, Volume 67, Issue 3, pp 549–554 | Cite as

Characterization and Control of Powder Properties for Additive Manufacturing

  • A. Strondl
  • O. Lyckfeldt
  • H. Brodin
  • U. Ackelid


Powder characterization and handling in powder metallurgy are important issues and the required powder properties will vary between different component manufacturing processes. By understanding and controlling these, the final material properties for different applications can be improved and become more reliable. In this study, the metal powders used in additive manufacturing (AM) in terms of electron beam melting and selective laser melting have been investigated regarding particle size and shape using dynamic image analysis. In parallel, powder flow characteristics have been evaluated with a powder rheometer. Correlations within the results have been found between particle shape and powder flow characteristics that could explain certain effects of the powder processing in the AM processes. The impact, however, in the processing performance as well as in ultimate material properties was found to be limited.


Impact Toughness Additive Manufacturing Selective Laser Melting Electron Beam Melting Powder Property 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by Swerea 3D,3 a project within the Swerea group of research institutes, aimed to promoting the development and spreading of additive manufacturing in Sweden.


  1. 1.
    J.-P. Kruth, P. Mercelis, J. Van Vaerenbergh, L. Froyen, and M. Rombouts, Rapid Prototyp. J. 11, 26 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    U. Ackelid and M. Svensson, Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Powder Metallurgy & Particulate Materials, Las Vegas, NV, 2009, pp. 9101–9109.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Retsch Technology, Dynamic Image Analysis, Camsizer XT,
  4. 4.
    R. Freeman, Powder Technol. 174, 25 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    O. Lyckfeldt (Paper presented at the Euro PM2013, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2013).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A.W. Jenike, Storage and Flow of Solids (Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah, 1964).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.A. Stevens and P.E.J. Flewitt, Mater. Sci. Technol. 14, 81 (1980).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Q.Z. Chen and D.M. Knowels, Mater. Sci. Technol. 19, 447 (2003).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Appa Rao, M. Srinvas, and D.S. Sarma, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 435, 84 (2006).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B.-O. Bengtsson, G.J. Del Corso, and J.F. Scanlon, Paper presented at the Proceedings of Euro PM2012, Basel, Switzerland, 2012.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Sgobba, F. Savary, J. Liimatainen, and M. Kumpula (Paper presented at PM2000: Powder Metallurgy World Congress & Exhibition, Kyoto, Japan, 2000).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Lind, J. Sundström, and A. Peacock, Fusion Eng. Design 75–79, 979 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Angré and A. Strondl (Paper presented at HIP14, Stockholm, Sweden, 2014).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Strondl
    • 1
  • O. Lyckfeldt
    • 2
  • H. Brodin
    • 3
  • U. Ackelid
    • 4
  1. 1.Swerea Kimab ABKistaSweden
  2. 2.Swerea IVF ABMölndalSweden
  3. 3.Siemens AB, Siemens Industrial Turbomachinery ABFinspångSweden
  4. 4.Arcam ABMölndalSweden

Personalised recommendations