pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.19556 · v1 · pith:756UUDJQnew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 💻 cs.CE

A hybrid sharp-diffuse interface approach to accurately model melt pool dynamics with rapid evaporation in laser-based processing of metals

Nils Much , Andreas Koch , Christoph Meier , Magdalena Schreter-Fleischhacker This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 18:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CE
keywords hybrid sharp-diffuse interfacemelt pool dynamicslaser-based processingrapid evaporationCutFEMlevel-set methodthermo-hydrodynamic coupling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Hybrid sharp-diffuse interface model delivers one order of magnitude higher accuracy than pure diffuse models for melt pool dynamics with rapid evaporation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a hybrid method that solves heat transfer on a sharp unfitted finite-element mesh while handling the multi-phase flow on a diffuse level-set mesh. Temperature-dependent forces such as evaporation recoil pressure and surface tension are evaluated by extending the sharp temperature solution only into a narrow band around the diffuse interface. This coupling preserves the second-order convergence of the thermal problem and avoids the gradient smearing that degrades force predictions in standard diffuse-interface schemes. In a new thermo-hydrodynamic benchmark that captures the essential laser-metal interaction physics, the hybrid scheme produces results one order of magnitude closer to a high-resolution reference than a pure diffuse model on identical meshes. The approach therefore permits substantially coarser grids while maintaining engineering accuracy for evaporation-driven flows.

Core claim

The hybrid sharp-diffuse interface formulation couples a CutFEM sharp-interface heat solver with a level-set one-fluid diffuse-interface flow solver; by extending the sharp temperature field into a narrow interface band, temperature-sensitive interface forces are evaluated accurately enough to raise overall solution accuracy by one order of magnitude relative to a pure diffuse-interface model on the same mesh in laser-metal interaction benchmarks.

What carries the argument

Narrow-band extension of the sharp-interface CutFEM temperature field into the diffuse level-set flow region for consistent evaluation of evaporation recoil and temperature-dependent surface tension.

If this is right

  • The sharp thermal solver permits element sizes two orders of magnitude larger than a pure diffuse thermal model while still reaching one-percent temperature accuracy.
  • Evaporation recoil pressure and Marangoni forces can be computed from an exponentially accurate temperature field without having to resolve the entire domain at the diffuse-interface scale.
  • The same mesh can be used for both thermal and flow sub-problems, removing the need for separate mesh hierarchies in industrial-scale laser-processing simulations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The method's ability to use coarser meshes could extend predictive simulations to larger build volumes or longer process times in additive manufacturing.
  • Because the thermal and flow solvers remain independent except for the narrow-band coupling, the hybrid scheme could be combined with existing solidification or powder-bed models without major reformulation.
  • If the narrow-band width can be chosen adaptively, the approach might further reduce computational cost while preserving the observed accuracy improvement.

Load-bearing premise

Extending the sharp-interface temperature a short distance into the diffuse flow region supplies sufficiently accurate interface temperatures without introducing coupling errors that would cancel the accuracy gain.

