Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-LB

In this document, a workflow that includes experimental procedures and flaw (imperfection) detection algorithms to identify the location of flaws created during the powder bed fusion-laser-based (PBF-LB) process of metals is explained. These flaws may have detrimental effects on the printed part mechanical performance. In this practice, only guidelines and workflow for coaxial photodiode-based in-situ monitoring as well as the associated statistical and machine learning flaw detection algorithms are provided. This practice does not address the security risks associated with manufacturing and environmental information. It is the responsibility of the user to follow practices and establish appropriate information technology related security measures. WARNING - This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Fabrication additive de métaux — Fusion sur lit de poudre — Surveillance par photodiode coaxiale in situ pour la détection de défauts de fusion en PBF-LB

General Information

Status
Not Published
Current Stage
5020 - FDIS ballot initiated: 2 months. Proof sent to secretariat
Start Date
27-Jan-2026
Completion Date
27-Jan-2026

Relations

Effective Date
18-Mar-2023

Overview

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 is a pivotal standard focusing on additive manufacturing of metals through the powder bed fusion-laser based (PBF-LB) process. This document outlines a comprehensive workflow for in-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring aimed at identifying lack of fusion flaws-a key imperfection that can compromise the mechanical integrity of printed metal parts. It provides detailed guidance on experimental procedures and flaw detection algorithms using statistical and machine learning methodologies.

This technical report serves as a guide for implementing and calibrating flaw detection techniques during the PBF-LB process, addressing important challenges such as sensor calibration, data correction, and validation with computed tomography (CT) scanning. The standard, however, does not cover security or broader safety concerns, leaving those responsibilities to the user.

Key Topics

  • Flaw Detection Workflow
    The document provides step-by-step guidance on designing coupons with intentionally seeded flaws, collecting coaxial photodiode data during manufacturing, and applying algorithms for flaw detection.

  • Coaxial Photodiode Monitoring
    A coaxial photodiode sensor aligned with the laser beam path monitors melt pool light intensity. The standard highlights the importance of wavelength selection (750-900 nm preferred for metals) and the necessity of intensity and geometry calibration.

  • Detection Algorithms
    Two main categories of algorithms are discussed:

    • Statistical Algorithms for identifying flaw signal anomalies by setting upper and lower thresholds.
    • Machine Learning Clustering Algorithms for unsupervised classification of flaw indicators, optimizing the number of clusters to detect lack of fusion-induced defects.
  • Seeded and Randomized Flaw Design

    • Intentional flaws are designed as spherical or cylindrical voids sized to machine resolution limits (minimum ~100 µm).
    • Random or stochastic flaws are induced by altering process parameters like laser power, scanning speed, hatch spacing, or layer thickness to simulate realistic defect formation scenarios.
  • Validation with CT Scanning
    Flaw detection results are validated using non-destructive computed tomography (CT) data. The collected photodiode data is registered and voxelized to compare in-situ prediction against ex-situ analysis, ensuring reliability of detection models.

Applications

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 is essential for manufacturers and quality control teams involved in metal additive manufacturing using powder bed fusion with lasers. Its practical applications include:

  • Quality Assurance in PBF-LB Production
    Early detection of lack of fusion flaws during the build phase enables timely interventions, reducing waste and costly rework.

  • Process Optimization
    Data-driven insights from in-situ monitoring support tuning of laser parameters and scanning strategies to minimize defects.

  • Algorithm Development for Automated Inspection
    Machine learning techniques can be customized and refined using intentionally seeded flaws, facilitating automated real-time defect classification.

  • Research and Development
    Provides a standardized methodology for developing new sensors, monitoring technologies, and advanced analytics in metal additive manufacturing.

  • Standards Compliance and Certification
    Supporting conformity assessments and improving traceability by integrating in-situ flaw detection into manufacturing workflows.

Related Standards

  • ISO/ASTM 52900
    Additive manufacturing - General principles - Fundamentals and vocabulary. This foundational standard provides the necessary terms and definitions referenced in DTR 52958.

  • ISO/ASTM TR 52906
    Guidelines for in-situ monitoring and data analysis techniques in metal additive manufacturing, especially for flaw detection.

  • ASTM E3166-20
    Standard terminology for metal additive manufacturing describing process-induced porosity types such as lack of fusion.

  • Additional ISO/IEC Directives
    Governing editorial procedures and technical collaboration essential for maintaining ISO/ASTM additive manufacturing standards.

