The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06178-w

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Influence of wire-arc additive manufacturing path planning

strategy on the residual stress status in one single buildup layer
Chi Zhang 1 & Chen Shen 1 & Xueming Hua 1 & Fang Li 1 & Yuelong Zhang 1 & Yanyan Zhu 1

Received: 28 June 2020 / Accepted: 24 September 2020

# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
In recent years, the significant residual stress in the wire-arc additively manufactured components has been continuously one of
the most concerning issues for the further development of the wire-arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) technology. Although
many pre/post processing methods have been proved capable of modifying the residual stress, few works have been conducted to
reduce the residual stress using appropriate path planning. In the present research, a WAAM path planning strategy is developed
combining both zigzag and contour-offset methods, which aims to obtain a single WAAM deposition buildup layer with both
optimal outline accuracy and residual stress status. The path planning and residual stress measurement processes have been
carefully designed to acquire reasonable results. According to the residual stress results measured using X-ray diffraction method,
the arc deposits finished with more contour-offset paths contain smaller tensile residual stresses, which is due to the hooping
function of the outer contour deposit path to the inner deposit. Therefore, it can be concluded that the offsetting of the external
contours before zigzag filling the internal dimensions is beneficial to both the residual stress distribution and shape outline
accuracy of the WAAM buildup layer.

Keywords Wire-arc additive manufacturing . Path planning . Residual stress . Arc welding

1 Introduction fields such as automotive and shipbuilding industries [4–6].

In recent years, metal additive manufacturing (AM) technolo-
gy has been developing rapidly due to its high shaping flexi-
bility and efficiency compared with the traditional material
forming methods [1]. The layer-by-layer deposition nature
of AM technique requires significantly lower post-
processing workload and improves the material utilization
rate. Meanwhile, along with the further development of the
technique, more and more metals have been proved feasible of
being additively manufactured [2, 3]. To date, the metal AM
technique has been widely used in medical and aerospace
industries. It has also been considered as one of the most
promising part manufacturing technology in mass production
* Chen Shen
cshen486@sjtu.edu.cn
* Xueming Hua
xmhua@sjtu.edu.cn
1
Shanghai Key Lab of Materials Laser Processing and Modification,
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University, Shanghai 200240, China
However, most of the current existing AM methods are still
not available for mass production industries because of the
unacceptable high cost and low material deposition rate.
Current metal AM technologies can be categorized using
the heating power source (e.g., laser, electron beam, electric
arc), the filler material status (powder, wire), and the shape
forming method (selective melting, direction deposition)
[7–9]. Among the many AM technologies, the wire-arc addi-
tive manufacturing (WAAM) has been considered as the most
promising AM method of low-cost mass production applica-
tion for medium to large-sized components due to its intrinsic
low cost, high material deposition rate, and direct full-density
buildup nature [10]. Compared with the typical laser-powder
based AM processes such as selective laser melting (SLM)
and laser metal deposition (LMD), the cost of the WAAM
equipment and filler wires are much cheaper. Also, since the
WAAM is developed from arc welding, such technology is
more familiar for the mass production industries. Besides, the
WAAM can easily achieve direct full-density in the target
buildup component since the porosity and inclusion control
in the arc welding technique is already quite mature, while for
laser-powder based AM processes the expensive hot isostatic

