Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science and Engineering A

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

Microstructural evolution of AISI 4340 steel during Direct Metal Deposition

process
S. Bhattacharya a,∗ , G.P. Dinda b , A.K. Dasgupta b , J. Mazumder a
a
Center for Laser Aided Intelligent Manufacturing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
b
Center for Advanced Technologies, Focus: HOPE, Detroit, MI 48238, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the current investigation AISI 4340 steel was laser deposited on a rolled mild steel substrate by Direct
Received 23 September 2010 Metal Deposition (DMD) technology. The microstructural investigation of the clad was performed using
Received in revised form 2 November 2010 optical and electron microscopes and X-ray diffraction techniques. The microstructure consisted of ferrite,
Accepted 9 November 2010
martensite and cementite phases. Two types of martensite, lathe-type and plate-type, were observed in
Available online 16 November 2010
the microstructure. Decrease in microhardness values from the top layer to the alloy layer proves that the
degree of tempering of the martensite phase increases in the same direction. The lattice parameters of
Keywords:
the identified phases were found to be shorter than those reported in literature. The reported parameters
Direct Metal Deposition
Clad
in literature are from samples processed under equilibrium conditions.
Microhardness © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Tempering
Lattice parameters

1. Introduction In DMD, RP of the 3D object to be created starts with a CAD

Direct Metal Deposition (DMD) technology [1–3] developed at
the University of Michigan Ann Arbor is a solid free form fabrication
(SFF) technology. SFFs are a group of manufacturing technologies
that include rapid prototyping (RP) and rapid manufacturing (RM)
to produce near-net shape components from their computer aided
design (CAD) files. Other SFF technologies, similar to DMD have
been developed at other laboratories and have been named dif-
ferently; Directed Light Fabrication (DLF) at Los Alamos National
Laboratory [4], Laser Engineered net Shaping (LENS® ) at Sandia
National Laboratory [5] and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS® ) at Uni-
versity of Texas, Austin (commercialized by Desktop Manufacturing
Corporation) [6] to name a few. DMD and other SFF technologies
(except SLS) work on same basic principle that involves a high
power laser to create a melt pool in the substrate and simultane-
ously deposit fused pure metal (or alloy) powders (or wires) into
the melt pool, forming a metallurgical bond with the substrate. SLS
uses a powder bed where laser melts a layer of powder and a fresh
layer of powder is provided each time a new layer is melted while
the table moves downward to accommodate the new layer.
∗ Corresponding author at: 2350 Hayward Street, 2040 G.G. Brown Laboratories,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Tel.: +1 734 764 2177;
fax: +1 734 763 5772.
E-mail address: sudipb@umich.edu (S. Bhattacharya).
design. The entire CAD model is first sliced into several parallel lay-
ers, each with a build height of approximately 25–33% of the beam
diameter, and then a tool path is created to build each layer. The
tool path data is processed by converting them into conventional
CNC G and M codes and feeding into the DMD computer. RM then
follows by focusing a high power laser beam onto a substrate to
create a melt pool and simultaneously delivering metal powders
into the melt pool through a specially designed coaxial nozzle that
converge the powder at the same point on the focused laser beam.
The 3D object is created layer by layer (and/or pixel by pixel) by
using a CNC machine or a Robot that controls the part geometry
and layer height according to the tool path data fed to the DMD
computer [7].
DMD process can be used to manufacture near-net shape com-
ponents with complex geometries, coat surfaces, repair parts and
build graded materials which is otherwise difficult to accomplish by
conventional manufacturing processes [7].The closed loop optical
feedback system used in DMD process reduces the manufacturing
time by eliminating intermediate steps from design to product. The
closely controlled process parameters produces clad with uniform
thickness and extremely fine and controlled microstructure [2,3,7]
with the ability to extend the solid solubility of certain elements
into another [8]. However during DMD residual stresses are gen-
erated in the clad layer due to (i) plastic deformation caused by
thermal mismatch among the deposited clad and substrate because
of rapid solidification and (ii) volumetric change induced by solid-
state phase transformation in the clad which could result in crack
formation [9,10].

