Bayesian inverse uncertainty quantification of a MOOSE-based melt pool model for additive manufacturing using experimental data. (January 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Xie, Ziyu; Jiang, Wen; Wang, Congjian; Wu, Xu
• Is Part Of: Annals of nuclear energy. Volume 165(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-01
• Subjects: Inverse uncertainty quantification -- Melt pool -- Additive manufacturing; Nuclear energy -- Periodicals; Nuclear engineering -- Periodicals; 621.4805
• DOI: 10.1016/j.anucene.2021.108782
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0306-4549

Abstract

Highlights: A Bayesian inverse UQ method has been applied to a MOOSE-based melt pool model. Parameter uncertainties were quantified using melt pool size data. The agreement between model and data is improved after inverse UQ. Abstract: Additive manufacturing (AM) technology is being increasingly adopted in a wide variety of application areas due to its ability to rapidly produce, prototype, and customize designs. AM techniques afford significant opportunities in regard to nuclear materials, including an accelerated fabrication process and reduced cost. High-fidelity modeling and simulation (M&S) of AM processes is being developed in Idaho National Laboratory (INL)'s Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) to support AM process optimization and provide a fundamental understanding of the various physical interactions involved. In this paper, we employ Bayesian inverse uncertainty quantification (UQ) to quantify the input uncertainties in a MOOSE-based melt pool model for AM. Inverse UQ is the process of inversely quantifying the input uncertainties while keeping model predictions consistent with the measurement data. The inverse UQ process takes into account uncertainties from the model, code, and data while simultaneously characterizing the uncertain distributions in the input parameters–rather than merely providing best-fit point estimates. We employ measurement data on melt pool geometry (lengths and depths) to quantify the uncertainties in several melt pool model parameters. Simulation results using the posterior uncertainties have shown improved agreement with experimental data, as compared to those using the prior nominal values. The resulting parameter uncertainties can be used to replace expert opinions in future uncertainty, sensitivity, and validation studies.