metals

Article
Internal Friction Angle of Metal Powders
Jiri Zegzulka 1,2 , Daniel Gelnar 1 , Lucie Jezerska 1, * ID
, Alvaro Ramirez-Gomez 3 , Jan Necas 1,2
and Jiri Rozbroj 1
1 VSB-TU Ostrava, ENET CENTRE–Energy Utilization of Non-traditional Energy Sources, Bulk Solids Centre,
17. listopadu 15, 70833 Ostrava, Czech Republic; [email protected] (J.Z.); [email protected] (D.G.);
[email protected] (J.N.); [email protected] (J.R.)
2 VSB-TU Ostrava, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Transportation, 17. listopadu 15,
70833 Ostrava, Czech Republic
3 Technical University of Madrid, Department of Mechanical, Chemical and Industrial Design Engineering,
Ronda de Valencia 3, 28012 Madrid, Spain; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +420-597-329-430




Received: 25 January 2018; Accepted: 6 April 2018; Published: 10 April 2018


Abstract: Metal powders are components with multidisciplinary usage as their application is very
broad. Their consistent characterization across all disciplines is important for ensuring repeatable
and trouble-free processes. Ten metal powders were tested in the study. In all cases, the particle
size distribution and morphology (scanning electron microscope—SEM photos) were determined.
The aim of this work was to inspect the flow behavior of metal powders through another measured
characteristic, namely the angle of internal friction. The measured values of the effective internal
friction angle in the range 28.6–32.9◦ , together with the spherical particle shape and the particle
size distribution, revealed the likely dominant mode of the metal particle transfer mechanism for
stainless steel 316L, zinc and aluminum powder. This third piston flow mechanism is described and
illustrated in detail. The angle of internal friction is mentioned as another suitable parameter for the
characterization of metal powders, not only for the relative simplicity of the determination but also
for gaining insight into the method of the movement of individual particles during the flow.

Keywords: metal powders; particle size distribution; particle shape; angle of internal friction;
piston mechanism

1. Introduction
Metal powders, i.e., fine metal particles, are the basis for many areas of modern industrial
production from powder metallurgy, paint-making industry, medicine to pyrotechnics. The market for
metal powders, therefore, exponentially rises with the development of other manufacturing techniques
for metal systems such as the additive manufacturing (AM), including powder bed fusion (PBF), direct
energy deposition (DED) and binder jetting using metal powders as the primary source of material
to form components. The PBF and DED techniques use direct melting of powder materials to create
fully dense parts using high-energy sources (laser, electric beams), while the binder jetting method
uses the precipitation of pulverized particles with adhesive agents before subsequent sintering and
secondary infiltration for partial restoration of the parts. Above all, powder bed fusion (PBF), including
the selective laser melting (SLM) processes and electron beam melting (EBM), is the preferred direct
production option of high-quality metal parts from metal powders [1–3]. The characterization of input
metal powder was dealt with in several studies [4–6]. In traditional layered methods (LM—laser
melting, 3D Printing, SLS—selective laser sintering, SLM, etc.), input powders are characterized, for
example, by morphology, granulometry, surface parameters (packing density), rheology or thermal
properties known to affect the behavior of raw materials during the production of metal parts. Good

Metals 2018, 8, 255; doi:10.3390/met8040255 www.mdpi.com/journal/metals

Metals 2018, 8, 255 2 of 12

flow and high packing density of metal powders [7] are desirable in all the production techniques
mentioned. These parameters are mainly dependent on the particle shape, particle size distribution and
internal friction angle. The particle size distribution is usually presented as a differential (distribution)
curve with the differentiation of the mode, mean (average) and median of the particle size of the
input metal powder and as a cumulative curve that identifies the volume content in terms of size (d10 ,
d50 and d90 ). Various particle size distributions lead to the production of various packing behaviors
which, for instance, influence the shrinkage and the densification of molding parts in conventional
sintering processes and other manufacturing procedures [8]. The authors of another study on the
granulometry of input metal powders, which may affect the ability to process the material throughout
the manufacturing process, determined stated the preliminary requirements for the particle size
distribution particularly suited to additive production (including SLS and SLM) [9]:

