Welding in the World (2021) 65:1373–1388

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-021-01117-z

RESEARCH PAPER

Experimental characterization of stainless steel 316L alloy fabricated

with combined powder bed fusion and directed energy deposition
Kumaran M 1 & Senthilkumar V 1

Received: 18 August 2020 / Accepted: 23 March 2021 / Published online: 5 April 2021
# International Institute of Welding 2021

Abstract
Powder bed fusion (PBF) is an additive manufacturing (AM) technique commonly used to manufacture metallic components.
External geometry of parts printed by PBF process can be extended by regular processes, namely, laser cladding and spraying
powder metal. But these methods have disadvantages such as increased heat-affected zone (HAZ) and extended deficiencies like
cracks and pores, whereas samples produced with directed energy deposition (DED) exhibited strong metallurgical bonding and
has reduced HAZ due to least dilution. The present work investigates the properties of stainless steel 316L (SS316L) sandwich
structure built by combining PBF and DED process. The external geometry of the SS316L samples built by PBF was extended by
using DED technique. Metallurgical and mechanical characteristics of DED extended PBF samples were studied. Tensile
properties such as percentage elongation and tensile strength were compared for PBF, DED, and SWS (DED extended PBF).
It was found that the yield stress for the DED samples, PBF samples, and SWS samples is in the range of 486 MPa, 564 MPa, and
401 MPa. Moreover, the average hardness of the interface portion is found to be 220.5 HV and it is higher than the hardness
observed in the PBF and DED regions.

Keywords Additive manufacturing . Stainless steel 316L . Sandwich structures . Powder bed fusion . Directed energy deposition

Nomenclature PR Powder feed rate (g/min)

