Accepted Manuscript

Title: Weldability, microstructure and mechanical properties

of laser-welded selective laser melted 304 stainless steel joints

Authors: Jingjing Yang, Yun Wang, Fangzhi Li, Wenpu

Huang, Guanyi Jing, Zemin Wang, Xiaoyan Zeng

PII: S1005-0302(19)30110-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.04.017
Reference: JMST 1537

To appear in:

Received date: 18 February 2019

Revised date: 17 March 2019
Accepted date: 21 March 2019

Please cite this article as: Yang J, Wang Y, Li F, Huang W, Jing G, Wang Z, Zeng X,
Weldability, microstructure and mechanical properties of laser-welded selective laser
melted 304 stainless steel joints, Journal of Materials Science and amp; Technology
(2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2019.04.017

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
Weldability, microstructure and mechanical properties of
laser-welded selective laser melted 304 stainless steel joints

Jingjing Yang 1, Yun Wang 2, Fangzhi Li 1, Wenpu Huang 1, Guanyi Jing 1,

Zemin Wang 1,*, Xiaoyan Zeng 1

T
1
Wuhan National Laboratory for Optoelectronics, Huazhong University

IP
of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China
2
Xi'an Space Engine Factory, Xi'an 710100, China

R
SC
*
Corresponding author: Prof., Ph.D.; Tel.: +86 027 87544774; Fax: +86
027 87541423, E-mail address: zmwang@hust.edu.cn (Zemin Wang).
U
N
[Received 18 February 2019; Received in revised form 17 March 2019;
A
Accepted 21 March 2019]
M

Laser welding is a promising process for joining small

components produced by selective laser melting (SLM) to
ED

fabricate the large-scale and complex-shaped parts. In the

work, the morphology, microstructure, microhardness, tensile
PT

properties and corrosion resistance of the laser welded

stress-relieved SLMed 304 stainless steel joints are
E

investigated, as the different sections of stress-relieved SLMed

CC

304 stainless steel are joined. Results show that the SLMed
304 stainless steel plates have a good laser weldability. The
A

microstructure of laser-welded joints consists of the cellular

dendrites in austenite matrix within columnar grains,
exhibiting a coarser dendrite structure, lower microhardness
(~220 HV) and tensile properties (tensile strength of ~750
1
 MPa, and area reduction of ~27.6%), but superior corrosion
resistance to those of SLMed plates. The dendrite arm spacing
of the joints varies from ~3.7 μm in center zone, to ~5.0 μm in
fusion zone, to ~2.5 μm in epitaxial zone. The SLMed
anisotropy shows a negligible effect on the microstructure and
performance of the laser-welded joints. The laser welding

T
along the building directions of the SLMed base plates can

IP
induce a slightly finer dendritic structure and higher tensile
properties.

R
SC
Keywords: Selective laser melting; Laser welding; 304 stainless
steel; Anisotropy
U
N
1. Introduction
A
Among the additive manufacturing technologies, selective laser
M

melting (SLM) is always characterized by a better surface roughness and

ED

higher geometrical accuracy, which is thus appropriate to manufacture

small-scale metal components with higher complexities [1,2]. Recently, the

PT

large-scale and high-quality metal parts with complicated shapes have

E

however already become a new and significant trend of SLM under the
CC

drive of application demands in aerospace, automotive and medical fields.

Unfortunately, the development and application of SLMed

A

large-scale parts are facing three major challenges. The first one is a

severe restriction on the availability of large-scale SLM equipment. Up to

now, the largest commercial SLM equipment has reached up to 800 mm×
2
400 mm× 500 mm in building volume (Concept Laser X line 2000R [3]),

which still lags behind the industrial demand. The second one is the

control of defects (pore, crack, spatter and incomplete fusion) [4] and

microstructures (columnar grain, texture and anisotropy) [5,6]. The last one

is the residual stress [7] and dimensional accuracy [8]. The residual stress

T
IP
associated with SLM complex heat history is always accompanied by the

R
distortion of components and failure of fabrication process. Besides,

SC
another non-negligible aspect is that the production of large-scale parts by

SLM has generally poor uniformity and stability during long

U
manufacturing period compared with traditional methods.
N
A
Interestingly, welding of a traditional joining technology supplies an
M

