The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (2019) 105:1585–1596

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04372-z

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Laser energy density dependence of performance

in additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing
of 316L stainless steel
Yadong Gong 1 & Yuying Yang 1 & Shuoshuo Qu 1 & Pengfei Li 1 & Chunyou Liang 1 & Huan Zhang 1

Received: 17 January 2019 / Accepted: 29 August 2019 / Published online: 14 September 2019
# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
An enormous amount of research effort goes into the manufacturing process for additive manufacturing (AM) or subtractive
manufacturing (SM) process for property microstructure. Moreover, additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing (ASHM), which
combines additive and subtractive processes in a single machine, has provided an important opportunity to increase the high
percentage of stock utilization and produce complex functional components. However, the system comprehensive investigation
and the study of ASHM-manufactured parts by various process parameters have rarely been reported. The present paper depicted
the effect of laser energy density (ψ) on the phase change, density, microstructure, Vickers hardness, and tensile testing within the
ASHM specimens. It was observed that the highest Vickers microhardness, the largest tensile strength, and the attendant ductility
were gained at ψ =222 J/mm3, the most excellent value, which was put down to the high density and relatively fine grains. The
results of this study have a better knowledge of the ASHM method to produce a high surface state and mechanical behavior 316L
SS component by governing laser energy density (ψ).

Keywords Additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing . Laser energy density . Densification . Microstructure . Tensile properties .
Vickers microhardness

1 Introduction energy deposition (DED), and so on have been developed;

Additive manufacturing (AM) technique is an important and
prevalent representative of a manufacturing process that has
matured rapidly in the past few decades and has been gradu-
ally applied to all walks of life—aerospace, automotive, med-
ical, military, mold manufacture, and so on—as an advanced
material processing skill. Contrary to the traditional, subtrac-
tive manufacturing (SM), AM is a “bottom-up” process by
adding the material to three-dimensional components from a
feedstock via layer-upon-layer forming and solidification. A
wide range of complex shape and the higher utilization ratio of
the material are produced via a computer-controlled laser
beam source [1–3]. AM methods consisting of selective laser
melting (SLM), laser melting deposition (LMD), directed
* Yadong Gong
gongyd@mail.neu.edu.cn
1
School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Northeastern
University, Shenyang 110819, China
“staircase effect” is one of the most important and basic of
all of the above-mentioned, which gives rise to the layer-wise
approximation of component geometries. Furthermore, tem-
perature gradients and correlated surface tension could draw
attention to quickly dynamic fluid motions called the
Marangoni flow, which constrained successful melt pool to
substrate or previous layer bonding in LMD process [4, 5].
Long thin molten pools can cause the “balling” of material,
which decrease surface roughness and part density [6].
Machining and other mechanical SM, such as milling, drilling,
and grinding, have been widely applied to additive
manufacturing processes, which can obtain better precision
and surface quality. As a result, the additive/subtractive hybrid
manufacturing (ASHM) method, which combines additive
and subtractive processes in a single machine, has drawn a
great deal of attention owing to their ability to exploit the
advantages of single process while minimizing their short-
comings [7–10].
Currently, some methods have been put forward and devel-
oped to manufacture the metal components by the ASHM
process. Liu et al. [7] put forward a topology optimization
1586
method to gain 3D structures parts with geometry complexity
and dimensional accuracy by the hybrid additive/subtractive
manufacturing. The method is being extended to adopt un-
structured grid of high quality at present and its capability will
be reported in the future. Du et al. [8] proposed an ASHM
technique, which combines selective laser melting as an addi-
tive with subtractive technique (i.e., milling) to manufacture
18Ni maraging samples; moreover, the studied influence of
machined residual stress, microstructure, cutting force, and
surface roughness of ASHM samples were compared with
the wrought samples. Song et al. [9] adopted the 3D welding
and milling to directly fabricate metallic prototypes and com-
pared it with SLS and LENS in the aspect of density, accuracy,
surface roughness, and mechanical strength.
However, the unique conditions generate some specific
problems in the LMD process that happened in the context
of ASHM process, which results in rapid solidification and
subsequent quick cooling, and the thermal energy is the repet-
itive application of the feedstock in the LMD process. Some
defects such as pores, distortion, balling phenomenon, and
poor interlayer bonding existed in the LMD process [11]. In
order to predict the temperature distribution under various
process conditions, an original physics-based analytical model
was proposed [12–14]. The LMD processing parameters (e.g.,
laser power (P), scanning speed (v), and process time interval)
and powder properties decided the metallurgical characteristic
of molten pool and degree of localized heating—thus
impacting the microstructural characteristics, thereby affect
the mechanical behaviors of the final component.
Ma et al. [15] demonstrated that a uniform microstructure
and refined crystalline grain were acquired by direct laser
fabrication (DLF) with higher laser scanning speeds due to
the rapid solidification behavior. Chen et al. [16] reported that
microstructure, relative densification level, and mechanical
behaviors of SLM components by the powder feedstock found
the highest relative density (97.92 ± 0.13%), and the best re-
sult for mechanical properties were microhardness (291 ±
6 HV) and ultimate tensile strength (UTS) (611.9 ±
9.4 MPa), which were obtained by using the fine powder (~
16 μm). Finally, other authors focus on the densification level
and mechanical behaviors of different powder materials by the
SLM process with energy density. Wang et al. [17] showed the
energy density that decides the grain size and further affects
the mechanical behaviors of the 316L samples during SLM
the process. AlMangour et al. [18] investigated the effect of
the density of TiC/316L nanocomposites manufactured by
SLM. The results show that the volumetric laser energy den-
sity has effects on the mechanical behaviors dramatically. Ma
et al. [19] investigated the relative density, metallurgical bond-
ing mechanisms by high-power SLM of 1Cr18Ni9Ti using
layer thickness. Ciurana et al. [20] developed efficient manu-
facture of the single tracks using the variation energy density
by SLM with the CoCrMo powder material.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596
In this study, 316L SS is extensively applied in high-
temperature bolts, marine, biomedical applications, and other
industries with a stable austenitic microstructure because of its
strong corrosion resistance, good high-temperature strength,
resistance to inter-granular corrosion, machinability, and other
characteristics [21–23]. Some oxidation degrees are inevitable
due to the volatile chromium (Cr), as a main alloy element in
316L SS materials, and an especially active element to oxygen
during the normal LMD processing [24]. From these previous
reports, it could be seen that the porosity behavior of AM
samples is an important role that affects the mechanical
strength and fatigue strength. The balling phenomenon is ex-
tremely easy to form. This phenomenon can lead to a rough
surface, impediment to the uniform deposition and amplifying
the porosity of the manufactured sample, and therefore de-
grades the AM quality due to the oxide contamination and
irregular rheological behavior of the melt across the processed
parts—that the process parameters are optimized to reduce the
porosity to gain the best mechanical behaviors as soon as
possible [25].
Nowadays, an enormous amount of research effort goes
into the manufacturing process for AM or SM process for
property microstructure between the various materials, such
as austenitic stainless steel, including 316L SS and 304.
However, a system-comprehensive investigation and study
of the ASHM-manufactured component by various process
parameters to obtain industry acceptable quality have rarely
been reported. In the present paper, balling phenomena were
investigated in the LMD process that took place in the ASHM
process. Moreover, we set up the relationships among the
LMD processing conditions, density, microstructure, and me-
chanical behaviors of 316L components manufactured with
different laser energy densities (ψ). The study may provide
the theoretical foundation for the ASHM method to increase
efficiency, reduce costs and lead times, and reliably fabricate
316L SS components with optimizing microstructure and me-
chanical behaviors.
2 Experiment details
2.1 Material
In the present study, the gas-atomized AISI 316L powder was
used as the starting material with a particle size distribution
from 10 to 130 um (Fig. 1a). In addition, the composition of
the AISI 316L powder and 40# steel substrate can be detected
by the energy dispersive spectrograph (EDS), and the results
are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The morphology of
316L powder was characterized using a super depth of field
emission scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Fig. 1b).
Dendritic solidification structure can be seen from the powder
surface, as shown by the inset in Fig. 1b. In order to obtain dry
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596 1587