pressing (HIP) is always necessary for the part to reach full-
density. In addition, the performance of the WAAM requires
simply open-air condition, thus it is very suitable for medium
to large sized component buildup.
Although the WAAM is a quite attractive technique for
mass production industries, the development of this process
is still in the initial stage. Because of the high heat input during
the layer deposition, the significant residual stress is one of the
most troubling concerns, which would cause part distortion,
deposition defects and buildup failure. As it is known, in arc
deposition the residual stress is mainly induced by the arc
generated temperature gradient; thus, the buildup path plan-
ning method significantly influences the residual stress status
in the buildup component.
In recent years, enormous works have been conducted to the
residual stress measurement and modification in the WAAM
fabricated components. Due to the much higher heat input dur-
ing arc deposition, the WAAM fabricated sample usually has
larger residual stress and deformation than the laser AM com-
ponent. Because of the largest temperature difference and fol-
lowing deposition heat input effect, in the entire WAAM build-
up component, the largest stress is always observed in the re-
gion between the substrate and the buildup wall [11, 12].
Although the by-pass (e.g., elevated preheating temperature
[13], interpass rolling [14–17]) and post-production (e.g., laser
shock penning [18], heat treatment [19]) processing can to
some extent reduce the residual stress, the incidental excessive
heat input would inevitably decrease the buildup surface quality
and the use of rolling and laser shock peening would either
significantly limit the flexibility of the WAAM process or can-
not perform to the inner corners of the buildup component.
Therefore, in recent years more research works have been con-
ducted to investigate the residual stress control using optimum
path planning method in WAAM process, which method is
capable of reduce the initial residual stress in the buildup com-
ponent without additional modification process.
According to the neutron residual stress measurement results
on the WAAM buildup component, the residual stress in pre-
ceding layers has very little effect on the following layers [20];
therefore, most of the present path planning methods focus on
the path planning in a single 2-dimention (2D) layer rather than
3-dimention (3D) space. In a single 2D buildup layer, present
path planning methods for the WAAM process mainly include
raster, zigzag, and spiral. The raster path planning method uses
parallel lines in the same moving direction to fill the target
shape, which is the simplest and earliest AM path planning
method that [21]. Although this simple algorithm can ensure
the uniform and complete filling, the arc starting and ending
points on the parallel deposition lines are all in the same side,
which is detrimental to the layer flatness and would induce
significant deformation along the longitudinal direction because
as it is known in the arc deposition the residual stress is always
largest along the longitudinal axis than the other transverse and
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
normal axes. And the spiral path produces uniform and small
deformations compared with the raster path [22].
Compared with the raster method, the zigzag method is also
a parallel reciprocating scanning strategy [23], but it reduces the
number of arc starting and ending from one each parallel line
into one each entire filling shape. According to the path plan-
ning comparing study between raster and zigzag methods in
SLM, similar residual stress value is found in both methods
[24]. However, compared with the laser in SLM, the arc in
WAAM process brings much higher heat input into the deposit,
and as it is known the arc starting always conduct the highest
heat in one single arc deposition; thus, in the case of WAAM
the zigzag method brings lower residual stress compared with
the raster method. Therefore, the zigzag method is currently the
most widely used path planning method in AM processes and
enormous works have been conducted to further optimize the
zigzag path planning algorithm. For example, some algorithms
evaluate the target buildup layer shapes to find the optimal scan
direction for the zigzag, thus reduce the number of iterations to
obtain a reasonable scan path [25, 26]. Also, to improve the
shaping filling accuracy and efficiency for complex 2D poly-
gons, the newly developed algorithm first uses parallel lines to
split the polygons and plans scan paths for each small polygon,
and finally connects these paths [27]. If it is not reasonable that
the path scans always follow the same direction for some spe-
cial shapes, the algorithm proposes to decompose the complex
shapes into multiple convex polygons, then designs the optimal
scan direction for each convex polygon, and finally connect
these paths [28]. There is also an algorithm based on a water-
pouring rule to fill complex polygons with only one zigzag scan
path, which has wider applicability [29]. However, although the
zigzag method ensures the continuity of the scan, it will inevi-
tably cause unevenness in the corners of the reciprocating scan
[30]. When the angle between the scanning direction and the
outer contour changes, there may be missing or excessive ac-
cumulation at the corners [30, 31]. In order to solve this prob-
lem, an algorithm proposes an adaptive trajectory planning
method, which solves the problem of uneven filling of the
location by dynamically changing the walking speed of the
arc welding robot [31]; however, the changing deposition pa-
rameter set would still induce uneven deposition height in the
target deposit layer. Afterall, considering both the shape filling
accuracy and residual stress, zigzag has a clear advantage over
raster method for WAAM working condition.
The contour method is another basic path planning method,
it offsets the inner and outer contour lines at a certain distance,
then processes the possible intersection lines of the offset,
resulting in several contour-offset lines that fill the entire tar-
get shape [32]. A study comparing the effect of the raster
method and the contour method on surface accuracy in AM
shows that the contour method is superior due to its path
continuity with only one start and end point [33]. Compared
with the zigzag method, the contour-offset path can ensure the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
target shape outline more accurately, but when the contour
method meets a small angle, it may cause a gap defect. In
order to generate gap-free paths for WAAM and to improve
material efficiency, an algorithm is used to obtain the path by
offsetting the medial axis of the given geometry towards its
boundary, but the part requires subsequent machining [34].
The authors further improved the algorithm by building the
welding bead model [35], and proposed an adaptive medial-
axis offset algorithm suitable for WAAM [36], thus effective-
ly reduce the subsequent post machining workload. In addi-
tion, to solve the intrinsic discontinuity problem of the
contour-offset method, an algorithm has been developed turn-
ing the initial open path into closed path [37]. In terms of
residual stress, according to the recent research, the contour-
offset method in arc deposition filling has provided optimal
residual stress status compared with the zigzag method be-
cause of its relatively uniform heat input distribution [38, 39].
Although many researches have referred to the finding that
path planning can significantly affect the WAAM residual
stress, and the influences of certain path planning method on
residual stress have been investigated, few works have been
addressed to the specific influence of the combination of dif-
ferent path planning methods (also referred to as the path
planning strategy) on the residual stress status. As can be
summarized above, the zigzag method is superior in target
shape filling while the contour-offset method is superior in
the uniform residual stress distribution and the shape outline
accuracy. Therefore, in the real WAAM deposition layer
buildup, different path planning methods have to be combined
to achieve both optimal residual stress distribution and com-
plete target shape filling.
As can be summarized above, a path planning strategy
combining both residual stress preferential contour method
and shape filling optimal zigzag method is one feasible and
promising mode for WAAM real application for component
buildup. The present research has designed such path planning
strategy to fill a randomly generated polygon with inside tri-
angle hole. By changing the contour-offset path amount in the
path planning strategy, the residual stress status in the buildup
layer can be changed accordingly. Thus, the effect of the
WAAM path planning strategy on the residual stress state in
the deposition layer can be effectively revealed. Another pur-
pose of the present research is to show the important role of
WAAM path planning strategy in residual stress optimization
in one 2D layer.
2 Experimental
2.1 WAAM system setup
The WAAM layer buildup in the present research is per-
formed using the robotic WAAM system developed in
Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The deposition power source
was a gas metal arc welding (GMAW) torch under cold metal
transfer (CMT) mode (Fronius CMT 4000 Advanced), which
is currently one of the most popular and widely used deposi-
tion process for the WAAM buildup due to its favorable low
heat input and minimal thermal induced distortion. The arc
deposition equipment was integrated on a Yaskawa YR-
MA1400 six-axis robot; thus, the programmed deposition
path can be accurately generated by the system. The deposi-
tion filler wire was 1.2-mm diameter ER4043-grade alumi-
num alloy, and the substrate for deposition was 4043 alumi-
num alloy with the dimension of 250 mm (length) × 250 mm
(width) × 10 mm (thickness). During the deposition the square
aluminum alloy WAAM substrate was fixed to the working
stage using four holding pliers on the four edges. The deposi-
tion parameters were adjusted based on the system build-in
parameter set for 4043 aluminum alloy in the Fronius CMT
4000 Advanced system. The dry extension of electrode was
14 mm, and the wire feeding speed was 6.5 m/min. During the
zigzag shape filling, the robot travel speeds for the long side
and corner depositions were 0.3 m/min and 0.9 m/min, respec-
tively, thus prevent the accumulation of excess material at the
zigzag reciprocating corners. The shielding gas was pure
Argon with a flow rate of 15 L/min.
2.2 Path planning strategy
Target 2D polygon geometry for the CMT WAAM filling in
the present research is shown in Fig. 1. Besides the relatively
complex asymmetric polygon outline, a triangle internal hole
is designed. The present geometry containing the outer poly-
gon and inside hole polygon was randomly drawn and the
corresponding angles and dimensions were subsequently
obtained.
Fig. 1 Target 2D polygon for the CMT WAAM filling. Corresponding
angles and coordinates of the geometry vertexes are marked besides the
points