effective solution for the above issues by joining smaller SLMed parts to

form large-scale final parts without size limit. More recently, a few
ED

pioneering studies have demonstrated attempts on Ti alloy [9], Al alloys

PT

[10–12]
, superalloys [13] and stainless steels [14]. Especially, laser welding has
E

a wide range of advantages including high welding speed, precise control

CC

of power output, narrow joint with reduced heat affected zone (HAZ),

low residual stress, small distortion and excellent environment

A

adaptability [15,16]. Such merits make laser welding more potential for

joining small SLMed parts to manufacture the large-size metal

components quickly and effectively. But, relevant studies are still limited.
3
Only Yu et al. [17] and Wits et al. [18] tried to join SLMed to SLMed and

SLMed to wrought Ti-6Al-4V plates by laser welding to explore their

weldability, microstructure and tensile properties.

On the other hand, a strong anisotropy is frequently observed in

microstructure and mechanical properties during SLM because of its

T
IP
sharp temperature gradient and rapid solidification rate [19,20]. As the

R
different sections of SLMed parts are always needed to be joined in

SC
practical applications, it is imperative to determine whether the SLMed

anisotropy would influence the weldability, morphology, microstructure

and properties of joints. U

N
A
304 stainless steel has been widely used as air craft fittings,
M

aerospace components, nuclear structural parts because of their excellent

mechanical properties and corrosion resistance [21,22]. Particularly, these

ED

parts are required to have large size, high dimensional accuracy and
PT

complex structure, suggesting that the investigation on laser welding of

E

SLMed 304 stainless steel is indispensable.

CC

Based on these considerations, 3 mm-thick 304 stainless steel plates

were welded to explore the feasibility of joining SLMed parts by laser

A

welding in the present study. A comparison on microstructure and

performance between the laser-welded joints and SLMed base plates was

conducted. Also, the effect of SLMed anisotropy on weldability,

4
microstructure, microhardness, mechanical properties and corrosion

resistance during welding was evaluated. This work is of great

significance in affording a simple and feasible approach for fabricating

large-scale, high-quality and complex-shaped metallic parts by SLM plus

laser welding, enlarging the application scopes.

T
IP
2. Experimental

R
2.1. SLM process

SC
All SLM experiments were conducted using a self-developed SLM

U
system (LSNF-П), whose details have been described in our previous
N
publication [23]. The starting material was gas-atomized and spherical 304
A

stainless steel powders, whose chemical compositions and morphology

M

were shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1(a), respectively. The D10, D50 and D90
ED

of the gas atomized 304 stainless steel powders are 18.8 μm, 37.6 μm and

58.0 μm, respectively. All samples with a dimension of 100 mm× 50

PT

mm× 10 mm (Fig. 1(b)) were deposited on a Q235 steel substrate in an

E

argon environment with oxygen content controlled well below 100 ppm.
CC

In order to eliminate the effects of metallurgical defects (such as porosity

A

and crack) on the welding characteristics, almost full-dense SLMed plates

were fabricated under proper processing parameters (laser power of 350

W, scanning speed of 1000 mm/s, hatch spacing of 0.12 mm, and layer

5
thickness of 40 μm) based on our previous work [24].

The SLMed plates were annealed at 500 °C for 2 h in a SBF322H

vacuum furnace to eliminate the residual stress. Then, the stress-relieved

SLMed samples were cut from the substrate and divided into small plates

with a dimension of 100 mm× 50 mm × 3 mm by wire electrical

T
IP
discharge machining.

R
2.2. Laser welding process

SC
A 6 kW fiber laser (IPG YLR-6000) was employed with a

wavelength of 1070 nm, a TEM01 beam mode and a beam parameter

U
product of 6.9 mm×mrad in the experimental laser welding set-up. During
N
A
welding, the laser beam was transmitted by a 200 μm core-diameter fiber,
M

collimated by a lens with 150 mm focal length, and focused by a 250 mm

lens to get a focused radius of 0.4 mm. The welding material was 3
ED

mm-thick stress-relieved 304 stainless steel plates produced by SLM.

PT

Before welding, and all the specimens were brushed to remove surface
E

oxidization film by sand blasting treatment. The laser beam was inclined
CC

5° to vertical direction to avoid the equipment damage from beam

reflection. The used shielding gas was argon, flowing out of a paraxial
A

copper gas nozzle with a diameter of 8 mm. The applied welding

parameters are shown in Table 2.

