Rapid Prototyping Journal

Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting

Peter Mercelis Jean-Pierre Kruth
Article information:
To cite this document:
Peter Mercelis Jean-Pierre Kruth, (2006),"Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting", Rapid
Prototyping Journal, Vol. 12 Iss 5 pp. 254 - 265
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552540610707013
Downloaded on: 20 May 2015, At: 05:17 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 10 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3235 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
J-P. Kruth, P. Mercelis, J. Van Vaerenbergh, L. Froyen, M. Rombouts, (2005),"Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering
and selective laser melting", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 11 Iss 1 pp. 26-36 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552540510573365
J.P. Kruth, X. Wang, T. Laoui, L. Froyen, (2003),"Lasers and materials in selective laser sintering", Assembly Automation, Vol.
23 Iss 4 pp. 357-371 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01445150310698652
Ben Vandenbroucke, Jean-Pierre Kruth, (2007),"Selective laser melting of biocompatible metals for rapid manufacturing of
medical parts", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 13 Iss 4 pp. 196-203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552540710776142

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 543672 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering
and selective laser melting
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth
Division PMA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Abstract
Purpose – This paper presents an investigation into residual stresses in selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting (SLM), aiming at a
better understanding of this phenomenon.
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Design/methodology/approach – First, the origin of residual stresses is explored and a simple theoretical model is developed to predict residual
stress distributions. Next, experimental methods are used to measure the residual stress profiles in a set of test samples produced with different process
parameters.
Findings – Residual stresses are found to be very large in SLM parts. In general, the residual stress profile consists of two zones of large tensile
stresses at the top and bottom of the part, and a large zone of intermediate compressive stress in between. The most important parameters determining
the magnitude and shape of the residual stress profiles are the material properties, the sample and substrate height, the laser scanning strategy and the
heating conditions.
Research limitations/implications – All experiments were conducted on parts produced from stainless steel powder (316L) and quantitative results
cannot be simply extrapolated to other materials. However, most qualitative results can still be generalized.
Originality/value – This paper can serve as an aid in understanding the importance of residual stresses in SLS/SLM and other additive manufacturing
processes involving a localized heat input. Some of the conclusions can be used to avoid problems associated with residual stresses.

Keywords Sintering, Lasers, Stress (materials)

Paper type Research paper

Introduction parameters on the residual stress can be concluded. Finally,

Selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser melting
(SLM) are two production technologies offering great
advantages and opportunities compared to traditional
material removal techniques (Kruth et al., 2003, 2004).
However, the residual stresses that arise in the parts being
produced impose some serious limitations to the practical use,
since they introduce part deformations and/or micro cracks.
Moreover, large residual stresses can limit the load resistance of
the parts compared to a stress free state.
In the field of Laser Engineered Net Shaping, a lot of effort
has been done to measure, predict and control residual
stresses (Vasinonta et al., 2000; Aggarangsi and Beuth, 2003).
Whereas researchers mainly focussed on the stresses in the
growth-direction at the substrate-part connection, the current
research will focus on the stresses perpendicular to the build
direction, and their variation along the build direction.
In order to investigate the residual stresses, the origin of the
stresses is firstly explained. Next, a simple theoretical model is
presented to predict the basic residual stress distribution.
Using an experimental procedure, residual stress profiles are
then measured in a set of test samples having different kinds
of process parameters. Thus, the effect of the process
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2546.htm
some guidelines are presented to reduce the residual stress in
SLS and SLM.
The difference between SLS and SLM concerns the
binding mechanism that occurs between the powder particles
(Kruth et al., 2004). In SLS, either a combination of a low
melting binder and high melting structural material is used -
called liquid phase sintering (LPS) or the powder particles are
just partially molten. In case of LPS, a post treatment is
generally necessary to enhance the mechanical properties and
to increase the part’s density. In SLM, the powder particles
are fully molten. Since the border between SLS and SLM is
rather vague, the stress inducing mechanisms are explained
generally for the case of SLM. In the case of partial melting
without infiltration, the same stress inducing mechanisms will
occur. On the other hand, in the case of the LPS mechanism,
the furnace cycle that is used to infiltrate the parts, will result
in stress relaxation, so the resulting parts can be expected to
be stress free.
The origin of residual stresses
Residual stresses are stresses that remain inside a material, when
it has reached equilibrium with its environment. Residual stresses
are generally classified according to the scale at which they occur
(Withers and Bhadeshia, 2001). This investigation includes only

This research was funded by the IAP project P5-08 of the Belgian Federal
Science Policy and the GOA/2002/06 project from KU Leuven.
Rapid Prototyping Journal
12/5 (2006) 254– 265 Received: 1 January 2006
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1355-2546] Revised: 1 March 2006
[DOI 10.1108/13552540610707013] Accepted: 23 June 2006

254
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

type I residual stresses, which vary over large distances, namely
the dimensions of the part. These macro stresses can result in
large deformations of the part. Type II and type III residual
stresses, which occur due to different phases in the material and
due to dislocations at atomic scale, are not considered in this
study, since they are of less importance for the material’s
strength. Moreover, the measurement resolution of most test
methods is not small enough to measure type II and type III
residual stresses.
Residual stresses are not always disadvantageous, e.g. glass
plates are many times rapidly cooled to introduce compressive
stress in the surface area of the plate, thus increasing the
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)
thus introducing tensile stress in the added top layer and
compressive stress below.
Simplified theoretical model
To get an idea of the residual stress profiles that would be
found in SLM samples, a simplified theoretical model was
developed. Assume that a part is being built on top of a base
plate with height hb. The part that was built so far has height
hp and the layer thickness is t (Figure 2). This simple
theoretical model assumes that:
.
the base plate and the part being built are at room

overall loading resistance and preventing crack growth at temperature;