As it is known, due to the curved surface the arc deposits
have to be overlapped to achieve a relatively flat top surface.
Therefore, in the present path planning the ratio between the
adjacent deposition pass distance and the single bead width
was set as 73.8%, which has been proved optimal for WAAM
process when consider the single bead outline as a parabola
model [40, 41]. The general path planning strategy is shown in
Fig. 2. For the shape filling of the target 2D polygon (Fig. 1),
the path planning method around the inner triangle hole was
chosen as zigzag method due to its advantage of flexible cor-
ner shape filling and for rest of the space till the polygon
outline the contour-offset method was used to achieve a uni-
form residual stress status. The first step of the path planning
was the calculation of outer contour-offset threshold. This is a
necessary step considering the situation when the outer
contour-offset paths intersect the inner triangle contour, voids
and uneven filling are likely to occur in the intersection area
[32, 36, 42]. Thus, the intersection to the inner triangle was set
as the threshold of the contour-offset method and the number
of contour-offset path was set according to the threshold.
Afterwards, the path planning strategy was divided into
two sections: inner geometry near the triangle hole and outer
contour-offset section. For outer contour-offset section, the
independent contour-offset passes were connected into one
continuous path. For inner zigzag section, the shape filling
area was divided into a minimum number of multiple convex
polygons, then zigzag path with a minimum number of itera-
tions was generated in each single convex polygon. The zig-
zag path direction was set along the long axis of the convex
polygon since previous research showed that scanning along
the long axis in the zigzag method would produce less stress
and deformation in the filling deposit [43]. Since the present
Fig. 2 General logic for 2D
WAAM path planning strategy
integrating zigzag and contour-
offset methods. Key steps of the
path programming process are
further illustrated using the
attached subfigures
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
path planning strategy intends to combine both zigzag and
contour-offset path planning methods to investigate the effect
of the number of contour-offset layers on the residual stress,
the zigzag path in the multiple convex polygons were not
connected into one continuous deposition pass thus to avoid
any new contour pass generated by the connection process.
The results generated by the present path planning strategy
with different numbers of outer contour-offset layers (0, 2, 4,
6) are shown in Fig. 3. The four samples with 0, 2, 4, and 6
contour-offset layers are named as the Sample 1, Sample 2,
Sample 3, and Sample 4, respectively. Along with increasing
number of contour-offset layers, the residual stress status in
the target shaping deposit would be changed accordingly. As
indicated by the different colors, the target shape filling de-
posits were finished from blue → orange → green → purple.
In addition, as indicated by the arrows, the deposition direc-
tions of the zigzag layers are from outside to inside and the
contour-offset layers are from inside to outside. During the
actual WAAM deposition, the four samples were finished in
a certain time of 9 min to exclude the effect of time on the
residual stress status. The specific finishing times for each
sample were 8.81 min (Sample 1), 8.92 min (Sample 2),
9.05 min (Sample 3), and 9.13 min (Sample 4).
2.3 X-ray residual stress measurement
The X-ray diffraction (XRD) instrument used for residual
stress measurement was a Proto 8812 V-2 system with Cr
Kα radiation (λ = 5.415 Å). To get rid of the arc deposition
induced corrugated surface obtain a flat area for XRD residual
stress measurement, the testing spots were electrolytically
polished to remove the initial surface waviness. As indicated
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
Fig. 3 Path planning results for the single layer buildup deposition: a
Sample 1: full zigzag; b Sample 2: zigzag with 2 layers contour-offset;
c Sample 3: zigzag with 4 contour-offset; d Sample 4: zigzag with 6
in Fig. 4a, the polishing depth was set as 2 mm to exclude the
adjacent deposition overlap and ensure the residual stresses
were measured from the target deposition passes. The running
voltage and current for the X-ray source were 20 kV and
4 mA, respectively. The 2θ diffraction angle for stress mea-
surement was set at 139°. The residual stress in the longitudi-
nal direction of the arc deposit was chosen for measurement,
Fig. 4 XRD residual stress measurement point setup (taking Sample 4 as the example): a testing point depth location in the cross-sectional view; b point
location in the top view
contour-offset. For each pass the deposition direction has been marked
using arrows with corresponding colors. The deposition sequence is: blue
→ orange → green → purple
since as it is known for bead-on-plate deposit the residual
stresses in the longitudinal direction are always the largest
[12, 20, 44]. For each residual stress measurement point, three
sets of data were acquired to minimize the measurement error,
and a 3-min inspection time was set for each measurement.
The testing point locations are shown in Fig. 4b. For each
WAAM deposit sample, the 5 testing points were selected at