Fig. 1 SEM image showing a the particle size distribution and b the characteristic of the 316L powder, in the inset SEM micrograph of the particle surface

powder material, the powder was heated to 100 °C for 12 h happened in the ASHM process were selected. These layer
and cooled in room temperature in a cooling chamber. The thicknesses corresponded to ψ of 370, 278, 222, and 159 J/
substrate has chemical compositions closely resembling that mm3 separately, as the following Eq. (1) [26]:
of the powder material, but 316L contained 2.0–3.2% of mo-
P
lybdenum (Mo); moreover, the substrate contained less than ψ¼ ð1Þ
2.5% of cuprum (Cu). vhd

2.2 Additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing
method
The experimental study of the ASHM machine (SVW80C-
3D) was executed on a laser melting deposition (LMD) part
and milling machine in a single machine, as presented in Fig.
2a–c, respectively. The ASHM machine (SVW80C-3D)
mainly consists of a five-axis CNC milling equipment and
an IPG YLS-2000 high-power fiber laser, maximum output
power of 2000 W, 3-mm spot diameter, and a coaxial powder
nozzle. The automatic tool changer can take out the suitable
cutters from the tool storage that can contain thirty different
types of tools. The CNC system is used to realize the skills of
translating freely between LMD and milling process in the
entire ASHM processing cycle. During the LMD process, a
fixed value of P was 1000 W, v of 9 mm/s and hatch spacing
(h) of 1 mm. The scan strategy was rotating by 90°. To study
the influence of the ψ on the density and mechanical behavior
of ASHM-fabricated specimens, the layer thicknesses (d) of
0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and 0.7 mm in the LMD process parameters that
According to Eq. (1), volumetric energy densities may im-
prove through raising laser powder or reducing v, h, or d.
Subsequently, to improve the surface quality of the LMD pro-
cess, the dry milling technology as a SM process was carried
out on finishing the machining of the component. The dry
milling processing parameters mainly include the feed per
tooth (fz), milling linear speed (VZ), amount of axis feed
(ap), and amount of radial feed (ae) which were 0.25 mm,
120 m/min, 0.5 mm, and 0.2 mm, respectively. The detail of
the ASHM processing parameters is given in Table 3. Bulk
rectangle samples with dimensions of 110 × 5 × 10 mm3 were
fabricated by the ASHM method to investigate the influence
of processing parameters on the porosity, microstructure, and
mechanical behaviors such as the Vickers hardness and tensile
property.
The sample is fabricated with a laser beam scanning pass
through the surface of the substrate or previous layer to melt
the metal powders. When a layer is done, the laser head is
raised to a certain thickness and go on a further deposition.
The process repeats several times followed by a milling pro-

Table 1 Chemical composition (wt%) of the 316L powder

Elements C Si Mn P/S Cr Ni Mo Other Fe

wt% Min 0.01 0.4 0.8 – 16.0 12.0 2.0 – Bal.