the surface. However, in most cases, residual stresses are .
the upper layer induces stress due to its shrinkage (aDT);
unwanted, since they result in deformations from the tensile stress is equal to the material’s yield strength s
the intended shape. Moreover, tensile pre-stress adds to the (since a strain of aDT would result in a stress much larger
stresses caused by external loading, thus reducing the strength than the material’s yield strength);
of the parts and favoring propagation of cracks from the .
the stress sxx is independent of the y coordinate, i.e. the
surface. variation of the normal stress across the part’s width is
Each production process introduces some amount of neglected;
residual stress (Withers and Bhadeshia, 2001). However, the .
the general beam theory is valid; and
amount of residual stress that is introduced varies a lot among .
no external forces are applied to the combination part-
different production processes. Laser based processes (laser base plate.
welding, SLM, etc.) are known to introduce large amounts of
residual stress, due to the large thermal gradients which are At each moment, the equilibria of force equation (1) and
inherently present in the processes. In case of laser bending, moment equation (2) need to be obeyed, since there are no
these stresses are, e.g. used to deform sheet metal plates to a external forces acting on the system:
desired shape. Two mechanisms can be distinguished which Z
cause residual stresses. sxx ðzÞdz ¼ 0 ð1Þ
The first mechanism introducing residual stress is called the Z
temperature gradient mechanism (TGM, Figure 1). It results sxx ðzÞzdz ¼ 0 ð2Þ
from the large thermal gradients that occur around the laser
spot. The TGM mechanism is commonly used for laser
bending of sheets along straight lines. Owing to the rapid Owing to the continuity of the deformation at the border
heating of the upper surface by the laser beam and the rather between the base plate, following strain profile is assumed
slow heat conduction, a steep temperature gradient develops. over the combination base plate-part:
The material strength simultaneously reduces due to the e xx ðzÞ ¼ az þ b ð3Þ
temperature rise. Since the expansion of the heated top layer
is restricted by the underlying material, elastic compressive Owing to the different stiffness of the base plate and the part
strains are induced. When the material’s yield strength is material, this deformation results in different stress levels; the
reached, the top layer will be plastically compressed. In stress profile reveals a jump at the border between the base
absence of mechanical constraints, a counter bending away plate and the part. Suppose that m represents the ratio of base
from the laser beam would be perceived. During cooling the plate stiffness to the part’s stiffness:
plastically compressed upper layers start shrinking and a E base
m¼ ð4Þ
bending angle towards the laser beam develops. This E part
mechanism is also present in SLS and SLM, where the
underlying layers inhibit the expansion of the heated top Using this assumption, the equilibrium conditions can be
layers. It is important to notice that this mechanism does not rewritten as:
require the material to be molten. Figure 2 Simplified theoretical model of the SLM process
A second mechanism that induces residual stresses is the
cool-down phase of the molten top layers (in SLM). The
latter tend to shrink due to the thermal contraction. This
deformation is again inhibited by the underlying material,

Figure 1 TGM inducing residual stress

255
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

Z hb Z hb þhp Z hb þhp þt
Figure 3 Residual stress in the part and the base plate
mðazþbÞdzþ ðazþbÞdzþ s
dz ¼ 0 ð5Þ
0 hb hb þhp
Z hb Z hb þhp Z hb þhp þt
mðazþbÞzdzþ ðazþbÞzdzþ s
zdz ¼ 0 ð6Þ
0 hb hb þhp

From equations (5) and (6), the coefficients a and b can be

derived:
ð2mhb hp þ mhb hp t þ h2p þ hp t þ mh2b Þ
a ¼ 26s
t ð7Þ
ð4mh3b hp þ h4p þ m2 h4b þ 6mh2b h2s þ 4mhb h3p Þ
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

ð2mh3b þ 6hp mh2b þ 3mh2b t þ 6hb h2p þ 6hb hp t þ 2h3p þ 3h2p tÞ

b ¼ s
t
ð4mh3b hp þ h4p þ m2 h4b þ 6mh2b h2s þ 4mhb h3p Þ
ð8Þ

Equations (5) and (6) assume that the part and the base plate
are equally wide. Usually the base plate is wider than the part.
Including the widths of the part and the base plate in the
equations would result in a different m factor: m ¼ Ebasewbase/
Influence of number of layers, base plate geometry and
Epartwpart. The influence of a wider base plate can thus be
material properties
simulated by increasing the E modulus of the base plate.
Number of layers
After the production, the parts produced are generally
Figure 5 shows the influence of the number of layers on the
removed from the base plate. To simulate this, a relaxation
residual stress profile. Before part removal, the stress in the part
stress must be added to the stress profile calculated in the
equals the yield strength at the top. However, when the number
part. This relaxation stress has a linear profile (z 0 ¼ z-hb,
of layers keeps increasing, compressive stresses occur at the
Figure 2):
bottom of the part. It can also be seen that the stresses in
srelaxation ðz0 Þ ¼ cz0 þ d ð9Þ the base plate become very large, so plastic deformation of the
base plate could occur. However, this behaviour is not included
The constant part of the relaxation stress corresponds to a
in the model. After part removal, a more or less symmetrical
uniform shrinkage of the part that is being removed from the
stress profile remains in the part. At the top and bottom of the
base plate. The linear part results in a curvature of the part.
part, tensile residual stress remains, with a zone of compressive
The coefficients c and d can be determined by recalculating
stress in between. The tensile residual stress is somewhat larger
the equilibrium conditions for the produced part (with hc the
at the bottom than at the top surface.
height of the part in the new coordinate system X, Y, Z0 ): Figure 6 shows the influence of the number of layers on the
Rh Rh
22 0c z0 sðz0 Þdz0 þ hc 0c sðz0 Þdz0 relaxation stresses. It can be seen that the constant part,
c ¼ 26 ð10Þ which relates to the shrinkage in X direction, is reduced by
h3c
adding more layers, while the linear part is increased.
R hc 0 0
R hc 0 0 0
0 sðz Þdz 2 3hc 0 z sðz Þdz
However, one should not conclude that this would increase
d ¼ 2hc ð11Þ the part’s bending deformation, since the surface moment of
h2c
inertia increases with the number of layers (according to h3).