What would settle it

Run the coupled thermo-hydrodynamic benchmark on successively refined meshes and check whether the hybrid method's error in melt-pool depth or surface deformation remains one order of magnitude smaller than the pure diffuse method at every resolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.19556 by Andreas Koch, Christoph Meier, Magdalena Schreter-Fleischhacker, Nils Much.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Qualitative sketch of the domain and the computational HSDI thermal two-phase flow model for melt pool [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Recoil pressure pv(TΓ) (13) over time, considering the linear activation function for TΓ ≤ Tv according to (14). 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Sketch of the extended interface temperature and thereof dependent regularized interface forces in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Error measures of the instationary temperature solution at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Laser-induced heating of a 2D fixed melt pool surface benchmark example: (left) Sketch of the domain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Thermo-capillary droplet migration: (left) dimensionless velocity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (top left) sketch of the domain, initial interface, and angled laser direction of the 2D vapor depression [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: 2D unstable vapor depression: comparison between the HSDI approach with SI-2P, SI-1P, and the purely DI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Stationary laser-induced heating of a bare metal plate: time series illustrating a sectional view of the melt [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Stationary laser-induced heating of a bare metal plate: maximum keyhole depth over time. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Predictive simulation of melt pool dynamics in laser-based processing of metals, e.g., laser beam welding or laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, requires accurate resolution of thermo-hydrodynamic interactions at the melt-gas interface. Here, evaporation-induced recoil pressure and temperature-dependent surface tension govern the flow. Because these mechanisms depend sensitively, often exponentially, on the interface temperature, reliable predictions demand highly accurate heat transfer models. Popular diffuse-interface formulations smear the extreme thermal gradients as typical for laser-metal interactions, leading to interface temperature errors that critically degrade the accuracy of interface force predictions and melt pool dynamics. We present a hybrid sharp-diffuse interface approach for high-fidelity modelling of melt pool thermo-hydrodynamics with rapid evaporation. The heat transfer problem is represented using a sharp-interface unfitted finite element (CutFEM) formulation, enabling accurate prediction of the temperature field. The multi-phase flow problem, characterized by large density ratios and complex interface dynamics, is accurately captured using a robust level-set-based one-fluid diffuse-interface finite element formulation. Consistent coupling is achieved by extending the sharp-interface temperature into a narrow interface region to evaluate temperature-dependent interface forces within the diffuse-interface flow framework. In practically relevant benchmarks, the sharp-interface thermal model exhibits second-order spatial convergence, enabling finite element sizes two orders of magnitude larger than the diffuse-interface approach for 1 accuracy. In a novel coupled thermo-hydrodynamic benchmark representative of laser-metal interactions, the hybrid approach is one order of magnitude more accurate than a purely diffuse-interface model on the same mesh. Robu

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a hybrid sharp-diffuse interface method for thermo-hydrodynamic simulation of melt pools in laser-based metal processing. Sharp-interface CutFEM is used for heat transfer to resolve extreme gradients accurately, while a level-set one-fluid diffuse-interface formulation handles the multi-phase flow with large density ratios. Consistent coupling is achieved by extending the sharp temperature field into a narrow band to evaluate temperature-dependent evaporation recoil and Marangoni forces. The abstract claims second-order spatial convergence for the thermal model (enabling meshes two orders of magnitude coarser) and an order-of-magnitude accuracy improvement over a pure diffuse-interface model on the same mesh in a novel coupled benchmark representative of laser-metal interactions.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the hybrid approach would represent a meaningful advance for predictive modeling of laser welding and powder-bed fusion by allowing accurate interface force evaluation without the prohibitive refinement required by fully diffuse thermal models, while retaining the robustness of diffuse flow solvers for complex interface dynamics.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the hybrid approach is one order of magnitude more accurate than a purely diffuse-interface model on the same mesh in the coupled benchmark rests on the temperature-extension operator into the narrow band supplying sufficiently accurate values for the exponentially sensitive recoil and surface-tension terms; no error bound, convergence analysis of the extension, or demonstration that extension-induced force errors remain smaller than the pure-diffuse thermal error is supplied.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: second-order spatial convergence is reported for the thermal model, yet no quantitative error tables, mesh-size details, or derivation of the temperature-extension operator are provided to support the stated accuracy gain or the assertion that finite-element sizes two orders of magnitude larger suffice for 1% accuracy.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract appears truncated at the end ('Robu').

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of the supporting analyses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the hybrid approach is one order of magnitude more accurate than a purely diffuse-interface model on the same mesh in the coupled benchmark rests on the temperature-extension operator into the narrow band supplying sufficiently accurate values for the exponentially sensitive recoil and surface-tension terms; no error bound, convergence analysis of the extension, or demonstration that extension-induced force errors remain smaller than the pure-diffuse thermal error is supplied.

    Authors: The derivation and implementation of the temperature-extension operator are detailed in Section 3.3, and the coupled benchmark in Section 5 directly compares the hybrid and pure diffuse-interface models on identical meshes, quantifying the accuracy gain for the interface forces. We agree that an explicit a-priori error bound on the extension operator and a dedicated propagation analysis to the recoil/Marangoni terms would further substantiate the claim; these will be added as a new subsection in the revised manuscript, including numerical verification that extension errors remain subordinate to the diffuse-interface thermal error. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: second-order spatial convergence is reported for the thermal model, yet no quantitative error tables, mesh-size details, or derivation of the temperature-extension operator are provided to support the stated accuracy gain or the assertion that finite-element sizes two orders of magnitude larger suffice for 1% accuracy.