Max 0.03 0.65 1.4 < 0.01 18.0 14.5 3.2 0.01 Bal.
Actual 0.02 0.5 1.2 < 0.01 17.0 13.0 2.5 0.00 Bal.
1588 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596

Table 2 Chemical composition (wt%) of the substrate

Elements C Si Mn Cr Ni Cu P S Fe

wt% 0.37–0.45 0.15–0.35 0.50–0.80 ≤ 0.25 ≤ 0.30 ≤ 0.25 ≤ 0.04 ≤ 0.045 Bal.

cess to machine the LDM-fabricated specimen to obtain the
fine surface, alternatively in the LDM process with the milling
process until the component is completed. Moreover, the inner
and outer surface contours are processed by contour milling in
order to eliminate the stair steps and obtain a smoother surface
state of the metal part. Figure 2 (d) and (e) show the example
of the LMD deposition process and CNC milling process,
respectively. And the characteristics of ASHM method are
shown in Fig. 3. The low geometric accuracies and surface
quality that exist in the LMD process can be improved through
a subsequent milling system. Prior to the shaping process, the
substrate with a dimension of 160 × 160 × 20 mm3 was posi-
tioned flat on the workbench, which was machined succes-
sively by milling to eliminate a very thin oxide coat on the
surface of the substrate.
21 ml, respectively. Prior to etching, the morphology of cross-
sections surface of polished specimen was examined with
SEM at the magnification of × 2000 and × 10,000.
Vickers hardness measurements were performed using a
430SVD Vickers hardness testing machine (made in Wilson
Hardness, America) on the polished surface with a load and
loading time of 1000 gF and 10 s.
The room temperature tensile tests were performed at the
tensile velocity of 5 mm/s in a WDW-100E Electronic univer-
sal material testing machine. At last, the microstructures of
fracture surfaces were characterized by SEM at the magnifi-
cation of × 10,000. The characteristic microstructures of the
cross-section of polished bulk ASHM-processed specimens
after etching were carried on optical microscopy.

2.3 Material characterizations 3 Results

The microstructures of the 316L powder and ASHM- 3.1 Phase discussion
processed specimens can be performed by the X-ray diffrac-
tion (XRD) technique. More details regarding this test method The typical XRD spectra of ASHM-manufactured samples
have also been described previously [27, 28]. The element and 316L powder were prepared with four different laser en-
analysis was carried out by the EDS during SEM observa- ergy densities that occur in the LMD process under the ASHM
tions. The degree of densification of ASHM-fabricated sam- process (Fig. 4). The strong diffraction peaks that correspond
ples can be examined according to the Archimedes theory. to 111, 200, and 220 peak intensities of the face-centered
And further detail in this way can be seen elsewhere cubic (fcc) lattice, known as γ-Fe austenite were identified
[28–30]. The specimens were metallographic examinations for all ASHM-processed samples and 316L powder in Fig.
based on conventional metallographic procedures. Prior to 4. Among the ASHM-processed specimens, the 2θ location
microstructure observations, the specimens were etched with shifted to slightly higher Bragg angles compared with that of
a solution of FeCl3, HCl, and distilled water at 8 g, 14 ml, and the standard of γ-Fe phase (PDF #31-0619), implying that
residual stresses and related lattice distortion perhaps will hap-
Table 3 Material properties and the ASHM processing parameters pen because of laser-induced thermal stress [17]. Meanwhile,
Processing parameters Unit Value
the XRD patterns of 316L powder show that the particles
mainly include γ-Fe with a fraction of body-centered cubic
Laser power, P W 1000 (bcc) lattice, namely δ-ferrite, with a weak peak revealed in
Layer thickness, d mm 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.7 Fig. 4. The high cooling rate helped to increase the formation
Laser beam spot size, D mm 3 of δ-Fe phase during the ASHM process. Minute quantities of
Hatch spacing, h mm 1 δ-ferrite peaks were seen only in ASHM-processed samples
Powder feed rate, Q g/min 1 manufactured with the highest d = 0.7 mm (and the lowest
Scanning speed, V mm/s 9 ψ = 159 J/mm3) because of the highest cooling rate, as exhib-
Volumetric energy densities, ψ J/mm3 370, 278, 222, 159 ited in Fig. 4. Furthermore, the quantity of ferrite in the sam-
Focal length mm 13.5 ples manufactured with layer thicknesses less than 0.7 mm (or
Feed per tooth, fz mm 0.25 volume energy densities more than 159 J/mm3) was below the
Amount of axis feed, ap mm 0.5 XRD detection threshold. In other words, no evidence was
Milling linear speed, VZ m/min 120 demonstrated that the δ phase came into being in the present
Amount of radial feed, ae mm 0.2 ASHM process, due to the cooling rate decreasing with the
increasing laser energy densities (decreasing the layer
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596 1589

Fig. 2 ASHM setup: (a) real

photograph of the ASHM
machine (SVW80C-3D);
(b) LMD laser head; (c) CNC
milling; (d) example of additive
deposition process; (e) example
of CNC milling process

thickness) (Fig.4). This is in accordance with the Schaeffler
diagram (Fig. 5) [28]. The 316L powder consists of austenite
and 0–5% of δ-ferrite, by using the values of Creq/Nieq (Creq =
Cr + Mo + 1.5 Si + 0.5 Nb; Nieq = Ni + 30C + 0.5 Mn), as
shown in Table 1, where Creq is the chromium equivalent
and Nieq represents the nickel equivalent. The higher Creq/
Nieq implies the larger amount of ferrite. The element contents
of ASHM-processed 316L SS samples with the laser energy
density ψ = 159 J/mm3 and ψ = 370 J/mm3 are investigated by
EDS (Fig. 6a, b). Results were indicative of the composition
that lies in the ferrite-austenite region predicting the ferrite is
in 0–10 wt% with ψ = 159 J/mm3 and the full austenite struc-
ture was gained with ψ = 370 J/mm 3 according to the
Schaeffler diagram. It may be associated with that the residual
δ-Fe changed to γ-Fe under high laser energy density or lower
layer thickness.
3.2 Densification behavior
corresponding results by Archimedes method are shown in
Fig. 7. Taking 8.03 g/cm 3 as the reference value, the
ASHM-processed AISI 316L SS samples from 159 J/mm3
(0.7 mm) to 370 J/mm3 (0.3 mm) achieved an average relative
density of 90.74%, 96.35%, 97.69%, and 99.01%, respective-
ly. It is evident from Fig. 7 that the densities of all the speci-
mens still cannot reach 100% and only very close to full-den-
sity, which implied that some limited-defect contents are pre-
sented in the ASHM-manufactured 316L SS specimens. The
relative density of ASHM-processed 316L SS samples de-
creases from 99.01 to 90.74% as the layer thickness (d) in-
creased from 0.3 to 0.7 mm. This was because of the increas-
ing d, and the size of gaps between layers increased. The re-
melted liquid does not effectively fill the empty space in time,
and the complete meltdown of particles is practically impos-
sible because of insufficient laser energy penetration and rapid
solidification between the adjacent layers, thereby increases

