Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Characterization
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matchar

Dual interfacial characterization and property in multi-material selective T

laser melting of 316L stainless steel and C52400 copper alloy
⁎
Yuchao Baia, Jiayi Zhanga, Cuiling Zhaoa, Chaojiang Lib, Hao Wanga,
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, National University of Singapore, 9 Engineering Drive 1, Singapore 117575, Singapore
b
School of mechanical engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Zhongguancun Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing 100081, PR China

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

Keywords: Manufacturing multi-material part is one of the native advantages of selective laser melting (SLM) due to its
Selective laser melting layer-by-layer manufacturing method, which is attracting more and more attention in recent years. In an effort to
Multiple materials reveal the dual interfacial characterization of dissimilar materials manufactured by SLM with different printing
Microstructure sequences, this paper presents the morphology, microstructure, element distribution, phase composition and
316L stainless steel
microhardness of multi-material interfaces between SLMed 316L steel and C52400 copper alloy. Both interfaces
Copper alloy
Interfacial characterization
display isolated alloy islands with various shapes and different morphologies. The melt pool at 316L/C52400
interface is deeper and narrower than that at C52400/316L interface. Small 316L and C52400 spheres with a size
of 1–5 μm are formed under the surface tension, Marangoni convection in the melt pool and rapid cooling
condition, in which many smaller particles with a size of < 1 μm appear due to the material supersaturation and
convection. Interdiffusion of elements and very fine grains with a size of < 6 μm result in excellent metallurgical
bonding performance. Cracks tend to originate from the interface and extend to the stainless steel side for both
interfaces. No separation of the two materials caused by cracks is found in their contact area. Healing of the
cracks by C52400 copper alloy at 316L/C52400 interface is easier to complete. The interface thickness depends
on the building sequence of the two materials, which features a much thicker transition when building C52400
on 316L. No intermetallic compound but a trace of CuNi alloy is formed at the interface. The microhardness
varies in the transition area due to the existence of isolated 316L/C52400 islands and decreases from 316L to
C52400 with the highest value of 283.33 ± 5.51 HV to the lowest value of 181.33 ± 17.62 HV. This research
advances the understanding of the different interfacial characterizations of dissimilar materials manufactured by
SLM and provides guidance and reference for manufacturing multi-material components with complex interfaces
using SLM.

1. Introduction manufacturing single material, such as 316L steel, maraging steel,

Additive manufacturing (AM) technology provides a new method to
manufacture various parts quickly, which has many advantages, in-
cluding high manufacturing freedom, excellent part performance and
high production efficiency [1–3]. Owing to its layer-by-layer manu-
facturing approach, AM is particularly suitable for manufacturing
multi-material parts, such as gradient materials, sandwich structure
materials, etc. [4–8] As one of extensively applied AM technologies,
selective laser melting (SLM) inherits the advantages of AM and is
especially capable of manufacturing metal parts using the laser beam to
melt metal powders [9,10]. Moreover, the SLM process has high cooling
rate (103–108 K/s), which improves the nucleation rate to refine grains
for better properties [11,12]. Therefore, SLM is being widely used in
aluminium alloy, CoCrW alloy, titanium alloy, copper alloy, etc.
[13–17] Besides, the process optimisation, microstructure, mechanical
properties, heat treatment and simulation have been reported by many
researchers [18–20].
However, insufficient attention has been paid to manufacturing
multilateral part using SLM. It is known that combining multiple ma-
terials into one single part can enhance the properties and add value to
final products. In the past, welding was used to combine dissimilar
materials [21–24]. However, it is mainly applied in joining large pieces
of dissimilar materials, which is difficult for fabricating small-size parts
of an appreciable level of delicacy and impossible for changing material
in the designated position of the same part. SLM, however, can not only
programme the change of multiple materials but also accurately edit