In the work, three kinds of laser welding type were designed to

6
investigate the effect of anisotropy in the SLMed parts on their welding

characteristics, as shown in Fig. 2. In types 1 and 3, the laser welding

direction is parallel to the building direction (z axis) and scanning

direction (y axis) of the both SLMed plates, respectively. But, the

building plane (XOZ) and scanning plane (XOY) of SLMed plates were

T
IP
laser-welded in type 2.

R
2.3. Characterization of microstructure and properties

SC
After welding, the metallographic samples of the SLMed plates and

welded joints were prepared and etched by a mixture of FeCl3 and HCl
U
with etching time of 3 s. The macro- and micro-structures were
N
A
characterized by EPIPHOT300 optical microscope (OM) as well as
M

Quanta 200 and Nova NanoSEM 450 scanning electron microscopes

(SEM). Electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) analysis was also utilized

ED

to investigate the grain orientation and grain size of the joint. The total
PT

scanned dimensions are 400 µm × 800 µm during EBSD measurement.

E

Phase identification was performed on the SLMed plates and three

CC

laser-welded joints by X'Pert PRO X-ray diffraction (XRD) using a CuKα

radiation with a step size of 0.02° and a dwell time of 1 s per step.
A

Microhardness tests of all the joints in various locations were conducted

with an HVS-1000 microhardness tester at a holding time of 20 s. The

tensile tests of the welded joints were designed and carried out according
7
to GB/T228.1-2010 standard. Moreover, a wrought 304 stainless steel

sample is introduced as the reference.

Also, the electrochemical tests of all the samples were carried out on

a CorrTest CS310 electrochemical station in a conventional

three-electrode cell at ambient temperature. CorrTest®, an

T
IP
electrochemical measurement and analysis software, was equipped on the

R
electrochemical workstation. In the electrochemical measurements, the

SC
platinum sheet and saturated calomel electrode were selected as counter

and reference electrodes, respectively. The samples with a size of 10

U
mm×10 mm × 3 mm were kept in the 3.5 wt% NaCl solution for enough
N
A
time to stabilize the open circuit potential (OCP) and guarantee the test
M

accuracy. Then, the potentiodynamic polarizations were operated for three

times to improve the data reproducibility. The potential range relative to

ED

OCP was from − 0.5 V to 1.0 V at a scanning rate of 1 mV/s.

PT

3. Results and Discussion

E

3.1. Surface morphology

CC

Fig. 3 is the surface morphologies of three laser-welded joints with

A

the thickness of 3 mm, showing a smooth and uniform surface, as well as

good welding quality. As shown, a small deformation and good surface

precision of the three laser-welded joints could be obtained. The

8
cross-section morphologies of the joints in Fig. 4 reveal typical

characteristics of laser full-penetration welding. The obvious concave is

observed on the top surface and root of the joints consisting of wide

upper zone (~1 mm in width), narrow middle zone (~0.6 mm in width)

and wide lower zone (~0.8 mm in width). The concave is about 0.1 mm,

T
IP
which can be neglected when big parts were manufacture by SLM plus

R
laser welding. The cross-section area of welded joint under type 1 is

SC
slightly smaller than those under the other two types. Also, the base metal,

laser fusion zone and HAZ can be discriminated clearly in the joints
U
without apparent transition zone. No visual defects (pores, cracks,
N
A
spatters and non-fusions) are found in the three joints, demonstrating that
M

the SLMed parts can exhibit superior laser weldability regardless of

anisotropy in the SLMed parts.

ED

3.2. Microstructure
PT

Fig. 5 is the XRD patterns of the SLMed sample and three

E

laser-welded joints, showing similar positions and intensities of peaks

CC

between them. Clearly, γ-Fe and δ-Fe phases are observed in all the

samples. But the diffraction peaks of γ-Fe phase have the higher
A

intensities than those of δ-Fe phase, thus a higher content of γ-Fe phase

exists in the samples. During the non-equilibrium rapid solidification

condition of laser processing, the high cooling rate induces the

9
incomplete phase transformation of δ→γ and thus some metastable δ-Fe

is also remained unavoidably [25].

