Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science & Engineering A

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

Interfacial microstructure and mechanical properties of 316L /CuSn10 T

multi-material bimetallic structure fabricated by selective laser melting
Jie Chen, Yongqiang Yang, Changhui Song, Mingkang Zhang, Shibiao Wu, Di Wang∗
School of Mechanical & Automotive Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Selective laser melting (SLM) is a metal additive manufacturing (AM) technique that can fabricate complex parts
Selective laser melting of any shape. In this paper, the interfacial microstructure and mechanical properties of 316L/CuSn10 bimetallic
Multi-material structure were studied, and the ability of self-developed multi-material SLM equipment to form multi-material
Microstructure bimetallic structures was described. The investigations of 316L/CuSn10 bimetallic structure involved micro-
Mechanical properties
scopic features, phase analysis, microhardness, tensile properties and bending properties. Moreover, the me-
316L/CuSn10 interfacial properties
chanical properties of multi-material specimens were compared with that of single material samples. In addition,
scanning electron micrograph shows that the width of the bimetallic fusion zone is about 550 μm, and dendritic
crack sources was found on the boundary between the bimetallic fusion zone and the steel region. In the di-
rection perpendicular to the interface, the Vickers microhardness value gradually changed from 233.1 ± 8.1 HV
in the steel zone to 154.7 ± 6.0 HV in the bronze zone. The non-standard tensile samples were printed and
tested for evaluating tensile properties, the ultimate strength of 316L/CuSn10 joint was 423.3 ± 30.2 MPa
comparing with the 316L stainless steel of 673.1 ± 4.2 MPa and the CuSn10 Tin-bronze of 578.7 ± 30.6 MPa.
Tensile stress-strain curves and fracture characteristics show that the fusion zone of steel and bronze exhibits
brittle fracture mechanism. Furthermore, three-point bending test was used to evaluate the interfacial bonding
strength of the bimetallic structure, and results show that the maximum flexural strength of 316L/CuSn10 bi-
metallic structure isn't in middle of but below that of 316L stainless steel and CuSn10 Tin-bronze. The research
founding that SLM can obtain 316L/CuSn10 bimetallic structure with good joint strength by adopting island
scanning strategy and inter-layer stagger scanning strategy in the interfacial layers.

1. Introduction manufacturing method can simultaneously perform two steps of man-

Selective laser melting (SLM) is one kind of metal additive manu-
facturing technique that fabricates parts with complex shape based on
discrete and stacking principle. It has the advantages of high dimen-
sional accuracy and low surface roughness compared to other metal
additive manufacturing technologies [1–5]. With the increasing de-
mand for composite materials in industrial applications, many scholars
are committed to using additive manufacturing methods to fabricate
composite structures [6,7]. In some applications, components need to
be made of different materials in different positions to achieve the
comprehensive performance with the two materials. Bimetallic struc-
ture proposed in this paper can meet this requirement. Traditional
method was usually to adapt welding process to combine two different
metal materials, but metal additive manufacturing techniques can now
be used for directly integrated manufacturing multiple materials
[8–13]. Compared to the welding process, the metal additive
ufacturing and combination, which can form complex geometries, and
also has the advantages of shortening the processing time, reducing
material waste, and reducing manufacturing cost.
Steel is a widely used alloy with high hardness, high strength and
corrosion resistance, and many literature report the researches on SLM
of it [14–16]. Tin-bronze is one of the oldest traditional alloys known to
people, which exhibits excellent heat conduction and wear resistance.
Moreover, due to high thermal conductivity and low laser absorption
rate of tin-bronze, higher laser power and lower scanning speed are
required in the SLM processing to achieve suitable density [17]. By
virtue of high electrical and thermal conductivity and higher stiffness
[18], steel-bronze bimetallic system is being widely used in power
generation industry, nuclear industry and automobile industry [19–21].
The steel and copper bimetallic structure usually is prepared by welding
[22–24], but the bonding and forming processes cannot be performed
simultaneously in this processing. Z.H. Liu et al. [12] studied SLM

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mewdlaser@scut.edu.cn (D. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.02.097
Received 26 January 2019; Received in revised form 26 February 2019; Accepted 28 February 2019
Available online 05 March 2019
0921-5093/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
J. Chen, et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85

Fig. 1. Schematic of the Dimetal-300 machine.

Table 1 Table 4
Parameters of the DiMetal-300. SLM process parameters.
Item Parameter 316L SS CuSn10 TB