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mpewhao@nus.edu.sg (H. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2020.110489
Received 1 April 2020; Received in revised form 5 May 2020; Accepted 2 July 2020
Available online 07 July 2020
1044-5803/ © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Y. Bai, et al.
the material composition within one layer thickness (~30 μm or less),
which is more suitable for manufacturing multi-material part with the
more uniform material distribution. One easy way using SLM to man-
ufacture multi-material part is to print one material on another material
fabricated by a conventional manufacturing process such as casting
[25,26]. Another way is to print one material on another SLMed ma-
terial [27,28]. The third way is to print different materials (such as
mixed powders) on the same layer [29]. Furthermore, SLM can also be
used to print dissimilar materials, which are difficult to directly fuse via
a metal interlayer such as copper alloy [30].
For manufacturing multi-material parts using SLM, the key issue is
the interfacial characterization between dissimilar materials, which
determines the metallurgical bonding performance and corresponding
mechanical properties. Due to the melt pool characteristics of SLM, it is
predicted that there will be multiple physical processes during manu-
facturing the interface: (1) Remelting of previous solid material; (2)
Mutual melting of multiple materials in the same melt pool; (3)
Different solidification behaviours of the dissimilar materials in the
same melt pool; and (4) The pinning effect on the previously built solid
layer with a curved melt pool. The abovementioned processes will take
effects on the microstructure, grain morphology, element distribution,
mechanical properties, etc. Due to different material properties, the
design of the printing sequence influences the interfacial characteriza-
tion, microstructure and mechanical properties. The state-of-the-art
works on selective laser melted (SLMed) multi-material parts are fo-
cused on printing one material on another SLMed material with dif-
ferent printing order and corresponding solidification behaviour, mi-
crostructure and element distribution at the interface as well as phase
composition and microhardness.
Herein, this study aims to investigate the dual interfacial char-
acterization of 316L stainless steel-C52400 alloy parts manufactured by
SLM. Two interfaces combining dissimilar materials with different
printing orders are manufactured and investigated. The defects, such as
cracks, oxides and pores, formed at the interface are analysed. The
dynamic behaviour of melt pools at the interface during the SLM pro-
cess is characterised. The morphology, microstructure, element dis-
tribution, phase composition and microhardness at the interfaces are
investigated in details. The mechanism of multi-material interactions
during SLM is discussed. This study offers reference and guidance for
the development and application of multi-material parts manufactured
by SLM technology.
2. Experiments
2.1. Sample preparation
All the experiments were carried out using a laser 3D printing ma-
chine SLS/SLM-3 V equipped with a 200 W IPG Yb fibre laser (wave-
length: 1064 nm, laser beam diameter: 100 μm) and high-purity argon
was used during the building process. The SLM parameters for 316L
stainless steel were as follows: gas-atomised powder with a particle size
distribution of 20–50 μm, laser power of 160 W, scanning speed of
800 mm/s, hatching space of 0.09 mm, and layer thickness of 30 μm.
The SLM parameters for C52400 copper alloy were as follows: gas-
atomised powder with a particle size distribution of 15–45 μm, laser
power of 180 W, scanning speed of 300 mm/s, hatching space of
0.08 mm and layer thickness of 30 μm. The scanning strategy for both
Table 1
Chemical composition (wt%) of 316L stainless steel and C52400 copper alloy.
Alloy name Cr Ni Mo C Mn
316L 16–18 10–14 2–3 ≤0.03
Alloy name Cu Sn Zn Pb
C52400 Bal. 9–11 ≤0.2 ≤0.05
Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489
SLMed parts was the zigzag scan mode with rotating 90° every two
layers. Table 1 shows the chemical composition of 316L stainless steel
and C52400 copper alloy used in this study. 316L stainless steel part
(10 × 10 × 3 mm) was built on a 316L stainless steel substrate at the
room temperature, and then C52400 copper alloy part
(10 × 10 × 3 mm) was built on the formerly manufactured 316L steel
substrate. Finally, a second 316L stainless steel layer
(10 × 10 × 3 mm) was built on the as-printed layer of C52400 copper
alloy. Fig. 1 displays the building process of dual interfacial materials
using SLM. For the change of different powders, it was manually done
by pausing the building process and changing for the other powders. To
reduce the negative effect of oxygen during powder changing, the air
was purged by argon from the printer chamber, and the building pro-
cess was not resumed until the oxygen level was below 200 ppm. Two
interfaces between 316L stainless steel and C52400 copper alloy were
formed. The interface between first 316L stainless steel part and
C52400 copper alloy part is called 316L/C52400 interface, which is
referred to as the “L/C interface”. The interface between C52400 copper
alloy and second 316L stainless steel part is called C52400/316L in-
terface, which is referred to as the “C/L interface” in the context.
2.2. Characterization
Microhardness was evaluated on the polished surface using Vickers
microhardness tester (SHIMADZU Corporation) with the load of 200 g
(1.961 N) and dwell time of 15 s according to ASTM E384-17. The
microhardness of each point was measured with three repetitions. X-ray
diffraction (XRD) patterns were achieved by a Bruker D8 Advanced
diffractometer system with Cu Kα radiation source after polishing the
sample surface with #80, #400, #1000, #1500 and #2000 sandpapers.
Electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD) was used to investigate the
grain size and crystallographic orientation of the interfaces and ad-
jacent areas of the multi-material sample in Hitachi SU5000 SEM ma-
chine with Hikari Super EBSD Camera. The microstructure was ob-
served by a LEICA DM 2500 M metallographic microscope and JEOL
JSM-5500LV scanning electron microscope (SEM) after polishing to a
mirror finish and etching using ferric chloride hydrochloric acid aqu-
eous solution (FeCl: HCl: H2O = 3.5 g: 25 ml: 75 ml) for 2 s. The
chemical composition and element distribution on the interface were
evaluated using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Microstructure and morphology
The microstructure, morphology and chemical element distribution
of SLMed C/L interface are shown in Fig. 2. From the optical micro-
scope (OM) images after polishing (Fig. 2a), it can be seen that two
different colours present different metals: dark colour for 316L stainless
steel and orange colour for C52400 copper alloy. The mixing of metals
at the interface is displayed clearly by embedding each other of two
materials, which shows excellent metallurgical bonding characteristics
without any cracks between C52400 material and 316L material. This
result indicates that SLM can be used to manufacturing a multi-material
part using C52400 and 316L. At the C/L interface, 316L part becomes
interconnected and curved elongated blocks/bands, and many gaps are
formed between them and filled with copper alloy. Fig. 2b shows the
P S Si N Fe
≤2.0 ≤0.045 ≤0.03 ≤0.75 ≤0.1 Bal.
Fe P
≤0.1 0.03–0.35
2
Y. Bai, et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of additively manufactured dual interfaces of 316L stainless steel and C52400 copper alloy using SLM.
shallower and wider melt pools at the interface under SEM. Fig. 3 shows
the microstructure, morphology and chemical element distribution of
SLMed L/C interface, in which 316L and C52400 can also be dis-
tinguished with two different colours.
Comparing Figs. 2b and 3b, the melt pools at C/L interface are
shallower and wider comparing to the deeper and narrower melt pool at
the L/C interface. One reason is that the process parameters for printing
316L steel are different from that printing C52400 copper alloy, which
have different energy density. Another important reason is that the heat
conductivity of 316L (16.2 W/m·K) is lower than C52400 copper alloy
(50 W/m·K). More heat can be absorbed to melt the pre-built 316L part.
Moreover, isolated 316L blocks (marked by blue arrows) with irregular
size and shape appear in the area far from the interface and near the
copper side in Fig. 2a, and isolated copper blocks (marked by blue ar-
rows) are also embedded in the pre-built 316L part in Fig. 3a. One
reason is that high undercooling leads to liquid phase separation
[31–34]. Another reason is the disturbance of the melt pool under the
effect of the laser beam as well as the complex and non-uniform metal
liquid flowing [35], which transfers the material from one place to
another place [30,36]. Solidification occurs before they can mingle
Fig. 2. Microstructure, morphology and chemical element distribution at C/L interface: (a) Optical image; (b) SEM image; (c) (d) (e) Fe and Cu element distribution
at the interface using EDS mapping.
3
Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489
homogeneously due to the high cooling rate.
Beside the melt pool morphology, another difference between C/L
and L/C interfaces is seen that there is a significant transition at the L/C
interface marked by white dotted lines. However, no significant tran-
sition area can be found at the C/L interface. This transition is formed
due to the C52400 melt pool flowing where the remelt 316L is mixed
with the copper alloy. Moreover, the contents of 316L and C52400 are
similar, which can be seen in the EDS mapping images of both inter-
faces between 316L and C52400 as shown in Figs. 2d, e, 3d, e. Besides,
the distribution of Fe and Cu elements further displays the boundaries
between two different SLMed metals at the interfaces and the inter-
diffusion of elements.
High magnification images of both interfaces were obtained using
SEM after etching as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Both interfaces are re-
vealed between 316L and C52400 parts, in which very small particles
(< 1 μm in size) are formed as shown in Figs. 4B and 5E. EDS mapping
results (Figs. 2 and 3) show that these regions are the mixtures of 316L
and C52400 because substantial Fe and Cu elements are found to co-
exist. According to Fig. 5E and the chemical composition in Table 2,
approximately spherical particles are mainly composed of 316L and the
Y. Bai, et al. Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Fig. 3. Microstructure, morphology and chemical element distribution at L/C interface: (a) Optical image; (b) SEM image; (c) (d) (e) Fe and Cu element distributions
at the interface using EDS mapping.