Furthermore, the microstructural features of the stress-relieved

SLMed 304 stainless steel are revealed in Fig. 6. A dense microstructure

without obvious defects is found in the SLMed sample, showing a

T
IP
relatively strong metallurgical bonding between tracks (Fig. 6(a)). On

R
XOY section, a distinctive chessboard pattern structure is observed due to

SC
the applied hatch angle of 90° (Fig. 6(b)). The average width of square is

approximately equal to the hatch spacing. On XOZ section, the columnar

U
grains with a high aspect ratio (~8) growing along the building direction
N
A
are seen in Fig. 6(d). Under high cooling rates of SLM process, the
M

cellular dendrites with dendrite arm spacing of ~0.3 μm are within the

columnar grains in Fig. 6(c) and (e). Apparently, the microstructure shows
ED

a typical anisotropic characteristic, which is frequently seen during SLM

PT

process [26].
E

During welding, the joints between SLMed base plates will

CC

experience a thermal cycle of remelting and cooling. The microstructures

of laser-welded joints are presented in Fig. 7. Microstructures of the

A

samples consist of dominant γ-Fe phase with face centered cubic structure

and less-prevalent, finely-dispersed δ-Fe phase with body centered cubic

structure. The joint can be divided into three zones including center zone
10
(CZ) in the centerline, fusion zone (FZ) around the centerline, and

epitaxial zone (EZ) at the boundary. In center zones, the columnar grains

tend to be parallel to the joints in Fig. 7(b), (d) and (f), which is called as

axial grains. Only a small part of the trailing pool boundary can be

perpendicular to the axial direction within teardrop-shaped pool [27], thus

T
IP
the center zone is rather narrow. In fusion zones, the cellular dendritic

δ-Fe solidification structure in austenite γ-Fe matrix is observed within

R
SC
the columnar grains in Fig. 7(a), (c) and (e). Such columnar grains always

grow extending from fusion boundary to weld centerline. In epitaxial

U
zone, a very fine cellular dendrite structure forms at the boundary.
N
A
The laser-welded joints under the three types show a uniform and
M

fine-grained microstructure. No significant microstructural differences in

the three zones are observed between the laser-welded joints under types
ED

1, 2 and 3. Table 3 summarizes the average dendrite arm spacing of

PT

dendrites in the SLMed sample and laser-welded joints based on Fig. 7.

E

Obviously, the dendrite arm spacing of the joints is an order of magnitude

CC

coarser than those of the SLMed base metal. The dendrite arm spacing of

joints slightly increase from 3.6 to 4.0 μm in center zone (CZ), from 4.6
A

to 5.5 μm in fusion zone (FZ), and from 2.3 to 2.7 μm in epitaxial zone

(EZ), as the welding type changes from type 1 to type 3. Therefore, the

microstructure of the three laser-welded SLMed 304 stainless steel joints

11
are similar, without the effects of SLMed anisotropy.

Fig. 8(a) is EBSD inverse pole figure (IPF) mapping of the

laser-welded joint. The irregular grain orientations imply a relative weak

texture in the laser-welded joint. The columnar grains in the joint always

grow along the direction of heat flow. Also, the columnar grains with

T
grain size mainly in the range of 8-100 μm are seen in the joint, showing

IP
the average grain size is 24.5 μm (Fig. 8(b)). Additionally, only γ-Fe

R
SC
phase was identified in the EBSD phase mapping of the laser-welded

joints, implying that the content of δ-Fe phase is insignificant.

U
As is well known, the higher the cooling rate, the finer the dendrite
N
A
arm spacing. The relationship between dendrite arm spacing (DAS, μm)
M

and cooling rate (Ṫ, K/s) at solidification temperatures has been reported

to obey the following equation for the typical austenitic stainless steel
ED

[28,29]
:
PT

DAS=80Ṫ0.33 (1)
E

Furthermore, the cooling rates at various locations during laser

CC

welding and SLM process are calculated from the measured dendrite arm

spacing based on Eq. (1) in Table 3. The calculated cooling rates under
A

laser welding and SLM process are the level of 103-4 K/s and 107 K/s,

respectively. The cooling rate in laser welding is about four orders of

magnitude lower than that in SLM process. The dendrite arm spacing is
12
different at various locations of laser-welded joints, i.e. epitaxial zone

(~2.5 μm) < center zone (~3.7 μm) < fusion zone (~5.0 μm). Such

difference in microstructure is also associated with the cooling rate,

thermal gradient, and solidification growth rate during welding process.