Base plate geometry

Theoretical residual stress profiles
When a layer is added to the base plate, it induces a
compressive stress in the upper part of the base plate and a
tensile stress in the lower part. When successive layers are
added on top, each layer induces a certain stress profile in the
base plate, but also in the underlying solidified layers, thus
reducing the initial tensile stress present in these layers.
Figure 3 shows the resulting stress profile in the part and
baseplate, after 50 layers (properties: base plate
thickness ¼ 20 mm, E base ¼ 210 GPa, Epart ¼ 110 GPa,
t ¼ 50 mm, s ¼ 300 MPa). It can be seen that the stress at
the last added layer equals the yield stress of the material.
When the part is removed from the base plate, the stress state
in the part is drastically changed; due to the relaxation, the
resulting stress in the part will be much lower. The constant part
of the relaxation stress corresponds to the shrinkage of the part,
whereas the linear part of the relaxation stress corresponds to
the bending deformation. Figure 4 shows the relaxation
principle and the resulting stress in the part.
Since the model assumes that the general beam bending theory
is valid, the width of the base plate can be combined with its E
modulus to represent the stiffness. The base plate height,
however, must be treated separately. Figure 7 shows the
influence of the base plate height on the stress profiles.
According to this simple theoretical model, the height of the
base plate has a clear influence on the residual stress
distribution. Before part removal, a higher height results in a
lower stress level in the base plate itself and a more uniform
stress level in the part. This means that a thick base plate results
in a smaller deformation due to part removal, compared to a
thin base plate. Since almost all stress is released by a uniform
shrinkage, only little residual stress remains in the part after
removal. Figure 8 shows the influence of the base plate height on
the relaxation stress components.
Material properties
Figure 9 shows the influence of the material’s yield strength
on the residual stress being developed. The higher the yield

256
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

Figure 4 Relaxation of the residual stress and resulting stress in the part
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Figure 5 Influence of the number of layers on the residual stress profile

Figure 6 Influence of the number of layers on the relaxation stress strength, the higher the stresses being developed. The stresses
after part removal are also larger.

Conclusions
.
Stress profiles before removal consist of a large zone
of tensile stress at the upper zone of the part being built. The
maximum stress is reached at the surface of the part (equal to
the yield stress). The stress reduces with decreasing Z
values. The lower part of the base plate is under tensile
stress, the upper part is under compressive stress.
.
Part removal drastically reduces the residual stresses
which are present in the part; the residual stress relaxes by
a uniform shrinkage and a bending deformation. The
residual stress after removal consists of a zone of tensile
stress at the upper and lower zone of the part and a
compressive stress zone in between. The stresses after part
removal are much smaller than before part removal.

257
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

Figure 7 Influence of the base plate height on the residual stress profile
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Figure 8 Influence of the base plate height on the relaxation stress components

Figure 9 Influence of the materials yield strength on the residual stress profile

258
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth
.
The more layers are added, the larger the final residual
stress will be. The shrinkage along the X axis will reduce
when the amount of layers increases.
. The thicker the base plate, the smaller the resulting
residual stresses will be (for a fixed part thickness). A very
thick base plate results in a large shrinkage in X direction,
while the bending deformation becomes smaller. A thin
base plate height results in high residual stresses in the
part and in a high bending deformation.
.
The higher the yield strength of the added material, the
higher the resulting residual stresses.
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)
Experimental measurement of residual stress: the
Crack compliance method
In order to measure the residual stresses in the parts, a novel
experimental model is used, based on measurement of the
part’s deformation when the stresses are relieved. The method
is called the “Crack Compliance Method” (CCM) (Prime,
1999; Nowell et al., 2000). Compared with “traditional” test
methods like X-ray diffraction or hole drilling, this method
has the advantage that trough-thickness measurements can be
performed in a simple and cheap way (Schindler, 2000). The
method will be shortly explained first, without discussing
the mathematical implementation in detail.
Figure 10 shows a sample in which an unknown residual stress
distribution sxx(z) is present. This stress distribution is
supposed to be independent from the Y coordinate. One or
more strain gauges are connected to the sample’s surface at
known positions. Next, the part is cut in subsequent small steps
using wire electric discharge machining (EDM). After each
cutting step, the strain is measured at each strain gauge position.
Suppose that the unknown stress distribution can be written
as a series expansion of functions Pj (z).
X
n produced, having a known stress distribution. The four point
sxx ðzÞ ¼ Aj P j ðzÞ ¼ ½P
{A}
j¼1
The set of basic functions Pj (z) can be polynomials, Fourier
series, etc. Legendre polynomials are generally chosen, since
these polynomials (from order 2 on) automatically obey the
equilibrium conditions of force and moment. For each basic
function Pj (z) we can now calculate the strain profiles that
would be measured at the strain gauge locations, if this basic
function was the actual residual stress profile. These
calculations are generally performed using a finite element
method[1]. The calculated strains, belonging to each of the
basic functions, are referred to as “compliances” Cj (di). Using
the superposition principle, the total strain due to the sum of
all the basic functions can be written as:
Figure 10 Schematic representation of test sample
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265
X
n
e xx ðzÞ ¼ Aj C j ðzÞ ¼ ½C
{A} ð13Þ
j¼1
From equation (13), the coefficients Aj can be calculated
using a least-squares fitting algorithm:
{A} ¼ ð½C T
½C
Þ21 ½C
T {e measured } ð14Þ
Substitution of the coefficients [A ] in equation (12) results in
the residual stress profile.
Figure 11 shows the compliance functions that were
calculated for the selected top face and back face strain
gauge positions.
In practise, the strains are measured at two locations, while
the parts are being cut by wire-EDM. Figure 12 shows the
practical setup.
Experimental results
Test of the CCM method
In order to evaluate the suitability of the Crack compliance
method to do residual stress tests on SLM samples, and to
check the FEM model being used, some initial experiments
were performed on samples with a know residual stress
distribution.
A first tests performs a stress measurement on an
aluminium sample that was heated up to 2008C for 1 h and
cooled in air, to remove all residual stresses. Figure 13 shows
the stress distribution that was calculated from the strain
measurements. As it can be seen, the stress level of 0 MPa lies
within the two sigma uncertainty bound (95 per cent
confidence limit) at most points.
Using a four point bending setup some test samples were
ð12Þ bending test ensures a constant bending moment between the
two middle contact points. The samples were bent until
plastic deformation occurs at the upper and lower zones of the
parts. After removing the force, a new equilibrium is formed,
that can be calculated from the recorded force values and the
yield strength. Figure 14 shows the calculated stress profile for
one of the test samples. The stress distribution that is
calculated this way, assumes that the samples are bent
according to the general beam bending theory. It also assumes
a perfect elastic-plastic behaviour of the material, with a clear
yield strength; in reality the real stress profile could be slightly
different, but the general tendencies are assumed to be
correct.
Figure 15 shows the stress profile that is calculated from the
measured strains. It can be seen that the calculated stress
distribution matches the “known” stress profile rather well.
However, at some points large deviations occur.
Figure 16 shows the calculated stress distribution for a
second test sample. In this case, the deviations are much
larger. This is due to the steepness of the “real” stress profile,
which cannot be fit accurately with the set of Legendre
polynomials that is being used. This is shown in Figure 17
which shows the optimal fit of the “real” stress profile using
the Legendre polynomials up to order 7. In order to fit these
sharp peaks accurately, higher order polynomials are
necessary. When sharp peaks are expected in a residual
stress profile, the Legendre polynomials are therefore not the
259
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth
Figure 11 Top face (left) and back face (right) compliance functions for 2nd-9th order Legendre polynomials
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)
Figure 12 Practical setup of the CCM method
Figure 13 Calculated stress distribution in a stress free Al test sample
ideal ones and other types of basic functions are favorable.
However, from the theoretical model there is no reason to
expect sharp peaks in the residual stress profiles, thus the
Legendre polynomials with their inherent force and moment
equilibrium were used.
260
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265
Description of test samples
Table I summarizes the most important test parameters of the
test samples that were all built on a concept laser M3 linear
machine. All test samples were produced from a standard
stainless steel powder (grade 316L). The parts were built on
top of a 15 mm thick stainless steel substrate plate.
Influence of the exposure strategy
The exposure strategy of the laser beam highly influences the
thermal gradients which occur in the parts being produced.
To test the influence of the exposure strategy on the residual
stresses, a set of test samples was made using different
scanning strategies. Figure 18 shows the different exposure
strategies that were used.
The “line Y” part is scanned along the Y axis and is thus
also referred to as “short track” scanning, while the “line X”
part will be named “long track” scanning. To test the
influence of the sector scanning, two different sector sizes
were used: 5 by 5 mm and 10 by 10 mm. The position of the
islands is shifted in X and Y direction between successive
layers. The sector scanned parts discussed in this paragraph
are all scanned according to a certain patented pattern, which
minimizes the thermal influence of previous scanned sectors
on the next scanned sector. The influence of the sector
scanning order is investigated in the next paragraph.
Figure 19 shows the stress distributions that were measured
for the exposure strategies. Some important conclusions can
be derived:
.
all stress profiles correspond to the general tendency of a
small zone with high tensile stresses at the top of the part,
followed by broad zone of compressive stress and again a
small zone of tensile residual stress;
.
there is a clear difference between “short track” scanning
and “long track” scanning: scanning along the Y direction
results in the largest values for sxx, while scanning along
the X direction results in the smallest sxx values;
.
division of the part surface in smaller sectors yields an
intermediate stress level; the top layer stress lies between
the stress resulting from “long” and “short” scanning of
the whole part surface; and
.
there is no significant difference in the resulting stress
profile between 5 and 10 mm sector size.
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

