ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Influence of Process Parameter and Build Rate Variations on Defect Formation in Laser Powder Bed Fusion SS316L.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) is an additive manufacturing process that has gained interest for its material fabrication due to multiple advantages, such as the ability to print parts with small feature sizes, good mechanical properties, reduced material waste, etc. However, variations in the key process parameters in LPBF may result in the instantiation of porosity defects and variation in build rate. Particularly, volumetric energy density (VED) is a variable that encapsulates a number of those parameters and represents the amount of energy input from the laser source to the feedstock. VED has been traditionally used to inform the quality of the printed part but different values of VED are presented as optimal values for certain material systems. An optimal VED value can be maintained by changing the key process parameters so that various combinations yield a constant value. In this study, an optimal constant VED value is maintained while printing SS316L with variable key processing parameters. Porosity analysis is performed using optical microscopy, as well as X-ray computed tomography, to reveal the volume density and distribution of those pores. Two primary defect categories are identified, namely lack of fusion and porosity induced by balling defects. The findings indicate that, even at optimal VED, variations in process parameters can significantly influence defect type, underscoring the sensitivity of defect formation to the variation of these parameters. Furthermore, a minor change in the build rate, driven by adjustments in process parameters, was found to influence defect categories. These findings emphasize that fine tuning the process parameters and build rate is essential to minimize defects. Finally, fiducial marks have been identified as a source of unintentional porosity defects. These results enable the refinement of process parameters, ultimately optimizing LPBF to achieve enhanced material density and expedite the printing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.