Page 32 - MSAM-4-2

Materials Science in Additive Manufacturing Measuring the porosity of AM components

the sintered 316L components and a part porosity of The density of sintered zirconium oxide ceramic
approximately 1.5% was determined. The results were not produced using the LCM process was determined by
validated with further density or porosity analyses, nor Homa and Schwentenwein using the Archimedes
28
were any tests carried out on the 316L green parts. method. A part density of 6.011 g/cm³ was measured. No
The mechanical and geometric properties of FDM- further comparative analyses were carried out. In addition,
printed components made of 316L stainless steel were the green parts were not analyzed.
also characterized by Caminero et al. Among other Llanos used micrograph analyses to determine the
25
29
things, the part density and porosity were determined density and porosity of sintered zirconia ceramics printed
using the Archimedes method and the pore distribution using the LCM process. Part densities of 6.01 – 6.02 g/cm³
by micrograph analyses. For sintered 316L component and part porosities of 0.98 – 1.18% were determined.
samples, a porosity of 1.9 – 2.1%, depending on the In addition, Suominen et al. also determined the
30
component orientation, was documented. The results were density of LCM-printed zirconia ceramics using the
not validated by other analytical methods or by analyzing Archimedes method. Part densities of 6.022 – 6.085 g/cm³
316L green parts.
were measured. Comparative analysis methods were not
Dupin et al. analyzed the density and porosity of used and green parts were not analyzed.
22
SLS parts made from various PA12 powders using the A summary of the density and porosity values
Archimedes method. In addition, the microstructure of determined in the literature for parts manufactured using
the parts was mapped using micrograph analyses. At a
laser power of 10 W, a porosity rate of approx. 6.1 – 6.5% the same AM materials and processes as in the present
study is given in Table 3.
was determined using the Archimedes method.
Porosity evaluations on parts made of titanium powder 3. Materials and methods
using EBM were carried out by Galarraga et al. using To quantify the influence of the component geometry
26
micrograph analysis. A maximum part porosity of 0.25% on the analysis quality of the density and porosity
was measured. The part density was not determined measurement methods, three components of varying
and the porosity results were not validated using other complexity (cuboid, cylinder, femoral ball head) were
analytical methods. designed using the Computer-Aided Design software
Scharowsky et al. also analyzed the porosity of EBM Autodesk Inventor Professional 2019 (Autodesk Inc., San
27
parts made of titanium by micrograph analysis. A part Rafael, USA) (Figure 4). The component files were then
porosity of 0.17% was determined for optimized system exported as STL files and prepared for printing using
settings. No further porosity or density analyses were the four AM processes selected. The dimensions of the
carried out. component designs are listed in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 3. Part density and porosity of various AM materials and processes
Method Material Porosity (%) Density Analysis method Source
FDM 316L green - 4.3 – 4.6 g/cm 3 Calculation of weight/volume 31
FDM 316L green 1.7 4.46 – 4.73 g/cm 3 Micrograph analysis 32
FDM 316L sintered 1.5 7.88 g/cm 3 Gaspycnometer 24
FDM 316L sintered 1.9 - Archimedes method 25
SLS PA12 4.1 – 6.7 - Archimedes method 22
EBM Titan 0.25 - Micrograph analysis 26
EBM Titan 0.17 - Micrograph analysis 27
LCM ZrO slurry 2.89 – 3.32 g/cm 3 Calculation of weight/volume 33
2
LCM ZrO sintered - 6.011 g/cm 3 Archimedes method 28
2
LCM ZrO sintered 0.98 – 1.18 6.01 – 6.02 g/cm 3 Micrograph analysis 29
2
LCM ZrO sintered - 6.022–6.085 g/cm 3 Archimedes method 30
2
Abbreviations: AM: Additively manufactured; EBM: Electron beam melting; FDM: Fused deposition modeling; LCM: Lithography-based ceramic
manufacturing; SLS: Selective laser sintering.

Volume 4 Issue 2 (2025) 6 doi: 10.36922/MSAM025090010