0921-5093/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2010.11.036
2310 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318
Fig. 1. SEM micrograph of AISI 4340 steel powder showing (a) particle morphology (b) particle cross-section.
AISI 4340 steel is a medium carbon, heat treatable, high strength
low alloy (HSLA) steel used for critical structural applications, such
as building components, automobile components, high pressure
vessels for nuclear power plants, and aircraft components, due to its
toughness, high strength and ability to retain good fatigue strength
at elevated temperatures [11–13]. The microstructure of carbon
steels primarily consists of a mixture of ferrite with some cementite
carbides, tempered and untempered martensite, and some retained
austenite depending on the processing conditions. Primary alloy-
ing elements (nickel, chromium and molybdenum) addition along
with carbon makes it the material of choice for corrosion and wear
resistant applications, e.g. for making medical devices (along with
stainless steels) and submarine components used under submerged
conditions [13,14].
The current research effort was undertaken to evaluate the
microstructure evolution during the repair of some high value AISI
4340 steel components by DMD process. AISI 4340 steel has been
well researched. However, reported literature on laser processing
of AISI 4340 steel primarily discuss laser surface treatment and its
effect on the mechanical properties of the alloy. Few published
works have also reported the microstructural characterization of
post laser treated AISI 4340 steel surfaces [12,13,15]. In this inves-
tigation complete microstructural characterization and mechanical
properties (based on microhardness measurements), of AISI 4340
steel deposited by DMD process has been reported, which is not
available in open literature. The paper also investigates the change
in lattice parameters of the microstructural phases due to rapid
solidification.
2. Experimental
2.1. Materials
Gas atomized prealloyed AISI 4340 steel powder (−140/+325
mesh), manufactured by Carpenter Powder Products, PA, was used
to prepare reported DMD samples. Table 1 shows the chemical
composition of the as-received powder. Fig. 1(a) shows as-received
powder particles morphology. Powder was also mounted in epoxy,
ground and polished to examine the powder particle cross-sections,
using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), for particle morphol-
ogy, size and porosity measurements. As-received powder particles
Table 1
AISI 4340 steel powder composition (wt.%).
Fe C Ni Cr Mn Mo
Bal. 0.42 2.63 0.90 0.74 0.45
cross-section can be seen in the SEM micrograph of Fig. 1(b). The
powder particles were mostly spherical with an average parti-
cle size of 75 ␮m and 85% of the particles within the 60–120 ␮m
range. Approximately 100 particles per micrograph were selected
for measurements and always the largest diameter and the diame-
ter in the direction perpendicular to the long axis were measured.
The average powder particle porosity was found to be approxi-
mately 0.45%.
2.2. Sample preparation
Fig. 2 shows the schematic of DMD process. DMD system primar-
ily consisted of the laser generation system, the powder delivery
system, feedback control system, and CNC motion stage [16]. The
DMD process could be performed either in air or under controlled
atmosphere. DMD samples for this investigation were prepared
at Focus: HOPE using a 1 kW fiber coupled diode laser (Laserline
GmbH, Germany) POM DMD 105D system with a 2 mm diam-
eter laser beam. A combination of DMD processing parameters:
laser powers 500, 550 and 600 W, processing speeds 400, 450, and
500 mm/min, and powder feed rate 5, 6 and 7 g/min and 50% over-
lap between two adjoining passes, were used to build a trial sample
matrix (Table 2), and later experimental samples. Argon was used
as both carrier and shielding gases during deposition. The trial sam-
ple matrix was made to perform a statistical design of experiment
(DOE) based on a L9 orthogonal array of Taguchi method [17] in
order to optimize parameters to produce samples with minimum
porosity and maximum deposition rate. Table 3 shows the opti-
mal parameter combination drawn from this trial sample matrix
Si
0.29 Fig. 2. Schematic diagram showing the DMD process.
 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318 2311

Table 2
DOE sample matrix used for developing process parameters for AISI 4340 steel on mild steel substrate using diode laser.