AM Additive manufacturing SS Scanning speed (mm/min)
PBF Powder bed fusion P Laser power (W)
DED Directed energy deposition E Energy density (J/mm2)
SS316L Stainless steel 316L
HAZ Heat-affected zone
FESEM Field emission scanning electron microscope
EBSD Electron back scattered diagram
XRD X-ray powder diffraction
1 Introduction
SWS Sandwich structures
Metal-based AM process [1, 2] gained attention due to bene-
EDAX Energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometer
fits in the manufacture of complex structural components
DMLS Direct metal laser sintering
which are hard to produce through conventional processes like
DMD Direct metal deposition
casting, forging, and rolling. ASTM categorised metal-based
AM techniques into DED [3–5] and PBF [6–8]. DED can
manufacture components by depositing the metal powder in
Recommended for publication by Commission I - Additive a specific location. PBF manufactures 3D parts by selectively
Manufacturing, Surfacing, and Thermal Cutting irradiating high energy onto a bed where the metal powder is
spread [9]. Presently, the DED process is mostly used for
* Senthilkumar V repair work [10, 11], but literature indicates a trend where it
vskumar@nitt.edu
can be used to develop and extend an already built PBF spec-
1 imens [12, 13]. Cheng-Xu Ren et al. and Zhanqi Liu et al. [14,
Department of Production Engineering, National Institute of
Technology Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu 620015, 15] have used the DED technique for developing sandwich
India structures from similar or dissimilar materials.
1374
While metallic products produced by AM have amazing
mechanical characteristics [16], it has to be investigated for
adopting in industries. If the structure which already exists
needs to be enlarged for an application, it has to be modified
for reuse instead of being replaced. Welding, wire arc addi-
tive, laser cladding, metallizing, and brazing are traditional
ways to extend such products. However, due to their suscep-
tibility to produce pores, cracks, and wider HAZ, more ad-
vanced laser melting techniques like DED are suggested.
DED can reduce the HAZ of the interface region to create a
perfect structure. In DED the contact area is less which ac-
counts for the reduction in the heat-affected zone. Moreover,
in DED process, the chances of powder agglomeration, poros-
ity, surface defects, and dilution rates with previously depos-
ited layer are very less. Thus, the parts produced by DED
would offer high geometrical fidelity as compared to the wire
arc additive manufacturing. It is also possible to make com-
plex shapes by adjusting the laser nozzle accurately. In previ-
ous studies, the surface of DED manufactured components
were studied by fabricating components at different powder
feed rate, laser power, and scanning speed. Surfaces on the
border of the deposited layers were observed, and equiaxed
microstructures were found at the top and bottom of the de-
posited region [17]. Differences were identified in mechanical
and microstructure characteristics by adjusting the deposition
distance amongst layers during DED manufacturing, which
also proved the mechanical properties of the components
manufactured by DED conventionally.
Till now, laser melting deposition (DED) studies used tra-
ditionally manufactured base components for rebuilding.
Several other researchers results have shown [11, 12, 18], over
the PBF developed component additional new surfaces were
built using DED process. This kind of developing a new geo-
metrical surface over the existing component. Since two dif-
ferent processes were involved in fabrication, the tensile spec-
imens of PBF and DED sandwiched zones were opted for the
tensile study to identify the weakest zone undergoing fracture.
Further, fractography results elucidate the nature of fracture.
The present study focused on SS316L [19], a material com-
monly used in industrial applications as it has excellent corro-
sion resistance, high-temperature strength and weldability.
Most of the researchers have studied the mechanical proper-
ties of the PBF fabricated SS316L specimens by varying pro-
cess parameters such as powder feed rate, laser power, and
scanning speed [20]. However, the present investigation aims
to study the mechanical and microstructural properties of
Table 1 Chemical composition
of SS316L [% by weight] Element/material Fe
PBF (5 to 45 μm) 68.34
DED (50 to 150 μm) 68.66
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
sandwich structure fabricated by combining PBF and DED.
Further, a comparison between the mechanical and micro-
structural properties of PBF, DED, and SWS specimens are
made.
2 Experimental procedure
2.1 Materials and experimental setup for PBF and DED
SS316L spherical granules in a diameter range of 5–45 μm
and 50–150 μm were used for PBF and DED processes, re-
spectively, in this study. The chemical composition of the
above powders is provided in Table 1.
Figures 1a and 2a show the morphology of SS316L pow-
der as observed in FESEM. Powder particles are spherical but
have varied sizes. Histograms for particle size distribution are
shown in Figures 1b and 2b indicating an average particle
diameter of 22 μm and 80 μm, respectively, for the PBF and
DED processes. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometer
(EDAX) results shown in Figs. 1c and 2c reveal that samples
of chemical compositions meet the standard values of
SS316L. Hall flow test (ASTM B213) results ensured powder
particles flowability as a continuous and consistent powder
flow rate is essential as it affects the AM process [21].
Spherical-shaped particles make powder flow quickly through
the deposition nozzle orifice.
SS316L substrate for the present study was fabricated
by direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) (EOS M280,
Germany). DMLS process (PBF) uses a continuous wave
Yb (Ytterbium) fibre laser with a laser power of 400 W;
1100 nm wavelength with multi-mode and 500-μm diam-
eter. The three-axis laser CNC control device with the
process software (PSW) controlled the build process,
while other systems measured and controlled printing of
components. Substrates were built with a scanning speed
of 900 mm/s, 200-W laser power, 100-μm hatching pitch
with 400-μm layer thickness and 0.2-mm laser diameter
in a completely an inert ambience without infiltration of
atmospheric gases. The above parameters were the same
as those used for virgin powder which yielded the least
porosity with superior mechanical properties [22].
Direct metal deposition (DMD) machine used in the pres-
ent work (POM-DMD 105D, USA) is shown in Fig. 3a, and
the images of the building up of extended part on the initial
PBF substrate is shown in Fig. 3b–c. The DMD machine had a
Cr Ni Mo Si Mn C N P S
16.62 10.57 2.11 0.60 1.58 0.030 0.10 0.035 0.020
16.99 10.59 2.00 0.2 1.4 0.01 0.10 0.024 0.007
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388 1375

Fig. 1 PBF SS316L powder: (a) FESEM morphology, (b) histogram of particle size distribution, and (c) EDAX results

Fig. 2 DED SS316L powder: (a) FESEM morphology, (b) histogram of particle size distribution, and (c) EDAX results