irregular particles are mainly composed of C52400. This is because Fe
and Cu are infinitely soluble in the liquid state and limitedly soluble in
the solid state. Due to the higher melt point, 316L will solidify first and
tend to form spheres to reduce surface free energy. Then, liquid-state
C52400 fulfils the gaps between the pre-solidified 316L particles and
solidified into irregular shapes. Figs. 4A and 5F display the
microstructure near 316L sides, in which the melt pools can be seen and
some copper blocks are embedded in the 316L part. However, near the
C52400 sides, Fig. 4C presents the sawtooth shape without well-defined
melt pools. Fig. 5D shows the feathery morphology which features the
microstructure of SLMed copper alloy [37].

Fig. 4. High magnification microstructure at the C/L interface after etching.

4
Y. Bai, et al. Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Fig. 5. High magnification microstructure at the L/C interface after etching.

Table 2 to the higher thermal conductivity of C52400 than 316L, the absorbed
Chemical composition (wt%) results from the microstructure as shown in energy by 316L melt pool is much lower than that when building 316L
Fig. 5E. on the 316L substrate material. This condition is equivalent to the
Element Fe Cr Ni Mo Si Cu Sn condition for manufacturing 316L with low laser power or low energy
density, which results in the formation of various defects such as large
Spectrum 1 36.63 9.77 7.48 1.56 0.92 39.18 4.45 cracks, holes, or pores [41,42].
Spectrum 2 7.76 2.57 5.19 – – 74.5 9.98
Cracks filled with copper alloy were also found in Fig. 3a (marked
by the yellow arrow), which means that some of the crack defects can
be eliminated and the metallurgical bond between crack interface and
3.2. Defects
copper alloy can be improved to mitigate the negative effect on the
mechanical properties [43]. However, large cracks are formed near the
Cracks (marked by the yellow arrows) can be observed at the in-
316L sides (shown by yellow arrows in Figs. 2c and 3c, and green da-
terface near 316L side in Fig. 2c, and in the pre-built 316L part near the
shed box in Fig. 5F) which are not filled or partially filled with copper
melt pool as shown in Fig. 3a and c. This is mainly caused by the dif-
alloy. For the L/C interface, the massive cracks cannot be filled com-
ference in physical properties between 316L and C52400 such as
pletely by the copper alloy before solidification because of the large size
thermal expansion, heat conduction and melt points, resulting in the
of these cracks. For the C/L interface, one reason is that the density of
stress mismatch [28,38]. Similar phenomena can be seen during
C52400 is higher than that of 316L which leads to less C52400 material
welding of copper and iron base material, in which a small amount of
near the 316L side. Another reason is the lower melt point of 316L
copper penetrates the border of 316L stainless steel and a brittle copper
which will solidify first and the crack is far from the interface, such that
film with low strength is formed. In the subsequent cooling process, due
the melted copper is blocked by the solidified 316L part from entering
to the differences in the thermophysical properties between copper and
the cracks. Similar phenomena can also be observed in the completely
stainless steel, the degree of shrinkage between copper and steel is not
and partially filled cracks with copper in electrical beam freeform
consistent, which results in high residual stress and thermal penetration
fabrication of copper/steel thin-wall parts [44]. Other types of defects
cracks in the steel side [39,40]. The cracks originate from the interface
are also evident, such as black spots marked by the white arrow in
and extend to the 316L side (as shown by yellow arrows in Figs. 4 and
Fig. 3a and pores marked by black arrows in Fig. 5. The black spots are
5), which also substantiates the above analysis. Fig. 6 displays the crack
mainly caused by oxidation. The oxides appear in the melt pool because
distribution at the C/L and L/C interfaces, respectively. It can be seen
they are too heavy to be brought to the interface of the melt pool by the
that there are few cracks in the transition area and near the copper side,
Marangoni convection [45]. Cracks, oxides and pores are undesirable
which indicates that high content of copper and low content of 316L
for the properties of SLMed multi-material parts. They should be
will not lead to cracks during SLM process. Some big cracks (marked by
eliminated by designing better process parameters and reducing the
the yellow dashed circle) with different directions are shown near 316L
oxygen content in the building process.
side at the C/L interface in Fig. 6a. These cracks are caused not only by
thermal penetration crack but also by the process parameter mismatch.
During the whole SLM process, the process parameters for 316L remain
the same. However, when building 316L on the pre-built C52400, due

