γ𝑚 (t)
sheet surface and cut surface:
𝑞𝐴 − 𝜆𝛻𝑇 = 0 , 𝑥 ∈ Γ+ 𝑡 \Γ𝑚 (𝑡)
bottom sheet surface Γ− (t):
𝛻𝑇 ∙ 𝒏 = 0 , 𝑥 ∈ Γ− (𝑡)
outer boundary:
𝑇𝑥 ∞ = 𝑇𝑎 , 𝑥 ∈ Ω(𝑡)
𝑞𝐴 = 𝐴 𝑒𝑧 ∙ 𝑛 𝐼(𝑥, 𝑡)(−𝑒𝑧 ∙ 𝑛)
Estimates for length and time scales
Lengths: 𝛿 Velocities:
Convection-diffusion-equation with external sources
Length scales:
Time scales:
Smallness parameters
𝜅
𝛿= ≪ 𝑤0 ≪ 𝑑:
𝑣𝑜
𝑥 = 𝛿 𝜉,
𝑦 = 𝑤0 𝜂,
𝑧 = 𝑑 𝜁,
𝛿2
𝑡= 𝜏
𝜅
2 2
𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝜃 𝜕 2 𝜃 𝛿 𝜕2𝜃 𝛿 𝜕2𝜃
= + 2+ +
𝜕𝜏 𝜕𝜉 𝜕𝜉 𝑤0 𝜕𝜂2 𝑑 𝜕𝜁 2
2 2
Motion Equation and 𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝜃 𝜕 2 𝜃 𝛿 𝜕2𝜃 𝛿 𝜕2𝜃
= + + +
smallness parameters: 𝜕𝜏 𝜕𝜉 𝜕𝜉 2 𝑤0 𝜕𝜂2 𝑑 𝜕𝜁 2
Structure of Solution:
1D 2D 3D
Position 𝐴 of melt front Position 𝐴, Radius 𝛼 of melt front Axially distributed

Penetration Q of heat Penetration Q of heat Position 𝐴, Radius 𝛼, Penetration Q of heat
𝜉 = 𝐴(𝜏)
Tem perature
𝑄(𝜏)
depth
most relevant bit of information

One-Phase Problem
infinite dimensional PDE-system
𝑤02
𝑇 = 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 𝜃 + 𝑇𝑎 , 𝑥 = 𝑤0 𝜉 , 𝑡= 𝜏, 𝑎 𝑡 = 𝑤0 𝐴(𝜏)
𝜅 1D
𝜕𝜃 𝜕 2 𝜃
= , 𝜉 ∈ [𝐴 𝜏 , +∞)
𝜕𝜏 𝜕𝜉 2
Heating phase Melting phase
𝜕𝐴(𝜏)
= 0, 𝜃 =0 𝜃 = 1, 𝜃 =0
𝜕𝜏 𝜉 ∞ 𝜉=𝐴(𝜏) 𝜉 ∞
𝜕𝜃 𝜕𝜃 𝑑𝐴(𝜏)
𝛾 𝜏)𝑓(𝐴 𝜏 − 𝑃𝑒 𝜏 + =0 𝛾 𝜏)𝑓(𝐴 𝜏 − 𝑃𝑒 𝜏 + = ℎ𝑚 >0
𝜕𝜉 𝜉=𝐴(𝜏)
𝜕𝜉 𝜉=𝐴(𝜏)
𝑑𝜏
𝑑𝐴(𝜏)
𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏 = exp(−𝑃𝑒 𝜉 − 𝐴 𝜏 , 𝑃𝑒
𝑑𝜏 𝑡 ∞
Vector potential 𝑯 of thermal energy 𝜌𝑐 𝑇 − 𝑇𝑎
𝑑𝑇
𝜌𝑐 = 𝛻 ∙ 𝜆𝛻𝑇
𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝑇 𝑑
𝜌𝑐 =𝛻∙ − 𝑯
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
𝜌𝑐 𝑇 − 𝑇𝑎 = −𝛻 ∙ 𝑯 energy conservation 𝜃 = −𝛻𝒉