The relative densities of the specimens with different laser

energy densities were decided by the Archimedes method in
ethanol (technical purity). It is noteworthy that the average
valve of ψ was carried on several measurements for three
specimens under the same processing parameters and the

Lower Accuracy, material property High

and surface
f ce roughness
surfa

AM ASHM method SM

Part complexity, material utilization

and degree of automation Fig. 4 The XRD patterns of ASHM-manufactured components with
High Lower
different volume energy densities (layer thicknesses): (a) 159 J/mm3
Fig. 3 Characteristics of additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing (0.7 mm); (b) 222 J/mm3 (0.5 mm); (c) 278 J/mm3 (0.4 mm); and (d)
(ASHM) method 370 J/mm3 (0.3 mm)
1590 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596

Fig. 5 Schaeffler constitution diagram revealing the location of the
composition of the 316L powders and the ASHM-processed 316L
samples
the porosity in the ASHM-manufactured 316L SS specimens
that diminishes the relative density. Meanwhile, the degree of
densification level increases as the layer thickness decreases
due to laser energy density delivered to the substrate or as the
previous layer increases.
The SEM images showing the several types of laser-
induced defects that were affected by four different layer
thicknesses, and thus laser energy densities, which occur in
the LMD process under the ASHM process, are presented in
Fig. 8: the variation in the degree of densification, porosity on
the basis of pores size and shape (see the yellow with a circle),
balling phenomenon (see the red arrows in the inset a SEM
micrograph), and thermal cracking (see the green with a
block) following the changing of laser energy density of the
ASHM-fabricated 316L samples. A heterogeneous micro-
structure includes large defects such as pores with irregular
shape and homogeneously dispersion and long cracks at a low
ψ = 159 J/mm3 (i.e., P = 1000 W, v = 9 mm/s, d = 0.7 mm, h =
1 mm). Moreover, a lot of un-melted powders were visible, as
Fig. 7 The effect of different ψ and d on the relative density of ASHM-
processed 316L specimens
shown in Fig. 7(a). The two main reasons which contribute to
un-melted powders are as follows: First, one of the larger
powder is a raw material, one is the balling phenomenon,
which is the major reason that a thicker layer (or lower laser
energy density) has not completely melted because of insuffi-
cient penetration of laser beam into the powder layer and melt
flow instability, which resulted in a comparatively less and
lower-temperature molten pool. It is remarkable that most of
the pores present to the boundary of the layer, suggesting that
a low ψ may lead to delamination and thermal cracking de-
veloped in the ASHM samples. Furthermore, the large internal
thermal stresses resulted in the repeated rapid melting and
solidification, which has promoted the formation of solid-
state cracks—yielding a relatively low densification level
(ρr= 90.74%). At the ψ < 300 J/mm3, a small amount of balls
and un-melted powder particles arise (see the red arrows in the
inset a SEM micrograph of Fig. 8a–c, respectively). In the
LDM process, the balling phenomenon made the melting met-
al develops into droplets to minimize surface tension rather
than uniform distribution on the surface of previous layer and

(a) Element Wt. % (b) Element Wt. %

O 9.12 O 28.75
Si 0.33 Si 10.56
Mn 6.68 Mn 0.77
C 0.21 C 0.28
Cr 19.62 Cr 10.18
Mo 5.08 Mo 7.95
Fe 51.23 Fe 37.93
Ni 7.73 Ni 3.58
Totals 100.00 Totals 100.00

Fig. 6 EDS spectrums of 316L samples by ASHM method with varied laser energy density, a 159 J/mm3 and b 370 J/mm3, as well as the corresponding
inset the element content and the SEM micrographs of the ASHM-processed 316L samples
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596 1591

Fig. 8 SEM micrographs of (a) Un-melted (b)

polished sample surfaces showing Cracks
Irregular powder
the influence of the ψ on the
pores
samples’ average relative density Pores Un-melted
and the presence of defects with 10 m 10 m
powder
various ψ (d), a 159 J/mm3 Long cracks
(0.7 mm), b 222 J/mm3 (0.5 mm), Irregular Cracks
c 278 J/mm3 (0.4 mm), and pores
d 370 J/mm3 (0.3 mm) that occur Pores
in the LMD process under the Pores
Long cracks
ASHM process Irregular
pores Pores

(c) Un-melted (d)

powder
Pores
smaller spherical
Pores 10 m pores 10 m

Pores
Cracks

lead to porosity formation. When the ψ increased to 370 J/
mm3, a quite fine microstructure with no obvious pores or
balling defects were obtained, implying a relatively higher
density increased to 99.01%, the maximum densification level
acquired. This is because a layer thickness of 0.3 mm leads to
the ψ increase. As the ψ is increasing, the temperature in-
creases result in low contact angle and viscosity, as well as
high Marangoni flow, thereby sufficient fluidity to remelt the
previous layer to improve the coherent bonding—promoting
higher densification; nevertheless, such a high value of ψ
gives rise to a number of smaller spherical pores appeared in
the LMD process, which makes it impossible for components
to achieve complete densification as shown in Fig. 8d.
Reasons resulting in such phenomena are relatively higher ψ
can cause the surface vaporization of the metal powder that
produces bubbles to be trapped in the solidification process of
molten pool. Accordingly, the thermo-kinetic and thermo-
at the ψ of 159, 222, 278, and 370 J/mm3 by using optical
microscopy, which presented the grain size varies with the
changing ASHM process parameter conditions. It can be seen
that more micropores and lower dense were presented in the
samples with the lower laser energy density compared with
the higher laser energy density ψ. It is obviously shown that
the average grain size on the horizontal section also increased
in the ASHM-produced 316L samples with the d decreased
from 0.7 to 0.3 mm and the corresponding ψ raised from 159
to 370 J/mm3, which indicates that the cellular dendrites were
markedly coarsened with the increased ψ.
The cooling rate of the molten pool during additive
manufacturing (AM) process by the ΔT Δt , which is strongly re-
liant on the density as the following [31]:
APv =2
1
ΔT
¼ 5 ð2Þ
Δt D =2 ð2ρr CK Þ =2
1