Run order Power (W) Scanning speed (mm min−1 ) Powder feed rate (g min−1 ) Deposition quality Average porosity (%)

L1 500 400 5 Good 0.20

L2 500 450 6 Good 0.40
L3 500 500 7 Good 0.20
L4 550 400 6 Good 0.20
L5 550 450 7 Non-bonding at interface 1.98
L6 550 500 5 Good 0.60
L7 600 400 7 Good 0.53
L8 600 450 5 Voids 4.13
L9 600 500 6 Good 0.20

Table 3 2.3. Characterization

Optimal parameter combination for depositing DMD samples for microstructural
characterization.
The microstructure along the longitudinal (x–z), transverse
Sample Power (W) Scanning speed Powder feed (y–z) cross-sections, and horizontal (x–y) (or top view) of the
(mm min−1 ) rate (g min−1 )
as-deposited experimental sample were examined by optical
AISI 4340 steel 500 450 5 microscopy (OM) (NikonTM ), and SEM (PhilipsTM , XL30 FEG scan-
ning electron microscope). The crystal structure and the lattice
parameter determination were performed by X-ray diffraction
(XRD), (Rigaku rotating electrode X-ray diffractometer) and trans-
for depositing the experimental samples used for microstructural mission electron microscope (TEM) (JEOL 3011 high resolution
characterization. Rolled mild steel plates were used as the sub- transmission electron microscope (HRTEM)) operating at 300 kV.
strates for all samples. Both trial and experimental samples had 8 XRD was performed with Cu K␣ radiation at 40 kV and 100 mA,
layers, alloy (or dilution) layer plus 7 layers on top of it. The layers scanned in the standard –2 ranges of 30–100◦ and data collected
were deposited in a cross hatched pattern, i.e. deposition direction at every 0.01◦ interval. TEM samples were prepared from thin slices,
for every layer was perpendicular to the previous layer. Fig. 3 shows (approximately 300–400 ␮m thick), taken out of the bulk sample.
the schematic of the cross hatched pattern deposition scheme. The 3 mm diameter discs were punched out of these slices and these
Z increment between layers was approximately 0.5 mm. The alloy discs were further ground to approximately 100–110 ␮m. These
layer was deposited with slightly different DMD parameters; laser discs were then further thinned to make them electron transparent
power 800 W, processing speed 500 mm/min and powder feed rate using a FischioneTM Model 110 twin-jet electropolisher. Electropol-
3 gm/min. ishing was performed at 18–20 V and 45–50 mA using 33% nitric

Fig. 3. Optical micrograph showing the longitudinal cross-section of the experimental sample and a diagram showing the laser scanning direction and layers in AISI 4340
steel DMD sample.
2312 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318
acid–methanol solution as the electrolyte, maintained at approx-
imately −15 to −20 ◦ C. Microhardness (MH) measurements were
performed on the polished samples with a Vickers microhardness
tester (Clark, CM-400AT) using 500 g load and dwell time of 15 s.
The final hardness measured along each layer was calculated as the
average of six data values while the final hardness across the layers
was calculated as the average of three data values.
3. Results
3.1. Microstructure
Specimens for OM, SEM and MH measurements were cut from
different parts of the experimental sample and etched with 2.5%
Nital (97.5% ethanol and 2.5% nitric acid) solution to reveal the
microstructure.
3.1.1. Optical microscopy
Fig. 3 shows the optical micrograph of the longitudinal (x–z)
cross-section of the as-deposited experimental sample, and a
schematic of the laser deposition and laser scanning directions
in different clad layers. Total thickness of the clad was found to
be approximately 3.400 ␮m. Thickness of each layer was found to
vary approximately between 300 ␮m and 500 ␮m. However, no
feedback control was used during these experiments. Since the Z
increment for each layer during deposition was kept constant at
0.5 mm (500 ␮m), it shows that there is some interlayer overlap
during deposition. The laser band width measured from optical
micrograph (Fig. 3) was found to be approximately 943 ␮m. Also
as the laser beam diameter was 2 mm (2000 ␮m), percentage over-
lap measured from optical micrograph was approximately 50%. The
Fig. 4. SEM micrographs showing the three-dimensional view of the AISI 4340 steel DMD sample at three different locations (a) first few layers, (b) middle layers, (c) top.
Table 4
AISI4340 DMD® clad composition (wt.%) from EDAX.
Fe C Ni Cr Mn Mo Si
Bal. – 2.57 1.40 0.55 – 0.30
percentage overlap corresponds to the experimental parameters.
The specific energy (or fluence) applied to the sample, calcu-
lated from processing parameters, was found to be approximately
33 J/mm2 .
3.1.2. Scanning electron microscopy
Fig. 4 shows three-dimensional view of microstructures at three
different locations along the clad; (a) first few layers, (b) middle
layers, and (c) top layers. Fig. 5(a–h) shows the longitudinal (x–z)
view microstructures of clad layers 7 through alloy layer. Fig. 5(i)
shows the interface microstructure, and Fig. 5(j) shows the sub-
strate microstructure.
Fig. 6 shows the plan (x–y) view microstructure of the clad.
The longitudinal view microstructures clearly show needle shaped
martensite in the top few layers (layer 7–5), and they appear to get
tempered or rounded in middle through lower layers (layer 4–1),
towards the interface. The grain size also appears to increase in
that direction. Plan view (Fig. 6(b)) also shows microstructure with
probably some retained austenite along the grain boundaries. How-
ever, XRD and TEM analysis did not detect any retained austenite
phase.
Fig. 5(j) shows typical rolled microstructure with large grains in
the substrate. Interface and alloy layer also show some fine tem-
pered martensite and larger grains. Fig. 7 shows the EDAX® analysis
of the clad layers and Table 4 gives the chemical composition
of the clad obtained from the analysis. The chromium composi-
 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318 2313