Laser Fiber laser (Maximum power 400 W) Laser power (W) 200 300
Wavelength 1064 nm Laser scan speed (mm/s) 1200 700
Scanning speed Maximum 7 m/s Scanning space (mm) 0.07 0.085
Building size 250 mm × 250 mm × 300 mm Layer thickness (mm) 0.03 0.03
Focus beam size 75 μm Relative density (%) 98.68 98.66
Layer thickness 0.02 mm～0.1 mm
Powder delivery method Double tanks conveyed by gravity
bimetallic structures manufactured by SLM, which provide references
for the research work in this paper. However, due to the functional
Table 2 limitations of SLM equipment and the insufficient interfacial adhesion
Chemical composition of the 316L SS powder.
strength of steel and copper, few researches have been done on SLM of
Elements Fe Cr Ni Mo Mn Si others steel/copper structures.
This study was carried out on a self-developed multi-material SLM
Content (wt.%) Bal. 17.66 12.86 2.40 0.05 0.74 0.07
equipment, and the equipment was used to fabricate 316L stainless
steel (316L SS) and CuSn10 Tin-bronze (CuSn10 TB) multi-material
Table 3
bimetallic structure. Since the mechanical properties of single alloy
Chemical composition of the CuSn10 TB powder. affects the entire mechanical properties of the bimetallic structure, the
process parameters of the single material are optimized by orthogonal
Elements Cu Sn others
experiments before the formation of the bimetallic structure to achieve
Content (wt.%) Bal. 10.11 Less than 0.06 a density of more than 98.6%. The experiments focused on SLM for-
mation of interfacial layers in bimetallic structure, island scanning
strategy and inter-layer stagger scanning strategy were used in the SLM
forming 316L/C18400 bimetallic structures, and Mingkang Zhang et al. forming process of the interfacial layers [26,27]. The inter-layer stag-
[25] investigated the compression properties of CuSn/18Ni300 gered scanning strategy helps reduce porosity to improve bonding

Fig. 2. (a) SEM image of 316L SS powders (1600 × ), (b) CuSn10 TB powders (1200 × ).

76
J. Chen, et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85

Fig. 3. (a) 316L/CuSn10 Multi-material bimetallic structure formed by Dimental-300, (b) Schematic of inter-layer staggered scanning strategy and island scanning
strategy.

Fig. 4. FE-SEM images showing the interface microstructure of SLM-formed steel/bronze: (a) entire fusion zone (100 × ), (b) area A of entire fusion zone (500 × ),
(c) area B of entire fusion zone (600 × ), (d) area C of entire fusion zone (3000 × ), (e) area D of (c) (1500 × ), (f) schematic diagram of dendritic cracks.

strength in multi-layer fabrication, and the island scanning strategy can mechanical properties of the 316L/CuSn10 bimetallic structure under
shorten scan line length to reduce residual stress. Then, investigations two composite ways were compared, and the influence of interfacial
of interfacial microscopic features, phase analysis, microhardness, microscopic characteristics on the mechanical properties was analyzed.
tensile properties and bending properties were made. In addition, Furthermore, the interfacial bond strength of the 316L/CuSn10

77
J. Chen, et al.
Fig. 5. EDS analysis of the bronze/steel interface (100 × ).
Fig. 6. XRD pattern of the 316L SS, CuSn10 TB and steel/bronze interface.
Fig. 7. Vickers microhardness along the steel/bronze interface.
78
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
Table 5
Average values and standard deviation of microhardness in each re-
gion.
Region type Microhardness value (HV)
Steel region 233.1 ± 8.1
Interfacial region 212.8 ± 7.6
Bronze region 154.7 ± 6.0
bimetallic structure fabricated in this study was tested.
2. Material and experimental procedures
2.1. Multi-material SLM equipment and materials
The experiments were carried out on the Dimetal-300 SLM equip-
ment (South China University of Technology, China), and the schematic
is shown in Fig. 1. The Dimetal-300 parameters are shown in Table 1,
and it was equipped with a 400 W fiber laser (YLR-400-WC, IPG), a
high-speed and high-precision galvanometer scanning unit and f-θ lens.
However, unlike other conventional SLM devices [28], the equipment
includes two sets of powder feeding device, in which a method of
feeding powders from top to bottom is used. The powder feeding device
is installed outside the building chamber which make powder can be
added during the SLM forming process, and powder feeding speed of
each powder tank is monitored and controlled by the powder flow
regulator. There are two powder hoppers on the laying car, each of
which has a switch that controls the distribution of two kinds of powder
at different positions on the XY plane. Moreover, 316L SS and CuSn10
TB powders in this work were produced by argon gas atomization and
the chemical compositions were listed in Table 2 and Table 3 respec-
tively. The micrographs of the powders are shown in Fig. 2.
2.2. Process parameters
Process parameters of single alloy were optimized via orthogonal
experiments to achieve high relative density, and the orthogonal ex-
periments’ results of individual alloy are shown in Table 4. Relative
density as described in Table 4 was measured by Archimedes principle,
and the weight of the samples was measured by the BS224S analytical
balance (precision is 0.001 g). In order to reduce temperature gradient
during SLM forming process [29], island scanning strategy (Fig. 3(b))
was applied in the SLM processing with single rectangular square area
of 5 mm × 5 mm. Moreover, inter-layer stagger scanning strategy [27]
was applied in the Z-axis building direction (Fig. 3(b)), and scan lines
were S-shaped orthogonal in the rectangular block. The forming ex-
periment was carried out on 316L SS substrate as shown in Fig. 3(a).
Bronze need higher energy input than steel during SLM processing due
to high thermal conductivity and low absorptivity at laser [17],
therefore, 316L SS was formed before CuSn10 TB in order to make
interfacial layers (Fig. 3(b)) melt adequately.
2.3. Microscopic feature
SLM samples were polished first and etched for 12 s by dilute aqua
regia (H2O: HNO3: HCl = 6: 1: 3), and then rinsed with alcohol and
dried. The interfacial microstructure and fracture surface were respec-
tively observed by Nova Nano430 FE-SEM and Quanta-200 SEM, and
analyzed by electron dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) from Oxford
Instruments X-max. Phase identification and determination of the pre-
sence of intermetallic compounds were conducted by X-ray diffraction
(XRD) using Smartlab X-ray diffractometer [30].
J. Chen, et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85