𝑑 𝑑
𝜆𝛻𝑇 + 𝑯 = 0 Fourier‘s Law 𝛻𝜃 + 𝒉=𝟎
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝜏
𝑤02
𝑯 = 𝜌𝑐 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 𝑤0 𝒉 , 𝑇 = 𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 𝜃 + 𝑇𝑎 , 𝑥 = 𝑤0 𝜉 , 𝑡 = 𝜏
𝜅
M.A. Biot, Variational Principles in Heat Transfer, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1970)
Variational equation and generalized coordinates 𝑄𝑖
𝜃 = −𝛻𝒉 𝛿𝜃 = −𝛻𝛿𝒉 energy conservation
𝑑 𝑑
𝛻𝜃 + 𝒉=𝟎 𝛻𝜃 + 𝒉 ∙ 𝛿𝒉𝑑𝑽 = 𝟎 Fourier‘s Law
𝑑𝜏 𝛀 𝑑𝜏
1 𝑑
𝛿 Ω
𝜃 2 𝑑𝑉 + Ω 𝑑𝜏
𝒉 ∙ 𝛿𝒉 𝑑𝑉 = − 𝜕Ω
𝜃𝒏 ∙ 𝛿𝒉 𝑑𝐴
2
1
𝑉= 𝜃 2 𝑑𝑉
2 Ω
𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝐷 1 𝑑
2
𝜃=𝜃 𝑄1 , … , 𝑄𝑛 , 𝜉, 𝜏 : + = 𝐹𝑖 𝐷=
2 𝑑𝜏
ℎ 𝑑𝑉
𝑑𝑄𝑖 𝑑𝑄𝑖 Ω
𝑑𝒉
𝐹𝑖 = 𝜃𝒏 ∙ 𝑑𝐴
𝜕Ω 𝑑𝑄𝑖
1D
Attractor
𝜉 = 𝐴(𝜏)
Tem perature
stationary solution during melting phase:
𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏 = 1 ∙ exp(−𝑃𝑒(𝜉 − 𝐴 𝜏 )
depth
Inertial Manifold
spanned by 3 dynamical parameters 𝜃𝑠 𝜏 , 𝑄 𝜏 , 𝐴(𝜏)
𝜉−𝐴(𝜏)
𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏 = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏) ∙ exp(− ) + 𝜃1 (𝜉, 𝜏)
𝑄(𝜏)
1
0 < 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏) ≤ 1 𝑄 𝜏 𝜃1 (𝜉, 𝜏) spectral corrections
𝑡 ∞ 𝑃𝑒
Vector potential ℎ 𝑄, 𝜉, 𝜏 of the spatially 1D temperature 𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏
energy conservation 𝜃 = −𝛻𝒉

𝑑
Fourier‘s Law 𝛻𝜃 + 𝒉=𝟎
𝑑𝜏
𝜉−𝐴(𝜏)
Ansatz: 𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏 = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏) ∙ exp(− ) + 𝜃1 (𝜉, 𝜏)
𝑄(𝜏)
∞ 𝜉−𝐴(𝜏)
𝜃 = −𝛻𝒉: ℎ 𝑄, 𝜉, 𝜏 = 𝜉
𝜃 𝜉 ′ , 𝜏 𝑑𝜉 ′ = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏)𝑄(𝜏) exp(− )
𝑄(𝜏)
∞
ℎ 𝑄, 𝜉 = 𝐴(𝜏), 𝜏 = 𝐴(𝜏)
𝜃 𝜉 ′ , 𝜏 𝑑𝜉 ′ = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏)𝑄(𝜏)
𝜃𝑠 (𝜏)𝑄(𝜏) thermal energy content
Variational equations
𝜉 − 𝐴(𝜏) ∞ 𝜉−𝐴(𝜏)
𝜃 𝜉, 𝜏 = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏)exp(− ) ℎ 𝑄, 𝜉, 𝜏 = 𝜉
𝜃 𝜉 ′ , 𝜏 𝑑𝜉 ′ = 𝜃𝑠 (𝜏)𝑄(𝜏) exp(− )
𝑄(𝜏) 𝑄(𝜏)
𝑏1 = 3 5
𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝐷
+ = 𝐹𝑖
𝑑𝑄 𝑑𝑄
3d-Inertial Manifold
1 𝜃𝑆
𝑄 = 𝑏1 −𝐴−𝑄
𝑄 𝜃𝑆
Fourier‘s Law energy conservation