Figure 14 Calculated stress distribution in bent test sample 1 Figure 17 Optimal fit of the real stress profile of test sample 2 using
Legendre polynomials up to order 7
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Figure 15 Calculated and measured stress distribution in bent test Table I Parameters used for the production of all test samples
sample 1
Length 50 mm
Width 10 mm
Height 10.5 mm
Laser power 100 W
Scanning speed 400 mm/s
Scan spacing 140 mm
Layer thickness 30 mm

Figure 18 Different exposure strategies

Figure 16 Calculated and measured stress distribution in bent test

sample 2 Figure 19 Measured stress distributions for different exposure strategies

261
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

A possible explanation for the reduction of the maximal Figure 21 Measured stress distributions for different sector exposure
stress level in case of sector scanning, is the fact that the orders
stress at the borders of each individual sector -that has no
neighbouring sectors yet -is zero, since no material exhibits
its contraction at the sector borders (Figure 20). When
more sectors are added, neighbouring sectors are connected
and the stress level also rises at the sector borders.
However, the overall stress level will be still be lower than
the maximum stress level in case of simple line scanning in
the perpendicular direction.

Influence of the sector scanning order

Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Knowing that a subdivision of the part surface can reduce the

largest tensile stresses that occur in the upper layers of the
parts, the question remains how to expose these sectors.
There are number of ways to do so. Three different exposure
orders were tested in the investigation, all with the same sector
size (3-3 mm):
1 scanning of the sectors along the width of the part;
2 scanning the sectors along the length of the part; and
3 scanning the sectors in a randomized order, minimizing
the mutual thermal influence of the different sectors.
Since the exposure order of the sector influences the thermal
gradients that occur, it also affects the level of residual stress
in the parts. Figure 21 shows the difference between the two
first exposure orders. It can be seen that scanning the sectors
along the width of the part yields a larger sxx value at the top
of the part, than scanning along the part’s length. This is no
surprise, since the exposure order along the part width
corresponds to the “short track” scanning strategy, if the
sector size goes to zero. The stress level in case of the
randomized scanning order was comparable to the stress level
when scanning along the length of the part (red curve in
Figure 21), however, a bad top face strain reading resulted in
a high uncertainty border.
by increasing the scan speed accordingly. Each of the parts was
scanned with a “short track” exposure strategy, as well for the
normal scanning as the post scanning step. Figure 22 shows the
measured stress distributions for the 50 and 100 per cent post
scanning levels, compared to the case without post scanning. It
can clearly be seen that the 50 per cent post scanning level
reduces the tensile stress in the upper zone of the part (from
120 ^ 7 to 84 ^ 11 MPa). Scanning each layer twice with the
normal scanning parameters (100 per cent) does not reduce the
residual stresses inside the part; the already solidified layer is
simply remelted partially and the same residual stress
distribution remains. The stress reducing effect of heating the
underlying layers could result in a reduction of stress levels, but
it is cancelled out by the TGM mechanism that introduces new
stress inside the part.

