Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
With additive manufacturing being rapidly integrated into mainstream manufacturing, there is a need to predict and eliminate any distortions in the manufactured parts. Simulation software tools can be helpful in achieving this aim efficiently and economically. This case study objectively compares the capabilities of five different simulation tools available commercially and benchmarks them through test geometries developed to recreate the distortions caused by residual stress in Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF) for metals. The software tools were assessed by printing the compensated geometries suggested by them for many types of distortions seen in Laser Powder Bed Fusion. The effectiveness of these compensations was then assessed using a 3D (3-Dimensional) scanner to compare the compensated part with the original CAD (Computer Aided Design) of the parts. This case study of some of the available software tools at the time of study from ANSYS, Autodesk, MSC, Additive Works, and Atlas3D also focuses on the features of these software and suggests improvements based on these tests. Information about the features of different simulation software stated in this study are based on the versions available at the time of study which is from 6/11/18 till 12/05/18 and is an objective account by the authors on the software capabilities. The experimental approach provided an in-depth understanding of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of these software.
Peter et al. (Sat,) studied this question.