Materials Technology

Advanced Performance Materials

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ymte20

Microstructural study and mechanical

characterisation of heat-treated direct metal laser
sintered Ti6Al4V for biomedical applications

Dheepa Srinivasan , Anubhav Singh , Anigani Sudarshan Reddy & Kaushik

Chatterjee

To cite this article: Dheepa Srinivasan , Anubhav Singh , Anigani Sudarshan Reddy & Kaushik
Chatterjee (2020): Microstructural study and mechanical characterisation of heat-treated
direct metal laser sintered Ti6Al4V for biomedical applications, Materials Technology, DOI:
10.1080/10667857.2020.1830566

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10667857.2020.1830566

Published online: 06 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 21

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ymte20
MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.1080/10667857.2020.1830566

Microstructural study and mechanical characterisation of heat-treated direct

metal laser sintered Ti6Al4V for biomedical applications
Dheepa Srinivasana,b*, Anubhav Singhc, Anigani Sudarshan Reddya and Kaushik Chatterjee c

a
INTECH DMLS, Pvt. Ltd., Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore, India; bPratt and Whitney R &D centre, Bangalore, India; cDepartment of
Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, C.V. Raman Avenue, Bangalore, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) of Ti6Al4V is being widely used to manufacture biomedical Received 29 July 2020
implants. The rapid solidification process can result in undesired microstructure that imparts Accepted 25 September 2020
poor ductility and end up residual stresses. An optimum heat treatment minimizes distortion KEYWORDS
and enables a desirable microstructure. In this work, we have examined the efficacy of heat Ti6Al4V; cranial implants;
treatment in vacuum and in air, at 800°C and 1100°C. There were minimal differences in the additive manufacturing;
microstructure and mechanical properties when heat treated in air or vacuum, at 800°C. Heat selective laser melting; direct
treatment at 1100°C was feasible in vacuum but not in air. Comparisons were made with two- metal laser sintering
layer thicknesses (30 and 50mm) to enable higher productivity. These results were validated
using a cranial implant. Thus, it may be possible to do heat treatment in air at 800°C for DMLS
Ti6Al4V thereby enabling manufacturing of implants by DMLS process in a timely and cost-
effective manner.

Introduction DMLS Ti6Al4V alloy has been used extensively for

implants in vivo, in the recent past, and is being
Metal additive manufacturing (AM) processes, also
increasingly recognised as a successful alternative to
known as three-dimensional printing, are now emer­
conventionally processed alloy [14,15]. High accuracy
ging as popular and acceptable manufacturing routes
and the speed of part (implant) delivery with possible
for preparing dental, cranial, maxillofacial, knee and
extension of the implant life [16] along with the added
hip implants, owing to their ability to yield custo­
advantages of light weighting and superior osseointe­
mised, patient-specific implants with rapid production
gration [17,18,19,20,21,22], make this technology as
time in a cost-effective manner [1] The ability to
a superior alternative to the current manufacturing
supply implants that are customised to the patient’s
technologies such as investment casting or forging
anatomy via this manufacturing technology is benefi­
for Ti6Al4V implants [14,23].
cial for the patients as well as the clinicians by redu­
Despite the advantages of manufacturing by
cing the duration of surgeries and in many cases better
DMLS, the as-printed Ti6Al4V parts suffer from
osseointegration, with potentially longer implant life
several limitations such as residual tensile stresses
[2]. Furthermore, these techniques can be easily
and non-equilibrium microstructure [24,25,26],
adapted for printing solid, porous and graded struc­
among others, resulting in warping of the part,
tures based on the clinical needs [3,4,5].
low toughness and poor fatigue life [27–29]. Thus,
Titanium and its alloys are one of the most popular
heat treatment is essential to achieve desired per­
class of biomaterials used in a variety of orthopaedic,
formance of the near net-shaped implant produced
dental and cardiovascular devices [6]. Even as newer
by DMLS [27,28]. However, being an alloy that is
generation of Ti alloys are being researched [7,8],
known to undergo various phase transformations
Ti6Al4V remains a popular choice as it is a well-
when exposed to oxygen or air, heat treatment
known, proven implant material that can be manufac­
under low oxygen partial pressure (typically in
tured via conventional processes such as forging, cast­
a vacuum furnace) is preferred. The cost of produc­
ing, etc., and more recently via AM processes [6,9,10].
tion could be reduced if the AM parts could be
Direct metal laser sintered (DMLS) or selective laser
heat treated in air without necessitating the use of
melting (SLM) of Ti6Al4V from powder is now well
vacuum furnace thereby reducing costs and could
established in industry and is being explored for var­
be particularly beneficial for parts of large dimen­
ious applications including aerospace components
sions in various applications. Thus, it is imperative
and biomedical implants, among others [11,12,13].
to establish the microstructure and mechanical