d50 d
d90 < tlayer , ≥ 10, 90 ≤ 19 (1)
d10 d10

This are the so called Karapatis derived criteria [10,11], where tlayer is the thickness of the powder
layer for the additive technology, d10 , d50 and d90 indicate 10%, 50% or 90% of the particle representation
for the measured dimension. These criteria indicate that 50% of the particles are 10 times coarser
than 10% of finer particles (grains), at the same time about 20% of the particle size is in the ratio of
1:20. These requirements were originally set for bimodal particle size distributions and adapted for
monomodal distributions. It was searched out that for d10 < 5–6 µm these fine metal particles begin to
agglomerate. This phenomenon reduces the flowability, consequently, it is difficult to form a suitable
homogeneous powder layer with the required density [12].
The angle of internal friction, which determines the failure properties of the particle assembly
under stress, is another fundamental characteristic of the metal powder flow [13]. Several authors
studied the effect of shape on the internal friction angle of metal powders [13–15]. Their studies state
that the angle of internal friction increases with decreasing particle size along with deviations from
the spherical surface. With the increasing particle angularity, the initial free space is reduced, and the
interlocking effect is increased. For the present, the systematic research of the internal friction angle of
metal particles of various shapes and sizes in this area is very limited. The angle of internal friction
can be defined as the rate of loss of work in the flow of powder materials. This gives a complex flow
efficiency term, which should indicate the energy balance of the powder movement more efficiently
than the traditional concept of the internal friction angle [16].
In the first part of this work, ten metal powders are characterized by particle size distributions,
their morphology and the values of the internal friction angles in relation to the processes of powder
metallurgy are demonstrated. These are zinc, aluminum, 316L stainless steel, copper, bronze, iron,
manganese, titanium, tin and ferrite powder. The second section provides the application of the
theory of the particle position change in the flow of metal powders based on the internal friction angle
expressed as the rate of loss of work, in other words an insight into the behavior of metal powders.

2. Materials, Methods and Model

2.1. Materials
Ten different metal powders were used for experiments. Metal powders were selected with
relation to their commercial availability (metal powder market). Stainless steel 316L was taken from
the production of 3D printing, zinc, aluminum, tin, copper, iron, bronze and titanium powder are
commercially available metal powders produced by the company Fichema (Brno, Czech Republic).
Manganese powder is a metal powder produced by the company Pkchemie (Trebic, Czech Republic).
Ferrite powder was taken from the production of permanent magnets.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 3 of 12

2.2. Methods

2.2.1. Particle Size Distribution

The granulometric analysis of the metal powder sample was performed on the Cilas 1190 laser
analyzer (Cilas, Orleans, France). Cilas uses Fraunhofer diffraction. This method is widely used for
particle size measurement [17]. The wet path method was implemented. Water was the medium used
in the tests. The metal powders were measured after sonication to ensure complete dispersion. The
determination of the particles size was conducted based on the passage of the measured material
dispersed in the carrier medium through coherent light with a wavelength of 830 nm. The results and
evaluations are usable directly from the Cilas device [18,19]. One measurement was repeated 3 times.
The resulting parameters d10 , d50 and d90 are the average values.

2.2.2. Angle of Internal Friction and Flow Function

Angle of internal friction measurement was done on the shear testing machine (Schulze Ring
Shear Tester) RST-01 (Wolfenbuttel, Germany). Angle of internal friction is an important descriptive
parameter of bulk solids for various applications [20]. Principle of its evaluation is based on metering
of the stable value of shear stress depending on the normal load [21,22]. The bulk density of the
sample is changing during the metering depending on the consolidation of defined normal load and
its average value is the result. The shear stress in test sample arise from the rotation of the shear cell
that is turning against the cap. The cap that does not rotate is connected to the force sensors indicating
the effects of rotation as an acting force. Figure 1 shows the RST-01 output with description of the most
significant parameters. To these parameters belongs for example also the effective angle of internal
friction δ, linearized angle of internal friction ϕ, cohesion c, major principal stress σ1 and unconfined
yield strength σc . The measurement done for this paper is focused on the effective angle of internal
friction. The major part of the RST-01 output data is just in connection with this very value. Angle of
internal friction is under contemporary state of technology measured by experimental methods.

