The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: This paper provides an overview of the different binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting (SLM), thus improving the understanding of these processes. Design/methodology/approach: A classification of SLS/SLM processes was developed, based on the binding mechanism occurring in the process, in contrast with traditional classifications based on the processed material or the application. A broad range of commercial and experimental SLS/SLM processes – found from recent articles as well as from own experiments – was used to explain the different binding mechanism categories. Findings: SLS/SLM processes can be classified into four main binding mechanism categories, namely “solid state sintering”, “chemically induced binding”, “liquid phase sintering – partial melting” and “full melting”. Most commercial processes can be classified into the latter two categories, which are therefore subdivided. The binding mechanism largely influences the process speed and the resulting part properties. Research limitations/implications: The classification presented is not claimed to be definitive. Moreover some SLM/SLM processes could be classified into more than one category, based on personal interpretation. Originality/value: This paper can be a useful aid in understanding existing SLS/SLM processes. It can also serve as an aid in developing new SLS/SLM processes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rochus, P., Plesseria, J.-Y., Van Elsen, M., Kruth, J.-P., Carrus, R., & Dormal, T. (2007) · Acta Astronautica · doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2007.01.004 · Cited by 141
Self-citation
Cited by
Evaluation of 3D Printing and Its Potential Impact on Biotechnology and the Chemical Sciences
Gross, B. C., Erkal, J. L., Lockwood, S. Y., Chen, C., & Spence, D. M. (2014) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac403397r · Cited by 1,746
Review of in-situ process monitoring and in-situ metrology for metal additive manufacturing
Everton, S. K., Hirsch, M., Stravroulakis, P., Leach, R. K., & Clare, A. T. (2016) · Materials & Design · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.099 · Cited by 1,469
Wickramasinghe, S., Do, T., & Tran, P. (2020) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym12071529 · Cited by 1,052
Fatigue performance evaluation of selective laser melted Ti–6Al–4V
Edwards, P., & Ramulu, M. (2014) · Materials Science and Engineering: A · doi:10.1016/j.msea.2014.01.041 · Cited by 874
Zhang, L., & Attar, H. (2016) · Advanced Engineering Materials · doi:10.1002/adem.201500419 · Cited by 721
Metadata
- Authors
- Kruth, J., Mercelis, P., Van Vaerenbergh, J., Froyen, L., & Rombouts, M.
- Venue
- Rapid Prototyping Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2005-02-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26-36
- ISSN
- 1355-2546 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043301592
- Cited by
- 1,383
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 28.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/13552540510573365
- The paper
- Kruth, J., Mercelis, P., Van Vaerenbergh, J., Froyen, L., & Rombouts, M. (2005). Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyping Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540510573365
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.