Fig. 5 XRD residual stress
measurement point setup of
Sample 4 on three sides from
inner triangle hole to the outline
same locations. As have been designed by the path planning
strategy, the number of 9 deposition passes are the same in
each side of the target polygon; therefore, the XRD testing
points were selected at the first, third, fifth, seventh, and ninth
passes (from inside to outside); thus, the residual stress status
from inner to outer contour of the polygon can be exhibited.
In the present path planning strategy, the zigzag and
contour-offset methods are combined; therefore, in each side
of the target polygon shape both methods are used. As shown
in Fig. 5, to exclude the effect of different side on the residual
stress distribution, residual stresses in the three sides (Side 1,
Side 2, Side 3) of the Sample 4 from inner contour to outer
contour are measured.
3 Results
The actual CMT WAAM deposition results of the four sam-
ples are shown in Fig. 6. According to the inner and out out-
lines marked using blue and orange lines, the target shape of
outer polygon outline with inner triangle hole has been suc-
cessfully filled by the four path planning designs shown in
Fig. 3. It is clearly shown that the contour-offset paths provide
more filling accuracy at the contour outline, while zigzag
paths induce less accuracy at the reciprocal positions.
However, the zigzag is still the appropriate method to fill the
sharp corners since the contour-offset method is simply not
applicable for such shape filling condition.
XRD residual stress measurement results obtained from the
three sides of Sample 4 are shown in Fig. 7. The residual
stresses from inner contour to the outer contour of all three
sides have similar variation tendency: at point 1, point 3, and
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
point 5, the stresses are generally compressive, while at point
2 and pint 4 the stresses are generally tensile. Although the
specific pass numbers of the testing points are different in the
three sides deposition passes, the residual stress conditions of
the three sides are very similar. Therefore, hereby it can be
concluded that in the present target shape design the side dif-
ference has little effect on the residual stress status.
The residual stresses of the four samples in side 2 are
shown in Fig. 8. Generally, the residual stresses from point 1
to point 4 are tensile with point 5 compressive. In the Sample
1, which is deposited using fully zigzag method, the tensile
residual stresses are the largest compared with the other three
samples. Along with the increase of contour-offset layers, the
tensile stresses in the deposit decrease. When four contour-
offset layers are planned in the filling paths, the residual stress
of point 1 starts to turn compressive (Sample 3). When six
contour-offset layers are planned in the filling paths, the resid-
ual stresses in the point 1 to point 4 turn out to be very small.
This is because different path planning strategies change the
heat input sequence, thus result in temperature gradient and
cooling rate changes. At the same testing point, the increasing
contour-offset layers induce decrease of the tensile stresses.
To sum up, the change in path planning strategy causes the
change in residual stresses.
4 Discussion
Currently, most of the researches on residual stress and defor-
mation in additive manufacturing consider temperature gradi-
ent and cooling rate as the critical factors [12, 45, 46]. In
deposition-type additive manufacturing processes, the law of
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Fig. 6 CMT-based WAAM