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of powder yield locus obtained from the Schulze ring tester.

The angle of internal friction was measured for each metal powder 10 times for 3 normal stress
settings—5000 Pa, 10,000 Pa and 20,000 Pa. The resulting angles of internal friction (linearized, effective)
for individual metal powders are the average values of 30 measurements.
The relationship between the unconfined yield strength σc and the major principal stress σ1
is called the flow function ffc of the powders. The metal powders were characterized by the ratio
ffc = σ1 /σc . The larger ffc, the more easily the bulk materials flow [23].
Metals 2018, 8, 255 4 of 12

2.3. Angle of Internal Friction Model

The internal friction angle model details the method of moving individual metal powder particles
for the piston particle motion mechanism (1), which was defined by prof. Zegzulka [16]. The term
is of historical character. The schematic representation of this first mechanism is shown in Figure 2.
Individual particle shifts are defined as a degree of energy intensity that is given by the angle of
internal friction. It is essentially a value representing the mechanical difficulty of moving one particle
from its initial position to its final position. Therefore, the angle of internal friction can represent the
physical quantity known as the “mechanical efficiency” of the mutual transformation of the forms of
energy Wkinetic → Wpotential → Wpressure → Wdissipation .

Figure 2. Schematic representation of the piston flow mechanism (1) [16].

The first possibility of moving a particle between two positions, the initial and final one is shown
in Figure 2. The monitored particle copies the shape of the surface to which is bound, by means of
which its trajectory of motion is determined. Around the first mechanism, where the particles do
not pass through the shear plane, there are 5 basic types of motion. Prof. Zegzulka provides the
detailed specification of partial particle movement mechanisms according to the first piston flow
mechanism (1) in his publication [16]. This mechanism is valid for the internal friction angle ranging
from 5.66◦ to 30.36◦ .
The second mechanism of moving, that helps with transfer of particles in bulk solids with angle
of internal friction bigger than 30.36◦ is casing mechanism (2) [24]. In this case, the transferring of
particles is caused by their mutual exchange. This particle exchange runs in the shear level. The
resulting vector of movement follows the direction of bulk solid flow.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Particle Characterization

The particle size distributions of the first five metal powders are shown in Figure 3, another five
in Figure 4 and the d10 , d50 and d90 values are summarized in Table 1.

Figure 3. The particle size distribution (differential and cumulative) for the first five metal powders.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 5 of 12

Figure 4. The particle size distribution (differential and cumulative) for another five metal powders.

Table 1. Characteristics values for the particle size distribution.

Metal Powders d10 (µm) d50 (µm) d90 (µm) d50 /d10 d90 /d10
Stainless Steel 316L 26.0 ± 0.8 38.8 ± 0.1 58.0 ± 0.1 1.5 2.2
Zinc powder 8.3 ± 0.1 15.8 ± 0.2 24.8 ± 0.4 1.9 3.0
Aluminum powder 29.4 ± 0.2 79.1 ± 0.4 187.3 ± 5.0 2.7 6.4
Tin powder 6.3 ± 0.3 26.9 ± 0.4 59.1 ± 1.8 4.3 9.3
Copper powder 16.1 ± 0.1 35.6 ± 0.1 57.5 ± 0.2 2.2 3.6
Manganese powder 6.1 ± 0.2 32.3 ± 1.2 88.0 ± 1.6 5.3 14.5
Bronze powder 12.1 ± 0.1 29.6 ± 0.2 57.2 ± 1.4 2.4 4.7
Iron powder 72.7 ± 0.2 121.1 ± 0.5 195.1 ± 0.5 1.7 2.7
Titanium powder 80.7 ± 1.6 295.1 ± 0.5 452.1 ± 0.2 3.7 5.6
Ferrite powder 29.2 ± 0.4 54.9 ± 0.7 86.6 ± 3.0 1.9 3.0