5
Y. Bai, et al.
Fig. 6. Cracks distribution at (a) the C/L interface and (b) the L/C interface.
Fig. 7. SEM and EBSD images at the SLMed C/L interface: (a) Testing region; (b) EBSD result; (c)(d)(e) Pole figures and (I): Microstructure after polishing corre-
sponding to (b).
3.3. Texture characterization
Phase detection results at the C/L interface using EBSD show that
only a face-centre cubic (FCC) structure is found in the whole interface,
which are γ-Fe and ε-Cu phases [46], as shown in Fig. 7b. The
boundaries between 316L part, transition area and C52400 part can be
seen clearly. The fine grains in the grain size measurements obtained
from EBSD characterization at the C/L interface displayed that the in-
terface region has the smallest size with an average value of 5.66 μm,
compared with the C52400 regions of 8.29 μm and 316L of 13.53 μm,
as shown in Figs. 9a, b and c. The main reason for the formation of fine
grain is that the pre-solidified 316L particles offer the cores for the
subsequent grain growth. Another reason for fine grains is the melt pool
flowing and Rayleigh-Taylor instability which result in the local tur-
bulence occurring in the contact area between C52400 liquid droplet
and 316L liquid droplet. Therefore, much smaller droplets are formed.
The third reason is secondary phase separation from the highly super-
saturated Fe-rich matrix and Cu-rich matrix during solidification. Ul-
trafine grain was also found during additive manufacturing titanium
alloy by blending pure titanium powders and copper powders [47].
Regions c, d and e present significant orientated anisotropy, along
6
Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489
(001), (101) and (111). A few large grains in the fine grain region are
316L blocks which move to the transition area due to the liquid metal
flow. Moreover, obtained from the pole figure, Brass {011}⟨211⟩ and
Copper{112}⟨111⟩ are the main orientations in Region c, Cube{110}
⟨001⟩ and Brass are the main orientations in the transition Region d,
and Goss {011}⟨100⟩ and Cube mainly exist in Region e.
EBSD was also performed on the L/C interface as shown in Fig. 8.
Fine grains are also found in the transition area. However, the width of
the L/C transition (~550 μm) is much larger than that of the C/L
transition (~170 μm). Besides the liquid melt pool flowing caused by
Marangoni convection, another reason is the lower density of 316L than
C52400. Therefore, more 316L liquid can float up in the liquid melt
pool. Besides, compared with the pre-built copper alloy part, the lower
heat conductivity of pre-built 316L reduces the heat loss, increases melt
pool volume and is conducive to melting more material, which offers
the more time for 316L liquid to float up to the upper. When the next
laser scans the powders, the 316L in the upper of the previous layer will
continue to float up following the liquid metal in the melt pool. How-
ever, the size of fine grain (5.16 μm) only has negligible change com-
pared with the C/L interface (5.66 μm), as well as the grain size of the
316L part and C52400 part, as shown in Fig. 9c, d and e. Similarly,
Y. Bai, et al. Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Fig. 8. SEM and EBSD images at the SLMed L/C interface: (a) Testing region; (b) EBSD; (c) (d) (e) Pole figures and (II) Microstructure after polishing corresponding to
(b).

some big 316L blocks are found in the transition area near the 316L
side. In Fig. 8d, the orientations show more dispersion compared with
Region d in Fig. 7b. From the pole figure, Cube is the main orientation
in Region c, Goss and Copper are main orientations existing in transi-
tion Region d, and Brass and Copper are the main orientations in Region
e. Compared with the orientations in Fig. 7, the orientations of the
transition zone show significant variations in texture components. As
for the 316L and C52400 parts, the same main texture components are
maintained as orientations in Fig. 7.
3.4. Material distribution behaviour
Fig. 10a and b display the typical two-phase microstructure in
CueFe base alloys [48], in which small Fe-rich particles are formed in
large Cu matrix sphere, as well as small Cu-rich particles in large Fe
matrix sphere. The large spheres are mainly due to the liquid metal
flowing, i.e. liquid metal (316L or C52400) transporting from one lo-
cation to another. It is because the thermal distribution in the melt pool
is uneven when the laser melts the powders and remelts the pre-built
part [49,50]. Therefore, a large surface tension gradient is formed as
well as resultant Marangoni convection, which takes effects on the

Fig. 9. Grain size distribution at the dual interfacial regions: (a) (b) (c) at the L/C interface; (d) (e) (f) at the C/L interface.

7
Y. Bai, et al. Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Fig. 10. (a) Melt behaviour at the L/C interface; (b) Melt pool behaviour at the C/L interface.