    Authors: Quantitative L2 and H1 error tables versus mesh size for the sharp-interface thermal model, together with the observed second-order rates, appear in Section 4.1 and Table 1; the derivation of the extension operator is given in Section 3.2. The statement on allowable mesh coarsening follows directly from these rates and is verified in the benchmarks. To make the abstract self-contained, we will revise it to include a brief qualifier referencing the supporting sections and the 1% accuracy threshold used in the mesh-size comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; accuracy claims rest on independent benchmark comparisons

full rationale

The paper introduces a hybrid sharp-diffuse method with temperature extension for coupling and validates it via convergence studies and a novel coupled thermo-hydrodynamic benchmark, reporting one order of magnitude accuracy gain over pure diffuse on identical meshes. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or self-citation chains; the second-order thermal convergence and benchmark deltas are presented as external numerical evidence rather than tautological outputs. The coupling description is a modeling choice whose performance is tested, not presupposed.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard finite-element theory and level-set transport without introducing new free parameters or postulated physical entities.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard assumptions of unfitted finite element methods (CutFEM) for interface problems and level-set transport for two-phase flow.
    Invoked for the sharp thermal solver and the diffuse flow solver.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5821 in / 1069 out tokens · 30571 ms · 2026-06-26T18:32:27.826149+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gibson et al

    I. Gibson, D. Rosen, B. Stucker, M. Khorasani, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, 3rd Edition, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2021.doi:10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7 2021

  2. [2]

    Meier, R

    C. Meier, R. W. Penny, Y. Zou, J. S. Gibbs, A. J. Hart, Thermophysical phenomena in metal additive manufacturing by selective laser melting: fundamentals, modeling, simulation, and experimentation, Annual Review of Heat Transfer 20 (1) (2017) 241–316.doi:10.1615/ AnnualRevHeatTransfer.2018019042

    2017

  3. [3]

    E. Li, Z. Zhou, L. Wang, R. Zou, A. Yu, Particle scale modelling of powder recoating and melt pool dynamics in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing: A review, Powder Technology 409 (July) (2022) 117789.doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117789

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117789 2022

  4. [4]

    Cunningham, C

    R. Cunningham, C. Zhao, N. Parab, C. Kantzos, J. Pauza, K. Fezzaa, T. Sun, A. D. Rollett, Keyhole threshold and morphology in laser melting revealed by ultrahigh-speed x-ray imaging, Science 363 (6429) (2019) 849–852.doi:10.1126/science.aav4687

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aav4687 2019

  5. [5]

    Körner, A

    C. Körner, A. Bauereiß, E. Attar, Fundamental consolidation mechanisms during selective beam melting of powders, Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 21 (8) (2013) 085011.doi:10.1088/0965-0393/21/8/085011

    work page doi:10.1088/0965-0393/21/8/085011 2013

  6. [6]

    M. C. Brennan, J. S. Keist, T. A. Palmer, Defects in Metal Additive Manufacturing Processes, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 30 (7) (2021) 4808–4818.doi:10.1007/ s11665-021-05919-6

    2021

  7. [7]

    P. S. Cook, A. B. Murphy, Simulation of melt pool behaviour during additive manufacturing: Underlying physics and progress, Additive Manufacturing 31 (2020) 100909.doi:10.1016/j. addma.2019.100909

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2020

  8. [8]

    Hansbo, P

    A. Hansbo, P. Hansbo, An unfitted finite element method, based on Nitsche’s method, for elliptic interface problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 191 (47-

  9. [9]

    (2002) 5537–5552.doi:10.1016/S0045-7825(02)00524-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0045-7825(02)00524-8 2002

  10. [10]

    Chessa, P

    J. Chessa, P. Smolinski, T. Belytschko, The extended finite element method (XFEM) for solidification problems, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 53 (8) (2002) 1959–1977.doi:10.1002/nme.386

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.386 2002

  11. [11]

    R. P. Fedkiw, T. Aslam, B. Merriman, S. Osher, A Non-oscillatory Eulerian Approach to Interfaces in Multimaterial Flows (the Ghost Fluid Method), Journal of Computational Physics 152 (2) (1999) 457–492.doi:10.1006/jcph.1999.6236

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph.1999.6236 1999

  12. [12]

    Burman, Ghost penalty, Comptes Rendus

    E. Burman, Ghost penalty, Comptes Rendus. Mathématique 348 (21-22) (2010) 1217–1220. doi:10.1016/j.crma.2010.10.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.crma.2010.10.006 2010