Based on d90 parameter, titanium powder contained the largest particles (452 µm), whereas, zinc
powder contained the smallest particles (25 µm). For most metal powders, however, 90% of the particles
ranged from about 60 to 90 µm. It can be concluded from the values that manganese powder has the
widest span of particle distribution, which is also evident from the shape of the distribution curve
(Figure 4) and from the SEM photograph shown as a part of Figure 5. The symmetrical distribution of
the particle size is evident, e.g., by zinc powder (Figure 3). The SEM photographs suitably complement
the characterization of metal powders (Figure 5). The aforementioned manganese powder contains
sharp-angled particles of various sizes. Smaller particles can fill the gap between the larger ones to
ensure proper packing behavior. Stainless steel 316L and zinc powder contain separate spherical
particles whose geometrical shape is close to the sphere. Aluminum powder contains, in addition
to spherical particles, a minimum proportion of droplet-shaped particles whose exterior appearance
is close to the ellipsoid. The photograph also proves that the smaller particles cover the surface of
larger ones. Tin powder contains a considerable number of fine particles but also larger grains. The
distribution span is wide. The particles are spherical or droplet-shaped and separated. Copper powder
is composed of grains of irregular shape without geometric regularity. Bronze powder contains a
mixture ranging from spherical particles to irregular shaped particles. Iron powder can be partly
characterized by a sheet-like form of larger clumps. Titanium powder contains the largest particles,
some with a dendritic shape. In the case of ferrite powder, there are agglomerates of fine, sharp-edged
particles, either separate or packing coarser grains.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 6 of 12

Figure 5. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) photos of metal powders depicting the shape and the
structure of particles.

The last two columns of Table 1 provide values for the preliminary assessment of the level of
suitability of metal powder granulometry for the additive SLS and SLM production, according to
Karapatis criteria (Equation (1)). The d50 /d10 > 10 criterion has not been fully met for any of the studied
metal powders, although, for example, 316L stainless steel is used in additive production without
problems. This ratio ranged from 1.5 to 5.3 when the highest value corresponds to the manganese
powder. The value suggests that 50% of the particles are 5 times larger than 10% of finer particles.
On the other hand, the d90 /d10 ≤ 19 criterion was met for all metal powders tested. As for metal
powders examined by us, it applies that d90 /d10 ≤ 15. This requirement meets the condition of filling
the free spaces between the coarse particles by fine grains to form the effective layer. Similar results
regarding non-fulfilment/fulfilment of the criteria were also achieved in another study [12]. Therefore,
another complementary criterion qualitatively specifying the suitability of metal powder granulometry
for additive technology should be specified. To conclude from results, there is a certain balance
between the stated ratios. Larger amounts of fine particles (up to about 6 µm) are agglomerated, while
large amounts of larger particles often cause uneven (rough) surfaces. Both conditions are, therefore,
marginal to create a suitable homogeneous powder layer for additive production. A further alternative
of the addition is the determination of another characterization parameter, for instance the angle of
internal friction.

3.2. Angle of Internal Friction

The knowledge of the particle arrangement structure (together with the filling of the empty
inter-particle spaces) is essential for creating an effective homogeneous powder layer in additive
powder technologies. The internal friction angle of metal powders is the reference value for this
arrangement. The measured values of the effective internal friction angle and the internal friction
angle for the ten metal powders are given in Table 2.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 7 of 12

Table 2. Effective internal friction angle (δ) with standard deviation of measurement (σsd ), minimum
(δmin ) and maximum value (δmax ) for individual metal powders. Internal friction angle (φ) with
standard deviation (σsd ), minimum (φmin ) and maximum value (φmax ) for individual metal powders.