deposition results of a Sample 1,
b Sample 2, c Sample 3, d Sample
4. Inner and outer contours of the
designed target shape are
indicated using blue and orange
lines, respectively

residual stress is independent from the type of heating source
(laser, electron beam, arc etc.). And for residual stress of sin-
gle layer deposition, the path planning strategy (also can re-
ferred to as the heat input sequence) is the decisive factor
influencing the temperature gradient and cooling rate.
Therefore, it is meaningful to explore such effect on the resid-
ual stresses.
According to the experimental results, the residual stresses
of the four samples at the same location are different. In gen-
eral, as the number of contour-offset layers increases, the
tensile residual stress becomes smaller. As it is known, the
residual stress in additive manufacturing is caused by the un-
even heating of the material during the arc deposition process
and the shrinkage during the cooling process. And for the
entire deposition sample, the general temperature gradient
and cooling rate are the key factors. The contour offset method
produces a relatively stable temperature field and gentle
cooling rate compared with the zigzag method, thus makes
the sample with more contour-offset passes performing small-
er tensile residual stresses. Different from the other three

Fig. 7 XRD residual stress

measurement results along the
three sides of the Sample 4 in a
function of testing points from
inner contour to outer contour
(point 1 to point 5). The specific
pass numbers of each side are
marked besides the testing points
using corresponding colors