Fig. 11. Diagram of melted material behaviour during SLM: (a) C/L interface; (b) L/C interface.

melting dynamics, mass and heat transfer [51–53]. Fig. 11 shows the
mass transfer of melted material during SLM of dissimilar materials. It
can be known that C52400 is brought to 316L side at the C/L interface
and 316L is brought to C52400 side at the L/C interface, which results
in the mixture of both materials. However, due to the difference in
surface tension between FeeFe and CueCu and high cooling rate, the
same material tends to aggregate instead of being scattered to blocks.
Also, the rising metal vapour lifts up part of the material at the bottom.
Some smaller particles are found inside the large ones due to the effect
of liquid metal flow that transfers and breaks the material into small
droplets. This phenomenon comes mainly from the supersaturated solid
solution formed during SLM process due to rapid solidification, which is
called secondary phase separation [54,55]. It can be seen that some
holes are formed at both interfaces, especially in the Cu-rich blocks
(marked by white arrows). One reason is that the vapour generated
during SLM did not escape from the melt pool in time, resulting in the
formation of holes. Another important reason is that the shrinkage due
to solidification of the liquid copper alloy with a reduction in volume
and the pre-solidified stainless steel in the surroundings hinder the re-
plenishment of the copper alloy liquid. Chen et al. [44] also found si-
milar holes due to the shrinkage of copper alloy when studying the
copper/304 steel gradient composite materials fabricated by electron
beam freeform process.
The EDS results corresponding to Fig. 10a and b are shown in
Table 3. Both 316L matrix and C52400 matrix are highly super-
saturated because of high contents of other elements. Fig. 12a and b
display the distribution of chemical elements across the interfaces using
EDS line scan, which gives a clear composition change. Similar step

8
Y. Bai, et al. Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489

Table 3
Main chemical composition (wt%) measured from the microstructure of Fig. 9.
Element P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12

Fe 36.22 13.11 45.45 11.97 56.08 11.23 22.13 52.65 17.56 44.60 11.05 46.12
Cr 10.53 3.62 12.69 3.73 15.15 3.00 6.39 14.87 5.13 12.14 5.29 13.46
Ni 7.82 5.41 8.12 4.38 6.97 3.37 5.14 7.23 4.62 9.83 5.06 8.86
Cu 39.15 70.29 24.35 72.40 14.25 71.80 59.44 17.22 62.89 25.31 64.25 24.02
Sn 5.43 7.03 3.44 7.52 1.02 10.59 6.89 2.15 9.80 4.82 13.66 3.31

change and larger transition region appear at the L/C interface. The
drastic fluctuations of the profiles are caused by the isolated 316L and/
or C52400 blocks distributed at the interface due to the limited mis-
cibility between 316L and C52400 during SLM.
3.5. Phase composition and microhardness
Fig. 13a shows the XRD patterns of L/C interface, including the steel
side, copper side and transition region. It is clear to see that the XRD
pattern of the transition region combines the 316L steel and C52400
copper alloy. Besides, broadening and shifting of diffraction peaks ap-
pear at the transition area, which is mainly caused by the fine grains
and residual stress formed during SLM [56,57]. According to the XRD
patterns and phase diagram of FeeCu, none Fe/Cu intermetallic com-
pounds are formed in the transition area [48]. A small peak (marked by
black arrow) appears in the transition area, which is likely the CuNi
alloy [58–60].
The microhardness was measured across the interfacial regions of
both L/C and C/L to investigate the evolution laws of microhardness
along the building direction as shown in Fig. 13b. The microhardness of
the above two interfaces was measured from the steel side to the copper
side and then steel side with a total of 24 points. The average micro-
hardness of the L/C interface decreases from 283.33 ± 5.51 HV to
181.33 ± 17.62 HV, compared with the C/L interface increasing from
188.00 ± 2.65 HV to 268.00 ± 7.00 HV. At the C/L interface, the
microhardness value fluctuates greatly compared with the L/C interface
area. This is because the large isolated 316L blocks distribute at the
interface, which has higher microhardness than the interfacial area. The
chemical element distributions at both interfaces are illustrated in
Fig. 11. The microhardness near the copper side at C/L interface is a
slightly larger than that at the L/C interface, which may be caused by
the finer grains, as shown in Figs. 7–9.
4. Conclusions
In this work, dual interfaces between 316L stainless steel and
C52400 copper alloy are manufactured successfully by SLM, and dif-
ferent characterizations between two interfaces are presented. The
microstructure, interface morphology, defects, elemental composition,
phase composition and microhardness are characterised. The primary
findings of this study are as follows:
• Different isolated alloy islands are found at both interfaces. At the
C/L interface, 316L part becomes interconnected and curved elon-
gated blocks/bands, and many gaps are formed between them and
filled with copper alloy. At the L/C interface, some copper blocks are
formed in the pre-built 316L part, and the melt pool is much deeper
and narrower. After etching, serrated morphology is found near
C52400 side at the C/L interface compared with the feathered mi-
crostructure at the L/C interface.
• Small 316L and C52400 spheres with a size of 1–5 μm are formed
under the surface tension and Marangoni convection in the melt
pool due to the rapid cooling. Smaller particles with a size of below
1 μm are formed in these spheres due to the precipitation of su-
persaturated solid solution besides the effect of convection.
• Excellent metallurgical bonding performance between the two me-
tals is obtained by mixing metals at the interfaces with no separation
between the contact area between 316L and C52400. 316L/C52400
interface displays a better combination with fewer cracks, some of
which are filled with cooper alloy, as well as wider transition re-
gions due to the lower heat conductivity and density of pre-built
316L part. Both interfaces display fine grains with an average size of
5–6 μm in the transition zone, compared with the single metal re-
gions with average grain sizes above 13 μm for 316L and 8 μm for
C52400.
• Cracks extending to the 316L side, oxides and pores in the melt pool
are the main defects at the interface. The cracks are mainly caused
by parameter mismatch and stress mismatch because of different

Fig. 12. (a) EDS line scan at the C/L interface; (b) EDS line scan at the L/C interface.