Metal Powders δ (◦ ) σsd (◦ ) δmin (◦ ) δmax (◦ ) φ (◦ ) σsd (◦ ) φmin (◦ ) φmax (◦ )

Stainless Steel 316L 28.6 0.5 28.0 39.7 28.5 0.4 27.8 29.3
Zinc powder 29.9 0.3 29.3 30.7 29.6 0.5 28.8 30.7
Aluminum powder 32.9 1.2 31.4 35.2 32.9 1.2 31.4 35.2
Tin powder 37.8 2.8 33.8 42.2 36.1 1.8 33.3 38.8
Copper powder 39.1 0.7 38.2 40.6 38.1 0.5 37.4 39.1
Manganese powder 39.4 0.4 38.9 40.6 38.6 0.6 37.9 40.4
Bronze powder 39.9 0.5 39.0 40.7 38.7 0.7 37.6 40.1
Iron powder 40.0 0.7 39.0 41.6 39.4 0.5 38.7 40.7
Titanium powder 42.9 0.9 41.4 45.1 41.9 0.7 40.6 43.7
Ferrite powder 48.1 1.6 45.8 51.1 39.1 0.6 37.6 40.0

Regarding the above stated data, the metal powders are arranged with an increasing value of the
internal friction angle (both efficient and linearized). 316L stainless steel used in 3D printing contains
spherical particles with the internal friction angle effective value of 28.6 ± 0.5◦ . The ideal bulk material,
as is known, corresponds to the 30◦ angle of internal friction [16,23,25]. Its definition is: “Ideal bulk is
formed by spheres. The magnitude of the internal friction angle of the ideal bulk mass is equal to the
angle of repose and it is 30◦ . The angle of repose is invariant to external and internal influences in the
case of the ideal bulk material.” Metal powders approaching this quality would probably meet the
requirements for additive production of SLM or EBM. Information to the 30◦ angle of internal friction
are briefly summarized as follows:

• In case of the bulk solid where the angle of internal friction is α < 30◦ all particles are having all
possibilities to change their position—the first mechanism, the piston one (1)—does not come
through the theoretical shear level.
• In case of the bulk solid where the angle of internal friction is α > 30◦ all particles are having
all possibilities to change their position—the second mechanism, the casing one (2)—does come
through the theoretical shear level.
• This is therefore the limiting, threshold value among the mechanisms mentioned. 30◦ is the
boundary line between the areas mentioned above.
• Bulk solid having the angle of internal friction 30◦ in case of the free poured pile again forms an
angle 30◦ , which means that the angle of repose equals also 30◦ .

Zinc powder, which contains smooth, separated spherical particles with an average size of 16 µm
is the closest to this value (30◦ ) of the internal friction angle of the “ideal bulk mass”. Gaussian
distributions of the incidence of effective internal friction angle values for all tested metal powders
are shown in Figure 6. The largest range of values of the effective internal friction angle was found
in tin powder, the lowest range in zinc powder. The most frequent data occurred in the range from
37.5◦ to 43◦ .
316L stainless steel and aluminum powder are other powdered metals whose value of the internal
friction angle indicates suitability for additive technology. For aluminum powder, the value is already
slightly higher equaling to 32.9 ± 1.2◦ .
Figure 7 depicts dependence of flow function ffc on the effective angle of internal friction. In this
diagram two groups of materials can be seen. On the left there are metal powders usable for additive
manufacturing with respect to flowability parameter, e.g., interference with application of powder
layer (ffc = f(angle of internal friction)). Values of their effective angles of internal friction can be found
in proximity of the value of ideal bulk solid, which is 30◦ . On the right (marked red) there is a group of
metal powders with worse flowability (lower ffc value) and higher angle of internal friction values.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 8 of 12

Figure 6. Occurrence of the effective internal friction angle for all tested metal powders.

Figure 7. Relation between flow function ffc and effective angle of internal friction δ. ( metal
powders suitable for additive manufacturing, metal powders with worse flowability).