Conclusion

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 advances the state of quality control in metal additive manufacturing by offering a rigorous, in-situ monitoring framework for detecting lack of fusion flaws during the PBF-LB process. By leveraging coaxial photodiode sensors and sophisticated statistical and machine learning algorithms, manufacturers can achieve enhanced defect detection that improves the structural integrity and reliability of printed metal parts. This standard is indispensable for engineers and quality professionals dedicated to optimizing additive manufacturing performance and ensuring product excellence.

Draft

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 - Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-LB Released:13. 01. 2026

English language
23 pages
sale 15% off
sale 15% off
Draft

REDLINE ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 - Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-LB Released:13. 01. 2026

English language
23 pages
sale 15% off
sale 15% off

Get Certified

Connect with accredited certification bodies for this standard

National Aerospace and Defense Contractors Accreditation Program (NADCAP)

Global cooperative program for special process quality in aerospace.

ANAB United States Verified

CARES (UK Certification Authority for Reinforcing Steels)

UK certification for reinforcing steels and construction.

UKAS United Kingdom Verified

DVS-ZERT GmbH

German welding certification society.

DAKKS Germany Verified

Sponsored listings

Frequently Asked Questions

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 is a draft published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Its full title is "Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-LB". This standard covers: In this document, a workflow that includes experimental procedures and flaw (imperfection) detection algorithms to identify the location of flaws created during the powder bed fusion-laser-based (PBF-LB) process of metals is explained. These flaws may have detrimental effects on the printed part mechanical performance. In this practice, only guidelines and workflow for coaxial photodiode-based in-situ monitoring as well as the associated statistical and machine learning flaw detection algorithms are provided. This practice does not address the security risks associated with manufacturing and environmental information. It is the responsibility of the user to follow practices and establish appropriate information technology related security measures. WARNING - This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

In this document, a workflow that includes experimental procedures and flaw (imperfection) detection algorithms to identify the location of flaws created during the powder bed fusion-laser-based (PBF-LB) process of metals is explained. These flaws may have detrimental effects on the printed part mechanical performance. In this practice, only guidelines and workflow for coaxial photodiode-based in-situ monitoring as well as the associated statistical and machine learning flaw detection algorithms are provided. This practice does not address the security risks associated with manufacturing and environmental information. It is the responsibility of the user to follow practices and establish appropriate information technology related security measures. WARNING - This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 is classified under the following ICS (International Classification for Standards) categories: 25.030 - Additive manufacturing. The ICS classification helps identify the subject area and facilitates finding related standards.

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 has the following relationships with other standards: It is inter standard links to ISO 24070-2:2021. Understanding these relationships helps ensure you are using the most current and applicable version of the standard.

ISO/ASTM DTR 52958 is available in PDF format for immediate download after purchase. The document can be added to your cart and obtained through the secure checkout process. Digital delivery ensures instant access to the complete standard document.

Standards Content (Sample)


FINAL DRAFT
Technical
Report
ISO/ASTM DTR
ISO/TC 261
Additive manufacturing of metals —
Secretariat: DIN
Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ
Voting begins on:
coaxial photodiode monitoring for
2026-01-27
lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-
Voting terminates on:
LB
2026-04-21
Fabrication additive de métaux — Fusion sur lit de poudre —
Surveillance par photodiode coaxiale in situ pour la détection de
défauts de fusion en PBF-LB
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO­
ISO/CEN PARALLEL PROCESSING LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
Reference number
FINAL DRAFT
Technical
Report
ISO/ASTM DTR
ISO/TC 261
Additive manufacturing of metals —
Secretariat: DIN
Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-situ
Voting begins on:
coaxial photodiode monitoring for
lack of fusion flaw detection in PBF-
Voting terminates on:
LB
Fabrication additive de métaux — Fusion sur lit de poudre —
Surveillance par photodiode coaxiale in situ pour la détection de
défauts de fusion en PBF-LB
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
© ISO/ASTM International 2026
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO­
ISO/CEN PARALLEL PROCESSING
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester. In the United States, such requests should be sent to ASTM International.
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
ISO copyright office ASTM International TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, USA
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11 Phone: +610 832 9634
Fax: +610 832 9635
Email: copyright@iso.org Email: khooper@astm.org
Website: www.iso.org Website: www.astm.org
Published in Switzerland Reference number
© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Significance and use . 2
5 Design of coupons . 3
5.1 General .3
5.2 Intentionally seeded flaws .4
5.3 Randomized/stochastic flaws .6
6 Sensor description . 6
7 Flaw detection algorithms . 7
7.1 General .7
7.2 Statistical algorithms .8
7.2.1 General .8
7.2.2 Absolute limits (AL) .9
7.2.3 Short term fluctuations (STF) .10
7.2.4 Workflow .11
7.3 Machine-learning approach: clustering algorithm . 13
7.3.1 Self-organizing map (SOM) . 13
7.3.2 K-means .14
8 Implementation of customized algorithms to components with randomized flaws and
the associated voxelization thereof .15
9 Case study: procedural implementation and validation results .18
Bibliography .23