Fig. 8. Stress-strain curves of tensile specimens: (a) 316L SS, (b) CuSn10 TB, (c) horizontal combined 316L/CuSn10 samples, (d) vertically combined 316L/CuSn10
samples.

Table 6 3. Results and discussions

Average values and standard deviation of tensile ultimate tensile strength,
elongation. 3.1. Interfacial microstructure
Sample ultimate tensile strength Elongation (%)
(MPa) Fig. 4(a) shows the interfacial microstructure of SLM-formed steel/
bronze bimetallic structure, which is divided into three areas: 316L SS
316L SS 673.1 ± 4.2 35.4 ± 1.4
region, Fusion zone and CuSn10 TB region. Microscopic cracks were
CuSn10 TB 578.7 ± 30.6 23.9 ± 2.9
horizontal combined 316L/ 459.1 ± 8.0 10.5 ± 1.7 found near the boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region, and were
CuSn10 marked with square dotted frame, such as area A and B of Fig. 4(a).
vertically combined 316L/ 423.3 ± 30.2 4.6 ± 0.9 Interestingly, crack didn't appear in the CuSn10 TB region, but Fig. 4(d)
CuSn10 shows that large spherical steel particle presented with some finer
particles of bronze embedded existed in the CuSn10 TB region. Z.H. Liu
et al. [12] observed similar phenomenon in the study of SLM forming
2.4. Mechanical properties
316L SS and C18400 copper alloy bimetallic structures. Moreover,
Fig. 4(b) and (c) illustrate that a large number of dendritic cracks ex-
Tensile and bending samples of single alloy were cut by wire elec-
tend from the boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region to the 316L
trical discharge machining (EDM) from the integral part (Fig. 3(a)).
SS region, and the sources of the dendritic cracks (marked by round
Tensile specimens were deformed to failure at a fixed crosshead speed
dotted frames) are founding near the boundary of fusion zone and 316L
of 1 mm/min by using a SHIMADZU AG-X100KN machine, and the test
SS region. This phenomenon was mainly caused by the different phy-
was carried on the longitudinal direction (along the building direction,
sical properties between steel and bronze. Since the coefficient of
Z) of tabular test specimens at room temperature, all tests were per-
thermal expansion of bronze is greater than that of steel [31], bronze
formed at six times. Bending tests were carried out on YDL1000 ma-
tears the steel due to the strong adhesion of the 316L SS and the CuSn10
chine (Changchun Institute of Mechanical Science, China) to char-
TB. Area D of Fig. 4(c) was further observed at higher magnification
acterize the bonding strength between 316L SS and CuSn10 TB, and all
field as shown in Fig. 4(e), white dashed marked the boundaries of
tests were performed at three times. In addition, Vickers microhardness
fusion zone and 316L SS region, and white dash-dotted line marked the
was measured on the polished samples by DHV-1000Z microhardness
“layer-layer” and “track-track” melt pool boundary. The melt pool
tester under the load of 1.96 N (200 g).
boundary of this shape is a typical feature of SLM process, which was
also found in the study of SLM fabricating 316L SS by Di Wang et al.
[32]. In the 316L SS region, the growth of cellular dendrite (area Ⅰ of
Fig. 4(e)) occurred epitaxially at the solidified planar grains (area Ⅱ of
Fig. 4(e)) along boundary line marked by white dash-dotted line, and
small bronze area appeared in planar grains region (area Ⅱ of Fig. 4(e))