Post scanning of the produced parts X-ray diffraction experiments

To simulate a stress reducing heat treatment, post scanning of
the part surface was investigated. After the normal exposure of
each layer, the same layer was exposed again with the laser, at a
lower energy level. Four parts were tested, with a post scanning
energy of 10, 33, 50 and 100 per cent of the normal layer energy,
Figure 20 Sector scanning mechanism leading zero normal stress the
first sector borders
The Crack compliance method that was used in the
experiments, offered the possibility to measure the residual
stress trough the thickness of the test samples, unlike more
traditional XRD and hole drilling stress measurement
methods. Alas, the Crack compliance method fails to
measure the stress at the part surface very accurately,
Figure 22 Measured stress distributions for different post-scanning
parameters

262
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting Rapid Prototyping Journal
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265

because of several reasons, some of which were already Figure 24 XRD result with stress free dummy sample
mentioned before:
.
The first useful data point is the strain value recorded at
the first cut depth. Therefore, the stress at the part surface
is already an extrapolation of the calculated stress profile.
.
The first few stress readings are rather small (less than
5 mm strain), and the uncertainty on these readings is
therefore relatively large, resulting in a large stress
uncertainty near the upper surface.
.
The top face strain readings are very sensitive to the exact
distance between the gauge and the edge of the cut. A
slight positioning error of the top face gauge results in a
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

large variation in the top face strains, causing erroneous

results near the surface.
To cope with the large uncertainty of the stress readings near
the surface, additional XRD tests were performed on several
SLM samples. Due so practical size limitations, the SLM
samples tested with the Crack compliance method, could not
be tested using XRD, so a different set of test samples was in the etching step and a zero stress value is measured indeed
produced. in X and Y direction.
The X-ray diffraction stress measurements were performed Owing to the removal of the upper layer, the stress values
on a Siemens D500 diffractometer. The diffraction peak of that are measured are not any more the values at the upper
the 316L stainless steel material at a 2u angle of 1478 was used layer of the SLM part. However, the total removed thickness
to measure the peak shift. of about 120 mm is small enough compared to the total height
of the XRD test samples (10.5 mm) to consider them as the
Sample preparation
top layer stress values.
A first X-ray diffraction experiment on a untreated SLM
The influence of the base plate removal step is shown in
sample, resulted in a stress level of 12 ^ 7 MPa. This
Figure 25. The sample that was tested was exposed with a
unrealistically low value was caused by the roughness of the
top surface. Since the X-rays penetrate the material only to a random sector exposure. Thus, the stresses are equally large
depth of about 30 mm, large roughness values prohibit a in X and Y direction. The same sample was then cut from its
correct stress measurement. base plate and was measured again. It is clear that the base
To cope with this problem, an EDM finishing cut was used plate removal yields a large reduction of the stress levels.
to remove the peaks from the surface. However, the EDM The influence of the number of layers was investigated by
operation itself introduces large tensile stresses in a ^ 40 mm testing a series of three samples, having a height of 2.5, 5 and
thick zone below the surface (Kruth and Bleys, 2000), which 10 mm, respectively. The base plate was removed with all
deteriorates the measurement result. Therefore, the thermally samples. All three samples were scanned without dividing the
influenced layer from the EDM operation was removed by surface in sectors, to check the influence of the scanning
chemically etching a small top layer from the samples[2]. direction on the residual stresses. Figure 26 shows the axis
Figure 23 shows the sample preparation steps schematically. orientation and the exposure strategy that was used. From
Figure 24 shows the results of three different XRD Figure 27 it can clearly be seen that the sample height has a
measurement on a stress free dummy sample that was used large influence on the residual stress level, as expected from
to check the influence of the sample preparation steps. the theoretical model. Furthermore, Figure 27 shows the
The first XRD measurement indicates a low but non-zero influence of the scanning direction on the residual stresses;
stress value in X direction (the Y direction was not
measured). The non-zero value was probably caused by the Figure 25 Influence of base plate removal
presence of a small oxide layer resulting from the heat
treatment. Next, the dummy sample was cut with wire-EDM
on a finishing regime. The second XRD measurement reveals
very large stress values X and Y direction. There is no
significant difference between the direction of the cut and the
direction of the wire. The third XRD measurement indicates
the stress values after the etching step. It is clear that the small
thermally influence layer of the EDM process is removed