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee
has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations,
governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely
with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types
of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent
rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a)
patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that
this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 261, Additive manufacturing, in cooperation
with ASTM Committee F42, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, on the basis of a partnership agreement
between ISO and ASTM International with the aim to create a common set of ISO/ASTM standards on
Additive Manufacturing, and in collaboration with the European Committee for Standardization (CEN)
Technical Committee CEN/TC 438, Additive manufacturing, in accordance with the Agreement on technical
cooperation between ISO and CEN (Vienna Agreement).
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
iv
FINAL DRAFT Technical Report ISO/ASTM DTR 52958:2026(en)
Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF)
— In-situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion
flaw detection in PBF-LB
1 Scope
This document provides a workflow comprising experimental procedures and flaw detection algorithms
aimed at locating flaws in parts produced during the powder bed fusion-laser-based (PBF-LB) process of
metals. It emphasizes the use of coaxial photodiode-based in-situ monitoring and statistical and clustering
machine learning algorithms, particularly for detecting lack of fusion-induced flaws. The workflow
delineates setting thresholds for statistical detection and determining the number of clusters for machine
learning algorithms, utilizing intentional seeded flaws in parts. Validation procedures are provided through
computed tomography scanner data. Hardware limitations and considerations for multi-laser processes are
addressed, with attention to potential issues.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO/ASTM 52900, Additive manufacturing — General principles — Fundamentals and vocabulary
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO/ASTM 52900 and the following
apply:
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1
clustering algorithm
unsupervised machine learning methods with unlabelled input data is grouped by similarity
3.2
coaxial photodiode arrangement
type of sensor arrangement on the powder bed fusion-laser-based machine aligned with the laser beam path
3.3
computed tomography
CT
non-destructive examination technique capturing radiographic projections of an object at various rotational
angles followed by mathematically reconstruction to produce a three-dimensional volume data set or one or
more two-dimensional cross-sectional images

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
3.4
data alignment
process of transforming different sets of geometrically or temporally related data into a single, global
coordinate system
3.5
data registration
procedure of data alignment and assignation of a persistent identification to the aligned data set
3.6
ex-situ analysis
measurement procedure performed after the completion of the build cycle
3.7
flaw indicator
indicator corresponding to the location of flaws predicted by the flaw detection algorithm
3.8
lack of fusion
type of process-induced porosity with not fully melted or fused powder particles onto the previously
deposited substrate.
[SOURCE: ASTM E3166-20, 3.4.7]
3.9
reference datum feature
notch, groove, or similar feature added to the geometry in a seeded flaw coupon to ease data alignment and
registration of porosity locations for CT-scan ex-situ analysis
3.10
intentionally seeded flaw
act of intentionally creating flaws through computer-aided design or manipulation of designated processing
parameters, resulting in the placement of the anticipated flaw or the act of intentionally creating a flaw
through the insertion of an artificial object
4 Significance and use
A workflow for indirect flaw detection and analysis documentation during PBF-LB is provided by using
the signals received from a coaxial photodiode that can detect flaws, including lack of fusion, in fabricated
components.
These flaws may have detrimental effects on the mechanical performance of fabricated parts. The workflow
of this document provides a procedure to identify the range of upper and lower thresholds required for the
statistical detection algorithms to effectively identify stochastic lack of fusion defects induced during the
process. It provides a procedure to identify the number of clusters required for machine learning detection
algorithms. In the validation procedure, the datasets collected from a CT scanner that are registered and
voxelized can be used. It is noted that the size of detectable flaw, as determined by the procedure outlined in
this document, is contingent upon the resolution and frequency of the hardware employed, specifically a co-
axial photodiode and its associated data acquisition card. For instance, when utilizing a commonly available
photodiode with a frequency of 60 kHz, the procedure and algorithms specified by this document are unable
to detect flaws smaller than 100 μm.
In general, an in situ photodiode installed coaxially provides information from the process signature and
flaws. However, the recorded in situ data needs to be corrected to remove chromatic and monochromatic
distortion. The corrected data analyse by two main algorithms to identify flaws:
a) statistically, and
b) by machine learning.
© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
These algorithms can be systematically optimized and customized to detect lack of fusion flaws. To this
end, intentionally seeded flaws are first added to the computer-aided design (CAD) of coupons to tune
the parameters of the algorithms. Then, the customized algorithm is tested by detecting randomized/
stochastic flaws created by powder bed fusion-laser based with intentionally decreased energy density.
The comparison of detection results could be analysed by algorithms with the CT data applied through a
volumetric approach to identify the randomized/stochastic flaws. A flowchart illustrating the progression
in this document is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 — Schematic for calibration flow needed for detecting the lack of fusion flaw
5 Design of coupons
5.1 General
To customize and calibrate the detection algorithms systematically, two sets of coupons are suggested.
Reference datum features can also be added to the geometry to ease data alignment and data registration
of porosity locations in the ex situ analysis that is CT-scan in this practice. Figure 2 represents some
suggestions for registry notches/grooves.