79
J. Chen, et al.
Fig. 9. Fracture morphologies of single alloy tensile samples: (a) entire CuSn10 TB fracture (80 × ), (b) area A of entire CuSn10 TB fracture (600 × ), (c) area B of
entire CuSn10 TB fracture (600 × ), (d) area C of (c) (600 × ), (e) entire 316L SS fracture (80 × ), (f) area D of entire 316L SS fracture (300 × ).
of the 316L SS region. Fig. 4(e) also shows that the source of the den-
dritic crack is located at the boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS re-
gion, then passes through the “layer-layer” melt pool boundary of the
316L SS region. In addition, another characteristic of the dendritic
crack was summarized in Fig. 4(f), that is, the extension direction of the
dendritic crack is substantially perpendicular to the boundary of fusion
zone and 316L SS region. This is because that the thermal conductivity
of bronze is higher than the thermal conductivity of steel [33], which
concentrates a large amount of heat in the fusion zone, so the gradually
increasing thermal stress drives the crack to extend.
Fig. 5 shows continuous and well adherent interface between the
316L SS region and the CuSn10 TB region. Moreover, the EDS analysis
shows that the width of fusion zone is about 550 μm (Fig. 5), so there
are about 19 layers in the fusion zone because the layer thickness is
30 μm (Table 4). The width of the fusion zone was determined by the
interfacial diffusion of Fe and Cu elements, and the process parameters
of the SLM processing affect the diffusion distance of the elements. Z.H.
Liu et al. obtained a fusion zone width of 750 μm by using a smaller
layer thickness and a slower scanning speed [12]. Therefore, the change
80
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
in the width of the fusion zone seems to be related to the layer thickness
becoming smaller and the scanning speed becoming slower. In addition,
since the powder feeding device starts to lay the bronze powders, the
boundary between fusion region and 316L SS region occurs. At the
boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region, the iron content began to
drop rapidly, but did not reach the minimum immediately. This illus-
trates the good diffusion of Fe in the CuSn10 TB region, which results in
the weight percentage of each metal element exhibiting a gradient
change in the fusion zone, and the gradient change of the composition
is beneficial to the improvement of the joint bonding strength. Due to
the infinite mutual solubility of Fe and Cu in the liquid state [34], the
liquid time can be extended by reducing the scanning speed during the
SLM forming process, thereby promoting the diffusion of elements.
3.2. X-ray diffraction
Fig. 6 depicts the XRD patterns of the SLM-processed parts: 316L SS,
CuSn10 TB and steel/bronze interface. The CuSn10 TB sample shows
the formation of the Cu(Sn) (space group Fm-3m [225]) and Cu41Sn11
J. Chen, et al.
Fig. 10. Fracture morphologies of horizontal combined 316L/CuSn10 tensile samples: (a) Picture of horizontal combined 316L/CuSn10 tensile samples, (b) SEM
micrograph of the entire fracture (100 × ), (c) area A of the entire fracture (800 × ), (d) area B of the entire fracture (400 × ).
(space group F-43 m [213]) phases with lattice parameters: 0.03655 nm
and 0.17965 nm. S. Scudino et al. [35] also found this in the study of
SLM forming CuSn10 TB. Moreover, the 316L SS sample shows the
formation of the γ-Fe (space group Fm-3m [225]) phases with lattice
parameters: 0.03591 nm. Di Wang et al. also reported this in reference
[32]. Meanwhile, the XRD pattern of the steel/bronze interface shows
XRD pattern combination of 316L SS and CuSn10, but the intensity of
Cu phase peaks is a lot bigger than Fe phase peaks due to residual stress
of steel region is larger than that of bronze region. According to the
XRD test results and combining with the FeeCu binary diagram [23], it
can be indicated that there are very little or none Fe/Cu intermetallic
compounds formed in the steel/bronze interface. As described by Livne
Z et al., the presence of intermetallic compounds reduces the tensile
strength of the joint [36]. However, the tensile strength of the joint in
the experiment is considerable, indicating that the tensile properties
were not affected by the intermetallic compounds. In addition, A.
Durgutlu et al. [24] and Y. Zhang et al. [37] also found no Fe/Cu in-
termetallic compounds in the study of copper-steel interfaces.
3.3. Microhardness
Vickers microhardness was considered to understand the micro-
hardness change across the interfacial area. The microhardness was
measured from the 316L SS region to the CuSn10 TB region, with five
indentations across each region as show in Fig. 7. Table 5 shows mi-
crohardness value was measured to be 233.1 ± 8.1 HV at the steel
region, 212.8 ± 7.6 HV at interfacial region and 154.7 ± 6.0 HV at
the bronze region. In addition, the Vickers microhardness value of 316L
SS is close to that reported in other researches [38–40]. The results
reveal the Vickers microhardness decreases from the 316L SS region
through the interface to the CuSn10 TB region. Fig. 7 shows the change
in the microhardness value of the entire interface, and the gradual
decrease in microhardness across the interface is due to the proportion
81
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
of steel decreases as more bronze is melted in the melt pools.
3.4. Tensile properties
Tensile stress-strain curves and a summary of the material tensile
properties are respectively presented in Fig. 8 and Table 6. The 316L SS
and CuSn10 TB specimens (Fig. 8) separately display ultimate strength
of 673.1 ± 4.2 MPa and 578.7 ± 30.6 MPa with elongation of
35.4 ± 1.4% and 23.9 ± 2.9%. These values are close to the ultimate
strength of SLM manufacturing 316L SS or CuSn10 TB in other refer-
ences [14,41,42]. Moreover, the tensile properties of 316L/CuSn10
bimetallic structure under two composite ways are compared with that
of single alloy. Horizontal combined 316L/CuSn10 samples (Fig. 8(c))
show ultimate strength of 459.1 ± 8.0 MPa with elongation of
10.5 ± 1.7% (Table 6). Interestingly, the ultimate strength of hor-
izontal combined 316L/CuSn10 samples isn't in middle of but far below
that of 316L SS and CuSn10 TB. This phenomenon occurred because the
extension direction of dendritic cracks (Fig. 5(e)) perpendicular to the
boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region. Therefore, the cracks
accelerated fracture failure during tensile processing. In addition, ver-
tically combined 316L/CuSn10 samples (Fig. 8(d)) show ultimate
strength of 423.3 ± 30.2 MPa with elongation of 4.6 ± 0.9%, in-
dicating that the steel/copper structure fabricated by the SLM process
has considerable joint strength than steel/copper structures manu-
factured by conventional processing. The joint strength of steel/copper
structures manufactured by conventional processing was reported in
these references [34,37,43,44]. Fig. 8(c) and (d) also illustrate that
horizontal combined 316L/CuSn10 samples (Fig. 8(c)) manifest as
ductile fracture, and vertically combined 316L/CuSn10 samples
(Fig. 8(d)) exhibit brittle fracture.
The fracture surfaces of single metal material tensile samples (316L
SS and CuSu10 TB) were observed by SEM and the representative
images are presented in Fig. 9. Fig. 9(a) displays shear lip zone
J. Chen, et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85