tion in the clad was found to be slightly higher than the powder
composition.
3.1.3. X-ray diffraction analysis
Fig. 8 shows the XRD plot of the AISI 4340 steel DMD clad.
Ferrite (␣-Fe), martensite, and cementite (Fe3 C) phases were iden-
tified from the plot. No retained austenite was observed in the
XRD plot. The equilibrium microstructure of hypo-eutectoid steel is
expected to be primarily ferrite and pearlite (ferrite + cementite) at
room temperature. Since DMD is a non-equilibrium process some
metastable phases such as martensite could be certainly expected
in the microstructure.
3.1.4. Transmission electron microscopy
Figs. 9(a), 10(a) and 11(a) shows the bright field (BF) images of
microstructural phases and Figs. 9(a), 10(a) and 11(a) shows their
corresponding selected area diffraction (SAD) patterns. SAD pat-
terns identified these microstructural phases, i.e. ferrite, martensite

Fig. 5. SEM micrographs showing longitudinal (y–z) view microstructures of the AISI4340 DMD® sample layers (a) through (h) corresponding to layer 7 through alloy layer,
(i) interface, and (j) substrate marked in Fig. 3.
2314 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318

Fig. 5. (Continued.)

and cementite and corroborated the XRD results. Retained austen-
ite phase was not detected in TEM investigation as well. The phase
identified from the SAD pattern of Fig. 9(b) was ferrite (␣-iron),
with a body centered cubic (BCC) crystal structure and a [0 1 1]
zone axis (ZA). Lattice parameter a of the ferrite phase match-
ing the XRD pattern peaks (PDF #04-004-2482) was reported as
2.8676 Å. The corresponding lattice parameter calculated from the
SAD pattern was found to be 2.810 Å, which was approximately
2.0% shorter than the reported values. The phase identified from the
SAD pattern of Fig. 10(b) was a lathe type martensite with a body
centered tetragonal (BCT) crystal structure and a [1̄ 1 1] ZA. Lat-
tice parameters a, and c of the martensite phase matching the XRD
pattern peaks (PDF #00-044-1290) were reported as 2.859 Å and
2.937 Å,respectively. The corresponding calculated lattice parame-
ters from SAD pattern were 2.856 Å and 2.902 Å, respectively, which
were approximately 0.1% and 1.2% shorter than the reported val-
ues. The phase identified from the SAD pattern of Fig. 11(b) was
cementite (Fe3 C), with an orthorhombic crystal structure and a
[0 0 1] ZA. The reported lattice parameters a, b and c of the cemen-
tite phase matching the XRD pattern peaks (PDF #01-074-3832)
were 4.5119 Å, 5.0825 Å, and 6.7330 Å, respectively. The corre-
sponding calculated lattice parameters from the SAD pattern were
4.4800 Å, 5.0509 Å, and 6.7291 Å, which are approximately 0.7, 0.62
and 0.058%, respectively shorter than the reported values. The lat-

Fig. 6. SEM micrographs showing the plan (x–y) views microstructure of the AISI 4340 steel DMD® sample.