Figure 23 XRD sample preparation steps

263
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth
Figure 26 Exposure strategy and axis orientation
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)
Figure 27 Influence of the sample height
the stresses perpendicular to the scanning direction are
significantly larger than the stresses along the scanning
direction. This result corresponds to the Crack compliance
experiments.
Since residual stresses arise from temperature gradients,
heating up the build platform can reduce the stress levels
present in the parts (Over, 2003),(Vasinonta et al., 2000). To
validate this assumption the build platform was heated up to
2008C. Figure 28 shows the effect of the raised based plate
temperature. It is clear that the stresses are reduced by the
base plate heating. However, the stress reduction is rather
poor. It can be expected that a higher base plate heating
temperature will result in a greater stress reduction. Like
Figure 27, Figure 28 also clearly indicates the influence of the
scanning direction.
In general, there is a good qualitative agreement between
the theoretical model, the Crack compliance experiments and
the XRD tests. However, a quantitative comparison is not
easy, because of several reasons:
.
The theoretical model calculates the stresses resulting
from the shrinkage of the added molten layers. It does not
include the TGM, which induces extra residual stresses.
.
The sample geometry of the Crack compliance test
samples and the XRD samples was different, due to
practical reasons.
.
The Crack compliance test samples and the first batch of
XRD test samples, used non optimized scanning
264
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265
Figure 28 Influence of base plate heating
parameters, which appeared to contain a rather high
degree of porosity. This resulted in stress values much
lower than in the case of full density, since the stress
equals zero at each porosity border. The XRD samples
from Figures 27 and 28 were build with optimized
scanning parameters, yielding nearly 100 per cent density
and having much higher stress values.
Conclusions
This paper presented a theoretical and experimental
investigation on residual stresses in SLS and SLM. A simple
theoretical model could predict the basic shape of the
residual stress profile of a basic rectangular geometry. Two
experimental methods -the Crack Compliance Method and
an X-ray diffraction method -were used to validate the
theoretical predictions and to find a qualitative and
quantitative estimation of the residual stresses.
From the theoretical model and the experiments, some
important conclusions can be derived:
.
A distinction should be made between parts that remain
connected to their base plate and parts that are removed
afterwards. In general, parts that stay connected to the
baseplate contain very high stress levels, in the range of
the material’s yield strength. Parts that are removed from
the base plate, contain much lower stress levels, but they
suffer from deformation during part removal.
.
The basic residual stress distribution in the Z direction for
a part removed from its base plate, consists of a zone of
tensile stresses just below the upper surface, followed by a
large zone of compressive stress, to end again with a
tensile stress zone at the bottom. The magnitude of the
stresses depends amongst others on the part height and
the stiffness and height of the base plate.
. The exposure strategy that is being used to fuse the
powder layers, has a large influence on the residual stress
levels being developed. In general, the stresses are larger
perpendicular to the scan direction than along the scan
direction. A subdivision of the surface in smaller parts
results in a lower maximum stress value and in equally
large stresses in X and Y direction.
 Residual stresses in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting
Peter Mercelis and Jean-Pierre Kruth
.
It is possible to reduce the stress level by applying a heat
treatment using the laser source. However, no drastic
reductions could be obtained in this investigation.
.
Heating of the substrate plate results in a reduction of the
residual stress level, since temperature gradients are
reduced.
Notes
1. The calculations were performed using the Abaqus FEM
package.
2. A mixture of HCl and HNO3 was used to remove a top
layer of ^ 80 mm thickness from the top surface.
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)
References
Aggarangsi, P. and Beuth, J. (2003), “Melt pool size and
stress control for laser-based deposition near a free edge”,
Proceedings of the Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium,
pp. 196-207.
Kruth, J. and Bleys, P. (2000), “Measuring residual stress
caused by wire EDM of tool steel”, International Journal of
Electrical Machining, Vol. 5, pp. 23-8.
Kruth, J., Froyen, L., Rombouts, M., van Vaerenbergh, J. and
Mercelis, P. (2003), “New ferro powder for selective laser
sintering of dense parts”, Annals of the CIRP, pp. 139-42.
Kruth, J., Mercelis, P., Froyen, L. and Rombouts, M. (2004),
“Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and
selective laser melting”, Proceedings of the Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium, pp. 44-59.
Nowell, D., Hills, D. and Tochilin, S. (2000), “Use of the
crack compliance method for the measurement of residual
stress”, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Residual Stresses, Vol. 2, pp. 845-52.
Over, C. (2003), “Generative Fertigung von Bauteilen aus
Werkzeugstahl X38CrMoV5-1 und Titan TiAl6V4 mit
Selective Laser Melting”, PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen.
Prime, M. (1999), “Residual stress measurement by seccessive
extension of a slot: the crack compliance method”, Applied
Machanics Reviews, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 75-96.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
265
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 12 · Number 5 · 2006 · 254 –265
Schindler, H. (2000), “Residuals stress measurements in
cracked components: capabilities and limitations of the
cut compliance method”, Materials Science Forum,
Vol. 347-349, pp. 150-5.
Vasinonta, A., Beuth, J. and Griffith, M. (2000), “Process
maps for controlling residual stress and melt pool size in
laser-based sff processes”, Proceedings of the Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium, pp. 200-8.
Withers, P. and Bhadeshia, H. (2001), “Residual stress,
part 2 -nature and origin”, Materials Science and Technology,
Vol. 17, pp. 366-75.
About the authors
Peter Mercelis obtained a MSc degree in Mechanical
Engineering -Mechatronics at the University of Leuven and is
currently working as a PhD candidate at the department of
Mechanical Engineering at the University of Leuven. He is
part of the research group on production processes. His
research focuses mainly on process monitoring and control in
Selective Laser Sintering and Selective Laser Melting of metal
powders. Peter Mercelis is the corresponding author and can
be contacted at: peter.mercelis@mech.kuleuven.ac.be; web
site: http://people.mech.kuleuven.ac.be/ , pmerceli/
Jean-Pierre Kruth is Full Professor at the University of
Leuven, (KU Leuven), Belgium, where he is responsible for
Production Engineering. His main research activities are:
CAD/CAM/CAPP, production processes, metal cutting, non-
traditional machining (EDM, laser machining, . . .), Rapid
Prototyping and Manufacturing, dimensional metrology,
quality control, reverse engineering. He is Active Member of
CIRP, Fellow of SME, Honorary member Romanian Society
of Mech. Eng., Member BSMEE, Member IMEKO/
BEMEKO, Member K.VIV and founding board member of
the companies MATERIALISE N.V. (1997), METRIS N.V.,
MIH N.V. Email: jean-pierre.kruth@mech.kuleuven.be;
website: www.mech.kuleuven.be/pma/
 This article has been cited by:

1. Neil J. Harrison, Iain Todd, Kamran Mumtaz. 2015. Reduction of micro-cracking in nickel superalloys processed by Selective
Laser Melting: A fundamental alloy design approach. Acta Materialia 94, 59-68. [CrossRef]
2. Gerald T. GrantDirect Digital Manufacturing 41-56. [CrossRef]
3. L. M. Sochalski-Kolbus, E. A. Payzant, P. A. Cornwell, T. R. Watkins, S. S. Babu, R. R. Dehoff, M. Lorenz, O. Ovchinnikova,
C. Duty. 2015. Comparison of Residual Stresses in Inconel 718 Simple Parts Made by Electron Beam Melting and Direct Laser
Metal Sintering. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 46, 1419-1432. [CrossRef]
4. P. Prabhakar, W.J. Sames, R. Dehoff, S.S. Babu. 2015. Computational modeling of residual stress formation during the electron
beam melting process for Inconel 718. Additive Manufacturing . [CrossRef]
5. Manuel Marya, Virendra Singh, Surendar Marya, Jean Yves Hascoet. 2015. Microstructural Development and Technical
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