Consequently, the maximum cooling rate during EZ generates a smallest

T
IP
dendrite arm spacing, while the dendrite arm spacing is largest for FZ

R
under the minimum cooling rate in the laser-welded joints.

SC
Thus, the dendrite structure of the SLMed base metal is obviously

finer compared with the laser-welded joints. It is reported that the

U
increase of laser energy density is the main reason for the decrease of
N
A
cooing rate [30]. Hence, as compared with the SLMed microstructure (Fig.
M

6), a relative lower cooling rate produced by a higher-power (3000 W),

larger-spot (400 μm) and slower-speed (33.3 mm/s) laser can promote the
ED

growth of dendrite during welding (Fig. 7).

PT

3.3. Microhardness and tensile properties

E

The microstructure always acts a significant role in determining their

CC

mechanical properties of materials. The microhardness profiles of

laser-welded joints were evaluated in Fig. 9. A V-curve characteristic is

A

seen in microhardness of the laser-welded joints. Obviously, the

microhardness of SLMed base metal (~300 HV) is 1.36 times higher than

that of laser fusion zones (~220 HV) because of their finer grain size in
13
SLMed plates. Besides, no obvious differences in microhardness are

observed between the three laser-welded joints.

Fig. 10 shows tensile properties of the horizontally and vertically

SLMed 304 stainless steel samples and their laser-welded joints under

various types. As compared with the traditionally wrought alloy (520

T
IP
MPa, 220 MPa, and 50% [24]), a higher strength value but a lower

R
reduction of area is obtained in the laser-welded joints. Also, the tensile

SC
and yield strengths (824 and 729 MPa) of the horizontally SLMed

samples (SLM-H) are higher than those (761 and 512 MPa) of the
U
vertically ones (SLM-V), which are superior to their wrought counterpart.
N
A
On the other hand, the reduction in area (45.1%) of the horizontally
M

SLMed samples are lower than those (62.5%) of the vertically ones.

Obviously, an anisotropy of tensile properties exists between horizontal

ED

and vertical directions in the SLMed 304 stainless steel samples because
PT

of their anisotropic microstructures (Fig. 6).

E

The reduction in area of laser-welded joints are almost kept at

CC

27.6 %. Under the effect of fine-grain strengthening (Table 3), a slight

decrease trend in tensile strength of joints are found from (777 MPa) in
A

type 1, to (735 MPa) in type 2, and to (722 MPa) in type 3. The thermal

conductivity is considered to be slightly higher in the direction parallel to

than perpendicular to the long-axis of elongated grain [31], implying that

14
a thermal anisotropy may be produced by the microstructural anisotropy

of SLM. Also, a high thermal conductivity can enhance the heat exchange

rate, resulting in a more rapid cooling rate during welding. Hence, there is

a downtrend in cooling rate under the three welding types, i.e. type 1>

type 2> type 3 (Table 3). That may be the reason why the dendrite arm

T
IP
spacing of joints shows an uptrend and the tensile strength shows a

R
downtrend as the welding type changes from type 1 to type 3. Expectedly,

SC
the tensile properties of SLMed 304 stainless steel is superior to those of

the laser-welded joints. The tensile fracture of the three laser-welded

U
joints, therefore, occurs along the fusion zone of joints rather than the
N
A
base metals, as shown in the fracture path of Fig. 11.
M

3.4. Corrosion resistance

Corrosion resistance is usually a major consideration in the selection

ED

of a particular grade of stainless steel. The whole laser-welded joints were

PT

selected during the corrosion test. Hence, Tafel plots and potentiodynamic
E

curves in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution of all the samples are given in Fig. 12 to
CC

discuss their corrosion resistance. A similar polarization behavior

between laser processed samples and their wrought counterpart is

A

observed. Fig. 13 exhibits the corrosion parameters including corrosion

potential (Ecorr, V), corrosion current density (icorr, A/cm2), corrosion rate

(v, mm/a), and pitting potential (Ep, V), which are determined through
15
Tafel plots and potentiodynamic curves (Fig. 12).