Fig. 11. Fracture morphologies of vertically combined 316L/CuSn10 tensile samples: (a) Picture of vertically combined 316L/CuSn10 tensile samples, (b) SEM
micrograph of entire CuSn10 TB fracture (80 × ), (c) area A of entire CuSn10 TB fracture (400 × ), (d) SEM micrograph of entire 316L SS fracture (100 × ), (e) area B
of entire 316L SS fracture (300 × ), (f) area C of entire 316L SS fracture (600 × ).

Table 7 belong to ductile fracture. Di Wang et al. also found this in the study of
Average values and standard deviation of ultimate flexural strength, flexural SLM forming 316L SS [32].
strain. Fig. 10(a) shows that the 316L SS and the CuSn10 TB are well
Sample Flexural strength (MPa) Flexural strain (mm/mm) bonded in the middle, indicating that the bonding strength of 316L/
CuSn10 is sufficiently large that the single alloys on both sides were not
316L SS 729.1 ± 3.8 0.75 ± 0.05 separated during the tensile test. The opposite result is obtained by Z.H.
CuSn10 TB 657.1 ± 20.0 0.79 ± 0.03
Liu et al. [12] when the bonding strength is insufficient. Compared with
CuSn10 TB at the bottom 590.5 ± 30.4 0.68 ± 0.10
316L SS at the bottom 638.6 ± 23.8 0.70 ± 0.05 Fig. 9(a) and (e), the fracture feature of horizontal combined 316L/
CuSn10 (Fig. 10(b)) is obviously combination of that of single bronze
and single steel, but the fusion zone shows brittle fracture. The fracture
appeared on the edge of the CuSn10 TB fracture, and the shear lip zone mode of fusion zone is a mixed-mode of transgranular and intergranular
is inclined to the normal direction of the fracture. Moreover, Fig. 9(b) fracture with herringbone pattern and river pattern features as shown
and (d) show a lot of unmelted powders which lead to the holes for- in Fig. 10(c). Interestingly, flat ridge (Fig. 10(c)) seems to separate the
mation in Fig. 9(a). A large number of shallow dimples were found in fracture of fusion zone, and herringbone pattern and river pattern were
Fig. 9(c) and (d), indicating that the ductile fracture mechanism distributed on both sides of the flat ridge, unmelted powder (Fig. 10(d))
dominated the fracture of CuSn10 TB samples. In addition, Fig. 9(e) and was also found on the flat ridge. Moreover, the river pattern is mainly
(f) display sharp edges and large amounts of shallow dimples on the distributed on the right side of the flat ridge, which is near the
316L SS fracture, and these features show the fracture of 316L SS boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region. This suggests that the