CONTACT Kaushik Chatterjee kchatterjee@iisc.ac.in Department of Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, C.V. Raman Avenue,
Bangalore, India 560012
*Current address: Pratt and Whitney R &D centre, Bangalore, India
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.

properties after heat treatment in air and in DMLS of Ti6Al4V parts

vacuum. Furthermore, properties of the implant
All parts presented in this work were manufactured
are typically measured by evaluating a test coupon
using an EOS-M280 machine at INTECH DMLS
from the bulk. However, the mechanical properties
Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, in an Argon atmosphere,
and the microstructure of these samples may not be
built on a commercially pure (cp)-Ti substrate
representative of the surface properties of the actual
maintained at 150°C. Layer thickness of 30 or
implant and in particular of thin sections, such as
50 μm was used in order to examine the effect of
patient-specific cranial implants that get fabricated
a higher layer thickness for better build productiv­
via the DMLS route.
ity with corresponding energy density of 50 and
Thus, the aim of this study was to characterise
30 J/mm3. The scan strategy involved 67° rotation
the microstructural changes and the resultant
for every layer with respect to the underlying layer.
mechanical properties of DMLS Ti6Al4V when
These parameters were optimised parameters for
heat treated in air and in vacuum. In order to
a nearly dense implant (> 99.5%). After DMLS
systematically understand the phase equilibrium of
was complete, the substrate was slowly cooled to
DMLS Ti6Al4V, heat treatment was performed at
room temperature over a period of 2 h. Test speci­
two different temperatures, 800°C and 1100°C,
mens in the shape of rectangular cuboids
below and above the β-transus temperature of this
25.4 × 25.4 × 12.5 mm3 were prepared, as shown
alloy (982°C), respectively. Systematic characterisa­
in Figure 1(a). A model cranial implant was fabri­
tion of the powder, the as-printed alloy and the
cated using a 50 μm layer thickness, as shown in
alloy after heat treatment in air and vacuum are
Figure 1(b). All the specimens were subjected to
presented in this study. The heat treatment sche­
grit blasting after removing from the build plate,
dule on test coupons of DMLS Ti6Al4V alloy was
using Al2O3 grits via a manual blasting process to
further applied to a model cranial implant to assess
improve the surface finish. Surface roughness was
the possible differences between an actual implant
measured using a Zeiss profilometer Surfcom. As
and the test coupons in the as-printed and heat-
manufactured parts will be referred to as ‘as-
treated conditions.
printed’. For the sake of brevity, the rectangular
block specimens will be hereafter referred to as
Experimental ‘coupons’ and the cranial implant as the ‘implant’.

Powder characterisation
Pre-alloyed Ti6Al4V powder sourced from EOS,
GmbH of a nominal composition 90.0% Ti, 5.5%
Al, 4.08% V, 0.05% Fe, 0.13% O, 00.07% H and
0.01% N (all wt%) and mean size of ~ 38 μm (d
(10):25, d(50):38 and d(90):59), was used to prepare
test samples and a cranial implant. The morphol­
ogy and chemical composition of the as-received
powder were characterised by scanning electron
microscopy (SEM, Zeiss Ultra55, field emission
SEM with an Oxford Link system for the energy
dispersive spectroscopy (EDS).
Heat treatment
Both the coupons and the implant were subjected
to heat treatments in air (ambient pressure using
a Nabertherm box furnace) or in vacuum (10−5
mbar pressure, using a Delta power controls tube
furnace) at 800°C, 4 h. The furnace heating rate
was 5°C/min in air and 10°C/min in vacuum, with
furnace cooling at a rate between 5 and 10°C/min.
In order to understand the evolution of the β-phase
and establish the stability of the DMLS Ti6Al4V
implant, the coupon and implant were both