The corrosion potential of the laser processed samples is similar

(~-0.3 V) in Fig. 13(a) because of their similar phase composition, grain

size, and morphology. The SLMed sample produces the maximum

corrosion current density (as high as 1.6 μA/cm2), while the corrosion

T
current densities of the laser-welded joints (~0.7 μA/cm2) are comparable

IP
to that of the wrought sample (~0.6 μA/cm2). Based on Faraday′s law [32]:

R
SC
v=3272 (mm/(cm a))×ω×icorr/ρ (2)

where ω is the equivalent weight (ω = 25.12 g/equiv for 304 stainless

U
steel), and ρ is the density (7.90 g/cm3), the corrosion rate is positive
N
A
correlation with corrosion current density. According to the calculated
M

results in Fig. 13(b), the laser-welded joints and wrought sample are very

stable (103–2 mm/a), but the SLMed ones are stable (102–1 mm/year) in the
ED

3.5 wt% NaCl solution. Besides, the pitting potential of the SLMed base
PT

plate is about 0.11 V, while it is increased to a higher noble level (~0.25 V)

E

for the laser-welded joints, as shown in Fig. 13(c).

CC

According to the lower corrosion rate and nobler pitting potential,

the corrosion resistance of the laser-welded joints is comparable to their

A

wrought counterpart [33], and superior to the SLMed base plate. The

microstructures of the SLMed and laser-welded joint samples are mainly

composed of γ-Fe phase based on the results above. So, grain size of γ-Fe
16
phase acts a significant role in determining the corrosion resistance of the

samples. It is widely reported that intergranular corrosion and

intergranular stress corrosion cracking are serious problems for 304

stainless steel due to the grain boundary sensitization [34,35]. Therefore, as

compared with the SLMed samples, the superior corrosion resistance of

T
IP
the laser-welded joints may be attributed to their less grain boundaries

R
associated with larger grain size. It is also worth mentioning that the

SC
SLMed anisotropy shows a negligible effect on the corrosion resistance in

the three laser-welded joints.

U
N
4. Conclusions
A

The morphology, microstructure, microhardness, tensile properties

M

and corrosion resistance of the SLMed 304 stainless steel and their
ED

laser-welded joints under various welding types are investigated. The

main conclusions are as follows:

PT

(1) The stress-relieved SLMed 304 stainless steel shows a good laser
E

weldability without obvious defects. The microstructures of the SLMed

CC

base plates and laser-welded joints consist of the cellular dendrite in

A

austenite matrix within the columnar grains. The order of dendrite arm

spacing at various locations of laser-welded joints is epitaxial zone (~2.5

μm) < center zone (~3.7 μm) < fusion zone (~5.0 μm) under the effect of

17
decreasing cooling rates.

(2) As compared with the SLMed based metal, the joints exhibit a

coarser dendrite structure, lower microhardness (~220 HV) and tensile

properties (tensile strength of ~750 MPa and area reduction of ~27.6%),

but superior corrosion resistance.

T
IP
(3) SLMed anisotropy acts a negligible role in determining the

R
microstructure and mechanical properties in the laser-welded joints. As

SC
the welding type changes from type 1 to type 3, the dendrite arm spacing

of joints slight increases from 3.6 to 4.0 μm in center zone, from 4.6 to
U
5.5 μm in fusion zone, and from 2.3 to 2.7 μm in epitaxial zone, as well
N
A
as the tensile and yield strengths of joints slight decrease. The laser
M

welding along the building directions of the SLMed base plates can

induce a slightly finer dendritic structure and higher tensile properties.

ED

Acknowledgements
PT

This work was supported financially by the Pre-research Fund

E

Project of Ministry of Equipment and Development of China (No.

CC

61409230301), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central

A

Universities (No. HUST: 2016YXZD005), the National Natural Science

Foundation of China (No. 51805186) and the China Postdoctoral Science

Foundation Funded Project (Nos. 2017M620317 and 2018T110759).

18
Special thanks for the Analytical and Testing Center of HUST.

T
R IP
SC
U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

19
Reference

[1] M. Benedetti, V. Fontanari, M. Bandini, F. Zanini, S. Carmignato, Int.

J. Fatigue 107 (2018) 96–109.

[2] J. Yang, H. Yang, H. Yu, Z. Wang, X. Zeng, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 48

T
(2017) 3538–3593.

IP
[3] M. Zhang, C. Liu, X. Shi, X. Chen, C. Chen, J. Zuo, J. Lu, S. Ma,

R
Appl. Sci. 6 (2016) 304.