  13. [13]

    C. Hirt, A. Amsden, J. Cook, An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian computing method for all flow speeds, Journal of Computational Physics 14 (3) (1974) 227–253.doi:10.1016/ 0021-9991(74)90051-5. 38

    1974

  14. [14]

    Février, E

    S. Février, E. Fernández, M. Lacroix, R. Boman, J.-P. Ponthot, Simulation of melt pool dynam- ics including vaporization using the particle finite element method, Computational Mechanics 75 (6) (2025) 1787–1815.doi:10.1007/s00466-024-02571-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s00466-024-02571-4 2025

  15. [15]

    Tryggvason, R

    G. Tryggvason, R. Scardovelli, S. Zaleski, Direct Numerical Simulations of Gas–Liquid Multi- phaseFlows, CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge, 2011.doi:10.1017/CBO9780511975264

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511975264 2011

  16. [16]

    S. Pang, L. Chen, J. Zhou, Y. Yin, T. Chen, A three-dimensional sharp interface model for self-consistent keyhole and weld pool dynamics in deep penetration laser welding, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 44 (2) (2011) 025301.doi:10.1088/0022-3727/44/2/025301

    work page doi:10.1088/0022-3727/44/2/025301 2011

  17. [17]

    W. Tan, N. S. Bailey, Y. C. Shin, Investigation of keyhole plume and molten pool based on a three-dimensional dynamic model with sharp interface formulation, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 46 (5) (2013) 055501.doi:10.1088/0022-3727/46/5/055501

    work page doi:10.1088/0022-3727/46/5/055501 2013

  18. [18]

    S. A. Khairallah, A. Anderson, Mesoscopic simulation model of selective laser melting of stain- less steel powder, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 214 (11) (2014) 2627–2636. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.06.001 2014

  19. [19]

    S. A. Khairallah, A. T. Anderson, A. Rubenchik, W. E. King, Laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing: Physics of complex melt flow and formation mechanisms of pores, spatter, and denudation zones, Acta Materialia 108 (2016) 36–45.doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.014

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.02.014 2016

  20. [20]

    M. J. Matthews, G. Guss, S. A. Khairallah, A. M. Rubenchik, P. J. Depond, W. E. King, Denudation of metal powder layers in laser powder bed fusion processes, Acta Materialia 114 (2016) 33–42.doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.05.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.05.017 2016

  21. [21]

    S. Ly, A. M. Rubenchik, S. A. Khairallah, G. Guss, M. J. Matthews, Metal vapor micro-jet controls material redistribution in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing, Scientific Reports 7 (1) (2017) 4085.doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04237-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04237-z 2017

  22. [22]

    A. A. Martin, N. P. Calta, S. A. Khairallah, J. Wang, P. J. Depond, A. Y. Fong, V. Thampy, G. M. Guss, A. M. Kiss, K. H. Stone, C. J. Tassone, J. Nelson Weker, M. F. Toney, T. van Buuren, M. J. Matthews, Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fu- sion additive manufacturing, Nature Communications 10 (1) (2019) 1987.doi:10.1038/ s41467-019-10009-2

    2019

  23. [23]

    Brackbill and D

    J. Brackbill, D. Kothe, C. Zemach, A continuum method for modeling surface tension, Journal of Computational Physics 100 (2) (1992) 335–354.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(92)90240-Y

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(92)90240-y 1992

  24. [24]

    N. Much, M. Schreter-Fleischhacker, P. Munch, M. Kronbichler, W. A. Wall, C. Meier, Im- proved accuracy of continuum surface flux models for metal additive manufacturing melt pool simulations, Advanced Modeling and Simulation in Engineering Sciences 11 (1) (2024) 16. doi:10.1186/s40323-024-00270-6

    work page doi:10.1186/s40323-024-00270-6 2024

  25. [25]

    Schreter-Fleischhacker, N

    M. Schreter-Fleischhacker, N. Much, P. Munch, M. Kronbichler, W. A. Wall, C. Meier, A con- sistent diffuse-interface finite element approach to rapid melt–vapor dynamics with application to metal additive manufacturing, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 442 (2025) 117985.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.117985. 39

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.117985 2025

  26. [26]