capillary properties, for example, the viscosity, wettability,

and flow behavior of the molten pool should be adjusted rig-
orously to gain the needed structure in the ASHM process.
3.3 Microstructure
The thermal history of parts that occur in the LMD process
under the ASHM process will have an immediate effect on the
microstructure features consisting of surface morphology and
grain size. It may consist of high cooling/solidification rates,
an obvious temperature gradient. Figure 9 demonstrates the
microstructure characteristics of the ASHM process produced
316L stainless steel etched samples on the horizontal section
where A and K are laser absorption and thermal conductivity,
respectively, ρr and C are the density and the specific heat,
respectively, P and v are laser power and laser scanning speed,
respectively, and D represents the diameter of molten pool.
This demonstrates that the cooling rate is predictable given
the density. The results show that the density of molten pool
decreases with the increase in the cooling rate.
According to Eq. (2), it was discovered that the cooling rate
increased gradually with the ψ decreased from 370 to 159 J/
mm3, due to the part density ρr decreased from 99.01 to
90.79%, thereby promoting grain refinement. That was put
1592
Fig. 9 The influence of various a b
process parameters in ψ (d) on the
microstructure of ASHM- Long crack
processed samples at P of
1000 W, v of 9 mm/s, h of 1 mm.
a 159 J/mm3, 0.7 mm. b 222 J/ Pores
mm3,0.5 mm. c 278 J/mm3,
0.4 mm. d 370 J/mm3, 0.3 mm
Pores
c d
Pores
down to the possibility of a larger melt overheating at the
highest ψ with 370 J/mm3; hence, it takes longer to solidify.
Consequently, the higher temperature gradient would proba-
bly precipitate the higher cooling rate, which can lead to the
coarse microstructure of the ASHM-produced 316L samples
as well as the resultant increase of primary dendrite arm spac-
ing (Fig. 9d). With the ψ reduced to 222 J/mm 3 , the
overheating phenomenon is not so conspicuous, so the higher
value of mean interfacial temperature gradient was given,
which results in a faster cooling and finer tissue (Fig. 9b, c).
With a further decrease ψ to 159 J/mm3, the heat is exactly
adequate to melt powder and finest tissue, and the most po-
rosity can be seen in Fig. 8a, implying a relatively fast cooling
rate and shorter molten time of lowest density, in line with the
observation of AlMangour et al. [18] in their studies of SLM-
produced TiC/316L stainless steel nanocomposites. As the ψ
rises, the thermal transfer from the fabricated layers to the
substrate turns to good and the temperature is raised, which
results in sufficient heat accumulation in the molten pool,
thereby the attainment of highest density.
The most desired microstructure with a critical ψ was
gained at the occurrence of the LMD process of 316L pow-
ders, which may be put down to the initiation of a suitable
laser-material interaction that produces enough liquid phase
for the solidification mechanism, restrains the agglomeration
of particles, and improves cooling rates by the ASHM-
manufactured samples [32]. Nevertheless, decreasing the den-
sification level or less-desired microstructures acquired at the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596
Pores
Pores
Pores
Coarse gain
ψ lower or higher than the critical ψ would explain through
relatively shorter or longer laser-material interaction process.
For example, the critical value of ψ, which is higher than what
is required, improves the life span of the existing liquid phase,
thereby promoting balling phenomenon, breakdown in the
molten pool, relatively low cooling speed, which leads to
coarse dendritic structures, on the contrary, yielding the po-
rous microstructure and low density in the ASHM-
manufactured parts.
3.4 Mechanical properties
3.4.1 Microhardness
Hardness is an important mechanical performance indicator,
which is a matter of great concern for the specimens
manufactured by ASHM method due to the special AM pro-
cess. To evaluate the effect of ψ on the average hardness
measured on the cross-sections of the ASHM-fabricated sam-
ples, the Vickers microhardness was measured, and the results
are shown in Fig. 10. And the microhardness value of each
specimen was acquired through averaging 10 measurements
at different locations along a specified orientation.
Meanwhile, along with the insets reflecting the different
Vickers hardness, indentation morphologies corresponding
to variant ψ at the load 1000 gF while loading time is 10 s
are also displayed in Fig. 10. It was obvious that the Vickers
hardness increases from about 201 to 230 HV with ψ
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596
Fig. 10 The average Vickers hardness of ASHM-processed components
under incident P of 1000 W, v of 9 mm/s, h of 1 mm with various ψ
change from 159 to 370 J/mm3
increasing in the range of 159 to 222 J/mm3 but decreasing
from 230 to 212 HV when ψ continued to increase to 370 J/
mm3. This variation tendency is relative to the behavioral
change of the densification behavior and the grain size. Due
to the different microstructures and densities, there was a great
difference in hardness. The maximum average Vickers hard-
ness value of 230 HV was gained with 222 J/mm3. The higher
density behavior was obtained with less defects and more
refined microstructures due to a rapid cooling rate. At ψ =
222 J/mm3, the indentation surface topography was smooth
and in regular diamond shape with only a few defects (i.e.,
small pores and microcracks), which presents a good metal-
lurgical bonding and superior densification level. The mini-
mum hardness was achieved at the ψ value of 159 J/mm3,
which clearly demonstrates that the increased inter-
agglomerate pores and reduced densification level of
ASHM-processed 316L specimens have a significant impact
on the Vickers hardness. There are pores inside the material,
which will cause the material to collapse under load [33].
When the ψ increased from 222 to 370 J/mm3, the downward
trend in the average Vickers hardness to 212 HV appeared
because of the smaller heat gradient and the lower cooling rate
(from the highest ψ corresponding to the thinnest layer thick-
ness d), and the resulting increase in the grain size and the
presence of thermal microcracks tend to lower the hardness
performance.
3.4.2 Tensile property of ASHM samples
For a more comprehensive insight into the influence of the
microstructure on the mechanical behaviors of ASHM-
fabricated components, tensile tests were executed. The room
temperature tensile results of ASHM-processed 316L SS
1593
specimens according to various laser energy densities (ψ) are