SC
[4] S. Cao, Z. Chen, C.V.S. Lim, K. Yang, Q. Jia, T. Jarvis, D. Tomus, X.

Wu, JOM 69 (2017) 2684–2692.

U
N
[5] M.W. Wu, P.H. Lai, J.K. Chen, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 650 (2016) 295–
A
299.
M

[6] J. Yang, H. Yu, J. Yin, M. Gao, Z. Wang, X. Zeng, Mater. Des. 108
ED

(2016) 308–318.

[7] H. Ali, L. Ma, H. Ghadbeigi, K. Mumtaz, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 695

PT

(2017) 211–220.
E

[8] M. Mazur, M. Leary, S. Sun, M. Vcelka, D. Shidid, M. Brandt, Int. J.

CC

Adv. Manuf. Technol. 84 (2016) 1391–1411.

[9] K.G. Prashanth, R. Damodaram, T. Maity, P. Wang, J. Eckert, Mater.

A

Sci. Eng. A 704 (2017) 66–71.

[10] K.G. Prashanth, R. Damodaram, S. Scudino, Z. Wang, K.P. Rao, J.

Eckert, Mater. Des. 57 (2014) 632–637.

20
[11] M. Nahmany, I. Rosenthal, I. Benishti, N. Frage, A. Stern, Addit.

Manuf. 8 (2015) 63–70.

[12] Z. Du, M.J. Tan, H. Chen, G. Bi, C.K. Chua, Weld. World 62 (2018)

675–682.

[13] T. Raza, J. Andersson, L.E. Svensson, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joining 23

T
IP
(2018) 1–6.

R
[14] G. Casalino, S.L. Campanelli, A.D. Ludovico, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.

SC
Technol. 68 (2013) 209–216.

[15] H.L. Wei, J.W. Elmer, T. DebRoy, Acta Mater. 133 (2017) 10–20.
U
[16] L. Shao, A. Datye, J. Huang, J. Ketkaew, S.W. Sohn, S. Zhao, S. Wu,
N
A
Y. Zhang, U.D. Schwarz, J. Schroers, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 7989.
M

[17] H. Yu, F. Li, J. Yang, J. Shao, Z. Wang, X. Zeng, Mater. Sci. Eng. A

712 (2018) 20–27.

ED

[18] W.W. Wits, J.J. Becker, Procedia CIRP 28 (2015) 70–75.

PT

[19] Y. Kok, X.P. Tan, P. Wang, M.L.S. Nai, N.H. Loh, E. Liu, S.B. Tor,
E

Mater. Des. 139 (2018) 565–586.

CC

[20] J. Lu, L. Chang, J. Wang, L. Sang, S. Wu, Y. Zhang, Mater. Sci. Eng.

A 712 (2018) 199–205.

A

[21] L. Zhu, H. Ruan, A. Chen, X. Guo, J. Lu, Acta Mater. 128 (2017)

375–390.

[22] X. Feng, X. Lu, Y. Zuo, N. Zhuang, D. Chen, Corros. Sci. 103 (2016)
21
 223–229.

[23] J. Yang, J. Han, H. Yu, J. Yin, M. Gao, Z. Wang, X. Zeng, Mater. Des.

110 (2016) 558–570.

[24] K. Guan, Z. Wang, M. Gao, X. Li, X. Zeng, Mater. Des. 50 (2013)

581–586.

T
IP
[25] M. Alali, I. Todd, B.P. Wynne, Mater. Des. 130 (2017) 488–500.

R
[26] Y.M. Wang, T. Voisin, J.T. McKeown, J. Ye, N.P. Calta, Z. Li, Z.

SC
Zeng, Y. Zhang, W. Chen, T.T. Roehling, R.T. Ott, M.K. Santala, P.J.

Depond, M.J. Matthews, A.V. Hamza, T. Zhu, Nat. Mater. (2017) 1–

8. U
N
A
[27] R. Han, S. Lu, W. Dong, D. Li, Y. Li, J. Cryst. Growth 431 (2015)
49–59.
M

[28] J.W. Fu, Y.S. Yang, J.J. Guo, W.H. Tong, Mater. Sci. Technol. 24
ED

(2008) 941–944.

