A Comparative Investigation of Properties of Metallic Parts Additively Manufactured through MEX and PBF-LB/M Technologies

In this study, the research on 316L steel manufactured additively using two commercially available techniques, Material Extrusion (MEX) and Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Metals (PBF-LB/M), were compared. The additive manufacturing (AM) process based on powder bed synthesis is of great interest in the production of metal parts. One of the most interesting alternatives to PBF-LB/M, are techniques based on material extrusion due to the significant initial cost reduction. Therefore, the paper compares these two different methods of AM technologies for metals. The investigations involved determining the density of the printed samples, assessing their surface roughness in two printing planes, examining their microstructures including determining their porosity and density, and measuring their hardness. The tests carried out make it possible to determine the durability, and quality of the obtained sample parts, as well as to assess their strength. The conducted research revealed that samples fabricated using the PBF-LB/M technology exhibited approximately 3% lower porosity compared to those produced using the MEX technology. Additionally, it was observed that the hardness of PBF-LB/M samples was more than twice as high as that of the samples manufactured using the MEX technology.

Automated summary

In this study, the research compared 316L steel manufactured using two commercially available additive manufacturing (AM) techniques: Material Extrusion (MEX) and Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Metals (PBF-LB/M). The investigation involved determining the density, surface roughness, microstructures, and hardness of the printed samples. The research revealed that PBF-LB/M samples had lower porosity and higher hardness compared to MEX samples.