3d-Inertial Manifold – Variational formulation
𝑇𝑠 (𝑡) − 𝑇𝑎 𝑎(𝑡)
𝜃𝑠 𝜏 = 𝐴 𝜏 =
𝑇𝑚 − 𝑇𝑎 𝑤0
𝛿 (𝑡) 𝛿 (𝑡)
Q𝜏 = 𝑤0
Q𝜏 = 𝑤0
Schulz, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 40(12) pp.13-28, 1997
Changing of boundary conditions
Schulz, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 40(12) pp.13-28, 1997
Asymptotic Analysis – One Phase Problem
temperature distribution
0 temperature 1
Time scale separation

Slow surfaces within the Inertial Manifold
Fast and slow movement of the front explains ripple shape



Morse-Smale Complex
significant pathes

Customer
Drilling Reference
Simulation App
20
51
Phase: uncharged
Gauss
Phase: charged
Left-hand Donut
X-pol Y-pol left-hand circular right-hand circular

Intensity and Power – dynamics of laser radiation
Seite 52
Nozzle-Design for supersonic Gas Jet – laser fusion cutting
conical Venturi-Laval ring shaped
RingG20A27.avi
DGM Discontinuous Galerkin Method
Separation of supersonic Gas Flow

leads to splashing
Precision and productivity
single beam ps-ablation - metal foil ps-cutting glass
Ablation
glass, metal, composite
Simulation
multi-beam ps-laser ablation
ps-filamentation – glass
Homogeneous hole patterns – ps-multi-beam
Simulation Experiment
pulse parameters
 pulse energy
 spot diameter
 repetition rate
 …
pattern parameters
 spot distribution
 energy distribution
 …
Tas k
Minimize damage
PICOSECOND
 0 m e
2
GLASS
 crit  2
0
CUTTING
e
free electron density 
Tailored optical properties of band-gap materials

2 2
𝜔𝑝 2
𝜔𝐿 𝜏 𝜌 𝑡 𝑒 𝜏 𝜖 𝑡 −1
𝜖 𝑡 = 𝜖𝑟 − = 𝜖𝑟 − , 𝑛 𝑡 = 𝑅𝑒 𝜖(𝑡) , 𝑅 𝑡 =
𝜔𝐿 𝜔𝐿 𝜏 + 𝑖 𝜔𝐿 𝑚 𝑒 𝜖 0 𝜔𝐿 𝜏 + 𝑖 𝜖 𝑡 +1
𝜔𝐿 2 𝑚 𝑒 𝜖 0 Reflectivity 𝑅 𝜌(𝑡)
𝜌𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 =
𝑒2  t e
2
 P t  
m e 0
refractive index 𝑛 𝜌(𝑡)
Reflectivity R
 0  n ,  : collision time
2
0
 P : plasma - frequency
𝜌𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡  L : Laser - frequency 𝜌𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡

 : electron density
m e : electron mass
n 0 : index of refraction
𝜌𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡
free electron density 𝜌
Glass Cutting:  0 m e 0
2
 crit  2
e
ablation
or
filamentation?
Page 60
Reduced model for electronic ablation
Dynamics of electron density (SRE)

 I   c I    rec    diff 
k 2
t
Laser-Plasma Model electron density
laser-induced free electron density


 I   c I    rec    diff 
k 2
t
Intensity
Beam Propagation Model
E 2
2 ik 0     E  k 0 (   1) E
z
2
   (  ( I )), I   0 cn 0 E 0
Meta-Modelling Design Thinking