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
a) Added vertical and horizontal registry grooves b) Added inclined notches
Figure 2 — Addition of registry grooves and inclined notches to the geometry of the coupon
5.2 Intentionally seeded flaws
The effect of the lack of fusion flaw can be mimicked by embedding intentional seeds/voids in the coupons.
[1]
According to ISO/ASTM TR 52906 , for creating these seeds, various sizes, distributions, and geometries of
seeds can be added to the computer-aided design. Two forms of spherical and cylindrical intentional seeded
flaws can be considered where the size of spherical flaws is identified by their diameter and the size of
cylindrical flaws is identified by their cross-sectional diameter and height. Note that the minimum size of
the intentional flaw is dictated by the powder bed fusion-laser based machine restrictions. It is, however,
recommended that the feature size of flaws is set in the computer-aided design model to three different
classes:
The minimum size possible to be made by the powder bed fusion-laser based machine (for example 100 µm
for the diameter of spheres and 100 µm for height and diameter of cylinders) depending on the resolution
and laser spot size:
a) the minimum value plus 50 μm (for example 150 µm for the above-mentioned parameters);
b) the minimum value plus 100 µm (for example 200 µm for the above-mentioned parameters).
Note that within the layers in which the intentional flaws are made, an optimum down-skin parameter is
used to endure the mechanical integrity of the intentional flaw. The capping layer, however, can have no
down-skin setting.
Two examples of intentionally seeded flaws are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 a) and b) represent two
dimensional cross sections of samples showing the distribution of the intentionally seeded flaws (cylindrical
and spherical), respectively. In Figure 3 a), six nominally identical sets of three sizes of cylindrical flaws (Ø,
H = 200 µm, Ø, H = 150 µm, and Ø, H = 100 µm are shown; in Figure 3 b), six nominally identical sets of three
sizes of spherical flaws (Ø = 200 µm, Ø = 150 µm, and Ø = 100 µm) where Ø is the diameter and H is the
height, in microns, are demonstrated; in Figure 3 c), the capping layer of spherical flaws are represented.

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
a) Cylindrical type b) Spherical type
c) Schematic of spherical flaws showing the capping layer
Key
A sets (clustered intentional voids)
B capping layer
NOTE 1 All dimensions are in SI coordinate system.
NOTE 2 Figures 3 a) and 3 b) are published under an open access CC by 4.0 license.
Figure 3 — Two dimensional cross sections of samples showing the distribution of different types of
intentionally seeded flaws
© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
5.3 Randomized/stochastic flaws
Randomized/stochastic flaws can be achieved normally because of process anomalies or by altering process
parameters in which the lack of fusion flaws are created by decreasing the energy density during the
fabrication. For creating randomized lack of fusion flaws, four scenarios are recommended:
a) reducing the laser power;
b) increasing the hatching distance;
c) increasing the scanning speed;
d) increasing the layer thickness.
These alterations depend on the material. It is, however, recommended that the produced parts with altered
process parameters exhibit a relative density reduction of around 0,5 % compared to parts fabricated with
nominal process parameters.
6 Sensor description
The sensor embodied in this document is a coaxial photodiode arrangement with a sampling frequency
of equal or more than 60 kHz. The coaxial photodiode arrangement is aligned with the laser beam path
through a beam splitter (see Figure 4).
NOTE 1 Photodiodes can capture light intensity signals from the melt pool in different wavelengths; however, the
preferred wavelength range for most metallic alloys to capture melt pool light intensity is normally in the visible and
near-infrared ranges (between 750 nm to 900 nm).
In addition to the light intensity data, laser modulation and XY scanner position are recorded and stored in
the associated personal computer. Intensity and geometry calibrations of dataset are also required.
NOTE 2 Details of the data calibration routines are out of the scope of this practice.
NOTE 3 The intensity correction for the coaxial data can be implemented because of the chromatic aberration
phenomenon. It is initiated because the wavelength of light intensity recorded by the photodiode is not the same as the
wavelength optimized for the scanner mirror and f-theta lens or dynamic focusing units.
NOTE 4 The intensity and geometry corrections are dependent on the commercial system and are normally
implemented by the original equipment manufacturer’s monitoring system.

© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
Key
1 laser
2 scanner mirror
3 F-Thena lense
4 roller
5 powder
6 build plate
7 beam splitter
8 inside the optical path
9 co-axial sensor
Figure 4 — Position of the coaxial sensor in the PBF-LB setup
7 Flaw detection algorithms
7.1 General
Two different approaches are recommended for detecting flaws: statistical algorithms and clustering
machine learning-clustering algorithms.
The statistical algorithm works based on the threshold method, and the clustering algorithm distributes
data into different groups. The workflow to detect the flaws was demonstrated in Figure 1 and is the
following:
Step 1: The preferred algorithm can be applied to the data collected during the printing of the samples with
intentionally seeded flaws.
© ISO/ASTM International 2026 – All rights reserved
Step 2: The detection result is compared with the design and CT scan data to customize/calibrate the
algorithm parameters such as moving average windows length and thresholds.
NOTE The setting of CT scan can normally be optimized in terms of resolution.
Step 3: The customized algorithm stemmed from Step 2 can be used for the detection of randomized flaws
in the fabricated samples.
Step 4: The detection results of Step 3 are validated by CT scan through the volumetric approach and
confusion matrix which is explained in Clause 9.
As an example, several statistical and machine-learning algorithms that are suitable for this practice are
discussed in 7.2 and 7.3. Additionally, the volumetric approach is used to compare the result with CT, which
is discussed in Clause 9.
7.2 Statistical algorithms
7.2.1 General
Statistical algorithms work based on the selection of threshold levels, and their central feature is the moving
[2]
average. Thus, it is critical to have an optimized workflow to identify a threshold range and the window
size/length of the moving average by end users. In Figure 5, the application of the threshold range to the
photodiode's signal is shown. As seen, some ripples exist outside the upper and lower thresholds where each
data sample is associated with a geometrical point in the XY cartesian coordinate. Any processed signal (for
example moving averaged) greater than the upper threshold and lower than the lower threshold is defined
and is called a signal perturbation in this document [Figure 5 b)]. Signal perturbations are associated with an
abnormality in the process and are normally corresponding to the location of flaws. Thus, the perturbation
can be mapped to the geometry of samples and visua
...


ISO/TC 261
Secretariat: DIN
Date: 2025-12-082026-xx
Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-
situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection
in PBF-LB
Fabrication additive de métaux — Fusion sur lit de poudre — Bonnes pratiques pour — Surveillance par
photodiode coaxiale in situ pour la détection et l'analyse desde défauts in situ pour lede fusion en PBF laser-LB
FDIS stage
TThhiiss dr draaft ift iss su subbmmiittetted to d to aa p paaralrallelel vl voteote iinn IS ISOO, C, CEENN.

© ISO/ASTM International 2025 2026
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication
may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO
at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester. In the United States, such requests should be
sent to ASTM International.
ISO copyright office ASTM International
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, USA
Phone: + 41 22 749 01 11 Phone: +610 832 9634
Fax: +610 832 9635
Email: Email:
E-mail: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org Website:
Published in Switzerland
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
ii
Contents
Foreword . iv
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Significance and use . 2
5 Design of coupons . 3
5.1 General. 3
5.2 Intentionally seeded flaws. 4
5.3 Randomized/stochastic flaws . 6
6 Sensor description . 6
7 Flaw detection algorithms . 7
7.1 General. 7
7.2 Statistical algorithms . 8
7.3 Machine-learning approach: clustering algorithm . 13
8 Implementation of customized algorithms to components with randomized flaws and the
associated voxelization thereof . 16
9 Case study: procedural implementation and validation results . 19
Bibliography . 24

© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types of
ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent rights
in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a) patent(s)
which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that this may not
represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 261, Additive manufacturing, in cooperation
with ASTM Committee F42, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, on the basis of a partnership agreement
between ISO and ASTM International with the aim to create a common set of ISO/ASTM standards on Additive
Manufacturing, and in collaboration with the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Technical
Committee CEN/TC 438, Additive manufacturing, in accordance with the Agreement on technical cooperation
between ISO and CEN (Vienna Agreement).
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
iv
Additive manufacturing of metals — Powder bed fusion (PBF) — In-
situ coaxial photodiode monitoring for lack of fusion flaw detection in
PBF-LB
1 Scope
This document provides a workflow comprising experimental procedures and flaw detection algorithms
aimed at locating flaws in parts produced during the powder bed fusion-laser-based (PBF-LB) process of
metals. It emphasizes the use of coaxial photodiode-based in-situ monitoring and statistical and clustering
machine learning algorithms, particularly for detecting lack of fusion-induced flaws. The workflow delineates
setting thresholds for statistical detection and determining the number of clusters for machine learning
algorithms, utilizing intentional seeded flaws in parts. Validation procedures are provided through computed
tomography scanner data. Hardware limitations and considerations for multi-laser processes are addressed,
with attention to potential issues.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO/ASTM 52900, Additive manufacturing — General principles — Fundamentals and vocabulary
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO/ASTM 52900 and the following
apply:
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— — ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— — IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1 3.1
clustering algorithm
unsupervised machine learning methods with unlabelled input data is grouped by similarity
3.2 3.2
coaxial sensorphotodiode arrangement
type of sensor arrangement on the powder bed fusion-laser-based machine aligned with the laser beam path
3.3 3.3
computed tomography (
CT)
non-destructive examination technique capturing radiographic projections of an object at various rotational
angles followed by mathematically reconstructedreconstruction to produce a three-dimensional volume data
set or one or more two-dimensional cross-sectional images
[SOURCE: ISO/ASTM TR 52906]
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
3.4 3.4
data alignment
process of transforming different sets of geometrically or temporally related data into a single, global
coordinate system
3.5 3.5
data registration
procedure of data alignment and assigningassignation of a persistent identification to the aligned data set
3.6 3.6
ex-situ analysis
measurement procedure performed after the completion of the build cycle
3.7 3.7
flaw indicator
indicator corresponding to the location of flaws predicted by the flaw detection algorithm
3.8 3.8
lack of fusion
type of process-induced porosity with not fully melted or fused powder particles onto the previously
deposited substrate.
[SOURCE: ASTM E3166-20, 3.4.7]
3.9 3.9
reference datum feature
notch, groove, or similar feature added to the geometry in a seeded flaw coupon to ease data alignment and
registration of porosity locations for CT-scan ex-situ analysis
3.10
direct in-situ measurement
Commented [eXtyles1]: The term "direct in-situ
measurement" has not been used anywhere in this document
measurement procedure performed during the powder bed fusion-laser based manufacturing process
3.10 3.11
intentionally seeded flaw
act of intentionally creating flaws through computer-aided design or manipulation of designated processing
parameters, resulting in the placement of the anticipated flaw or the act of intentionally creating a flaw
through the insertion of an artificial object
[SOURCE: ISO/ASTM TR 52906]
4 Significance and use
A workflow for indirect flaw detection and analysis documentation during PBF-LB is provided by using the
signals received from a coaxial photodiode that can detect flaws, including lack of fusion, in fabricated
components.
These flaws may have detrimental effects on the mechanical performance of fabricated parts. The workflow
of this document provides a procedure to identify the range of upper and lower thresholds required for the
statistical detection algorithms to effectively identify stochastic lack of fusion defects induced during the
process. It provides a procedure to identify the number of clusters required for machine learning detection
algorithms. In the validation procedure, the datasets collected from a CT scanner that are registered and
voxelized can be used. It has to beis noted that the size of detectable flaw, as determined by the procedure
outlined in this standarddocument, is contingent upon the resolution and frequency of the hardware
employed, specifically a co-axial photodiode and its associated data acquisition card. For instance, when
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
utilizing a commonly available photodiode with a frequency of 60 kHz, the procedure and algorithms
prescribedspecified by this standarddocument are unable to detect flaws smaller than 100 micronsμm.