The practical application of the internal friction angle model is based on the structure of the
deposition of metal powder particles (the way they are arranged). The internal friction angle model
is based on the knowledge of two principal mechanisms of particle position change (Section 2.3).
The piston mechanism (1) of particle motion is the mechanism where the particles do not pass through
the shear plane but follow the shape of the surface to which they are bound. It copies the motion
trajectory. The casing mechanism (2) is the second flow mechanism. The particle position change is
done through the plane of shear. To the first mechanism of metal powder particle transition—the
piston mechanism (1) where the angle of internal friction is within the range of 5.66–30.36◦ , there are
five possible types of particle transfer (1.1–1.5) as shown in Figure 8.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 9 of 12

Figure 8. Schematic representation of piston flow mechanism (1) with types of particle motion (1.1–1.5).
Detailed visualization for zinc powder–type of particle motion 1.3. 1—initial position, 2—middle
position and 3—final position of zinc particle.

As mentioned above, the first three metal powders, namely stainless steel 316L, zinc and
aluminum powder have an internal friction angle of about 30◦ . This value predicts the piston
mechanism (1) of particle flow. Therefore, the particles of these three powders will move in one
shear plane, specifically by the third type of shift [16]. This method of moving particles is shown in
more detail in Figure 8. This is a movement of the particle along the diagonal of the bottom layer.
The situation is described by the red marked zinc powder particle passing from the initial position
(Figure 8, Marking 1) to the final position (Figure 8, Marking 3). The loss of work is proportional to
the path movement of the metal powder zinc particle between the initial and the final positions. The
solution of all partial mechanisms of the piston flow is conditioned by the regular arrangement of
particles, which is not achievable in the practical conditions of the production process. It is merely
achievable to approximate this state and to show it schematically.
It is important to note that the flow of the discussed metal powders—316L stainless steel,
zinc powder and aluminum powder—does not occur by means of merely the third mechanism
shown, but it is obvious that it will be dominant due to the magnitude of the internal friction angle.
As the measured values proved stainless steel 316L and zinc powder are proportionally of different
size. In distributions d10 , d50 and d90 it is by more than twice in ratio. This size difference, however,
had not substantial impact on the resulting values of effective angle of internal friction δ, they differ
solely by 1.3◦ . The slight difference of δ between stainless steel 316L and zinc powder results from the
particle shape, which is close to a spherical shape as it is apparent from the Figure 5. The sample of
copper powder is the closest to stainless steel 316L by the particle size in distributions d10 , d50 and d90 .
The difference of effective angle of internal friction (δ) between the samples equals to 10.5◦ and results
from the particle shape (Figure 5). As for the value of effective internal friction angle (δ) the shape is
more determining factor than the particle size of the measured samples. With respect to flowability
and energy, demandingness expressed by δ the spherical shape is preferable.

4. Conclusions
The aim of the work was to compare the mechanical and physical properties of metal powders
used in additive productions of powders, which have not been used in production yet. The properties
as the large particle size distribution and, above all, the particle shape, are the parameters that have a
considerable influence on the resulting angle of internal friction. The angle of internal friction was
selected as the primary characteristic quantity to demonstrate flow characteristics. As the used and
Metals 2018, 8, 255 10 of 12

the newly set metal powders are approaching the value of 30◦ of their angle of internal friction, the
description of possible particle transfer called the third type (1.3) of piston flow mechanism (1) was
stated. An ideal powder conditions meeting the requirement of 30◦ angle of internal friction were used.
Various metal powders were characterized in the study—stainless steel 316L, zinc, aluminum, tin,
cooper, manganese, bronze, iron, titanium and ferrite powder. Particle size distribution, morphology
and internal friction angles were determined for all of them. The possibility how to obtain preliminary
(basic) information on the suitability of the use of metal powders for additive production from these
primary, relatively fast physical methods was demonstrated.
The Karapatis derived criteria determined by particle size distributions indicated the need for
further additional criteria from which the suitability of the use or modification of metal powders for
additive production would be indicated.
The angle of internal friction (linearized and effective) was presented as another suitable
characteristic of metal powders. For all 10 metal powders, the linearized and effective internal
friction angle was found. This parameter was defined as the rate of loss of work when moving metal
powder particles and the possibility of applying an internal friction angle model was demonstrated.
For zinc powder, the effective internal friction angle of 29.9 ± 0.5◦ was found. This value indicates the
predominance of the piston mechanism (1) of particle flow for motion type 3 metal powders. Reversing
the application of the model makes it possible to analyze the internal friction angle for other new
metal powders.
By applying the internal friction angle model, it has been suggested how to describe the ongoing
movement of metal powder particles and to get insight into their behavior. However, the provisional
application interval being merely valid for internal friction angle values ranging from 5.66◦ to 30.36◦ is
the limiting factor.
With respect to the specified properties, 316L stainless steel, zinc powder and aluminum powder
are the most suitable metal powders of this study for additive production. They contain spherical
particles of uniform particle size distributions and exhibit the effective internal friction angle ranging
from 28.6◦ to 32.9◦ . These values ensure the suitable particle arrangement to form a homogeneous
layer of material for 3D printing and other technologies within their flow properties.