Fig. 7. EDAX analysis showing chemical composition of the AISI4340 DMD® clad.
 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318 2315

3.2. Microhardness measurement

Microhardness measurements were taken across the sample

and along each layer to determine the mechanical response of
various phases on the microstructure. Fig. 13 shows microhard-
ness plotted against distance from the interface and Fig. 14 shows
a histogram of microhardness measurements along each layer.
Microhardness decreases from layer 7 to alloy layer. The average
microhardness along each layer, layer 7 through alloy layer, varies
from 681–480 VHN. Decrease in hardness from the upper to the
lower layers indicates increase in amount of tempered martensite
across the samples which were also observed from SEM micro-
graphs (Figs. 5 and 6).

4. Discussion

The microstructure of steel is well researched over the years.

Fig. 8. XRD scan of AISI 4340 steel DMD® sample.
tice parameter information obtained from powder diffraction files
(PDF) of phases matching the XRD pattern peaks are obtained from
equilibrium microstructures. The bright field image in Fig. 12(a)
shows the plate type martensite and Fig. 12(b) shows the disloca-
tion networks surrounding the martensite phase observed in the
clad.
Several known microstructural phases in steel are austenite, fer-
rite, pearlite, martensite and bainite. Fig. 15(a) shows the portion
of the Fe–C phase diagram highlighting the eutectoid region and
Fig. 15(b) shows the continuous cooling transformation (CCT) dia-
gram of alloy steels [18]. Fig. 15(b) clearly shows that the cooling
rates can significantly alter the microstructure. Under equilibrium
processing condition, on cooling from austenite region to below
the eutectoid temperature, expected microstructure for the given
AISI 4340 steel powder composition (Table 1) should primarily con-
sists of ferrite and pearlite phases. However, the cooling rates for

Fig. 9. (a) Bright field image showing the area marked for SAD in the ferrite phase (␣) and (b) corresponding indexed SAD pattern.

Fig. 10. (a) Bright field image showing the area marked for SAD in the martensite phase (m) and (b) corresponding indexed SAD pattern.
2316 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318

Fig. 11. (a) Bright field image showing the area marked for SAD in the cementite (Fe3 C) and (b) corresponding indexed SAD pattern.

Fig. 12. Bright field image showing (a) martensite and dislocation networks around martensite.

DMD usually are as high as 103 –105 K/s [7,13] and result in devi-
ation from equilibrium microstructure. CCT diagram shows that
extremely rapid cooling rates place the DMD process to the extreme
left hand side of the diagrams, below the martensite finish line. The
DMD microstructure of an alloy steel is thus expected to be pri-
marily martensitic. The microstructure of the alloy steels may also
consists of secondary phases, such as several alloy carbides [19]
depending on the composition.
The microstructural investigation of DMD AISI 4340 steel, using
SEM and TEM, reveals that the clad primarily consists of ferrite
and martensite and some cementite phases. According to Costa
and Vilar [20] extremely rapid cooling rate during DMD suppresses
the diffusive microstructural transformations and results in major-