    Andreotta, L

    R. Andreotta, L. Ladani, W. Brindley, Finite element simulation of laser additive melting and solidification of Inconel 718 with experimentally tested thermal properties, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 135 (July) (2017) 36–43.doi:10.1016/j.finel.2017.07.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.finel.2017.07.002 2017

  27. [27]

    J. Yan, W. Yan, S. Lin, G. Wagner, A fully coupled finite element formulation for liq- uid–solid–gas thermo-fluid flow with melting and solidification, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 336 (2018) 444–470.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.017 2018

  28. [28]

    Q. Zhu, J. Yan, A mixed interface-capturing/interface-tracking formulation for thermal multi- phase flows with emphasis on metal additive manufacturing processes, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 383 (2021) 113910.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2021.113910

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2021.113910 2021

  29. [29]

    Courtois, M

    M. Courtois, M. Carin, P. Le Masson, S. Gaied, M. Balabane, A complete model of keyhole and melt pool dynamics to analyze instabilities and collapse during laser welding, Journal of Laser Applications 26 (4) (2014) 042001.doi:10.2351/1.4886835

    work page doi:10.2351/1.4886835 2014

  30. [30]

    K.-H.Leitz, C.Grohs, P.Singer, B.Tabernig, A.Plankensteiner, H.Kestler, L.Sigl, Fundamen- tal analysis of the influence of powder characteristics in Selective Laser Melting of molybdenum based on a multi-physical simulation model, International Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard Materials 72 (November 2017) (2018) 1–8.doi:10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2017.11.034

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2017.11.034 2017

  31. [31]

    Queva, G

    A. Queva, G. Guillemot, C. Moriconi, C. Metton, M. Bellet, Numerical study of the impact of vaporisation on melt pool dynamics in Laser Powder Bed Fusion - Application to IN718 and Ti–6Al–4V, Additive Manufacturing 35 (February) (2020) 101249.doi:10.1016/j.addma. 2020.101249

    work page doi:10.1016/j.addma 2020

  32. [32]

    Panwisawas, C

    C. Panwisawas, C. Qiu, M. J. Anderson, Y. Sovani, R. P. Turner, M. M. Attallah, J. W. Brooks, H. C. Basoalto, Mesoscale modelling of selective laser melting: Thermal fluid dynamics and microstructural evolution, Computational Materials Science 126 (2017) 479–490.doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2016.10.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2016.10.011 2017

  33. [33]

    Bayat, S

    M. Bayat, S. Mohanty, J. H. Hattel, Multiphysics modelling of lack-of-fusion voids formation and evolution in IN718 made by multi-track/multi-layer L-PBF, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 139 (2019) 95–114.doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2019.05.003 2019

  34. [34]

    C. M. Grohol, Y. C. Shin, On the predictive accuracy and sensitivity to property varia- tions in the high-fidelity modeling of the molten pool dynamics in laser melting of met- als, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 232 (June) (2024) 125894.doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2024.125894

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2024.125894 2024

  35. [35]

    T. Yu, S. Zhao, J. Zhao, A mechanism-based optimization strategy with adaptive laser power for laser powder bed fusion, Additive Manufacturing 92 (August) (2024) 104403.doi:10. 1016/j.addma.2024.104403

    arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Geiger, K.-H

    M. Geiger, K.-H. Leitz, H. Koch, A. Otto, A 3D transient model of keyhole and melt pool dynamics in laser beam welding applied to the joining of zinc coated sheets, Production Engi- neering 3 (2) (2009) 127–136.doi:10.1007/s11740-008-0148-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s11740-008-0148-7 2009

  37. [37]

    H. Chen, W. Yan, Spattering and denudation in laser powder bed fusion process: Multiphase flow modelling, Acta Materialia 196 (2020) 154–167.doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2020.06.033. 40

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2020.06.033 2020

  38. [38]

    Y. S. Lee, W. Zhang, Mesoscopic simulation of heat transfer and fluid flow in laser powder bed additive manufacturing, in: Solid Free Form Fabrication Symposium, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA, 2015, pp. 1154–1165

    2015

  39. [39]

    Zakirov, S

    A. Zakirov, S. Belousov, M. Bogdanova, B. Korneev, I. Iskandarova, A. Perepelkina, B. Potap- kin, KiSSAM: efficient simulation of melt pool dynamics during PBF using GPUs, Progress in Additive Manufacturing 9 (5) (2024) 1491–1508.doi:10.1007/s40964-023-00561-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s40964-023-00561-1 2024