Figure 1. Photograph of as-printed (a) test coupons and (b) model implant.

subjected to a heat treatment at 1100°C, in air and
in vacuum, using the same conditions as used for
the 800°C heat treatment. The samples were ana­
lysed for their surface and bulk microstructures
after heat treatment.
Microstructural characterisation
The model cranial implant was further subjected to an
anodising surface treatment after hand polishing the
surface. Porosity in the coupons and implant were
quantified using a Zeiss Axiocam optical microscope
with a Clemex image analysis system. The samples
were polished following standard metallographic tech­
niques and electrolytically etched using Kroll’s reagent
(92 ml distilled water, 6 ml HNO3, 2 ml HF). The
microstructural analysis of the samples was done on
an inverted optical microscope (CarlZeiss MAT 200
Motorised Axio Vision 4.7.2 Version) using ImageJ
software. SEM along with EDS was carried out on the
implant and the coupons, before and after heat treat­
ment. Phase identification was carried with X-ray dif­
fraction (XRD, Panalytical X’Pert Pro, operated at 40
kV, 30 mA, Cu-Kα (1.54 Å). A normal θ-2θ scan with
step size of 0.033° and a scan speed of 0.014°/s was
used for the samples before and after heat treatment.
Electron back-scattered diffraction (EBSD) was per­
formed using FEI Helios G4 Dual Beam operated at
25 kV.
Hardness measurement and tensile testing
Vickers microhardness measurements were made
using a Future-Tech, FM-810 hardness tester, with
200 gf load and 10 s dwell time. Micro-tensile speci­
mens of 21 mm (length), 6 mm (gauge length) and
0.5 mm (thickness) were drawn out of the cuboid
blocks, before and after heat treatment, along both
the longitudinal and the transverse directions [30].
Figure 2. SEM micrographs of Ti6Al4V powders showing (a–b) spherical morphology of powders at different magnifications, (c)
EDS spectra and (d–f) EDS maps of distribution of Al and V in the powder particles.
MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 3
The samples were tested in the as-printed condition
and after heat treatment at 800°C in air and in
vacuum. The sample orientation was such that the
tensile axis was placed along the longitudinal build
direction. Room temperature tensile tests were carried
out using a Zwick Roell instrument at a crosshead
speed of 0.006 mm/sec.
Results and discussion
Powder characteristics
The starting Ti6Al4V powders showed a unimodal
distribution of spherical particles, as shown in Figure
2(a,b). The powder composition conformed to the
nominal Ti6Al4V composition, as shown in the repre­
sentative EDAX spectrum (inset in Figure 2(c)).
Elemental distributions taken from the EDS spectra
show a uniform distribution of Al and V in the Ti
powders (Figure 2(d–f)).
Microstructure of as-printed and heat-treated
coupons
The as-built coupon and implant measured a surface
roughness of 5 to 6 μm Ra, which reduced to half the
value after grit blasting (2 to 3 μm Ra). The surface
roughness was marginally higher (by 10%) in the long­
itudinal direction as compared to the transverse direc­
tion. The microstructures in the longitudinal and
transverse planes of the as-printed coupon built with
a 30 µm layer thickness are shown in Figure 3. The
porosity in the as-printed coupon was less than 0.5%
(> 99.5% relative density) as quantified by analysis of
the micrographs in Figure 3(a,b) and consistent with
earlier work involving similarly prepared samples [31].
The prior β grain size varied between 100 and 300 µm
and the microstructure within the grains consisted of
metastable α′ martensite formed due to the high
4 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.