Fig. 8 XRD residual stress
measurement results of the
Sample 1, Sample 2, Sample 3,
and Sample 4 in a function of
testing points from inner contour
to outer contour. The pass number
of each testing point is
accordingly marked aside
samples, the testing point 3 of the Sample 4 turns out to be
compressive. This is because the point 3 in the other three sam-
ples are still in the zigzag region while in the Sample 4 the
testing point 3 is already in the contour-offset region. Such com-
pressive residual stress in point 3 is also found in the other two
sides residual stress measurement result of the Sample 4, there-
fore probably the contour-offset generated arc deposit is more
“compressive” while the zigzag generated deposit is more “ten-
sile.” This because in the contour-offset depositions, the outer
contour deposition is relatively a hoop for the inner contour
deposition, since the size and length of the outer contour is
continuously larger than the inner contour, the thermal induced
stresses in the contour-offset passes turn to be compressive.
Besides, in the zigzag depositions, the constraint force is simply
provided by the substrate and the residual stresses turn to be
significant tensile. Different from the other four testing points,
the point 5 is located at the outermost side of the entire deposit,
which is obviously less constrained than the internal testing
points with mostly tensile stresses, thus due to the stress balance
factor, the point 5 is compressive in all samples.
5 Summary
In this paper, the influence of WAAM path planning strategy
on the residual stress status is investigated. Major conclusions
and future prospects are summarized as follows.
1. Compared with zigzag method, the contour-offset path
planning method induces more uniformed residual stress.
In the present target shape WAAM filling, the increase of
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
contour-offset layers decreases the tensile stresses in the
single buildup layer deposit.
2. The present work proposes a path planning strategy capa-
ble of filling complex target shape with optimized residual
stress status and shape outline accuracy. During complex
shape filling in the WAAM process, it is beneficial to
priorly offset the external contour paths before zigzag
filling the internal dimensions.
3. Combining different path planning methods in one
WAAM buildup has been proved capable of optimizing
the residual stress status in the buildup deposit. Therefore,
for each target buildup part design, specific path planning
strategies are necessary for a high quality WAAM
buildup.
4. Future work will be focusing on corresponding finite ele-
ment simulation model buildup. Also, since the following
deposition buildup layer would inevitably change the re-
sidual stress status of the previous layer, more appropriate
experimental setup and residual stress measurement
methods (e.g., neutron and synchrotron) should be con-
ducted to further investigate the residual stress status in a
WAAM buildup bulk sample.
5. The present work has indeed shown a relationship be-
tween the path planning strategy and residual stress dis-
tribution in the WAAM buildup component. When the
zigzag and contour methods are combined in one path
planning strategy, the ratio between the amount of two
path planning passes is the key factor affecting the resid-
ual stress distribution in one single WAAM buildup layer.
Therefore, the specific mechanism of such relationship is
also one future work focus.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
Funding The authors received financial support from National Natural
Science Foundation of China (NSFC, Funding Nos. 51901136 and
51805321) and Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai
Municipality (STCSM, Funding No. 19511106400, “Sailing Program”
No. 19YF1422700).
References
1. Wong KV, Hernandez A (2012) A review of additive manufactur-
ing. ISRN Mech Eng 2012:1–10. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/
208760
2. Shen C, Pan Z, Ma Y, Cuiuri D, Li H (2015) Fabrication of iron-
rich Fe–Al intermetallics using the wire-arc additive manufacturing
process. Addit Manuf 7:20–26
3. Frazier WE (2014) Metal additive manufacturing: a review. J Mater
Eng Perform 23(6):1917–1928
4. Salmi M, Paloheimo K-S, Tuomi J, Wolff J, Mäkitie A (2013)
Accuracy of medical models made by additive manufacturing (rap-
id manufacturing). J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg 41(7):603–609
5. Uriondo A, Esperon-Miguez M, Perinpanayagam S (2015) The
present and future of additive manufacturing in the aerospace sec-
tor: a review of important aspects. Proc I Mech Eng G-J Aer
229(11):2132–2147
6. Talagani F, DorMohammadi S, Dutton R, Godines C, Baid H, Abdi
F, Kunc V, Compton BG, Simunovic S, Duty CE, Love LJ, Post
BK, Blue CA (2015) Numerical simulation of big area additive
manufacturing (3D printing) of a full size car. SAMPE J 51(4):
27–36
7. Williams SW, Martina F, Addison AC, Ding J, Pardal G, Colegrove
P (2016) Wire + arc additive aanufacturing. Mater Sci Technol
32(7):641–647
8. Murr LE, Gaytan SM, Ramirez DA, Martinez E, Hernandez J,
Amato KN, Shindo PW, Medina FR, Wicker RB (2012) Metal
fabrication by additive manufacturing using laser and electron
beam melting technologies. J Mater Sci Technol 28(1):1–14
9. Gu DD, Meiners W, Wissenbach K, Poprawe R (2012) Laser ad-