In general, an in- situ photodiode installed coaxially provides information from the process signature and
flaws. However, the recorded in- situ data needs to be corrected to remove chromatic and monochromatic
distortion. The corrected data analyse by two main algorithms to identify flaws:
a) 1. statistically, and
b) 2. by machine learning.
These algorithms can be systematically optimized and customized to detect lack of fusion flaws. To this end,
intentionally seeded flaws are first added to the computer-aided design (CAD) of coupons to tune the
parameters of the algorithms. Then, the customized algorithm is tested by detecting randomized/stochastic
flaws created by powder bed fusion-laser based with intentionally decreased energy density. The comparison
of detection results could be analysed by algorithms with the CT data applied through a volumetric approach
to identify the randomized/stochastic flaws. A flowchart illustrating the progression in this document is
shown in 0Figure 1.
52958_ed1fig1.EPS
Figure 1 — Schematic for calibration flow needed for detecting the lack of fusion flaw
5 Design of coupons
5.1 General
To customize and calibrate the detection algorithms systematically, two sets of coupons are suggested.
Reference datum features can also be added to the geometry to ease data alignment and data registration of
porosity locations in the ex- situ analysis that is CT-scan in this practice. 0Figure 2 represents some
suggestions for registry notches/grooves.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
52958_ed1fig2b.EPS
52958_ed1fig2a.EPS
a) Added vertical and horizontal registry grooves b) Added inclined notches
Figure 2 — Addition of registry grooves and inclined notches to the geometry of the coupon
5.2 Intentionally seeded flaws
The effect of the lack of fusion flaw can be mimicked by embedding intentional seeds/voids in the coupons.
[ [1]]
According to ISO/ASTM TR 52906 Error! Reference source not found., , for creating these seeds, various
sizes, distributions, and geometries of seeds can be added to the computer-aided design. Two forms of
spherical and cylindrical intentional seeded flaws can be considered where the size of spherical flaws is
identified by their diameter and the size of cylindrical flaws is identified by their cross-sectional diameter and
height. Note that the minimum size of the intentional flaw is dictated by the powder bed fusion-laser based
machine restrictions. It is, however, recommended that the feature size of flaws is set in the computer-aided
design model to three different classes:
The minimum size possible to be made by the powder bed fusion-laser based machine (for example, 100 µm
for the diameter of spheres and 100 µm for height and diameter of cylinders) depending on the resolution and
laser spot size;:
a) 1. the minimum value plus 50 μm (for example, 150 µm for the above-mentioned parameters);
and
b) 2. the minimum value plus 100 µm (for example, 200 µm for the above-mentioned parameters).
Note that within the layers in which the intentional flaws are made, an optimum down-skin parameter is used
to endure the mechanical integrity of the intentional flaw. The capping layer, however, can have no down-skin
setting.
Two examples of intentionally seeded flaws are shown in 0. 0Figure 3. Figure 3a)) and b) represent two
dimensional cross sections of samples showing the distribution of the intentionally seeded flaws (cylindrical
and spherical), respectively. In 0Figure 3 (a),), six nominally identical sets of three sizes of cylindrical flaws
(Ø, H = = 200 µm, Ø, H = = 150 µm, and Ø, H = = 100 µm are shown; in 0Figure 3 (b),), six nominally identical
sets of three sizes of spherical flaws (Ø = 200 µm, Ø = 150 µm, and Ø = 100 µm) where Ø is the diameter and
H is the height, in microns, are demonstrated; and in 0Figure 3 (c),), the capping layer of spherical flaws are
represented.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
52958_ed1fig3a.EPS
52958_ed1fig3b.EPS
a) Cylindrical type b) Spherical type
52958_ed1fig3c.EPS
c) Schematic of spherical flaws showing the capping layer
Key
A sets (clustered intentional voids)
B capping layer
NOTE 1 All dimensions are in SI coordinate system.
NOTE 2 0 Figures 3a)) and 03b)) are published under an open access CC by 4.0 license.
Figure 3 — Two dimensional cross sections of samples showing the distribution of different types of
intentionally seeded flaws
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
5.3 Randomized/stochastic flaws
Randomized/stochastic flaws can be achieved normally because of process anomalies or by altering process
parameters in which the lack of fusion flaws are created by decreasing the energy density during the
fabrication. For creating randomized lack of fusion flaws, four scenarios are recommended:
a) 1. reducing the laser power;
b) 2. increasing the hatching distance;
c) 3. increasing the scanning speed; and
d) 4. increasing the layer thickness.
These alterations depend on the material. It is, however, recommended that the produced parts with altered
process parameters exhibit a relative density reduction of around 0,5 % compared to parts fabricated with
nominal process parameters.
6 Sensor description
The sensor embodied in this document is a coaxial photodiode arrangement with a sampling frequency of
equal or more than 60 kHz. The coaxial photodiode arrangement is aligned with the laser beam path through
a beam splitter (see 0Figure 4).).
NOTE 1 Photodiodes can capture light intensity signals from the melt pool in different wavelengths; however, the
preferred wavelength range for most metallic alloys to capture melt pool light intensity is normally in the visible and
near-infrared ranges (between 750 nm to 900 nm).