Challenges in Laser Additive Manufacturing: Case Study with a 316L Industrial Part. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions
B . [CrossRef]
6. Galina Kasperovich, Joachim Hausmann. 2015. Improvement of fatigue resistance and ductility of TiAl6V4 processed by selective
laser melting. Journal of Materials Processing Technology . [CrossRef]
7. Wei Qingsong, Li Shuai, Han Changjun, Li Wei, Cheng Lingyu, Hao Liang, Shi Yusheng. 2015. Selective laser melting
of stainless-steel/nano-hydroxyapatite composites for medical applications: microstructure, element distribution, crack and
mechanical properties. Journal of Materials Processing Technology . [CrossRef]
8. Edward Chlebus, Bogumiła Kuźnicka, Robert Dziedzic, Tomasz Kurzynowski. 2015. Titanium alloyed with rhenium by selective
laser melting. Materials Science and Engineering: A 620, 155-163. [CrossRef]
9. Igor Yadroitsev, Ina Yadroitsava. 2015. Evaluation of residual stress in stainless steel 316L and Ti6Al4V samples produced by
selective laser melting. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 1. [CrossRef]
10. Erik R. Denlinger, Jarred C. Heigel, Pan Michaleris, T.A. Palmer. 2015. Effect of inter-layer dwell time on distortion and residual
stress in additive manufacturing of titanium and nickel alloys. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 215, 123-131. [CrossRef]
11. V. Cain, L. Thijs, J. Van Humbeeck, B. Van Hooreweder, R. Knutsen. 2014. Crack propagation and fracture toughness of
Ti6Al4V alloy produced by selective laser melting. Additive Manufacturing . [CrossRef]
12. X.P. Li, C.W. Kang, H. Huang, T.B. Sercombe. 2014. The role of a low-energy–density re-scan in fabricating crack-free
Al85Ni5Y6Co2Fe2 bulk metallic glass composites via selective laser melting. Materials & Design 63, 407-411. [CrossRef]
13. M. Simonelli, Y.Y. Tse, C. Tuck. 2014. Effect of the build orientation on the mechanical properties and fracture modes of SLM
Ti–6Al–4V. Materials Science and Engineering: A 616, 1-11. [CrossRef]
14. Amanda S. Wu, Donald W. Brown, Mukul Kumar, Gilbert F. Gallegos, Wayne E. King. 2014. An Experimental Investigation
into Additive Manufacturing-Induced Residual Stresses in 316L Stainless Steel. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A .
[CrossRef]
15. X.P. Li, M. Roberts, Y.J. Liu, C.W. Kang, H. Huang, T.B. Sercombe. 2014. Effect of substrate temperature on the interface bond
between support and substrate during selective laser melting of Al-Ni-Y-Co-La metallic glass. Materials & Design . [CrossRef]
16. Marlo Simonelli, Yau Yau Tse, C. Tuck. 2014. The formation of α + β microstructure in as-fabricated selective laser melting of
Ti–6Al–4V. Journal of Materials Research 29, 2028-2035. [CrossRef]
17. Bey Vrancken, Victoria Cain, Rob Knutsen, Jan Van Humbeeck. 2014. Residual stress via the contour method in compact tension
specimens produced via selective laser melting. Scripta Materialia 87, 29-32. [CrossRef]
18. Daniel Riedlbauer, Paul Steinmann, Julia Mergheim. 2014. Thermomechanical finite element simulations of selective electron
beam melting processes: performance considerations. Computational Mechanics 54, 109-122. [CrossRef]
19. X.P. Li, C.W. Kang, H. Huang, L.C. Zhang, T.B. Sercombe. 2014. Selective laser melting of an Al86Ni6Y4.5Co2La1.5
metallic glass: Processing, microstructure evolution and mechanical properties. Materials Science and Engineering: A 606, 370-379.
[CrossRef]
20. Z.H. Liu, D.Q. Zhang, S.L. Sing, C.K. Chua. 2014. Interfacial Characterisation of SLM Parts in Multi Material Processing:
Metallurgical Diffusion between 316L Stainless Steel and C18400 Copper Alloy. Materials Characterization . [CrossRef]
21. P. Edwards, M. Ramulu. 2014. Fatigue performance evaluation of selective laser melted Ti–6Al–4V. Materials Science and
Engineering: A 598, 327-337. [CrossRef]
22. P. Krakhmalev, I. Yadroitsev. 2014. Microstructure and properties of intermetallic composite coatings fabricated by selective laser
melting of Ti–SiC powder mixtures. Intermetallics 46, 147-155. [CrossRef]
 23. Martin J. Muir, Osvaldo M. Querin, Vassili ToropovRules, Precursors and Parameterisation Methodologies for Topology
Optimised Structural Designs Realised Through Additive Manufacturing . [CrossRef]
24. Loucas Papadakis, Andreas Loizou, Jeroen Risse, Sebastian Bremen, Johannes Schrage. 2014. A computational reduction model
for appraising structural effects in selective laser melting manufacturing. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 9, 17-25. [CrossRef]
25. H. Attar, M. Calin, L.C. Zhang, S. Scudino, J. Eckert. 2014. Manufacture by selective laser melting and mechanical behavior of
commercially pure titanium. Materials Science and Engineering: A 593, 170-177. [CrossRef]
26. Elena Bassoli, Neil Sewell, Lucia Denti, Andrea Gatto. 2013. Investigation into the failure of Inconel exhaust collector produced
by laser consolidation. Engineering Failure Analysis 35, 397-404. [CrossRef]
27. Bin Qian, Zhijian Shen. 2013. Laser sintering of ceramics. Journal of Asian Ceramic Societies 1, 315-321. [CrossRef]
28. Ahmed Hussein, Liang Hao, Chunze Yan, Richard Everson. 2013. Finite element simulation of the temperature and stress fields
in single layers built without-support in selective laser melting. Materials & Design 52, 638-647. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