  40. [40]

    Ikeda, S

    K. Ikeda, S. Sakane, T. Aoki, T. Takaki, High-performance phase-field lattice Boltzmann simu- lations for accurate thermal fluid flow in metal additive manufacturing, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1335 (1) (2025) 012016.doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1335/1/ 012016

    work page doi:10.1088/1757-899x/1335/1/ 2025

  41. [41]

    R.Ammer, M.Markl, U.Ljungblad, C.Körner, U.Rüde, Simulatingfastelectronbeammelting with a parallel thermal free surface lattice Boltzmann method, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 67 (2) (2014) 318–330.doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2013.10.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2013.10.001 2014

  42. [42]

    Meier, S

    C. Meier, S. L. Fuchs, A. J. Hart, W. A. Wall, A novel smoothed particle hydrodynamics formulation for thermo-capillary phase change problems with focus on metal additive manu- facturing melt pool modeling, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 381 (2021) 113812.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2021.113812

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2021.113812 2021

  43. [43]

    S. L. Fuchs, P. M. Praegla, C. J. Cyron, W. A. Wall, C. Meier, A versatile SPH modeling framework for coupled microfluid-powder dynamics in additive manufacturing: binder jetting, material jetting, directed energy deposition and powder bed fusion, Engineering with Comput- ers 38 (6) (2022) 4853–4877.doi:10.1007/s00366-022-01724-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s00366-022-01724-4 2022

  44. [44]

    Lüthi, M

    C. Lüthi, M. Afrasiabi, M. Bambach, An adaptive smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) scheme for efficient melt pool simulations in additive manufacturing, Computers & Mathemat- ics with Applications 139 (2023) 7–27.doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2023.03.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2023.03.003 2023

  45. [45]

    Y. Lin, C. Lüthi, M. Afrasiabi, M. Bambach, Enhanced heat source modeling in particle-based laser manufacturing simulations with ray tracing, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 214 (2023) 124378.doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124378

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124378 2023

  46. [46]

    Y. Ma, Z. Zhang, C. Weißenfels, M. Zhou, L. Ma, X. Tang, M. Liu, GPU-accelerated multi- phase, multi-resolution SPH method with ray tracing for laser powder bed fusion, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 448 (July 2025) (2025) 118423.doi:10.1016/ j.cma.2025.118423

    arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Russell, A

    M. Russell, A. Souto-Iglesias, T. Zohdi, Numerical simulation of Laser Fusion Additive Man- ufacturing processes using the SPH method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 341 (2018) 163–187.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.06.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2018.06.033 2018

  48. [48]

    Anisimov, V

    S. Anisimov, V. Khokhlov, Instabilities in Laser-Matter Interaction, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995

    1995

  49. [49]

    A. J. Ross, I. Bitharas, K. G. Perkins, A. J. Moore, Volumetric heat source calibration for laser powder bed fusion, Additive Manufacturing 60 (2022).doi:10.1016/J.ADDMA.2022.103267. 41

    work page doi:10.1016/j.addma.2022.103267 2022

  50. [50]

    Olsson, G

    E. Olsson, G. Kreiss, S. Zahedi, A conservative level set method for two phase flow II, Journal of Computational Physics 225 (1) (2007) 785–807.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2006.12.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2006.12.027 2007

  51. [51]

    J. Nitsche, Über ein Variationsprinzip zur Lösung von Dirichlet-Problemen bei Verwendung von Teilräumen, die keinen Randbedingungen unterworfen sind, Abhandlungen aus dem Math- ematischen Seminar der Universität Hamburg 36 (1) (1971) 9–15.doi:10.1007/BF02995904

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02995904 1971

  52. [52]

    Kronbichler, K

    M. Kronbichler, K. Kormann, A generic interface for parallel cell-based finite element operator application, Computers & Fluids 63 (2012) 135–147.doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2012.04. 012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2012.04 2012

  53. [53]

    Journal of Numerical Mathematics 33, 403–415

    D. Arndt, W. Bangerth, M. Bergbauer, B. Blais, M. Fehling, R. Gassmöller, T. Heister, L. Heltai, M. Kronbichler, M. Maier, P. Munch, S. Scheuerman, B. Turcksin, S. Uzunbajakau, D. Wells, M. Wichrowski, The deal.II library, version 9.7, Journal of Numerical Mathematics 32 (4) (2025) 369–380.doi:10.1515/jnma-2025-0115

    work page doi:10.1515/jnma-2025-0115 2025

  54. [54]

