# Measurement Technique Comparison in the Entire Fracture Surface Topography Assessment for Additively Manufactured Materials

## TL;DR

This paper compares three microscopic techniques for measuring fracture surfaces in 3D-printed materials and finds them equally effective.

## Contribution

The study evaluates the effectiveness of three microscopic techniques for assessing fracture surfaces in additively manufactured materials.

## Key findings

- No significant differences were found between the three measurement techniques for fracture surface topography.
- Both measurement devices can accurately assess LPBF-processed specimens using the entire fracture surface method.

## Abstract

This paper focuses on comparing the three microscopic measurement techniques, confocal, focus variation, and point for focus, for the evaluation of entire fracture surface topographies. The measurements were performed using a Sensofar S Neox 3D optical profilometer and the Mitutoyo QV Apex 302 vision measuring system. The test specimens required for measuring were printed through laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) technology using two materials: Stainless Steel 316L and Inconel 718. The printing was performed with a printing power of 200 W, scanning speed of 800 mm/s, and layer thickness of 30 µm or 50 µm. The measurement differences were analyzed on the basis of void volume (Vv), fractal dimension (Df), and texture isotropy parameters, as well as a general view of the surface topography. The obtained results did not show a comprehensible difference between the applied measurement techniques for particular specimens. Thus, both measurement devices and three measurement techniques can be used to precisely measure the dimensions of LPBF-processed specimens with the entire fracture surface method.