82
J. Chen, et al.
Fig. 12. Three-point bending test specimens: (a) 316L SS, (b) CuSn10 TB, (c)
316L/CuSn10 composite specimens of CuSn10 TB at the bottom, (d) 316L/
CuSn10 composite specimens of 316L SS at the bottom.
formation of river pattern is likely to be related to dendritic cracks as
shown in Fig. 4(b) and (c). In addition, the vertically combined 316L/
CuSn10 samples were all broken at the joint as shown in Fig. 11(a).
Fig. 11(b) and (d) display the fracture of vertically combined 316L/
CuSn10 samples belong to cleavage fracture with a lot of tongue pattern
features, and Fig. 11(f) also appeared river pattern which proved it. As
shown in Fig. 11(c), unmelted 316L SS powder was presented on the
CuSn10 TB side, indicating that the interfacial layers were still not fully
melted.
3.5. Bending properties
Bending test is often used to characterize the deformability of metal
materials and to show their defects. Therefore, the bonding strength
between the 316L SS and the CuSn10 TB was measured by a three-point
bending tester with indenter speed of 5 mm/min, bending radius of
10 mm, and a fracture threshold of 5 KN was set as a load termination
condition. The bending specimens have width of 15 mm and thickness
of 10 mm, and the support span used is 34 mm. Flexural stress-strain
curves and a summary of flexural properties are separately presented in
Fig. 13 and Table 7, and all tests were performed three times for each
alloy sample. As shown in Fig. 13(a) and (b), the 316L SS specimens
display maximum flexural strength of 729.1 ± 3.8 MPa with elonga-
tion of 0.75 ± 0.05 mm/mm, and the CuSn10 TB samples display
maximum flexural strength of 657.1 ± 20.0 MPa with elongation of
0.79 ± 0.03 mm/mm. Moreover, the 316L/CuSn10 composite speci-
mens of CuSn10 TB at the bottom demonstrates maximum flexural
strength of 590.5 ± 30.4 MPa with maximum strain of
0.68 ± 0.1 mm/mm in Fig. 13(c), and 316L/CuSn10 composite spe-
cimens of 316L SS at the bottom show maximum flexural strength of
638.6 ± 23.8 MPa with maximum strain of 0.7 ± 0.05 mm/mm in
Fig. 13(d). It reveals that 316L SS has higher maximum flexural
strength than CuSn10 TB, which leads to the flexural strength of 316L
SS at bottom is higher than that of CuSn10 TB at bottom. In addition,
due to the existence of dendritic cracks near the boundary of fusion
83
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
zone and 316L SS region, the maximum flexural strength of 316L/
CuSn10 composite specimens isn't in middle of but below that of 316L
SS and CuSn10 TB. What's more, Fig. 12(c) and Fig. 12(d) show that no
cracks appear in the interface after bending test, indicating good me-
tallurgical bonding between 316L SS and CuSn10 TB. Interestingly,
when CuSn10 TB is at the bottom during the bending test, cracks only
appeared in the CuSn10 TB region without extending to the 316L SS
region. In contrast, when 316L SS is at the bottom during the bending
test, cracks appeared in the 316L SS region and quickly extend to the
CuSn10 TB region.
4. Conclusions
Based on Dimetal-300 multi-material SLM equipment, the 316L/
CuSn10 bimetallic structures were fabricated via optimizing the process
parameters and scanning strategy. The microscopic interfacial char-
acteristics of 316L SS and CuSn10 TB were investigated, and the joint
bonding strength was tested. The mixed powder produced above the
building platform was finally separated by a self-designed magnetic
powder separator.
Conclusions are shown as follows:
(1) A good metallurgical bonding was obtained at the 316L/CuSn10
interface, and there were many dendritic cracks near the boundary
of fusion zone and 316L SS region, but cracks did not appear in the
CuSn10 TB region. The cracks originated from the boundary of
fusion zone and 316L SS region, then extended in a direction per-
pendicular to the boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region to the
steel region. This is mainly caused by the differences in physical
properties between 316L SS and CuSn10 TB. Since the coefficient of
thermal expansion of CuSn10 TB is greater than that of 316L SS,
bronze tears the steel due to the strong adhesion of 316L SS and
CuSn10 TB.
(2) After the process parameters and scanning strategy were optimized,
the joint strength of 316L SS and CuSn10 TB reached
423.3 ± 30.2 MPa. Due to dendritic cracks in the 316L SS region
which in a direction perpendicular to the boundary of fusion zone
and 316L SS region, the ultimate tensile strength of the horizontal
combined 316L/CuSn10 samples was lower than that of 316L SS
and CuSn10 TB.
(3) By comparing with the fracture characteristics of 316L SS and
CuSn10 TB tensile specimens, the fracture characteristics of 316L/
CuSn10 bimetallic structure under two composite ways were ana-
lyzed. On the one hand, it was found that brittle fracture dominates
the break of vertically combined steel/bronze samples. On the other
hand, the fracture mode of the fusion zone in the horizontal com-
bined 316L/CuSn10 samples is a mixed-mode of transgranular and
intergranular fracture with herringbone pattern and river pattern
features. Furthermore, the river pattern is mainly distributed on the