shown in Fig. 11. Meanwhile, the insets reflecting the final
dimensions schematic of ASHM-manufactured tensile speci-
mens on the basis of GB/T228.1-2010 are also presented in
Fig. 11. A summary of the material mechanical behaviors
(ultimate tensile strength (UTS), yield strength (YS), and elon-
gation to failure (ETF)) of the specimens manufactured by
ASHM with different laser energy densities and their compar-
ison with the cast materials and the industry requirement for
316L are provided in Table 4. For the ASHM specimens pro-
duced at different laser energy densities, the average value of
three specimens under same conditions acts as statistical val-
ue. The specimens exhibit various UTS ranging from 562.7 to
601.6 MPa, a YS ranging from 380.1 to 420.5 MPa, and the
ETF (or the ductility) ranging from 47.3 to 53.5% during the
ASHM process of the 316L SS specimens (Table 4). When
ψ = 159 J/mm3, the samples exhibits the lowest UTS and YS
of 562.7 MPa and 380.1 MPa, respectively, as the result of the
lower density has a noticeable influence on the inferior tensile
properties but possesses a highest ETF of 53.5% which indi-
cates that the highest ductility was gained at this condition. ψ
has a great effect on the mechanical properties of the ASHM-
processed specimens. As ψ increases to 222 J/mm3, it exhibits
the highest YS and UTS (420.5 MPa and 601.6 MPa, respec-
tively), while the ETF slightly decreases to the minimum
(47.3%), which results in less defects and a relatively high
density level. Moreover, the grain size has already been the
most influential factor in the tensile strength. And the grain
refinements are based on the semi-empirical Hall–Petch (HP)
formula using Eq. (3) [34]:
σ ¼ σ0 þ kd −ð =2 Þ
1
ð3Þ
0
R2
20
10
15
25 20 1.5
96.46
Fig. 11 The tensile stress-strain curve of ASHM-processed specimens
according to various ψ with a P of 1000 W, v of 9 mm/s, h of 1 mm,
and different d of 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and 0.7 mm. The inset shows the
configuration of ASHM-manufactured AISI 316L stainless steel tensile
test specimens according to GB/T228.1-2010
1594
Table 4 Tensile properties of the ASHM-processed 316L SS samples at different laser energy densities and their comparison with cast materials [34]
Conditions YS (MPa)
159 J/mm3 380.1
222 J/mm3 420.5
278 J/mm3 387.4
370 J/mm3 405.3
Cast 262
Industry requirement for 316L 450
where σ, σ0, k, and d represent proof stress, friction stress for
dislocation movement, Hall–Petch coefficient, and grain size,
respectively. Grain boundary strengthening is caused by fac-
tors such as rapid solidification rate, grain boundary disloca-
tion accumulation, and resistance of the dislocations to slip
transfer that occurred in the LMD process. However, with
the further increase of the ψ up to 278 J/mm3, both UTS and
YS decreased to 584.3 MPa and 387.4 MPa, respectively, and
the ductility increase to 49.6% can be observed due to the
cooling rate decrease, in which the grain size is gradually
coarsening. As ψ is further increased from 278 to 370 J/
mm 3 , the UTS decrease from approximately 584.3 to
570.5 MPa, while the ETF and YS increase from 49.6% and
387.4 MPa to 51.8% and 405.3 MPa, respectively; the heat
accumulation in the molten pool is remarkable. Therefore, the
lower cooling rate and longer solidification time significantly
improved the grain size. Despite the strength presenting on the
basis of the position of the model, the tensile fracture comes
into the middle of specimens, as demonstrated by the necking
(Fig. 12) [16]. The YS and UTS of ASHM-fabricated 316L
samples appear much higher than their conventional cast
methods [18] and exceed the industry requirement for 316L
[35], while the ETF is slightly decreased as shown in Table 4.
This is a very common characteristic to the laser-processed
materials owing to the high cooling rate which caused a fine
microstructure with high dislocation density which leads to
the improved YS and UTS, but the inevitable metallurgical
defects such as pores in the ASHM-fabricated samples have
depressed in ductility. Finally, the summary of the experimen-
tal finding for laser energy densities with the corresponding
densification level, tensile strength, yield strength, and
Necking
Fig. 12 Image of a tensile test sample after breakage
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596
UTS (MPa) ETF (%) References
562.7 53.5 Present study
601.6 47.3 Present study
584.3 49.6 Present study
570.5 51.8 Present study
552 55 [21]
170 40 [35]
Vickers microhardness is shown in Table 5.
To further study the fracture mechanism, the tensile frac-
ture the surfaces of ASHM-manufactured components with
various ψ (Fig. 13). From the high magnification SEM im-
ages, all the tensile specimens present ductile fracture charac-
teristics, along with evenly distributing dimples on the whole
fracture surfaces. The lower density at ψ of 159 J/mm3, the
lager voids can be seen on the fracture surfaces, which indi-
cates that it is the local stress concentration and deformation
localization of the surrounding material due to the voids that
cause the complex interaction of cracks and accelerating crack
propagation (Fig. 13a). As ψ increased to 222 or greater
(278 J/mm 3 ), the refined dimples were acquired (Fig.
13b, c). The dimples become larger and shallower when ψ
increases to 370 J/mm3, which indicates that both the YS
and UTS are inferior due to the longer liquid lifetime and
the higher molten pool temperature (Fig. 13d). These results
may contribute to the future study and analysis of more effi-
cient laser processing conditions to refine the cellular den-
drites to make the best of the situation and also improve the
densification level to gain suitable microstructure and me-
chanical behaviors of ASHM-manufactured 316L metallic
parts.
4 Conclusion
316L stainless steel (SS) as one of the basic industry materials
has been widely used to produce a complex 3D piece. In this
study, the additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing (ASHM)
technology, which consists of additive manufacturing (AM)
process and milling process in a single machine, has been used
to build 316L SS specimens. The effect of ψ on the phase
constituents, density, microstructure, and mechanical behav-
iors such as the Vickers microhardness and room temperature
tensile tests of 316L SS samples were studied in detail. The
following major conclusions can be drawn:
1. The different layer thicknesses and the corresponding la-
ser energy densities had different relative densities of
ASHM-processed 316L SS samples. Some degrees of
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596 1595