Acknowledgments: This paper was conducted within the framework of the project LO1404: Sustainable
development of ENET CENTRE–Energy Utilization of Non-traditional Energy Sources, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/19.0389:
Research Infrastructure Development of the CENET (Centre of Energy Utilization of Non-traditional Energy
Sources) and project Innovative and additive manufacturing technology—new technological solutions for 3D
printing of metals and composite materials.
Author Contributions: Jiri Zegzulka and Daniel Gelnar conceived and designed the experiments. Daniel Gelnar
and Lucie Jezerska performed the experiments. Alvaro Ramirez-Gomez and Jan Necas analyzed the data. Jiri
Rozbroj contributed analysis tools. Lucie Jezerska and Daniel Gelnar wrote the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
c Cohesion (Pa)
d10 10% particle representation for the detected size, cumulative phase lower decile
d50 50% particle representation for the detected size, median
d90 90% particle representation for the detected size, cumulative phase upper decile
ffc Flow function (-)
Metals 2018, 8, 255 11 of 12

Greek Symbols
δ Effective internal friction angle (◦ )
δmin Minimum value of effective internal friction angle (◦ )
δmax Maximum value of effective internal friction angle (◦ )
φ Internal friction angle (◦ )
φmin Minimum value of internal friction angle (◦ )
φmax Maximum value of internal friction angle (◦ )
σ1 Major consolidation stress (Pa)
σc Unconfined yield strength (Pa)
σsd Standard deviation (◦ )

Abbreviation
AM Additive Manufacturing
DED Direct Energy Deposition
EBM Electron Beam Melting
SEM Scanning Electron Microscope
SLM Selective Laser Melting
SLS Selective Laser Sintering
PBF Powder Bed Fusion

References
1. Seifi, M.; Salem, A.; Beuth, J.; Harrysson, O.; Lewandowski, J.J. Overview of materials qualification needs for
metal additive manufacturing. JOM 2016, 68, 747–764. [CrossRef]
2. Murr, L.E.; Gaytan, S.M.; Ramirez, D.A.; Martine, E.; Hernandez, J.; Amato, K.N.; Shindo, P.W.; Medina, F.R.;
Wicker, R.B. Metal fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron beam melting technologies.
J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2012, 28, 1–14. [CrossRef]
3. Tan, J.H.; Wong, W.L.E.; Dalgarno, K.W. An overview of powder granulometry on feedstock and part
performance in the selective laser melting proces. Addit. Manuf. 2017, 18, 228–255. [CrossRef]
4. Krystynova, M.; Dolezal, P.; Fintova, S.; Brezina, M.; Zapletal, J.; Wasserbauer, J. Preparation and
characterization of zinc material prepared by powder metallurgy. Metals 2017, 7, 396. [CrossRef]
5. Clark, N.; Jones, N.; Setchi, R.; Porch, A. Particle size characterisation of metals powders for additive
manufacturing using a microwave sensor. Powder Technol. 2017. [CrossRef]
6. Bertoli, U.S.; Guss, G.; Wu, S.; Matthews, M.J.; Schoenung, J.M. In-situ characterization of laser-powder
interaction and cooling rates through high-speed imaging of powder bed fusion additive manufacturing.
Mater. Des. 2017, 135, 385–396. [CrossRef]
7. Gu, D.D.; Meiners, W.; Wissenbach, K.; Poprawe, R. Laser additive manufacturing of metallic components:
Materials, processes and mechanisms. Int. Mater. Rev. 2012, 57, 133–164. [CrossRef]
8. German, R.M. Prediction of sintered density for bimodal powder mixtures. Metall. Trans. A 1992, 23,
1455–1465. [CrossRef]
9. Hanzl, P.; Zetek, M.; Baksa, T.; Kroupa, T. The influence of processing parameters on the mechanical
properties of SLM parts. Procedia Eng. 2015, 100, 1405–1413. [CrossRef]
10. Egger, G.; Gygax, P.E.; Glardon, R.; Karapatis, N.P. Optimization of powder layer density in selective
laser sintering. In Proceedings of the 10th Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium (SFF), Austin, TX, USA,
9–11 August 1999.
11. Spierings, A.B.; Herres, N.; Levy, G. Influence of the particle size distribution on surface quality and
mechanical properties in AM steel parts. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2011, 17, 195–202. [CrossRef]
12. Spierings, A.B.; Levy, G. Comparison of density of stainless steel 316L parts produced with selective laser
melting using different powder grades. In Proceedings of the SFF Symposium 2009, Austin, Texas, USA,
3–5 August 2009; Bourell, D.L., Crawford, R.H., Seepersad, C.C., Eds.; University of Texas at Austin: Austin,
Texas, USA, 2009; pp. 342–353.
Metals 2018, 8, 255 12 of 12