[29] L.L. Wang, H.L. Wei, J.X. Xue, T. DebRoy, Scr. Mater. 134 (2017)
PT

61–65.
E

[30] M. Ma, Z. Wang, X. Zeng, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 685 (2017) 265–273.
CC

[31] X. Zhu, Y. Sakka, Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 9 (2008) 033001.

[32] N. Zaveri, M. Mahapatra, A. Deceuster, Y. Peng, L. Li, A. Zhou,

A

Electrochim. Acta 53 (2008) 5022–5032.

[33] Z. Wang, X. Zeng, W. Huang, Surf. Coat. Technol. 166 (2003) 10–

16.
22
[34] C.Q. Cheng, L.I. Klinkenberg, Y. Ise, J. Zhao, E. Tada, A. Nishikata,

Corros. Sci. 118 (2017) 217–226.

[35] R.K. Gupta, B.S. Kumar, R. Sundar, P.R. Sankar, P. Ganesh, R. Kaul,

V. Kain, K. Ranganathan, K.S. Bindra, B. Singh, Corros. Eng. Sci.

Technol. 52 (2017) 220–225.

T
R IP
SC
U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

23
Figure and table captions

T
R IP
SC
Fig. 1. Morphology of metal powders (a) and macro-morphology of

SLMed plates (b) of 304 stainless steel.

U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC

Fig. 2. Schematic drawings of SLMed plates (a) and different laser

A

welding types (b).

24
 T
Fig. 3. Surface morphologies of laser-welded joints under types 1 (a, b), 2

IP
(c, d) and 3 (e, f) in front (a, c, e) and back (b, d, f) views.

R
SC
U
N
A

Fig. 4. Cross-section morphologies of joints under type 1 (a), 2 (b) and 3

M

(c).
ED
E PT
CC
A

Fig. 5. XRD patterns of SLMed sample and three laser-welded joints.

25
 T
R IP
Fig. 6. Three-dimensional optical microscopy composite view (a) and

SC
microstructures of stress-relieved SLMed 304 stainless steel on XOY (b,

c) and XOZ (d, e) sections.

U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

Fig. 7. Microstructures of laser-welded joints under type 1 (a, b), 2 (c, d)

and 3 (e, f).

26
Fig. 8. EBSD IPF figure (a) and grain size distribution (b) of laser-welded
joint.

T
R IP
SC
U
Fig. 9. Microhardness of laser-welded joints under three types.
N
A
M
ED

Fig. 10. Tensile properties of 304 stainless steel samples under various
PT

processes.
E
CC
A

27
 T
IP
Fig. 11. Photos of tensile test samples after tensile tests (a) and OM

R
image showing fracture path of laser-welded joint under type 2 (b).

SC
U
N
A
M

Fig. 12. Tafel plots (a) and potentiodynamic curves (b) of 304 stainless
ED

steel samples under various processes in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution.

E PT
CC

Fig. 13. Corrosion potential and corrosion current density (a), corrosion
A

rate (b), and pitting potential (c) of 304 stainless steel samples in 3.5 wt%

NaCl solution.

28
 Table list:

Table 1 Chemical compositions of 304 stainless steel powders (wt%).

C Cr Ni Mo Mn Si P S Fe

≤0.07 17.0-19.0 8.0-11.0 ≤0.03 ≤2.0 ≤1.0 ≤0.035 ≤0.03 Bal.

T
R IP
SC
U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

29
Table 2 Parameters of laser welding.

Laser Welding Laser defocused Gas flow

power speed distance rate

3000 W 33.3 mm/s +2 mm 15 L/min

T
RIP
SC
U
N
A
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

30
Table 3 Dendrite arm spacing and calculated cooling rate of SLMed

sample and three laser-welded joints at various locations.

Dendrite arm spacing, Cooling rate, Ṫ
Zone Weld type
DAS (μm) (K/s)
Type 1 3.6 1.2×104
Center zone
Type 2 3.7 1.1×104

T
(CZ)
Type 3 4.0 0.8×104

IP
Type 1 4.6 5.7×103
Fusion zone

R
Type 2 4.9 4.7×103
(FZ)

SC
Type 3 5.5 3.7×103
Type 1 2.3 4.7×104
Epitaxial zone
(EZ)
Type 2 2.7
U 2.9×104
N
Type 3 2.7 2.9×104
A
Base metal - 0.3 ~2.6×107
M
ED
E PT
CC
A

31