Fig. 3 (a) DMD metal additive

manufacturing machine, (b) ready
to start DED process above the
PBF subtract, and (c) during DED
process
1376 Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388

Table 2 DED process parameters

by the Taguchi method Sample Parameters Energy density
(J/mm2)
Laser power Scanning Powder feed
(W) speed (mm/min) rate (g/min)

a 400 300 2 133.333

b 400 500 3 80
c 400 700 4 57.142
d 600 300 3 200
e 600 500 4 120
f 600 700 2 85.714
g 800 300 4 266.666
h 800 500 2 160
i 800 700 3 114.285

five-axis CNC deposition platform controlled by DMD-CAM
path generation software, including a laser system with 1 kW
of fibre coupling. The machine had four powder hoppers to
supply powder, and powder nozzles to deliver processing gas
and powder. Argon was used to inject the powder to prevent
oxidation during manufacturing. An optical device was
mounted on the head where the powder was fed. A 0.6-mm
diameter nozzle supplied the laser beam and powder. The
distance between the nozzles from the substrate’s surface
was 15 mm. A high-power laser beam penetrates the powder
on the substrate’s surface forming a melt pool. The melt pool
rapidly solidifies after the beam had passed, forming the de-
position bead. During manufacturing, the parameters are re-
peated to form a layer. Powder feed rate, layer thickness, laser
scanning speed, hatching pitch, and laser power are
considered the main process parameters which in a specific
combination influenced the geometric, metallurgical, and me-
chanical properties of the material deposited. Optimal setting
of these parameters is vital to produce geometrically accurate
samples with good mechanical properties.
2.2 Effect of DED process parameters by the Taguchi
method
Multi-layer deposition experiments were conducted to estab-
lish the best condition by varying process parameters like
powder feed rate (PR) scanning speed (SS) and laser power
(P). L9 orthogonal array used for conducting experiments [3]
is shown in Table 2.