In addition to the light intensity data, laser modulation and XY scanner position are recorded and stored in
the associated personal computer. Intensity and geometry calibrations of dataset are also required.
NOTE 2 Details of the data calibration routines are out of the scope of this practice.
NOTE 3 The intensity correction for the coaxial data can be implemented because of the chromatic aberration
phenomenon. It is initiated because the wavelength of light intensity recorded by the photodiode is not the same as the
wavelength optimized for the scanner mirror and f-theta lens or dynamic focusing units.
NOTE 4 The intensity and geometry corrections are dependent on the commercial system and are normally
implemented by the original equipment manufacturer’s monitoring system.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
52958_ed1fig4.EPS
Key
1 laser
2 scanner mirror
3 F-Thena lense
4 roller
5 powder
6 build plate
7 beam splitter
8 inside the optical path
9 co-axial sensor
Figure 4 — Position of the coaxial sensor in the PBF-LB setup
7 Flaw detection algorithms
7.1 General
Two different approaches are recommended for detecting flaws: statistical algorithms and clustering machine
learning-clustering algorithms.
The statistical algorithm works based on the threshold method, and the clustering algorithm distributes data
into different groups. The workflow to detect the flaws was demonstrated in 0Figure 1 and is the following:
Step 1: The preferred algorithm can be applied to the data collected during the printing of the samples with
intentionally seeded flaws.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
Step 2: The detection result is compared with the design and CT scan data to customize/calibrate the
algorithm parameters such as moving average windows length and thresholds.
NOTE The setting of CT scan can normally be optimized in terms of resolution.
Step 3: The customized algorithm stemmed from Step 2 can be used for the detection of randomized flaws in
the fabricated samples.
Step 4: The detection results of Step 3 are validated by CT scan through the volumetric approach and
confusion matrix which is explained in 9Clause 9.
As an example, several statistical and machine-learning algorithms that are suitable for this practice are
discussed in 7.27.2 and 7.37.3. Additionally, the volumetric approach is used to compare the result with CT,
which is discussed in 9Clause 9.
7.2 Statistical algorithms
7.2.1 General
Statistical algorithms work based on the selection of threshold levels, and their central feature is the moving
[ [2]]
average. Error! Reference source not found. Thus, it is critical to have an optimized workflow to identify
a threshold range and the window size/length of the moving average by end users. In 0Figure 5,, the
application of the threshold range to the photodiode's signal is shown. As seen, some ripples exist outside the
upper and lower thresholds where each data sample is associated with a geometrical point in the XY cartesian
coordinate. Any processed signal (for example, moving averaged) greater than the upper threshold and lower
than the lower threshold is defined and is called a signal perturbation in this document [0(Figure 5b)).)].
Signal perturbations are associated with an abnormality in the process and are normally corresponding to the
location of flaws. Thus, the perturbation can be mapped to the geometry of samples and visualized with a
different colour ([for example, as a yellow indicator shown in 0Figure 5c)).)]. To map the perturbation with
potential flaws in the fabricated components, a proper detection algorithm is needed to be selected from
absolute limits (AL) and short-term fluctuation (STF). Two statistical algorithms are discussed in 7.2.2 and
7.2.3the following sections.
NOTE The capping layer of intentional seeded flaws [see 0Figure 5 (c)])] is used to optimize the value of upper and
lower thresholds and data window length since it represents higher signal perturbations.
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
52958_ed1fig5.EPS
Key
X1 time
X2 horizontal size of a layer
Y1 light intensity (a.u.)
Y2 vertical size of a layer
A photodiode time series data along with upper and lower thresholds
B magnified signal representing signal perturbation
C one layer of the sample including indicators
1 photodiode signal
2 magnified signal
3 signal perturbation
4 upper threshold
5 lower threshold
6 detection algorithm (AL, SD, SOM, etc.)
7 a layer
8 flaw indicator
Figure 5 — Correlation of signal perturbation and flaw location after applying the detection
algorithm
7.2.2 Absolute limits (AL)
The algorithm is based on the application of moving the average to the signal. The user can set the window
length of the moving average. The algorithm can be applied to the time-series one-dimensional data while
considering an upper and lower threshold (to be explained in the workflow sectionsubclause) in which any
ripples above the upper threshold and below the lower threshold indicate perturbation/disturbance in the
process as shown in 0Figure 6. The algorithm can normally detect flaws created as a result of a sudden laser
power variation. 0Formula (1) can be used to find the moving average for the data, I :
m,a
(1)
© ISO/ASTM 2026 – All rights reserved
𝑥+𝑛
𝐼 = (𝑖) (1)

𝑚,𝑎
2𝑛+1 𝑗=𝑥−𝑛
where
𝑛 is the number of datapoint;
𝑗 is the number of period;
i is the signal intensity.
NOTE If the number of data points in the last moving window is less than the nominal length of the moving average,
the average value for the last window is determined according to the available number of d
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

Loading comments...