Figure 3. Optical micrograph of the as-printed coupon with 30 µm layer thickness in (a, c) longitudinal and (b, d) transverse planes.
Porosity and α′ microstructure are seen in (a, b) and (c, d), respectively.

cooling rates in the SLM process, as reported by sev­
eral groups for Ti6Al4V prepared by DMLS [26,31–
33]. Note that this microstructure is markedly differ­
ent from that of the wrought alloy that typically con­
sists of equiaxed grains of α [33]. A change in the layer
thickness from 30 to 50 µm did not produce any
significant change in the microstructure, with porosity
of less than 0.5% and α′ martensite, the predominant
phase, in the as-printed condition. A magnified view
of the α′ phase can be seen in representative SEM
micrographs taken from the coupon along the long­
itudinal plane fabricated with a 50 µm layer thickness,
as illustrated in Figure 4. The microstructure along the
surface and in the bulk regions of the as-printed cou­
pon was found to be similar. Since there were no
discernable difference in the microstructure between
the two different layer thickness used for DMLS, all the
further studies were done with the higher layer thick­
ness of 50 μm, in order to enhance the build time and
thereby, productivity. Furthermore, since there was no
observable difference in the microstructures in the
longitudinal and transverse planes, only the
micrographs of the longitudinal plane are presented
in all the figures hereafter.
The microstructure of the as-printed coupon after
heat treatment in air at 800°C for 4 h, as shown in
Figure 5, revealed α′ martensitic laths transformed
into α + β phases. The β phase was present in between
the α laths and appeared with a brighter topographi­
cal contrast as shown in the secondary electron
micrographs. The two-phase α + β microstructure
was similar at the surface and in the bulk of the
coupon. This result suggests that heat treatment in
air at 800°C for 4 h did not significantly influence the
microstructural evolution at the surface. More
importantly, the influence of oxygen on microstruc­
tural evolution seems minimal for this specific heat
treatment.
The microstructures after heat treatment in
vacuum (800°C, 4 h) are shown in Figure 6. Here
again, the α′ laths also transformed in to an α + β
microstructure and the microstructures resembled
each other with no significant differences between
the surface and the bulk. Thus, there was no

Figure 4. SEM micrographs of the as-printed coupon built with 50 µm layer thickness: (a) in the bulk, and (b) at the surface of the
as-printed coupon with 50 µm layer thickness.
 MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 5

Figure 5. SEM micrographs of, (a, b) bulk and (c, d) surface of the as-printed coupon after heat treatment at 800°C for 4 h in air, at
low and high magnifications.

Figure 6. SEM micrographs of (a, b) bulk and (c, d) surface of the as-printed coupon after heat treatment at 800°C for 4 h in
vacuum.

observable difference in the microstructures, exam­
ined by SEM, after heat treatment in air or vacuum.
In both heat treatments, at 800°C, the as-printed
microstructure appeared to exhibit similar transfor­
mation to a two-phase microstructure, primarily com­
prising α phase and a lean β phase. When examined at
higher magnification, fine aligned precipitates (10 to
20 nm in length) with fibre-like appearance can be
seen. Figure 7 is a representative micrograph of the
coupon heat treated in vacuum at 800°C exhibiting
these fine bright features. More detailed investigations
using high resolution transmission electron
microscopy are warranted for further characterisation
of these precipitates.
XRD patterns for the as-printed and 800°C heat-
treated (air and vacuum) coupons are compiled in
Figure 8. The α′ and α phase both form with HCP
structure of similar lattice parameters that makes it
difficult to discern the two phases by XRD. The XRD
patterns are similar before and after the heat treatment
and confirm the predominant presence of α′ and α
phases. The relative intensities of the peaks also did
not change markedly suggesting that the crystallo­
graphic texture did not significantly evolve due to the
6 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.

Figure 7. SEM micrographs of the coupon heat treated in vacuum at 800°C showing the fine precipitates viewed at two different
magnification (a) 25,000 × and (b) 100,000 ×.

Figure 8. XRD patterns of the as-printed coupon and after heat treatment at 800°C in air and vacuum and 1100°C in vacuum.

heat treatment and the α phase likely inherited the
texture of the parent α′ phase. Note that negligible
fraction of β phase is seen. Heat treatment at 800°C
decomposes the α′ into α + β phases during which Al
and V are expected to partition between the α and β
phases, respectively. Figure 9 presents the EBSD
inverse pole figure maps of the coupon after the heat
treatment are in shown in Figure 9(a) (air) and Figure
9(b) (vacuum). The α phase is the predominant phase
and there is very minimal β phase seen after heat
treatment suggesting that the α phase likely inherited
the texture of the parent α′ phase.
The surface of the as-printed coupon was aggres­
sively oxidised when heat treatment was done in air at
a higher temperature of 1100°C and tended to crum­
ble, limiting any practical use of this heat treatment
owing to the apparently much higher diffusivity of
oxygen at 1100°C, unlike at 800°C. Figure 7 shows an
XRD pattern taken from the 1100°C (vacuum) heat
treatment.
Heat treatment at 1100°C in air was considered
unviable for implant applications due to oxidation and
therefore, is not discussed hereafter. The microstructure
after heat treatment at 1100°C for 4 h in vacuum is
 MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 7

Figure 9. EBSD inverse pole figure maps of the coupon after heat treatment at 800°C in (a) air and (b) vacuum.