9
Y. Bai, et al.
Fig. 13. (a) XRD patterns of single metal and transition; (b) Microhardness along the building direction.
thermal expansion, heat conduction and melt points between 316L
and C52400.
•
XRD patterns indicate that no obvious intermetallic compounds are
produced during manufacturing but a trace of CuNi alloy. The mi-
crohardness decreases gradually from the 316L side to C52400 side
with 283.33 ± 5.51 HV to 181.33 ± 17.62 HV at L/C interface
and 268.00 ± 7.00 HV to 188.00 ± 2.65 HV at C/L interface,
respectively.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the Ministry of Education - Singapore
AcRF Tier 1 (Project No.: R-265-000-686-114).
Data availability
The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings cannot
be shared at this time as the data also forms part of an ongoing study.
References
[1] I. Gibson, D. Rosen, B. Stucker, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Springer New
York, New York, NY, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3.
[2] K.K. Parker, Additive manufacturing of metals, Acta Mater. 117 (2016) 371–392,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.07.019.
[3] Y. Bai, A. Chaudhari, H. Wang, Investigation on the microstructure and machin-
ability of ASTM A131 steel manufactured by directed energy deposition, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 276 (2020) 116410, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.
116410.
[4] L.D. Bobbio, R.A. Otis, J.P. Borgonia, R.P. Dillon, A.A. Shapiro, Z.K. Liu, A.M. Beese,
Additive manufacturing of a functionally graded material from Ti-6Al-4V to invar:
experimental characterization and thermodynamic calculations, Acta Mater. 127
(2017) 133–142, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.12.070.
[5] J.S. Zuback, T.A. Palmer, T. DebRoy, Additive manufacturing of functionally graded
transition joints between ferritic and austenitic alloys, J. Alloys Compd. 770 (2019)
995–1003, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.08.197.
[6] A. Bandyopadhyay, B. Heer, Additive manufacturing of multi-material structures,
Mater. Sci. Eng. R. Rep. 129 (2018) 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2018.04.
001.
[7] G.H. Loh, E. Pei, D. Harrison, M.D. Monzón, An overview of functionally graded
additive manufacturing, Addit. Manuf. 23 (2018) 34–44, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.addma.2018.06.023.
[8] B.E. Carroll, R.A. Otis, J.P. Borgonia, J.O. Suh, R.P. Dillon, A.A. Shapiro,
D.C. Hofmann, Z.K. Liu, A.M. Beese, Functionally graded material of 304L stainless
10
Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489
steel and inconel 625 fabricated by directed energy deposition: characterization and
thermodynamic modeling, Acta Mater. 108 (2016) 46–54, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.actamat.2016.02.019.
[9] 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, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
msea.2017.06.033.
[10] B. Chen, S.K. Moon, X. Yao, G. Bi, J. Shen, J. Umeda, K. Kondoh, Strength and strain
hardening of a selective laser melted AlSi10Mg alloy, Scr. Mater. 141 (2017) 45–49,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2017.07.025.
[11] T. Vilaro, V. Kottman-Rexerodt, M. Thomas, C. Colin, P. Bertrand, L. Thivillon,
S. Abed, V. Ji, P. Aubry, P. Peyre, T. Malot, Direct fabrication of a Ti-47Al-2Cr-2Nb
alloy by selective laser melting and direct metal deposition processes, Adv. Mater.
Res. 89–91 (2010) 586–591, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.89-
91.586.
[12] X.P. Li, X.J. Wang, M. Saunders, A. Suvorova, L.C. Zhang, Y.J. Liu, M.H. Fang,
Z.H. Huang, T.B. Sercombe, A selective laser melting and solution heat treatment
refined Al-12Si alloy with a controllable ultrafine eutectic microstructure and 25%
tensile ductility, Acta Mater. 95 (2015) 74–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.
2015.05.017.
[13] 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, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2016.03.111.
[14] Y. Bai, Y. Yang, Z. Xiao, M. Zhang, D. Wang, Process optimization and mechanical
property evolution of AlSiMg0.75 by selective laser melting, Mater. Des. 140 (2018)
257–266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.045.
[15] Y. Bai, D. Wang, Y. Yang, H. Wang, Effect of heat treatment on the microstructure
and mechanical properties of maraging steel by selective laser melting, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 760 (2019) 105–117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.05.115.
[16] Y. Bai, Z. Shi, Y.J. Lee, H. Wang, Optical surface generation on additively manu-
factured AlSiMg0.75 alloys with ultrasonic vibration-assisted machining, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 280 (2020) 116597. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.
2020.116597.
[17] D. Wang, G. Ye, W. Dou, M. Zhang, Y. Yang, S. Mai, Y. Liu, Influence of spatter
particles contamination on densification behavior and tensile properties of CoCrW
manufactured by selective laser melting, Opt. Laser Technol. 121 (2020) 105678,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2019.105678.
[18] C. Panwisawas, C.L. Qiu, Y. Sovani, J.W. Brooks, M.M. Attallah, H.C. Basoalto, On
the role of thermal fluid dynamics into the evolution of porosity during selective
laser melting, Scr. Mater. 105 (2015) 14–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.
2015.04.016.