right side of the flat ridge, which suggests that the formation of
river pattern is likely to be related to dendritic cracks near the
boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS region.
(4) The results of three-point bending test show that the maximum
flexural strength of 316L/CuSn10 composite specimens isn't in
middle of but below that of 316L SS and CuSn10 TB, due to the
dendritic cracks are near the boundary of fusion zone and 316L SS
region. Moreover, when CuSn10 TB is at the bottom, it has a lower
maximum flexural strength, but the crack did not extend to the
316L SS region. Conversely, when the 316L SS is at the bottom, it
has a higher maximum flexural strength, but the crack extended to
the CuSn10 TB zone.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully appreciate the financial support from the
Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, No. 51875215),
J. Chen, et al.
Fig. 13. Flexural stress-strain curves of bended specimens: (a) 316L SS, (b) CuSn10 TB; (c) 316L/CuSn10 composite specimens of CuSn10 TB at the bottom, (d) 316L/
CuSn10 composite specimens of 316L SS at the bottom.
Guangdong Province Science and Technology Project
(2015B090921002, 2016B090925002, 2017B090912002), Guangzhou
Science and Technology Project (201704020118,201704030097).
References
[1] J.J. Lewandowski, M. Seifi, Metal additive manufacturing: a review of mechanical
properties, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 46 (1) (2016) 151–186.
[2] P.K. Gokuldoss, S. Kolla, J. Eckert, Additive manufacturing processes: selective laser
melting, electron beam melting and binder jetting-selection guidelines, Materials
(Basel) 10 (6) (2017).
[3] H.K. Rafi, N.V. Karthik, H. Gong, T.L. Starr, B.E. Stucker, Microstructures and
mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V parts fabricated by selective laser melting and
electron beam melting, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 22 (12) (2013) 3872–3883.
[4] Y. Zhong, L.-E. Rännar, S. Wikman, A. Koptyug, L. Liu, D. Cui, Z. Shen, Additive
manufacturing of ITER first wall panel parts by two approaches: selective laser
melting and electron beam melting, Fusion Eng. Des. 116 (2017) 24–33.
[5] W.E. Frazier, Metal additive manufacturing: a review, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 23
(6) (2014) 1917–1928.
[6] A. Bandyopadhyay, B. Heer, Additive manufacturing of multi-material structures,
Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 129 (2018) 1–16.
[7] S. Gantenbein, K. Masania, W. Woigk, J.P.W. Sesseg, T.A. Tervoort, A.R. Studart,
Three-dimensional printing of hierarchical liquid-crystal-polymer structures,
Nature 561 (7722) (2018) 226–230.
[8] B. Vamsi Krishna, W. Xue, S. Bose, A. Bandyopadhyay, Functionally graded Co-Cr-
Mo coating on Ti-6Al-4V alloy structures, Acta Biomater. 4 (3) (2008) 697–706.
[9] P. Fox, S. Pogson, C.J. Sutcliffe, E. Jones, Interface interactions between porous
titanium/tantalum coatings, produced by Selective Laser Melting (SLM), on a co-
balt–chromium alloy, Surf. Coating. Technol. 202 (20) (2008) 5001–5007.
[10] K.A. Mumtaz, N. Hopkinson, Laser melting functionally graded composition of
Waspaloy® and Zirconia powders, J. Mater. Sci. 42 (18) (2007) 7647–7656.
[11] C.A. Terrazas, S.M. Gaytan, E. Rodriguez, D. Espalin, L.E. Murr, F. Medina,
R.B. Wicker, Multi-material metallic structure fabrication using electron beam
melting, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 71 (1–4) (2013) 33–45.
[12] Z.H. Liu, D.Q. Zhang, S.L. Sing, C.K. Chua, L.E. Loh, Interfacial characterization of
84
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
SLM parts in multi-material processing: metallurgical diffusion between 316L
stainless steel and C18400 copper alloy, Mater. Char. 94 (2014) 116–125.
[13] S.L. Sing, L.P. Lam, D.Q. Zhang, Z.H. Liu, C.K. Chua, Interfacial characterization of
SLM parts in multi-material processing: intermetallic phase formation between
AlSi10Mg and C18400 copper alloy, Mater. Char. 107 (2015) 220–227.
[14] J. Suryawanshi, K.G. Prashanth, U. Ramamurty, Mechanical behavior of selective
laser melted 316L stainless steel, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 696 (2017) 113–121.
[15] Y. Liu, Z. Pang, J. Zhang, Comparative study on the influence of subsequent thermal
cycling on microstructure and mechanical properties of selective laser melted 316L
stainless steel, Appl. Phys. A 123 (11) (2017).
[16] Y. Bai, Y. Yang, D. Wang, M. Zhang, Influence mechanism of parameters process
and mechanical properties evolution mechanism of maraging steel 300 by selective
laser melting, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 703 (2017) 116–123.
[17] Z. Mao, D.Z. Zhang, J. Jiang, G. Fu, P. Zhang, Processing optimisation, mechanical
properties and microstructural evolution during selective laser melting of Cu-15Sn
high-tin bronze, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 721 (2018) 125–134.
[18] O. Yilmaz, H. Çelik, Electrical and thermal properties of the interface at diffusion-
bonded and soldered 304 stainless steel and copper bimetal, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 141 (1) (2003) 67–76.