Table 5 Summary of the ASHM-processed 316L SS samples at different laser energy densities with the corresponding densification level, tensile
strength, yield strength, and Vickers microhardness

Conditions Density YS UTS ETF Hardness

(%) (MPa) (MPa) (%) (HV)

159 J/mm3 90.74 380.1 562.7 53.5 201

222 J/mm3 96.35 420.5 601.6 47.3 230
278 J/mm3 97.69 387.4 584.3 49.6 223
370 J/mm3 99.01 405.3 570.5 51.8 212

defects such as porosity, balling, and hot cracking were
associated with the selected of unsuitable laser processing
parameters, thereby decreasing the densification level of
316L SS parts. The least amount of porosity of 0.99%
gained at the highest ψ = 370 J/mm3, and the lowest
ψ = 159 J/mm3 resulted in larges pores and balling phe-
nomenon due to the increased liquid instability which
leads to the minimum densification behavior of 90.74%.
The thermo-kinetics and thermo-capillary features includ-
ing the viscosity and wettability changed in the molten
pool and thereby affected the densification degree.
2. The dendritic morphology and characteristic microscale
of microstructures of ASHM-processed samples can be
controlled by adjusting the ψ. It is thought to affect the
grain size because of the different temperature gradient
and kinetic cooling rates during the solidification process.
Thereby, the microstructures of the ASHM-processed
316L SS parts revealed a demonstrable coarsening with
the raised ψ due to the decreased cooling rate.
3. The lower densification level or the coarsening grain
gives rise to the limited Vickers microhardness and tensile
property. Moreover, the highest Vickers microhardness of
230 HV, the largest UTS and YS of 601.6 MPa and
420.5 MPa, respectively, and the attendant ETF of
47.3% at the ψ of the optimal value of 222 J/mm3 occur
in the LMD process under the context of the ASHM pro-
cess. The ASHM-processed 316L SS samples all exhibit
ductile fracture morphologies with different laser energy
densities (ψ). Moreover, the tensile strengths of ASHM-
processed 316L samples are much higher than the con-
ventional cast methods and exceed the industry require-
ment for 316L SS due to a high cooling rate.
4. These findings may pave the way for optimizing the
ψ used in manufacturing SS parts that occur in the
LMD under the context of ASHM process to obtain
materials with finer grain sizes and better mechani-
cal behaviors in order to make it more widely used
in every industry.

Fig. 13 High-magnification SEM a b

morphology of tensile fracture
surfaces of ASHM-manufactured Un-melted
samples with different laser Pores
powder
processing parameters. a 159
J/mm3, 0.7 mm. b 222 J/mm3, Un-melted Decently refined dimples
0.5 mm. c 278 J/mm3, 0.4 mm. powder
d 370 J/mm3, 0.3 mm
Un-melted
Un-melted powder
powder
Large crater-like voids