Fig. 4 Micro-hardness test results

of samples fabricated with
varying process parameters
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
Fig. 5 Microscopic image of DED deposition samples developed with varying process parameters (sample (a–i))
Trial DED experiments were conducted according to L9
array to deposit samples of 4 mm high, 5 mm length, and
5 mm width above the substrate. Samples hardness after pro-
duction was tested with a Vickers micro-hardness tester [4].
Hardness results are indicated in Fig. 4. Optical images of all 9
samples are shown in Fig. 5a–i. The same were used to char-
acterize the melt pool and porosity.
Fig. 6 (a) PBF substrate and (b) DED extended specimen (SWS)
1377
Figure 5 shows the microstructural images of the SS316L
samples processed through DED under different process
conditions and varied laser power of 400, 600, and 800 W.
Figure 5a–c are the result of 400 W laser power where aver-
age micro-hardness is about 180.5, 176.3, and 157.6 HV,
respectively. It is observed that the micro-hardness values
decreased gradually, the reason being that a moderate
1378
Fig. 7 (a) and (b) Configuration of the tensile specimens
increase in the porosity level of the unmelted region leads to
low density reflecting a reduction in hardness values.
Figure 5d–f shows the result of 600-W laser power where
average micro-hardness is about 217.5, 225.4, and 218.6
HV, respectively. This is much attributed to higher powder
density as very low porosity was observed in this condition.
There was no indication of unmelted powder which resulted
in relatively higher hardness values. Moreover, the refined
grain induced during laser processing by rapid heating and
cooling improved micro-hardness. Figure 5g–i show the re-
sult of 800-W laser power where average micro-hardness
was about 204.5, 209.7, and 208.2 HV, respectively.
Compared to earlier process conditions, hardness was re-
duced further. The outcome resulted in good density simul-
taneously revealing un-melted powders between layers [23].
Based on the microstructural and harness analysis results,
Fig. 8 (a) Scale dimensions of tensile specimen and (b) different AM tensile specimens
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
processing conditions of 600-W laser power, 500 mm/min
scanning speed, and powder feed rate of 4 g/min were select-
ed as optimal conditions. The above DED processing param-
eters were used to build up material on PBF substrates.
2.3 Production of sandwiched structure specimen
Figure 6a–b show the AM SS316L substrate prepared using
PBF and an extended specimen with DED process. The PBF
substrate prepared was of 15 mm height (Z-axis, upright
position) and it was extended by a similar length by resorting
to the DED process in order to produce SWS. Excessively
accumulated material was removed from the SWS, and the
samples were sliced with a wire cut EDM machine to create
tensile samples in the build direction in accordance with
ASTM (E8) standard [23] as shown in Fig. 7a–b. To compare
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
the tensile properties of SWS samples, entire parts produced
with PBF and DED were cut along the build direction and the
same is shown in Fig. 8.
A uniaxial tester (Tinius Olsen H50KL) of 50-kN capacity
was used for the tensile test. The fractured surfaces of all three
test samples (PBF, DED, and SWS) were characterized.
Micro-hardness measurements were carried out along the
building direction of samples. The SWS sample was polished
for microstructural study using a silicon carbide polishing
sheet; etching solution (HCl:1, H2O:3, HNO3:6) with 3V
and 2Amperes current [18]. Macro- and micro-structures were
studied using optical microscope and FESEM images. EDAX
results were used for the element analysis of all test samples.
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Microstructure
Microstructural images and the corresponding magnified im-
ages of extended SWS specimens are shown in Fig. 9. Regions
A and B indicated in the microstructure are areas produced with
PBF and DED processes, respectively. The interfacial region is
indicated as C [12, 13]. Fabricated samples show no pores or
cracks in the SWS suggesting excellent metallurgical bonding
between substrate and the extended region.
Fig. 9 Microstructural images of extended SWS specimens (a) PBF portion, (b) DED portion, and (c) Interface region (SWS portion)
1379
Figure 10 describes the FESEM micrograph of the ex-
tended portion. Figure 10 a–b are magnified (×500 and
×1000) images of the PBF and DED bonding structure
specimens, respectively. All microstructural images show
three distinct regions, namely, HAZ, substrate, and dilu-
tion. The dilution zone is where the substrate is supposed
to be melted when the first layer of DED is deposited,
wherein mixing of molten powder with the substrate oc-
curs in the melt pool. Very fine HAZ of 3 μm thickness is
seen clearly in the samples immediately below the dilution
area suggesting highly localized heating and rapid cooling
that occurred during the DED process. Figure 10 c–d show