Parameter space analysis of ablation
ablation = crit 1 ns
Criteria 10 ps
damage = 0.025crit  fits best with experiment
100fs
ablation
threshold
intensity-based
ablation
threshold
fluence-based
Page 63
Single fs-ps pulse mechanism of filamentation

diffraction Kerr-self-focusing plasma de-focusing
 2
E  E  k c 0 n2 E E  k  ee  ( r ,  , z ) E
2
2 ik
z
2
    (I )  𝜔𝐿 2 𝑚 𝑒 𝜖 0
0  c1    n2  I 

c1  𝜌𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 =
𝑒2
4 n 0
2
 0
w 2  crit
Kerr-self-focusing
plasma de-focusing
built up
length
plasma
Tow nes beam
Predicted Filamentation: Filamentary damage in glass first observed:

Askar'yan, G. A., Soviet Phys. JETP 15, 1088 (1962) Hercher, M. (1964). , J.OSA 54: 563
Chiao, R. Y. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 479 (1964)
Single fs-ps pulse mechanism by Kerr-self-focusing

Filamentation criterion 1: Filamentation criterion 2:
(diffraction, self-focusing) (diffraction, self-focusing, plasma defocusing)
2 2
       (I )
0  c1    n2  I
 0  c1    n2  I 

 w0   w0  2  crit
 
2
Pthreshold 
4 n 0 n 2 filam entation
no filam entation ablation
ablation
1 n0  (I )
I threshold  2 2 n2  I  filam entation
w 0
n2k 2  crit no ablation
no filam entation
no ablation
below Pcrit 
n 2  I  c1 (
2
)
w0
above Pcrit
Filamentation peak power threshold:
Marburger, 1975
Phase Space of Filamentation

2
    (I )
0  c1  
  n2  I 
 0 
w 2  crit
__ slow surface of „stable“ filament
__ Diffraction-Kerr equilibrium
__ Plasma-Kerr equilibrium
beam power
Defocssing by
Plas m a
Fosussing by
Kerr effect
Defocssing by
Diffraction
beam radius
Page 66


Morse-Smale Complex
significant pathes

Customer
Drilling Reference
Simulation App
Meta-Modelling towards future Virtual Production Systems
the goal:
enabling v alue
by skilled developers
experimental numerical reduced

Meta-Modelling
Source: Gerber
evidence simulation m odel
Vis ual Des ign
the tools: Interactiv e Tools
unders tand – reduce

econom ic v alue
by skilled operators
sparse data dense data continuous data

Persistence Level – model reduction
Morse-Smale
Complex
reference highest lowest

function persistence level persistence level
Source:
Visual exploration of high dimensional
scalar functions, Gerber
Persistence Level – noise reduction

– filtering persistent relations  model reduction
reference coarse finest

function persistence level persistence level
Interactive Customized Simulation Tool

Asymptotic µs-Drilling Model
Model Validation
relativ e error CS T
3.58%-5.8%
Cus tom ized S im ulation Tool
𝑰 𝟐 Fast & Frugal Simulation
𝒅𝒛
= 𝑰𝒕𝒉
− 𝟏 𝒊𝒇 𝑰 ≥ 𝑰𝒕𝒉
𝒅𝒙 calculation tim e < 1 s econd
𝟎 𝒊𝒇 𝑰 < 𝑰𝒕𝒉
S im ulation:
Entry diameter:
650 µm
Ex perim ent:
Mean value hole
entry diameter :
669 ± 26 µm
S im ulation:
Exit diameter:
510 µm
Ex perim ent:
Mean value hole
exit diameter:
497 ± 19 µm
Page 7
Pulse Resolved µs-Drilling Model - Trepanning
CST
Customer
Simulation App
Simulation: Experiment:
Customer Simulation App
Beam Distribution
Model Validation
relativ e error
0.83%-2.16%
Patent pending
Additive Manufacturing
from cutting and welding to build-up
Data Ex ploration
Vis ual Des ign
additiv e m anufacturing
w elding and s canning

w elding
cutting
Know -How
Know -How
surrogate „plas tic s train“
fast instead of comprehensive process
m ov ing
Know -How
beam
Know -How avoid
pore formation by Cus tom er S im ulation App
avoid feedback Em ulator (=„Nachahmer“)
ripple formation by
s hadow ing Digital S hadow
Get more Skilled Developers and Operators