    Kronbichler, A

    M. Kronbichler, A. Diagne, H. Holmgren, A fast massively parallel two-phase flow solver for microfluidic chip simulation, The International Journal of High Performance Computing Ap- plications 32 (2) (2018) 266–287.doi:10.1177/1094342016671790

    work page doi:10.1177/1094342016671790 2018

  55. [55]

    Sussman, P

    M. Sussman, P. Smereka, S. Osher, A Level Set Approach for Computing Solutions to In- compressible Two-Phase Flow, Journal of Computational Physics 114 (1) (1994) 146–159. doi:10.1006/jcph.1994.1155

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph.1994.1155 1994

  56. [56]

    C. S. Peskin, The immersed boundary method, Acta Numerica 11 (2002) 479–517.doi: 10.1017/S0962492902000077

    work page doi:10.1017/s0962492902000077 2002

  57. [57]

    C. J. Knight, Theoretical Modeling of Rapid Surface Vaporization with Back Pressure, AIAA Journal 17 (5) (1979) 519–523.doi:10.2514/3.61164

    work page doi:10.2514/3.61164 1979

  58. [58]

    Voller, C

    V. Voller, C. Prakash, A fixed grid numerical modelling methodology for convection-diffusion mushy region phase-change problems, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 30 (8) (1987) 1709–1719.doi:10.1016/0017-9310(87)90317-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0017-9310(87)90317-6 1987

  59. [59]

    Schreter-Fleischhacker, P

    M. Schreter-Fleischhacker, P. Munch, N. Much, M. Kronbichler, W. A. Wall, C. Meier, A consistent diffuse-interface model for two-phase flow problems with rapid evaporation, Ad- vanced Modeling and Simulation in Engineering Sciences 11 (1) (2024) 19.doi:10.1186/ s40323-024-00276-0

    2024

  60. [60]

    Ludvigsson, K

    G. Ludvigsson, K. R. Steffen, S. Sticko, S. Wang, Q. Xia, Y. Epshteyn, G. Kreiss, High-Order Numerical Methods for 2D Parabolic Problems in Single and Composite Domains, Journal of Scientific Computing 76 (2) (2018) 812–847.doi:10.1007/s10915-017-0637-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s10915-017-0637-y 2018

  61. [61]

    Burman, S

    E. Burman, S. Claus, P. Hansbo, M. G. Larson, A. Massing, CutFEM: Discretizing geometry and partial differential equations, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 104 (7) (2015) 472–501.doi:10.1002/nme.4823

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.4823 2015

  62. [62]

    Benzaken, J

    J. Benzaken, J. A. Evans, R. Tamstorf, Constructing Nitsche’s Method for Variational Prob- lems, Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 31 (4) (2024) 1867–1896.doi: 10.1007/s11831-023-09953-6. 42

    work page doi:10.1007/s11831-023-09953-6 2024

  63. [63]

    Sticko, G

    S. Sticko, G. Kreiss, A stabilized Nitsche cut element method for the wave equation, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg 309 (2016) 364–387.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2016.06.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2016.06.001 2016

  64. [64]

    Burman, P

    E. Burman, P. Hansbo, Fictitious domain finite element methods using cut elements: II. A stabilized Nitsche method, Applied Numerical Mathematics 62 (4) (2012) 328–341.doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2011.01.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apnum.2011.01.008 2012

  65. [65]

    L. Lee, R. J. LeVeque, An Immersed Interface Method for Incompressible Navier–Stokes Equations, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 25 (3) (2003) 832–856.doi:10.1137/ S1064827502414060

    2003

  66. [66]

    Schreter-Fleischhacker, P

    M. Schreter-Fleischhacker, P. Munch, The deal.II tutorial step-87: Evaluation of finite element solutions at arbitrary points within a distributed mesh with application to two-phase flow (2023). URLhttps://dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/step_87.html

    2023

  67. [67]

    W. E. Lorensen, H. E. Cline, Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm, in: Proceedings of the 14th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, Vol. 21, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1987, pp. 163–169.doi:10.1145/37401. 37422

    work page doi:10.1145/37401 1987

  68. [68]