29. Wai Yee Yeong, Chee Kai Chua. 2013. A quality management framework for implementing additive manufacturing of medical
devices. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 8, 193-199. [CrossRef]
30. Antreas Kantaros, Dimitris Karalekas. 2013. Fiber Bragg grating based investigation of residual strains in ABS parts fabricated
by fused deposition modeling process. Materials & Design 50, 44-50. [CrossRef]
31. G. Campoli, M.S. Borleffs, S. Amin Yavari, R. Wauthle, H. Weinans, A.A. Zadpoor. 2013. Mechanical properties of open-cell
metallic biomaterials manufactured using additive manufacturing. Materials & Design 49, 957-965. [CrossRef]
32. Ahmed Hussein, Liang Hao, Chunze Yan, Richard Everson, Philippe Young. 2013. Advanced lattice support structures for metal
additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 213, 1019-1026. [CrossRef]
33. M. Ameli, B. Agnew, P.S. Leung, B. Ng, C.J. Sutcliffe, J. Singh, R. McGlen. 2013. A novel method for manufacturing sintered
aluminium heat pipes (SAHP). Applied Thermal Engineering 52, 498-504. [CrossRef]
34. S. Leuders, M. Thöne, A. Riemer, T. Niendorf, T. Tröster, H.A. Richard, H.J. Maier. 2013. On the mechanical behaviour of
titanium alloy TiAl6V4 manufactured by selective laser melting: Fatigue resistance and crack growth performance. International
Journal of Fatigue 48, 300-307. [CrossRef]
35. Jun Cao, Fencheng Liu, Xin Lin, Chunping Huang, Jing Chen, Weidong Huang. 2013. Effect of overlap rate on recrystallization
behaviors of Laser Solid Formed Inconel 718 superalloy. Optics & Laser Technology 45, 228-235. [CrossRef]
36. Meagan R. Vaughan, Richard H. Crawford. 2013. Effectiveness of virtual models in design for additive manufacturing: a laser
sintering case study. Rapid Prototyping Journal 19:1, 11-19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. T.A. Krol, C. Seidel, M.F. Zaeh. 2013. Prioritization of Process Parameters for an Efficient Optimisation of Additive
Manufacturing by Means of a Finite Element Method. Procedia CIRP 12, 169-174. [CrossRef]
38. Tushar K. Talukdar, Liang Wang, Sergio D. Felicelli. 2012. Thermo-mechanical Modeling of Laser Deposited Bimetallic
Components. Materials Performance and Characterization 1, 104378. [CrossRef]
39. Qian Bo, Shi Yu-sheng, Wei Qing-song, Wang Hai-bo. 2012. The helix scan strategy applied to the selective laser melting. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 63, 631-640. [CrossRef]
40. Bey Vrancken, Lore Thijs, Jean-Pierre Kruth, Jan Van Humbeeck. 2012. Heat treatment of Ti6Al4V produced by Selective
Laser Melting: Microstructure and mechanical properties. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 541, 177-185. [CrossRef]
41. Tushar K. Talukdar, Liang Wang, Sergio D. Felicelli. 2012. Thermo-mechanical Modeling of Laser Deposited Bimetallic
Components. Materials Performance and Characterization 1, MPC-2012-0009. [CrossRef]
42. Jordi Delgado, Joaquim Ciurana, Ciro A. Rodríguez. 2012. Influence of process parameters on part quality and mechanical
properties for DMLS and SLM with iron-based materials. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 60,
601-610. [CrossRef]
43. Dongdong Gu, Yves-Christian Hagedorn, Wilhelm Meiners, Guangbin Meng, Rui João Santos Batista, Konrad Wissenbach,
Reinhart Poprawe. 2012. Densification behavior, microstructure evolution, and wear performance of selective laser melting
processed commercially pure titanium. Acta Materialia 60, 3849-3860. [CrossRef]
44. Wahyudin P. Syam, Huda A. Al‐Shehri, A.M. Al‐Ahmari, Khalid A. Al‐Wazzan, M.A. Mannan. 2012. Preliminary fabrication
of thin‐wall structure of Ti6Al4V for dental restoration by electron beam melting. Rapid Prototyping Journal 18:3, 230-240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
45. S. Dadbakhsh, L. Hao, N. Sewell. 2012. Effect of selective laser melting layout on the quality of stainless steel parts. Rapid
Prototyping Journal 18:3, 241-249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
 46. Dongdong Gu, Chen Hong, Guangbin Meng. 2012. Densification, Microstructure, and Wear Property of In Situ Titanium
Nitride-Reinforced Titanium Silicide Matrix Composites Prepared by a Novel Selective Laser Melting Process. Metallurgical and
Materials Transactions A 43, 697-708. [CrossRef]
47. M. Averyanova, E. Cicala, Ph. Bertrand, Dominique Grevey. 2012. Experimental design approach to optimize selective laser
melting of martensitic 17‐4 PH powder: part I – single laser tracks and first layer. Rapid Prototyping Journal 18:1, 28-37.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
48. B. Gorny, T. Niendorf, J. Lackmann, M. Thoene, T. Troester, H.J. Maier. 2011. In situ characterization of the deformation
and failure behavior of non-stochastic porous structures processed by selective laser melting. Materials Science and Engineering:
A 528, 7962-7967. [CrossRef]
49. Jordi Delgado, Joaquim Ciurana, Lídia Serenó. 2011. Comparison of forming manufacturing processes and selective laser melting
technology based on the mechanical properties of products. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 6, 167-178. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ISLAMABAD At 05:17 20 May 2015 (PT)

50. Maarten Moesen, Tom Craeghs, Jean-Pierre Kruth, Jan Schrooten. 2011. Robust beam compensation for laser-based additive
manufacturing. Computer-Aided Design 43, 876-888. [CrossRef]
51. Wahyudin P. Syam, M. A. Mannan, A. M. Al-Ahmari. 2011. Rapid prototyping and rapid manufacturing in medicine and
dentistry. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 6, 79-109. [CrossRef]
52. Jamasp Jhabvala, Eric Boillat, Rémy Glardon. 2011. On the use of EBSD analysis to investigate the microstructure of gold samples
built by selective laser melting. Gold Bulletin 44, 113-118. [CrossRef]
53. Edward Chlebus, Bogumiła Kuźnicka, Tomasz Kurzynowski, Bogdan Dybała. 2011. Microstructure and mechanical behaviour of
Ti―6Al―7Nb alloy produced by selective laser melting. Materials Characterization 62, 488-495. [CrossRef]
54. M.F. Zaeh, M. Ott. 2011. Investigations on heat regulation of additive manufacturing processes for metal structures. CIRP
Annals - Manufacturing Technology 60, 259-262. [CrossRef]
55. Jamasp Jhabvala, Eric Boillat, Thibaud Antignac, Rémy Glardon. 2010. On the effect of scanning strategies in the selective laser
melting process. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 5, 99-109. [CrossRef]
56. Michael F. Zaeh, Gregor Branner. 2010. Investigations on residual stresses and deformations in selective laser melting. Production
Engineering 4, 35-45. [CrossRef]
57. L. Zhong Liang, L. Jin Hui, S. Yu Sheng, Y. Chun Ze. 2009. Characteristics of complicated AISI316L automobile components
manufactured by powder/metallurgy. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 23, 1924-1931. [CrossRef]
58. C Casavola, S L Campanelli, C Pappalettere. 2009. Preliminary investigation on distribution of residual stress generated by the
selective laser melting process. The Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering Design 44, 93-104. [CrossRef]
59. S.V. Pearce, V.M. Linton, E.C. Oliver. 2008. Residual stress in a thick section high strength T-butt weld. Materials Science and
Engineering: A 480, 411-418. [CrossRef]
60. J.-P. Kruth, G. Levy, F. Klocke, T.H.C. Childs. 2007. Consolidation phenomena in laser and powder-bed based layered
manufacturing. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 56, 730-759. [CrossRef]