ditive manufacturing of metallic components: materials, processes
and mechanisms. Int Mater Rev 57(3):133–164
10. Simunovic S, Nycz A, Noakes MW, Chin C, Oancea V (2017)
Metal big area additive manufacturing: process modeling and val-
idation. In: NAFEMS World Congress 2017
11. Martina F, Roy MJ, Szost BA, Terzi S, Colegrove PA, Williams
SW, Withers PJ, Meyer J, Hofmann M (2016) Residual stress of as-
deposited and rolled wire+arc additive manufacturing Ti–6Al–4V
components. Mater Sci Technol 32(14):1439–1448
12. Szost BA, Terzi S, Martina F, Boisselier D, Prytuliak A, Pirling T,
Hofmann M, Jarvis DJ (2016) A comparative study of additive
manufacturing techniques: residual stress and microstructural anal-
ysis of CLAD and WAAM printed Ti–6Al–4V components. Mater
Des 89:559–567
13. Mughal MP, Fawad H, Mufti R (2006) Finite element prediction of
thermal stresses and deformations in layered manufacturing of me-
tallic parts. Acta Mech 183(1):61–79
14. Martina F, Roy M, Colegrove P, Williams SW (2014) Residual
stress reduction in high pressure interpass rolled wire+arc additive
manufacturing Ti-6Al-4V components. In: 25th International Solid
Freeform Fabrication Symposium
15. Hönnige JR, Colegrove PA, Ahmad B, Fitzpatrick ME, Ganguly S,
Lee TL, Williams SW (2018) Residual stress and texture control in
Ti-6Al-4V wire + arc additively manufactured intersections by
stress relief and rolling. Mater Des 150:193–205
16. Colegrove PA, Coules HE, Fairman J, Martina F, Kashoob T,
Mamash H, Cozzolino LD (2013) Microstructure and residual
stress improvement in wire and arc additively manufactured parts
through high-pressure rolling. J Mater Process Technol 213(10):
1782–1791
17. Hönnige JR, Colegrove PA, Ganguly S, Eimer E, Kabra S,
Williams S (2018) Control of residual stress and distortion in alu-
minium wire + arc additive manufacture with rolling. Addit Manuf
22:775–783
18. Sun R, Li L, Zhu Y, Guo W, Peng P, Cong B, Sun J, Che Z, Li B,
Guo C, Liu L (2018) Microstructure, residual stress and tensile
properties control of wire-arc additive manufactured 2319 alumi-
num alloy with laser shock peening. J Alloys Compd 747:255–265
19. Shen C, Reid M, Liss K-D, Pan Z, Ma Y, Cuiuri D, van Duin S, Li
H (2019) Neutron diffraction residual stress determinations in
Fe3Al based iron aluminide components fabricated using wire-arc
additive manufacturing (WAAM). Addit Manuf 29:100774
20. Ding J, Colegrove P, Mehnen J, Ganguly S, Sequeira Almeida PM,
Wang F, Williams S (2011) Thermo-mechanical analysis of wire
and arc additive layer manufacturing process on large multi-layer
parts. Comput Mater Sci 50(12):3315–3322
21. Dunlavey MR (1983) Efficient polygon-filling algorithms for raster
displays. ACM Trans Graph 2(4):264–273
22. Nickel AH, Barnett DM, Prinz FB (2001) Thermal stresses and
deposition patterns in layered manufacturing. Mat Sci Eng A
Struct 317(1):59–64
23. Held M (1991) A geometry-based investigation of the tool path
generation for zigzag pocket machining. Vis Comput 7(5):296–308
24. Parry L, Ashcroft IA, Wildman RD (2016) Understanding the effect
of laser scan strategy on residual stress in selective laser melting
through thermo-mechanical simulation. Addit Manuf 12:1–15
25. Rajan VT (2001) The optimal zigzag direction for filling a two-
dimensional region. Rapid Prototyp J 7(5):231–241
26. Park SC, Choi BK (2000) Tool-path planning for direction-parallel
area milling. Comput Aided Des 32(1):17–25
27. Dwivedi R, Kovacevic R (2004) Automated torch path planning
using polygon subdivision for solid freeform fabrication based on
welding. J Manuf Syst 23(4):278–291
28. Ding D, Pan Z, Cuiuri D, Li H (2014) A tool-path generation strat-
egy for wire and arc additive manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 73(1):173–183
29. Wang X, Wang A, Li Y (2019) A sequential path-planning meth-
odology for wire and arc additive manufacturing based on a water-
pouring rule. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 103(9):3813–3830
30. Y-a J, He Y, J-z F, W-f G, Lin Z-w (2014) Optimization of tool-
path generation for material extrusion-based additive manufactur-
ing technology. Addit Manuf 1:32–47
31. Jin GQ, Li WD, Gao L (2013) An adaptive process planning ap-
proach of rapid prototyping and manufacturing. Robot Cim-int
Manuf 29(1):23–38
32. Farouki RT, Koenig T, Tarabanis KA, Korein JU, Batchelder JS
(1995) Path planning with offset curves for layered fabrication pro-
cesses. J Manuf Syst 14(5):355–368
33. Yang Y (2002) Equidistant path generation for improving scanning
efficiency in layered manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J 8(1):30–37
34. Ding D, Pan Z, Cuiuri D, Li H (2015) A practical path planning
methodology for wire and arc additive manufacturing of thin-
walled structures. Robot Cim-int Manuf 34:8–19
35. Ding D, Pan Z, Cuiuri D, Li H, van Duin S, Larkin N (2016) Bead
modelling and implementation of adaptive MAT path in wire and
arc additive manufacturing. Robot Cim-int Manuf 39:32–42
36. Ding D, Pan Z, Cuiuri D, Li H, Larkin N (2016) Adaptive path
planning for wire-feed additive manufacturing using medial axis
transformation. J Clean Prod 133:942–952
37. Jin Y, He Y, Fu G, Zhang A, Du J (2017) A non-retraction path
planning approach for extrusion-based additive manufacturing.
Robot Cim-int Manuf 48:132–144