13. Shinohara, K.; Oida, M.; Golman, B. Effect of particle shape on angle of internal friction by triaxial
compression test. Powder Technol. 2000, 107, 131–136. [CrossRef]
14. Yousuff, M.; Page, N.W. Particle material, morphology and load effects on internal friction in powders.
Powder Technol. 1993, 76, 155–164. [CrossRef]
15. Chan, L.C.Y.; Page, N.W. Particle fractal and load effects on internal friction in powders. Powder Technol.
1997, 90, 259–266. [CrossRef]
16. Zegzulka, J. The angle of internal friction as a measure of work loss in granular material flow. Powder Technol.
2013, 233, 347–353. [CrossRef]
17. Bowen, P. Particle size distribution measurement from millimeters to nanometers and from rods to platelets.
J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2002, 23, 631–662. [CrossRef]
18. Markandeya, S.A.; Dhiman, N.; Shukla, S.P.; Kisku, G.C. Statistical optimization of process parameters
for removal of dyes from wastewater on chitosan cenospheres nanocomposite using response surface
methodology. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 597–606. [CrossRef]
19. Engeli, R.; Etter, T.; Hovel, S.; Wegener, K. Processability of different IN738LC powder batches by selective
laser melting. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2016, 229, 484–491. [CrossRef]
20. Peciar, P.; Kluka, M.; Briss, L.; Peciar, M. Determination of stress in particulate matter with DEM method.
In Proceedings of the 39th International Conference of Slovak Sociaty of Chemical Engineering, Tatranské
Matliare, Slovakia, 21–25 May 2012; Markos, J., Ed.; Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava: Bratislava,
Slovakia, 2012; pp. 106–115.
21. Sogaard, S.V.; Pedersen, T.; Alleso, M.; Garnaes, J.; Rantanen, J. Evaluation of ring shear testing as a
characterization method for powder flow in small-scale powder processing equipment. Int. J. Pharm. 2014,
475, 315–323. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Schwedes, J. Review on testers for measuring flow properties of bulk solids. Granul. Matter 2003, 5, 1–43.
[CrossRef]
23. Mihlbachler, K.; Kollmann, T.; Seidel-Morgenstern, S.; Jurgen, T.; Guiochon, G. Measurement of the degree
of internal friction of two native silica packing materials. J. Chromatogr. A 1998, 818, 155–168. [CrossRef]
24. Zegzulka, J. An ideal Bulk Material. Bulk Solids Handl. 2002, 22, 214–221.
25. Zegzulka, J. Granular states of material aggregation—A comparison of ideal bulk material with ideal fluid
and ideal solid matter. Bulk Solids Handl. 2003, 23, 1–6.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).