[19] J. Wu, X.Q. Wang, W. Wang, M.M. Attallah, M.H. Loretto, Microstructure and
strength of selectively laser melted AlSi10Mg, Acta Mater. 117 (2016) 311–320,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.07.012.
[20] S.M.H. Hojjatzadeh, N.D. Parab, W. Yan, Q. Guo, L. Xiong, C. Zhao, M. Qu,
L.I. Escano, X. Xiao, K. Fezzaa, W. Everhart, T. Sun, L. Chen, Pore elimination
mechanisms during 3D printing of metals, Nat. Commun. 10 (2019) 1–8, https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10973-9.
[21] K.J. Lee, S. Kumai, Characterization of intermetallic compound layer formed at the
weld interface of the defocused laser welded low carbon steel/6111 aluminum alloy
lap joint, Mater. Trans. 47 (2006) 1178–1185, https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.
47.1178.
[22] Y. Shi, H. Zhang, T. Watanabe, J. Tang, CW/PW dual-beam YAG laser welding of
steel/aluminum alloy sheets, Zhongguo Jiguang/Chinese J. Lasers. 37 (2010)
1132–1137, https://doi.org/10.3788/CJL20103704.1132.
[23] M.J. Torkamany, S. Tahamtan, J. Sabbaghzadeh, Dissimilar welding of carbon steel
to 5754 aluminum alloy by Nd:YAG pulsed laser, Mater. Des. 31 (2010) 458–465,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.05.046.
Y. Bai, et al.
[24] S. Chen, L. Li, Y. Chen, J. Dai, J. Huang, Improving interfacial reaction non-
homogeneity during laser welding-brazing aluminum to titanium, Mater. Des. 32
(2011) 4408–4416, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2011.03.074.
[25] S. Shakerin, A. Hadadzadeh, B.S. Amirkhiz, S. Shamsdini, J. Li, M. Mohammadi,
Additive manufacturing of maraging steel-H13 bimetals using laser powder bed
fusion technique, Addit. Manuf. 29 (2019) 100797, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
addma.2019.100797.
[26] C. Tan, K. Zhou, W. Ma, L. Min, Interfacial characteristic and mechanical perfor-
mance of maraging steel-copper functional bimetal produced by selective laser
melting based hybrid manufacture, Mater. Des. 155 (2018) 77–85, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matdes.2018.05.064.
[27] 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. Charact. 107 (2015) 220–227, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2015.07.007.
[28] J. Chen, Y. Yang, C. Song, M. Zhang, S. Wu, D. Wang, Interfacial microstructure and
mechanical properties of 316L /CuSn10 multi-material bimetallic structure fabri-
cated by selective laser melting, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 752 (2019) 75–85, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.02.097.
[29] C. Wei, L. Li, X. Zhang, Y.H. Chueh, 3D printing of multiple metallic materials via
modified selective laser melting, CIRP Ann. 67 (2018) 245–248, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cirp.2018.04.096.
[30] C.F. Tey, X. Tan, S.L. Sing, W.Y. Yeong, Additive manufacturing of multiple ma-
terials by selective laser melting: Ti-alloy to stainless steel via a cu-alloy interlayer,
Addit. Manuf. 31 (2019) 100970, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ADDMA.2019.
100970.
[31] S. Chen, J. Huang, J. Xia, X. Zhao, S. Lin, Influence of processing parameters on the
characteristics of stainless steel/copper laser welding, J. Mater. Process. Technol.
222 (2015) 43–51, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.03.003.
[32] S. Chen, J. Huang, J. Xia, H. Zhang, X. Zhao, Microstructural characteristics of a
stainless steel/copper dissimilar joint made by laser welding, Metall. Mater. Trans.
A Phys. Metall. Mater. Sci. 44 (2013) 3690–3696, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-
013-1693-z.
[33] R.M. Miranda, E. Assunção, R.J.C. Silva, J.P. Oliveira, L. Quintino, Fiber laser
welding of NiTi to Ti-6Al-4V, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 81 (2015) 1533–1538,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7307-8.
[34] J. Li, Y. Liu, Z. Zhen, P. Jin, Q. Sun, J. Feng, Weld formation mechanism and mi-
crostructural evolution of TC4/304 stainless steel joint with Cu-based filler wire and
preheating, Materials (Basel) 12 (2019) 3071, https://doi.org/10.3390/
ma12193071.
[35] R.P. Shi, Y. Wang, C.P. Wang, X.J. Liu, Self-organization of core-shell and core-
shell-corona structures in small liquid droplets, Appl. Phys. Lett. 98 (2011)
2009–2012, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3591157.
[36] S.A. David, J.M. Vitek, Correlation between solidification parameters and weld
microstructures, Int. Mater. Rev. 34 (1989) 213–245, https://doi.org/10.1179/imr.
1989.34.1.213.
[37] Z.H. Liu, D.Q. Zhang, S.L. Sing, C.K. Chua, L.E. Loh, Interfacial characterization of
SLM parts in multi-material processing: metallurgical diffusion between 316L
stainless steel and C18400 copper alloy, Mater. Charact. 94 (2014) 116–125,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2014.05.001.
[38] 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, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2018.09.018.
[39] Z. Cheng, J. Huang, Z. Ye, Y. Chen, J. Yang, S. Chen, Microstructures and me-
chanical properties of copper-stainless steel butt-welded joints by MIG-TIG double-
sided arc welding, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 265 (2019) 87–98, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.10.007.
[40] J. Kar, S.K. Roy, G.G. Roy, Effect of beam oscillation on electron beam welding of
copper with AISI-304 stainless steel, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 233 (2016)
174–185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2016.03.001.