the PBF substrate and DED extended component’s micro-
structure. Columnar grains and epitaxial grain growth were
observed in both PBF substrate and DED area along the
build direction. Figure 10 e shows the DED sample’s mi-
crostructure near the substrate’s interface with no signifi-
cant difference in the expanded DED region. Figure 10 f
shows the columnar grain growth followed by equiaxed
grain growth very nearer to the deposited area between
PBF and DED (magnification—×2500). Generally, solidi-
fication rates have low correspondence with columnar
structures nearer to the track’s surface [18]. As compared
to the top layers, bottom most layers would undergo faster
heat dissipation due to the substrate attachment which can
result in directional solidification. The grains tend to grow
in a direction opposite to the direction of heat dissipation.
1380
Fig. 10 FESEM micrographs of the (a) extended zones, (b) interface portion, (c) PBF portion, (d) DED portion, (e) and (f) near the interface
From inverse pole figure, it is evident that grains of the
DED fabricated surface were grown in opposite direction
of the PBF sample. In DED process, the columnar to
equiaxed transition will be high due to the least dilution
rates. It is due to the fact that thermal gradient (G) to the
grain growth velocity (R) ratio (G/R) ratio is too low in
DED process; thus, high fractional equiaxed grains were
spotted out, whereas in PBF sample, more fraction of
coarser columnar dendrites were found due to the wider
HAZ because of dilution effects. Therefore, columnar to
equiaxed transition was hindered in PBF sample [24].
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
Figure 11 a–b show microstructures of the DED specimen
taken along the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd layers. The first, second and
third layers of deposition indicate that grain in each bead
changes from columnar structure to an equiaxed structure.
Due to sudden heat dissipation through the interface, some
grains have grown epitaxially in the columnar portion. The
existence of equiaxed grains suggests that homogeneous nu-
cleation occurs during the process through quick solidifica-
tion. Figure 11 c shows that the bonding interface layer thick-
ness is 3 μm including the HAZ and dilution portions, an
observation similar to that reported elsewhere [18].
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
Fig. 11 (a) and (b) FESEM micrographs of the interface portion and (c) bonded interface layer’s thickness
Figure 12 shows EBSD maps and the pole figure of an
as-built AM SWS specimen along the build direction. In
the PBF portion, the as-built specimen has a relatively
smaller grain size. Most grain boundaries indicate very
high misorientation angles. The DED portion noted from
the inverse pole figure maps reveals that microstructure
does not exist in cell form but rather as larger grain size.
Most grain boundaries revealed very low misorientation
angles. Due to the laser melting deposition’s rapid
cooling, the columnar grain of the DED component was
shaped vertically in the building direction. In the as-built
specimen, the equiaxed cellular crystal structure was dis-
tributed in orientations (111), (001), and (101).
Comparing EBSD maps of the as-built specimen’s DED
region with that of the PBF region, green and red regions
increased and blue regions decreased. This means
strengthening the orientation (101) and (001), and the
weakening of orientation (111) [22, 23].
A scanning line of the interface between the PBF and DED
samples was conducted to investigate the difference in the
extended specimens alloying elements (Z-axis, building direc-
tion). As shown in Fig. 13a, the laser melting deposition of the
PBF and DED portions had different compositions.
Figure 13b–d show each element being distributed uniformly.
1381
Differences in composition are due to the nature of the pro-
cess. In laser melt deposition, fast cooling speed resulted in
uniform morphology for each bead leading to a minor segre-
gation [5, 18].
3.2 Micro-hardness
Figure 14a–b show micro-hardness values for the PBF and
DED specimens and that of the interface of the SWS spec-
imen. Average hardness of PBF, DED, and the interface
region were 209.7 HV, 218.6 HV, and 220.5 HV, respec-
tively (deposition direction). Finer equiaxed grains corre-
spond to the DED process and coarser columnar grains
corresponds to the PBF process. Therefore, the micro-
hardness values of DED and PBF samples are completely
different. It has been widely reported that overlapping
layers due to dilution effects lead to agglomerated grains.
Thus, there was a drop in micro-hardness at the overlap-
ping layers. In DED process, the micro-hardness anisotro-
py was very minimum. It is because HAZ- of DED-
fabricated component is very less, and finer equiaxed
grains were spotted out. Finer grains offered superior
micro-hardness according to the Hall-Petch empirical phe-
nomenon [25]. Also, composition difference observed in
1382 Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388