Fig. 13. Plot showing variation microhardness with distance from interface. Fig. 14. Plot showing microhardness measured along each layer.
 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318
Fig. 15. (a) Portion of the Fe–C equilibrium phase diagram showing the equilibrium phases present at the sample composition indicated by an arrow [18] and (b) continuous
cooling transformation (CCT) diagram for alloy steel [18] (A = austenite, B = bainite, F = ferrite, M = martensite, P = pearlite).
ity of carbon atoms to remain in the solution in austenite (␥-Fe)
phase and form metastable martensite phase. The carbon atoms
occupying the interstices in the BCC lattice in ferrite phase causes
distortion of the lattice in one direction while contraction in the
other two normal directions and thus resulting in a BCT structure.
The strength of the martensitic structure in steels depends on the
tempering temperature, carbon content and the martensite start
(Ms ) and finish (Mf ) temperatures [21]. Lee and Su [22] related the
change of martensite morphology with carbon content. They stated
that low-carbon content results in lathe type martensite with high
density of dislocation, as observed in rolled structure, high carbon
content results in plate type martensite with very fine twins and
medium carbon content results in a complicated microstructure
with a mixture of lathe and plate type martensite. Figs. 11 and 12
shows that the both lathe and plate types of martensite are present
in the current DMD AISI 4340 steel samples
Heat treatments can alter the distribution, size and morphol-
ogy of the metastable phases and also results in the precipitation
of secondary phases [22,23] in as-cast structure. Lee and Su [22]
showed that the cast microstructure of AISI 4340 steel consisted
of lathe martensite and tempering process resulted in the growth
of the lathes and precipitation of several types of carbides around
these lathes. During DMD a considerable amount of heat is trans-
ferred to the bulk, hence starting from substrate every layer acts
as a heat sink for the subsequent layers above it. Thus according
to Costa and Vilar [20] every solidified layer undergoes successive
thermal cycles as new layers are deposited and results in solid-
state microstructural transformation in these resolidified layers.
This could significantly change the matrix microstructure, distribu-
tion of secondary phases and eventually material properties [22].
SEM micrographs (Fig. 5) show that the martensite phase in layer
7 is fine needle shaped and it gets tempered and rounded in sub-
sequent layers towards the interface. The microstructure of lower
layers is etched darker as compared to upper layers. Decrease in
microhardness values (Figs. 13 and 14) from layer 7 to alloy layer
also proves that the degree of tempering of the martensite phase
follows same direction.
Extremely rapid cooling during DMD results in residual stress
accumulation in clads [9]. These residual stresses could affect the
crystal structure of microstructural phases in the clad. The mechan-
2317
ical properties of the material could be directly related to the crystal
structure of each phase [24]. Researchers have [25,26] investi-
gated the effect of residual stress on the mechanical behavior of
microstructural phase in materials. The effect of cooling rate on the
microstructural phases is observed in the TEM SAD patterns. The
lattice parameters of the phases identified using TEM SAD patterns
were shorter as compared to the lattice parameters for the same
phases reported in literature. The reported lattice parameters were
obtained from the samples with equilibrium processing. This shows
the effect of residual stresses present in DMD clads on the crys-
tal structure of the microstructural phases. No information on the
effect of residual stresses on lattice parameter of microstructural
phases is available in open literature.
Fastow et al. [15,27] reported the presence of traces of
retained austenite phase along with martensite phase in the
microstructure of laser surface alloyed AISI 4340 steel. Researchers
[28,29] have also reported the presence of retained austenite
phase on prior austenite grain boundaries in cast and laser
surface treated AISI 4340 steel samples. Sastry and Wood
[28] showed that the orientation between retained austen-
ite and martensite exhibited a Kurdjumov–Sachs relationship,
(1 1 1)␣ //(1 1 0)␥ in a laser surface treated AISI 4340 steel sam-
ple. Molian [29] showed that cementite particles precipitated
during heat treatment of cast AISI 4340 steels displayed Bha-
garyatskii orientation relationship with martensite such as,
[0 1̄ 1]␣ //[1 0 0]Fe3 C , [1 1̄ 1]␣ //[0 1 0]Fe3 C and (2 1 1)␣ //(011)Fe3 C .