38. Sun Y (2018) Research on path planning of arc additive
manufacturing for repairing large defects of casting. Harbin
Institute of Technology, Harbin
39. Liu W (2017) Numerical simulation of temperature field and stress
field and forming path strategy evaluation in wire arc additive
manufacturing. Huazhong University of Science and Technology
40. Ding D, Pan Z, Cuiuri D, Li H (2015) A multi-bead overlapping
model for robotic wire and arc additive manufacturing (WAAM).
Robot Cim-int Manuf 31:101–110
41. Li Y, Han Q, Horváth I, Zhang G (2019) Repairing surface defects
of metal parts by groove machining and wire + arc based filling. J
Mater Process Technol 274:116268
42. Volpato N, Franzoni A, Luvizon DC, Schramm JM (2013)
Identifying the directions of a set of 2D contours for additive
manufacturing process planning. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(1):
33–43
43. Ren K, Chew Y, Fuh JYH, Zhang YF, Bi GJ (2019) Thermo-
mechanical analyses for optimized path planning in laser aided
additive manufacturing processes. Mater Des 162:80–93
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
44. Paradowska AM, Larkin N, Li H, Pan Z, Shen C, Law M (2014)
Neutron diffraction residual stress measurements of welds made
with pulsed tandem gas metal arc welding (PT-GMAW). Powder
Diffract 29(S1):S24–S27
45. Lu X, Lin X, Chiumenti M, Cervera M, Hu Y, Ji X, Ma L, Yang H,
Huang W (2019) Residual stress and distortion of rectangular and
S-shaped Ti-6Al-4V parts by directed energy deposition: Modelling
and experimental calibration. Addit Manuf 26:166–179
46. Cao J, Gharghouri MA, Nash P (2016) Finite-element analysis and
experimental validation of thermal residual stress and distortion in
electron beam additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V build plates. J
Mater Process Technol 237:409–419
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.