[19] M. Van Cleemput, H. Jones, M. Van der Burgt, J.R. Barrau, J.A. Lee, Y. Eyssa,
H.J. Schneider-Muntau, Copper/stainless steel conductor for high field pulsed
magnets, Phys. B Condens. Matter 216 (3–4) (1996) 226–229.
[20] V. Pantsyrnyi, A. Shikov, A. Vorobieva, N. Khlebova, I. Potapenko, A. Silaev,
N. Kozlenkova, Cu-Nb and Cu/stainless steel winding materials for high field pulsed
magnets, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 10 (1) (2000) 1263–1268.
[21] M. Weigl, M. Schmidt, Influence of the feed rate and the lateral beam displacement
on the joining quality of laser-welded copper-stainless steel connections, Phys.
Procedia 5 (2010) 53–59.
[22] J.-t. Xiong, Q. Xie, J.-l. Li, F.-s. Zhang, W.-d. Huang, Diffusion bonding of stainless
steel to copper with tin bronze and gold interlayers, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 21 (1)
(2011) 33–37.
[23] C. Yao, B. Xu, X. Zhang, J. Huang, J. Fu, Y. Wu, Interface microstructure and me-
chanical properties of laser welding copper–steel dissimilar joint, Optic Laser. Eng.
47 (7–8) (2009) 807–814.
[24] A. Durgutlu, B. Gülenç, F. Findik, Examination of copper/stainless steel joints
formed by explosive welding, Mater. Des. 26 (6) (2005) 497–507.
J. Chen, et al.
[25] M. Zhang, Y. Yang, D. Wang, C. Song, J. Chen, Microstructure and mechanical
properties of CuSn/18Ni300 bimetallic porous structures manufactured by selective
laser melting, Mater. Des. 165 (2019).
[26] L. Thijs, K. Kempen, J.-P. Kruth, J. Van Humbeeck, Fine-structured aluminium
products with controllable texture by selective laser melting of pre-alloyed
AlSi10Mg powder, Acta Mater. 61 (5) (2013) 1809–1819.
[27] W. Di, Y. Yongqiang, S. Xubin, C. Yonghua, Study on energy input and its influences
on single-track,multi-track, and multi-layer in SLM, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 58
(9–12) (2011) 1189–1199.
[28] L. Thijs, F. Verhaeghe, T. Craeghs, J.V. Humbeeck, J.-P. Kruth, A study of the mi-
crostructural evolution during selective laser melting of Ti–6Al–4V, Acta Mater. 58
(9) (2010) 3303–3312.
[29] J.P. Kruth, L. Froyen, J. Van Vaerenbergh, P. Mercelis, M. Rombouts, B. Lauwers,
Selective laser melting of iron-based powder, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 149 (1–3)
(2004) 616–622.
[30] H. Yi, L. Qi, J. Luo, Y. Guo, S. Li, N. Li, Elimination of droplet rebound off soluble
substrate in metal droplet deposition, Mater. Lett. 216 (2018) 232–235.
[31] B. Talic, P.V. Hendriksen, K. Wiik, H.L. Lein, Thermal expansion and electrical
conductivity of Fe and Cu doped MnCo2O4 spinel, Solid State Ionics 326 (2018)
90–99.
[32] D. Wang, C. Song, Y. Yang, Y. Bai, Investigation of crystal growth mechanism
during selective laser melting and mechanical property characterization of 316L
stainless steel parts, Mater. Des. 100 (2016) 291–299.
[33] Y. Liu, X. Wang, L. Zhong, A. Yang, M. Rong, J. Wu, Influence of Al, Fe or Cu vapour
on thermophysical properties of CO2 plasmas, Eur. Phys. J. D 72 (12) (2018).
[34] S.V. Kuryntsev, A.E. Morushkin, A.K. Gilmutdinov, Fiber laser welding of austenitic
steel and commercially pure copper butt joint, Optic Laser. Eng. 90 (2017)
101–109.
[35] S. Scudino, C. Unterdörfer, K.G. Prashanth, H. Attar, N. Ellendt, V. Uhlenwinkel,
85
Materials Science & Engineering A 752 (2019) 75–85
J. Eckert, Additive manufacturing of Cu–10Sn bronze, Mater. Lett. 156 (2015)
202–204.
[36] Z. Livne, A. Munitz, Characterization of explosively bonded iron and copper plates,
J. Mater. Sci. 22 (4) (1987) 1495–1500.
[37] Y. Zhang, J. Huang, H. Chi, N. Cheng, Z. Cheng, S. Chen, Study on welding–brazing
of copper and stainless steel using tungsten/metal gas suspended arc welding,
Mater. Lett. 156 (2015) 7–9.
[38] Z. Zheng, L. Wang, M. Jia, L. Cheng, B. Yan, Microstructure and mechanical
properties of stainless steel/calcium silicate composites manufactured by selective
laser melting, Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl. 71 (2017) 1099–1105.
[39] S. Yusuf, Y. Chen, R. Boardman, S. Yang, N. Gao, Investigation on porosity and
microhardness of 316L stainless steel fabricated by selective laser melting, Metals 7
(2) (2017).
[40] J.A. Cherry, H.M. Davies, S. Mehmood, N.P. Lavery, S.G.R. Brown, J. Sienz,
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 (5–8) (2014) 869–879.
[41] I. Tolosa, F. Garciandía, F. Zubiri, F. Zapirain, A. Esnaola, Study of mechanical
properties of AISI 316 stainless steel processed by “selective laser melting”, fol-
lowing different manufacturing strategies, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 51 (5–8)
(2010) 639–647.
[42] C. Deng, J. Kang, T. Feng, Y. Feng, X. Wang, P. Wu, Study on the selective laser
melting of CuSn10 powder, Materials (Basel) 11 (4) (2018).
[43] K.D. Leedy, J.F. Stubbins, Copper alloy–stainless steel bonded laminates for fusion
reactor applications: tensile strength and microstructure, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 297
(2001) 1–2 10-18.
[44] B.M. R.K, P. Maji, A. Samadhiya, S.K. Ghosh, B.S. Roy, A.K. Das, S.C. Saha, A study
on induction welding of mild steel and copper with flux under applied load con-
dition, J. Manuf. Process. 34 (2018) 435–441.