Fig. 12 EBSD inverse pole figure of the as-built specimen: (a) Inverse pole figure map, (b) IQ map, (c) boundary map, (d) grain size distribution, and (e)
misorientation angle distribution of the SWS sample (red: [001]; blue: [111]; green: [101])

the EDAX results as shown in Fig. 13a–d revealed that the
interface region has more iron content than the individual
DED- and PBF-treated surfaces. From the inverse pole
figure, it could be concluded that DED samples undergo
faster cooling rate as compared to the PBF sample.
Materials such as SS316L have low Cr/Ni ratio. For such
metals the on increasing cooling rate the ferrite content will
be less. Similarly, DED processed sample showed less fer-
rite content as compared to the PBF sample. The accuracy
was checked using ferritoscope [24]. Also Fig. 14 reveals
the average hardness of the interface portion to be 220.5
HV which is more than the hardness observed in the PBF
and DED regions [23].
3.3 X-ray diffraction (XRD)
XRD images were used to evaluate the phase constituents of
SS316L powder particles, PBF, DED, and the interface
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388 1383

Fig. 13 (a) EDAX results of the SWS specimen, (b) PBF portion, (c) DED portion, and (d) interface portion

regions. XRD images of PBF, DED, and interface regions of
SWS along with particles used for the above two processes are
shown in Fig. 15. Diffraction peaks obtained with coordina-
tion planes in the 2θ values were 43.62° (111), 50.81° (200),
and 74.70° (220) indicating that SS316L powders, PBF, DED,
and SWS specimens have FCC (face-centred cube) austenite
phase with no ferrite phase [5, 6].
3.4 Tensile properties
Figure 16 shows the tensile test results of the PBF, DED, and
SWS specimens. When individual PBF and DED specimens
were compared before extending, yield stress of the PBF spec-
imen was 564 MPa, at a total elongation of 45.5%, with ulti-
mate stress being 675 MPa. Yield stress of the DED specimen

Fig. 14 (a) Different processes in micro-hardness values. (b)Average micro-hardness of PBF, DED, and SWS
1384
Fig. 15 XRD spectrum of
SS316L
was 486 MPa, at a total elongation of 48.7%, and ultimate
stress 676 MPa. On the other hand, the PBF sample showed
a yield stress 78 MPa higher than that of the DED specimen.
The PBF specimen’s elongation was 3.2% less when com-
pared to the DED specimen. Ultimate stress of the PBF and
DED samples were almost similar. Further, higher strain hard-
ening was seen in the DED samples. These variations were
due to the characteristics of the laser melting deposition and
the resulting microstructural variation. In contrast to the DED
specimen, the PBF specimen produced coarse grains, and
hence, the DED specimen tends to have high strength and
elongation. As a result, dislocation movement was difficult
while the material’s strength increased. The results of the
Fig. 16 Engineering stress-strain
curve of the deposited SS316L
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
extended process (SWS) tensile test specimens revealed that
yield stress of the SWS specimen was 401 MPa, with a total
elongation of 47.1% and ultimate stress of 557 MPa. The
strength of all three samples was almost equal, and increase
in elongation in the SWS specimen was 1.6% as compared to
the PBF specimen [3, 18]. Figure 17 shows the comparisons
of ultimate stress, yield stress, and total elongation of the three
different specimens tested [26].
Figure 18 shows the macro-images of PBF, DED, and
SWS tensile samples after fracture during tensile loading.
PBF and DED specimens fractured in the middle of the
region, while the SWS specimens fractured above the cen-
tre of the extended zone. Specifically, strength and
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388 1385

Fig. 17 Comparisons of the (a) ultimate stress, (b) yield stress, and (c) total elongation