[41] 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 (2014) 869–879, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6297-2.
[42] A. Ahmadi, R. Mirzaeifar, N.S. Moghaddam, A.S. Turabi, H.E. Karaca, M. Elahinia,
Effect of manufacturing parameters on mechanical properties of 316L stainless steel
parts fabricated by selective laser melting: a computational framework, Mater. Des.
11
Materials Characterization 167 (2020) 110489
112 (2016) 328–338, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.09.043.
[43] U. Articek, M. Milfelner, I. Anzel, Synthesis of functionally graded material H13/Cu
by LENS technology, Adv. Prod. Eng. Manag. 8 (2013) 169–176. doi:10.14743/
apem2013.3.164.
[44] G. Chen, X. Shu, J. Liu, B. Zhang, J. Feng, Crystallographic texture and mechanical
properties by electron beam freeform fabrication of copper/steel gradient compo-
site materials, Vacuum. 171 (2020) 109009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vacuum.
2019.109009.
[45] T.N. Le, Y.L. Lo, Effects of sulfur concentration and Marangoni convection on melt-
pool formation in transition mode of selective laser melting process, Mater. Des.
179 (2019) 107866, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107866.
[46] Y.Z. Chen, F. Liu, G.C. Yang, X.Q. Xu, Y.H. Zhou, Rapid solidification of bulk un-
dercooled hypoperitectic Fe-Cu alloy, J. Alloys Compd. 427 (2007) 3–8, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2006.03.012.
[47] D. Zhang, D. Qiu, M.A. Gibson, Y. Zheng, H.L. Fraser, D.H. StJohn, M.A. Easton,
Additive manufacturing of ultrafine-grained high-strength titanium alloys, Nature.
576 (2019) 91–95, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1783-1.
[48] R.P. Shi, C.P. Wang, D. Wheeler, X.J. Liu, Y. Wang, Formation mechanisms of self-
organized core/shell and core/shell/corona microstructures in liquid droplets of
immiscible alloys, Acta Mater. 61 (2013) 1229–1243, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
actamat.2012.10.033.
[49] D. Gu, H. Wang, D. Dai, P. Yuan, W. Meiners, R. Poprawe, Rapid fabrication of Al-
based bulk-form nanocomposites with novel reinforcement and enhanced perfor-
mance by selective laser melting, Scr. Mater. 96 (2015) 25–28, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.scriptamat.2014.10.011.
[50] D. Gu, Y.C. Hagedorn, W. Meiners, G. Meng, R.J.S. Batista, K. Wissenbach,
R. Poprawe, Densification behavior, microstructure evolution, and wear perfor-
mance of selective laser melting processed commercially pure titanium, Acta Mater.
60 (2012) 3849–3860, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2012.04.006.
[51] C.L.A. Leung, S. Marussi, R.C. Atwood, M. Towrie, P.J. Withers, P.D. Lee, In situ X-
ray imaging of defect and molten pool dynamics in laser additive manufacturing,
Nat. Commun. 9 (2018) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03734-7.
[52] S.A. Khairallah, A.T. Anderson, A.M. Rubenchik, W.E. King, Laser powder-bed fu-
sion additive manufacturing: physics of complex melt flow and formation me-
chanisms of pores, spatter, and denudation zones, Addit. Manuf. Handb. Prod. Dev.
Def. Ind. 108 (2017) 613–628, https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315119106.
[53] C. Zhao, K. Fezzaa, R.W. Cunningham, H. Wen, F. De Carlo, L. Chen, A.D. Rollett,
T. Sun, Real-time monitoring of laser powder bed fusion process using high-speed X-
ray imaging and diffraction, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41598-017-03761-2.
[54] G. Salje, M. Feller-Kniepmeier, The diffusion and solubility of iron in copper, J.
Appl. Phys. 49 (1978) 229–232, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.324336.
[55] T. Toyama, F. Takahama, A. Kuramoto, H. Takamizawa, Y. Nozawa, N. Ebisawa,
M. Shimodaira, Y. Shimizu, K. Inoue, Y. Nagai, The diffusivity and solubility of
copper in ferromagnetic iron at lower temperatures studied by atom probe tomo-
graphy, Scr. Mater. 83 (2014) 5–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2014.03.
009.
[56] Y. Kok, X. Tan, S.B. Tor, C.K. Chua, Fabrication and microstructural characterisa-
tion of additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V parts by electron beam melting: this paper
reports that the microstructure and micro-hardness of an EMB part is thickness
dependent, Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 10 (2015) 13–21, https://doi.org/10.1080/
17452759.2015.1008643.
[57] Z. Sun, X. Tan, S.B. Tor, W.Y. Yeong, Selective laser melting of stainless steel 316L
with low porosity and high build rates, Mater. Des. 104 (2016) 197–204, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.035.
[58] W. Yi, J. Liu, H. Chen, Y. Gao, H. Li, Copper/nickel nanoparticle decorated carbon
nanotubes for nonenzymatic glucose biosensor, J. Solid State Electrochem. 19
(2015) 1511–1521, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10008-015-2766-2.
[59] A. Ungureanu, B. Dragoi, A. Chirieac, S. Royer, D. Duprez, E. Dumitriu, Synthesis of
highly thermostable copper-nickel nanoparticles confined in the channels of or-
dered mesoporous SBA-15 silica, J. Mater. Chem. 21 (2011) 12529–12541, https://
doi.org/10.1039/c1jm10971e.
[60] J. Yang, X. Shen, Z. Ji, H. Zhou, G. Zhu, K. Chen, In situ growth of hollow CuNi alloy
nanoparticles on reduced graphene oxide nanosheets and their magnetic and cat-
alytic properties, Appl. Surf. Sci. 316 (2014) 575–581, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apsusc.2014.08.097.