SEM micrographs (Fig. 6) also show some retained austenite along
the grain boundaries in the current sample. However, they were
neither detected in XRD scans nor in TEM analysis. These orien-
tation relationships between austenite (␥), ferrite (␣), martensite,
␧-carbide and Fe3 C phases in DMD AISI 4340 steel deposited using
a CO2 laser have been explored in detail by our group in another
publication [30].
It was found that the formation of martensite from ␥
followed the conventional Kurdjumov–Sachs relationship. Orien-
tation relationship between ␧-carbide and Fe3 C also followed the
conventional orientation relationships reported in literature. How-
ever, the relationship between ␣- and ␧-carbide did not follow any
of the conventional orientation relationships reported in literature
[30].
2318 S. Bhattacharya et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 528 (2011) 2309–2318
5. Conclusions
AISI 4340 steel were successfully deposited using a DMD system
with diode laser on a mild steel substrate. The samples consisted
of an alloy layer and 7 more layers on top. The microstructural
phases identified in the clad using SEM, XRD and TEM were ferrite,
martensite and cementite. It was observed that the clad micro-
hardness decreases from the top (layer 7) to the bottom (alloy)
layer. This corresponds to the SEM micrographs which show that
the degree of tempering of the martensite phase increases from
top to the bottom layers. The lattice parameters of the phases iden-
tified from TEM SAD patterns were found to be shorter than the
lattice parameters reported in literature, ferrite a = 2.0%, martensite
a = 0.1% and c = 1.2%, and cementite a = 0.7%, b = 0.62% and c = 0.058%,
respectively.
Acknowledgements
The current investigation was financially supported by the Office
of Naval Research. Authors would like to thank Dr. Kai Sun from
the Electron Microscope Analysis Laboratory (EMAL) at University
of Michigan for his help in the work.
References
[1] J. Mazumder, J. Choi, K. Nagarathnam, J. Koch, D. Hetzner, JOM 49 (1997) 55–60.
[2] J. Mazumder, A. Schifferer, J. Choi, Mater. Res. Innov. 3 (1999) 118–131.
[3] J. Mazumder, D. Dutta, N. Kikuchi, A. Ghosh, Opt. Lasers Eng. 34 (2000) 397–414.
[4] J.O. Milewski, G.K. Lewis, D.J. Thoma, G.I. Keel, R.B. Nemec, R.A. Reinert, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 75 (1998) 165–172.
[5] http://www.sandia.gov/mst/pdf/LENS.pdf.
[6] D.E. Bunnell, D.L. Bourell, H.L. Marcus, Advances in Powder Metallurgy and
Particulate Materials, Part 15, Metal Powers Industries Federation (MPIF),
Princeton, NJ, 1996, pp. 93–106, Section 15.
[7] G.P. Dinda, A.K. Dasgupta, J. Mazumder, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 509 (2009) 98–104.
[8] J. Singh, J. Mazumder, Acta Metall. 35 (1987) 1995–2003.
[9] M. Pilloz, J.M. Pelletier, A.B. Vannes, J. Mater. Sci. 27 (1992) 1240–1244.
[10] P.B. Kadolkar, T.R. Watkins, J.Th.M. De Hosson, B.J. Kooi, N.B. Dahotre, Acta
Mater. 55 (2007) 1203–1214.
[11] N. Ozdemir, Mater. Lett. 59 (2005) 2504–2509.
[12] M.P. Nascimento, R.C. Souza, W.L. Pigatin, H.J.C. Voorwald, Int. J. Fatigue 23
(2001) 607–618.
[13] R.L. McDaniels, S.A. White, K. Liaw, L. Chen, M.H. McCay, P.K. Liaw, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 485 (2008) 500–507.
[14] A. Ragab, H. Alawi, K. Sorein, Mech. Mater. 18 (1994) 69–77.
[15] M. Fastow, M. Bamberger, Scr. Metall. Mater. 22 (1988) 183–186.
[16] J.L. Koch, J. Mazumder, U.S. Patent Number 6,122,564, September 19, 2000.
[17] http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pri/section5/pri56.htm.
[18] D. William, Callister Jr., Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction,
sixth ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2003, pp. 281 and 317.
[19] S. Kheirandish, A. Noorian, J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 15 (2008) 61–66.
[20] L. Costa, R. Vilar, Rapid Prototyping J. 15 (2009) 264–279.
[21] K. Shimizu, Z. Nishiyama, Metall. Trans. B 3 (1972) 1055–1068.
[22] W.-S. Lee, T.-T. Su, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 87 (1999) 198–206.
[23] G.P. Dinda, L. Song, J. Mazumder, Metall. Trans. A 39 (2008) 2914–2922.
[24] Y. Liu, J. Mazumder, K. Shibata, Metall. Trans. A 25 (1994) 37–46.
[25] R. Dakhlaoui, A. Baczmański, C. Braham, S. Wroński, K. Wierzbanowski, E.C.
Oliver, Acta Mater. 54 (2006) 5027–5039.
[26] A.J. Perry, D.E. Geist, K. Narasimhan, J.R. Treglio, Surf. Coat. Tech. 86–87 (1996)
364–371.
[27] M. Fastow, M. Bamberger, N. Nir, M. Landkof, Mater. Sci. Technol. 6 (1990)
900–904.
[28] C.N. Sastry, W.E. Wood, Mater. Sci. Eng. 45 (1980) 277–280.
[29] P.A. Molian, Mater. Sci. Eng. 51 (1981) 253–260.
[30] G. Sun, S. Bhattacharya, G.P. Dinda, A. Dasgupta, J. Mazumder, Unpublished
results, 2010.