elongation of the SWS sample decreased by 1.6% com-

Fig. 18 Macro-images of PBF, DED, and SWS Specimens, (i, ii, and iii,
respectively) after tensile testing
pared to that of the PBF and DED specimens. Ultimate
stress of the SWS sample was almost the same as that of
the other two specimens. Initiation of crack occurred due
to repeated cycles of melting and solidification during
DED laser powder deposition. The crack in the specimen
was propagated and easily ruptured due to subsequent
loading along with stress concentration [9, 18].
Figure 19 a–c show the FESEM fractograph along the ex-
tended, heat-affected, and substrate regions of the fractured
specimens. Dimples were observed in the PBF and DED
structures. Dimples were seen in the DED portion of the
SWS structure. HAZ showed simultaneous dimples, quasi-
cleavage, and a ductile and brittle fracture behaviour, respec-
tively, which lead to a low percentage of elongation in the
specimens [5, 10].
As the number of melting-cooling cycles increased with
each laser transfer, thermal stress near the interface increased.
As the extended region’s height increased, the number of de-
position layers was also more thereby increasing chances of
further extension. Mechanical properties of the extended sam-
ples deteriorated a little due to this. Nevertheless, this research
revealed that when extended height was increased, there was
1386
Fig. 19 FESEM fractograph of the fractured specimens: (a) PBF tensile specimen, (b) DED tensile specimen, and (c) SWS tensile specimen
no significant change between the mechanical properties be-
fore and after the extension. In such a method, the extension
process of DED proved suitable for components of SS316L.
4 Conclusions
The mechanical and microstructural characteristics of laser
deposition of SS316L powder in the DED process were stud-
ied to optimize process parameters. SWS specimens were
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
fabricated by extending the substrate produced by the PBF
process using laser metal deposition (DED). The SWS speci-
men was evaluated for its tensile test results, XRD, and mi-
crostructural studies. The following conclusions are drawn
from the studies:
(1) Multilayer DED specimens were fabricated with differ-
ent process parameters and optimal scanning speed.
Optimizing key variables such as powder feed rate and
laser power the fine grain configuration could be tailored.
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
The fine grain configuration without porosities could re-
sult in improved micro-hardness with less anisotropic
effects.
(2) The interface region of the SWS specimen was exten-
sively analysed and no discontinuities such as pores and
cracks were found after metal deposition.
(3) Average hardness values of the interface region were
higher than PBF and DED regions indicating good bond-
ing between the two processes under optimal processing
conditions.
(4) Ultimate tensile strength, yield strength, and per-
centage of elongation of the SWS specimen were
compared to the PBF and DED processed speci-
mens. Minimal heat-affected zone results in minor
changes in the morphology of the DED and SWS
samples which attributed to their similar trend in
the mechanical properties.
(5) SS316 samples produced by PBF process (564
MPa) has higher yield stress than the DED build
samples (486MPa) because of the presence of
coarse grains in PBF samples. The total elongation
noticed with DED samples is 3.2 % higher than
PBF samples.
(6) The ultimate stress which the sandwich structure
(557MPa) can withstand is lesser than that of PBF
(675MPa) and DED samples (676MPa). The total elon-
gation of sandwich structure was 47.1% which is higher
than PBF samples (45.5%) and lesser than DED samples
(48.7%).
Funding This work was supported by the Central Manufacturing
Technology Institute (CMTI), Department of Additive Manufacturing,
Government of India. The authors thank Mr. A.R.Vinod, Scientist-C,
and Mr. B.N. Manjunath, Scientist-B of AM lab, CMTI for their help
during sample preparation.
References
1. Bandyopadhyay A, Traxel KD (2018) Invited review article: metal-
additive manufacturing-modeling strategies for application-
optimized designs. Addit Manuf 22:758–774. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.addma.2018.06.024
2. Graf B, Marko A, Petrat T, Gumenyuk A, Rethmeier M (2018) 3D
laser metal deposition: process steps for additive manufacturing.
Weld World 62:877–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-018-
0590-x
3. Weng F, Gao S, Jiang J, Wang JJ, Guo P (2019) A novel strategy to
fabricate thin 316L stainless steel rods by continuous directed en-
ergy deposition in Z direction. Addit Manuf 27:474–481. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.03.024
4. Yadollahi A, Shamsaei N, Thompson SM, Seely DW (2015)
Effects of process time interval and heat treatment on the mechan-
ical and micro structural properties of direct laser deposited 316L
stainless steel. Mater Sci Eng A 644:171–183. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.msea.2015.07.056
1387
5. Guo P, Zou B, Huang C, Gao H (2017) Study on microstructure,
mechanical properties and machinability of efficiently additive
manufactured AISI 316L stainless steel by high-power direct laser
deposition. J Mater Process Technol 240:12–22. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jmatprotec.2016.09.005
6. Sugavaneswaran M, Vinoth Jebaraj A, Barath Kumar MD, Lokesh