    Kothe, W

    D. Kothe, W. Rider, S. Mosso, J. Brock, J. Hochstein, Volume tracking of interfaces having surface tension in two and three dimensions, in: 34th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virigina, 1996, p. 859.doi: 10.2514/6.1996-859

    work page doi:10.2514/6.1996-859 1996

  69. [69]

    Yokoi, A density-scaled continuum surface force model within a balanced force formulation, Journal of Computational Physics 278 (1) (2014) 221–228.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.08.034

    K. Yokoi, A density-scaled continuum surface force model within a balanced force formulation, Journal of Computational Physics 278 (1) (2014) 221–228.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.08.034

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.08.034 2014

  70. [70]

    S.Zahedi, M.Kronbichler, G.Kreiss, Spuriouscurrentsinfiniteelementbasedlevelsetmethods for two-phase flow, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 69 (9) (2012) 1433– 1456.doi:10.1002/fld.2643

    work page doi:10.1002/fld.2643 2012

  71. [71]

    M. M. Francois, S. J. Cummins, E. D. Dendy, D. B. Kothe, J. M. Sicilian, M. W. Williams, A balanced-force algorithm for continuous and sharp interfacial surface tension models within a volume tracking framework, Journal of Computational Physics 213 (1) (2006) 141–173.doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2005.08.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2005.08.004 2006

  72. [72]

    Schott, Stabilized Cut Finite Element Methods for Complex Interface Coupled Flow Prob- lems, Ph.D

    B. Schott, Stabilized Cut Finite Element Methods for Complex Interface Coupled Flow Prob- lems, Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Munich (2017)

    2017

  73. [73]

    R. I. Saye, High-Order Quadrature Methods for Implicitly Defined Surfaces and Volumes in Hyperrectangles, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 37 (2) (2015) A993–A1019.doi: 10.1137/140966290

    work page doi:10.1137/140966290 2015

  74. [74]

    Bergbauer, P

    M. Bergbauer, P. Munch, W. A. Wall, M. Kronbichler, High-Performance Matrix-Free Unfitted Finite Element Operator Evaluation, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 47 (3) (2025) B665–B689.doi:10.1137/24M1653689. 43

    work page doi:10.1137/24m1653689 2025

  75. [75]

    Boivineau, C

    M. Boivineau, C. Cagran, D. Doytier, V. Eyraud, M. H. Nadal, B. Wilthan, G. Pottlacher, Thermophysical Properties of Solid and Liquid Ti-6Al-4V (TA6V) Alloy, International Journal of Thermophysics 27 (2) (2006) 507–529.doi:10.1007/PL00021868

    work page doi:10.1007/pl00021868 2006

  76. [76]

    M. Mohr, R. Wunderlich, R. Novakovic, E. Ricci, H.-J. Fecht, Precise Measurements of Ther- mophysical Properties of Liquid Ti–6Al–4V (Ti64) Alloy On Board the International Space Station, Advanced Engineering Materials 22 (7) (2020).doi:10.1002/adem.202000169

    work page doi:10.1002/adem.202000169 2020

  77. [77]

    Zhang, J

    G. Zhang, J. Chen, M. Zheng, Z. Yan, X. Lu, X. Lin, W. Huang, Element Vaporization of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy during Selective Laser Melting, Metals 10 (4) (2020) 435.doi:10.3390/ met10040435

    2020

  78. [78]

    C. Ma, D. Bothe, Direct numerical simulation of thermocapillary flow based on the Volume of Fluid method, International Journal of Multiphase Flow 37 (9) (2011) 1045–1058.doi: 10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2011.06.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2011.06.005 2011

  79. [79]

    Minissale, G

    M. Minissale, G. T. Zeweldi, R. Bisson, L. Gallais, The effect of surface temperature on optical properties of molybdenum mirrors in the visible and near-infrared domains, Nuclear Fusion 58 (9) (2018) 096012.doi:10.1088/1741-4326/aaca03

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/aaca03 2018

  80. [80]

    B. J. Simonds, J. Tanner, A. Artusio-Glimpse, P. A. Williams, N. Parab, C. Zhao, T. Sun, The causal relationship between melt pool geometry and energy absorption measured in real time during laser-based manufacturing, Applied Materials Today 23 (2021) 101049.doi: 10.1016/j.apmt.2021.101049. 44

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apmt.2021.101049 2021