Customized Simulation Tools
and Service for industrial everyday tasks
Portable
high performance
metamodel tools
Portable
interactive and fast
simulation tools
Detailed
comprehensive
simulation Further laser processes
Page 16
Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD Internet of Production 75
Tools Methods
Digital Gues s
Digital S hadow
Real w orld feedback

Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD Internet of Production 76
Tools Methods
Digital Gues s
Interactiv e
com m unication Calibration
Des ign Pers is tence
Digital S hadow

?
Acknowledgements
For partially funding the presented work we wish to thank:
Deuts che Fors chungs gem eins chaft
Clus ter of Ex cellence: Integrativ e Production Technology for high-w age Countries
Thank you very much for your attention!
For further information visit us at: Fraunhofer ILT in Aachen, Germany
or contact:
Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Wolfgang Schulz
Fraunhofer-Institut für Lasertechnik

Tel.: +49 (0) 241 89 06 -204
Fax: +49 (0) 241 89 06 -121
Email: wolfgang.schulz@ilt.fraunhofer.de

19 Intro SanJose Part2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

19 Intro SanJose Part2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nonlinear Dynamics of Laser-Processing NLD

Technical success is based on robustness !

Does robustness implies simplicity ?

• Physical extreme values reachable – Entropy Machine

𝑆=𝐼𝑠 Poynting vector

What is the most important difference for material processing?

• physical extreme values reachable • limited values reachable

Find robust parameter ranges Robust by birth

Technical success is based on robustness !

Does robustness implies simplicity ?

 Why m odel reduction is im portant?

 What are y our interes ts ?

Precision and Productivity – multi-beam ps-laser

is a finite-dimensional, smooth, invariant manifolds

Infinite dimensional PDE – diffusion

R. Temam. Inertial manifolds. Mathematical Intelligencer, 12:68–74, 1990

General solution – fast collapsing part

General solution – fast collapsing part

 Why m odel reduction is im portant?

 What are y our interes ts ?

Precision and Productivity – multi-beam ps-laser

Free moving boundaries

Methods for Model Reduction

the key for

1. Phenomenological Model Reduction

• Experience suggesting parametric relations

Inertial Manifolds / Central Manifolds

3. Numerical Model Reduction

• Proper Orthogonal Decomposition POD

4. Data Driven Model Reduction

S im ulation underly ing fundam ental concepts

From a s cientific pers pectiv e:

“All m odels are w rong,

George E.P. Box

Our way of thinking – Model Reduction is essential

As the world, which to the naked eye

and so much the simpler by how much the better it is understood.”

Don‘t forget about Phenomenology:

Pow er los s es 𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 in s heet m etal cutting

Pow er los s es 𝑷𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒔 in s heet m etal cutting

Buckingham – revised by knowledge: power scaling 𝑂 𝑑 𝜆∆𝑇

Buckingham – revealing impact of gas cooling / dross

coverage dross Buckingham

Schulz et al., Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, Volume 26, Number 9

Our way of thinking – Model Reduction is essential

Buckingham‘s Theorem – Principal Component Decomposition PCA

Our way of thinking – Model Reduction is essential

Take a sheet of paper and write down your observations!

Karl Popper, Wir sind alle Entdecker

The Karl Popper Story

Platon Hegel Marx

totalitarian systems To gain knowledge about nature

* 28. Juli 1902 in Wien

Clos ed planned s ociety Open error-corrected s ociety

1. Theory and experiment – define and ideate - avoid heuristics

Karl Popper, Wir sind alle Entdecker

Methods for Model Reduction

the key for

1. Phenomenological Model Reduction

• Experience suggesting parametric relations

• Inertial Manifolds / Central Manifolds

3. Numerical Model Reduction