K, John Rajan A (2018) Enhancement of surface characteristics of
direct metal laser sintered stainless steel 316L by shot peening. Surf
Inter 12:31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2018.04.010
7. Heiden MJ, Deibler LA, Rodelas JM, Koepke JR, Tung DJ, Saiz
DJ, Jared BH (2019) Evolution of 316L stainless steel feedstock
due to laser powder bed fusion process. Addit Manuf 25:84–103.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.10.019
8. Senthilkumar V, Velmurugan C, Balasubramanian KR, Kumaran
M (2020) Additive manufacturing of multi-material and composite
parts. Additive manufacturing applications for metals and compos-
ites. IGI Global:127–146. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-
4054-1.ch007
9. Sing SL, Yeong WY (2020) Laser powder bed fusion for metal
additive manufacturing: perspectives on recent developments. Virt
and Physi Prototyp 15:3,359–3,370. https://doi.org/10.1080/
17452759.2020.1779999
10. Sun GF, Shen XT, Wang ZD, Zhan MJ, Yao S, Zhou R, Ni ZH
(2019) Laser metal deposition as repair technology for 316L stain-
less steel: influence of feeding powder compositions on microstruc-
ture and mechanical properties. Opt Laser Technol 109:71–83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.07.051
11. Yu J-H, Choi Y-S, Shim D-S, Park S-H (2018) Repairing casting
part using laser assisted additive metal-layer deposition and its me-
chanical properties. Opt Laser Technol 106:87–93. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.04.007
12. Zhang X, Li W, Chen X, Cui W, Liou F (2018) Evaluation of
component repair using direct metal deposition from scanned data.
J Adv Manuf Technol 95:3335–3348. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00170-017-1455-y
13. Zhang X, Tan P, Li W, Liou F (2019) Experimental characterization
of a direct metal deposited cobalt-based alloy on tool steel for com-
ponent repair. T Miner Met Mater Soc 71:946–955. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11837-018-3221-5
14. Ren C-X, Hu Z-F, Cheng Y, Mo F (2019) Experimental study on
the quasi-static compression behavior of multilayer aluminum foam
sandwich structure. J Alloys Compd 810:151860. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.151860
15. Liu Z, Ma R, Xu G, Wang W, Liu J (2020) Laser additive
manufacturing of bimetallic structure from Ti-6Al-4V to Ti-48Al-
2Cr-2Nb via vanadium interlayer. Mater Lett 263:127210. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.127210
16. Fayazfar H, Salarian M, Rogalsky A, Sarker D, Russo P, Paserin V,
Toyserkani E (2018) A critical review of powder-based additive
manufacturing of ferrous alloys: process parameters, microstructure
and mechanical properties. Mater Des 144:98–128. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matdes.2018.02.018
17. Tan JHK, Sing SL, Yeong WY (2019) Microstructure modelling
for metallic additive manufacturing: a review. Virt and Physi
Prototyp 15:1745–2767. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2019.
1677345
18. Wook Jin O, Lee WJ, Kim MS, Jeon JB, Shim DS (2019) Repairing
additive-manufactured 316L stainless steel using direct energy de-
position. Opt Laser Technol 117:6–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
optlastec.2019.04.012
19. Bajaj P, Hariharan A, Kini A, Kürnsteiner P, Raabe D, Jagle EA
(2020) Steels in additive manufacturing: a review of their micro-
structure and properties. Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 772:138633. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.138633
20. Mukherjee M (2019) Effect of build geometry and orientation on
microstructure and properties of additively manufactured 316L
1388
stainless steel by laser metal deposition. Materialia 7:100359.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtla.2019.100359
21. Bhardwaj T, Mukul S, Paul CP, Bindra KS (2019) Direct energy
deposition - laser additive manufacturing of titanium-molybdenum
alloy: parametric studies, microstructure and mechanical properties.
J Alloys Compd 787:1238–1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.
2019.02.121
22. Kale AB, Kim B-K, Dong-Ik K, Castle EG, Reece M, Choi S-H
(2020) An investigation of the corrosion behavior of 316L stainless
steel fabricated by SLM and SPS techniques. Mater Charact 163:
110204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2020.110204
23. Tong Z, Ren X, Jiao J, Zhou W, Ren Y, Ye Y, Larson EA, Jiayang
G (2019) Laser additive manufacturing of FeCrCoMnNi high-
entropy alloy: effect of heat treatment on microstructure, residual
stress and mechanical property. J Alloys Compd 785:1144–1159.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.01.213
Weld World (2021) 65:1373–1388
24. Chakkravarthy V, Jerome S (2020) Printability of multiwalled SS
316L by wire arc additive manufacturing route with tunable texture.
Mater. Lett. 260:126981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.
126981
25. Chakkravarthy V, Jerome S (2020) Fabrication of preferentially
oriented Al4043 alloy and its wear anisotropy. Mater. Lett. 280:
128578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2020.128578
26. Dafan D, Dong A, Shu D, Zhu G, Sun B, Lic X, Lavernia E (2019)
Influence of build orientation on microstructure, mechanical and
corrosion behavior of Inconel 718 processed by selective laser melt-
ing. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 760:469–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
msea.2019.05.013
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.