c Un-melted d
powder
Pores
Larger and shallower dimples

Pores
d
Pores elte d
- m r elte Pores
Un-melted Un owde -m r
powder p Un owde
p
1596
Funding information The author wishes to thank the financial support of
the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51775100) and
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.
N180306001).
References
1. Bikas H, Stavropoulos P, Chryssolouris G (2016) Additive
manufacturing methods and modelling approaches: a critical re-
view. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83:389–405
2. Liu Y, Yang YQ, Wang D (2016) A study on the residual stress
during selective laser melting (SLM) of metallic powder. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 87(1–4):647–656
3. Song LJ, Bagavath-Singh V, Dutta B, Mazumder J (2012) Control
of melt pool temperature and deposition height during direct metal
deposition process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 58(1–4):247–256
4. Wei P, Wei ZY, Chen Z, He YY, Du J (2017) Thermal behavior in
single track during selective laser melting of AlSi10Mg powder.
Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 123:604
5. Flynn JM, Shokrani A, Newman ST, Dhokia V (2016) Hybrid
additive and subtractive machine tools-research and industrial de-
velopments. Int J Mach Tool Manu 101:79–101
6. Zhu ZC, Dhokia V, Nassehi A, Newman ST (2016) Investigation of
part distortions as a result of hybrid manufacturing. Robot Cim-int
Manuf 37:23–32
7. Liu JK, To AC (2017) Topology optimization for hybrid additive-
subtractive manufacturing. Struct Multidiscip O 55(4):1281–1299
8. Du W, Bai Q, Zhang B (2018) Machining characteristics of 18Ni-
300 steel in additive/subtractive hybrid manufacturing. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 95(5–8):2509–2519
9. Song YA, Park S, Choi D, Jee H (2005) 3D welding and milling:
part I–a direct approach for freeform fabrication of metallic proto-
types. Int J Mach Tool Manu 45(9):1057–1062
10. Zhu Z, Dhokia V, Newman ST, Nassehi A (2014) Application of a
hybrid process for high precision manufacture of difficult to ma-
chine prismatic parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 74(5–8):1115–1132
11. Olaknmi EO, Cochrane RF, Dalgarno KW (2015) A review on
selective laser sintering/melting (SLS/SLM) of aluminium alloy
powders: processing, microstructure, and properties. Prog Mater
Sci 74:401–477
12. Ning JQ, Sievers DE, Garmestani H, Liang SY (2019) Analytical
modeling of in-process temperature in powder bed additive
manufacturing considering laser power absorption, latent heat,
scanning strategy, and powder packing. Materials 12(5):808–824
13. Ning JQ, Mirkoohi E, Dong YZ, Sievers DE, Garmestani H, Liang
SY (2019) Analytical modeling of 3D temperature distribution in
selective laser melting of Ti-6Al-4V considering part boundary
conditions. J Manuf Process 44:319–326
14. Ning JQ, Sievers DE, Garmestani H, Liang SY (2019) Analytical
modeling of transient temperature in powder feed metal additive
manufacturing during heating and cooling stages. Appl Phys A
125:496
15. Ma MM, Wang ZM, Wang DZ, Zeng XY (2013) Control of shape
and performance for direct laser fabrication of precision large-scale
metal parts with 316L stainless steel. Opt Laser Technol 45:209–
216
16. Chen W, Yin GF, Feng Z, Liao XM (2018) Effect of powder feed-
stock on microstructure and mechanical properties of the 316L
stainless steel fabricated by selective laser melting. Metals 8(9):729
17. Wang D, Song CH, Yang YQ, Bai YC (2016) Investigation of
crystal growth mechanism during selective laser melting and me-
chanical property characterization of 316L stainless steel parts.
Mater Des 100:291–299
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2019) 105:1585–1596
18. AlMangour B, Grzesiak D, Borkar T, Yang JM (2018)
Densification behavior, microstructural evolution, and mechanical
properties of TiC/316L stainless steel nanocomposites fabricated
by selective laser melting. Mater Des 138:119–128
19. Ma MM, Wang ZM, Gao M, Zeng XY (2015) Layer thickness de-
pendence of performance in high-power selective laser melting of
1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 215:142–150
20. Ciurana J, Hernandez L, Delgado J (2013) Energy density analysis
on single tracks formed by selective laser melting with CoCrMo
powder material. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(5–8):1103–1110
21. Wang D, Mai SZ, Xiao DM, Yang YQ (2016) Surface quality of the
curved overhanging structure manufactured from 316-L stainless
steel by SLM. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:781–792
22. Casati R, Lemke J, Vedani M (2016) Microstructure and fracture
behavior of 316L austenitic stainless steel produced by selective
laser melting. J Mater Sci Technol 32:738–744
23. Yusuf SM, Nie MY, Chen Y, Yang SF, Gao N (2018) Microstructure
and corrosion performance of 316L stainless steel fabricated by
selective laser melting and processed through high-pressure torsion.
J Alloys Compd 763:360–375
24. Das S (2003) Physical aspects of process control in selective laser
sintering of metals. Adv Eng Mater 5(10):701–711
25. Pastras G, Fysikopoulos A, Chryssolouris G (2018) A numerical
approach to the energy efficiency of laser welding. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 92(1–4):1243–1253
26. Simchi A, Pohl H (2003) Effects of laser sintering processing pa-
rameters on the microstructure and densification of iron powder.
Mater Sci Eng A-Struct 359(1–2):119–128
27. Sun Y, Gong YD, Yin GQ, Cai M, Li PF (2018) Experimental study
on surface quality and machinability of Ti-6Al-4V rotated parts
fabricated by low-speed wire electrical discharge turning. Int J
Adv Manuf Technol 95:2601–2611
28. Yang YY, Gong YD, Qu SS, Rong YL, Sun Y, Cai M (2018)
Densification, surface morphology, microstructure and mechanical
properties of 316L fabricated by hybrid manufacturing. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 97(5–8):2687–2696
29. Gong YD, Qu SS, Yang YY, Liang CY, Li PF, She YB (2019) Some
observations in grinding SiC and silicon carbide ceramic matrix
composite material. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 103:3175–3186
30. Qu SS, Gong YD, Yang YY, Cai M, Sun Y (2018) Surface topog-
raphy and roughness of silicon carbide ceramic matrix composites.
Ceram Int 44:14742–14753
31. Hofmeister W, Griffith M, Ensz M, Smugeresky J (2001)
Solidification in direct metal deposition by LENS processing.
Jom-usl 53:30–34
32. Thompson SM, Bian LK, Shamsaei N, Yadollahi A (2015) An over-
view of direct laser deposition for additive manufacturing; part I: trans-
port phenomena, modeling and diagnostics. Addit Manuf 8:36–62
33. Cherry JA, Davies HM, Mehmood S, Lavery NP, Brown SGR,
Sienz J (2015) Investigation into the effect of process parameters
on microstructural and physical properties of 316L stainless steel
parts by selective laser melting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 76:869–
879
34. Li W, Li S, Liu J, Zhang A, Zhou Y, Wei QS, Yan CZ, Shi YS
(2016) Effect of heat treatment on AlSi10Mg alloy fabricated by
selective laser melting: microstructure evolution, mechanical prop-
erties and fracture mechanism. Mater Sci Eng A-Struct 663:116–
125
35. Chen CH, Li J, Cheng X, He B, Wang HM, Huang Z (2017)
Microstructure and mechanical properties of the austenitic stainless
steel 316L fabricated by gas metal arc additive manufacturing.
Mater Sci Eng A-Struct 703:567–577
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.