Figure 10. SEM micrographs of the coupon after heat treatment at 1100°C for 4 h in vacuum (a) in the bulk and (b) at the surface
(c) composition measured by EDS at different regions of the micrographs.

shown in Figure 10. A markedly different microstruc­
ture evolved after heat treatment at 1100°C compared to
that observed at 800°C. The microstructure consists of
equiaxed grains of primary α. The regions between the
primary α grains is occupied by the β and secondary α
phases. The secondary α has a lath shaped morphology
in contrast to the equiaxed morphology of the primary
α. Figure 10(c) has a detailed elemental distribution
carried out in this microstructure, taken at high magni­
fication. The relative volume fractions of the primary
and secondary α are a function of the temperature-time
profile of the heat treatment.
Mechanical properties of as-printed and
heat-treated coupons
The effect of heat treatment of the coupon on Vickers
microhardness is plotted in Figure 11. The average
hardness at the surface and in the bulk of the as-
printed coupon was comparable at 406 HV and 411
HV, respectively, in agreement with the similar micro­
structures noted in Figure 4. These values are similar
to those reported for this alloy prepared by DMLS in
several other studies [32]. The hardness was observed
to be reduced after the heat treatment at 800°C by ≈
10% (± 5%) for both surface and bulk regions of the
8 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.
Figure 11. Vickers microhardness of the as-printed and 800°C heat-treated coupons.
coupon, in both air and vacuum. Minimal difference
in the values between the surface and bulk hardness is
further supported by the microstructural evidence in
Figure 5 suggests that oxygen diffusion was limited
during the heat treatment in air at 800°C for 4 h.
Oxygen is a strong solid solution strengthener in Ti
that makes hardness very sensitive to the oxygen con­
centration and so any significant oxygen diffusion
would have reflected in a higher surface hardness.
The hardness was higher after heat treatment in
vacuum than air. Heat transfer can be quite different
between air and vacuum due to lack of convection in
the latter that can lead to different temperature–time
profiles and consequently, different final hardness in
the coupons. Moreover, the difference in the heating
rate in the two furnaces (5°C/min in air and 10°C/min
in vacuum) could have contributed to these marginal
differences.
Room temperature tensile properties of the as-
printed and heat-treated coupons measured along
the longitudinal direction are compared in Table 1.
The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) reduced and elon­
gation increased after heat treatment. The as-printed
microstructure consisted of fine martensite that com­
bined with its high initial dislocation density led to the
high strength. Heat treatment coarsened the as-
printed martensitic microstructure and would have
reduced the dislocation density substantially,
a combination of which led to reduction in strength
and improvement in tensile elongation. These obser­
vations are in good agreement with reported literature
suggesting that DMLS alloy is stronger and brittle than
the wrought alloy [31,33]. Although the strength was
Table 1. Summary of tensile properties of as-printed and 800°
C heat treated coupons.
Tensile property As-printed 800°C, 4 h (Air) 800°C, 4 h (vacuum)
UTS (MPa) 1343 ± 11 1060 ± 16 1191 ± 4
% Elongation 10.1 ± 2.0 (1) 12.5 ± 1.0 14.5 ± 0.2
slightly higher in the vacuum heat-treated coupon
compared to air heat-treated, in agreement with the
hardness values, this difference was marginal. In
agreement with reported literature, heat treatment
reduced the strength and enhanced the elongation of
the alloy [33]. However, the elongation was lower than
that of the wrought material and unique heat treat­
ment schedules have been proposed to achieve elonga­
tion and toughness comparable to the wrought alloy
[31]. This result signifies that heat treatment at 800°C
can be performed in air without any significant loss in
mechanical properties compared to vacuum. Heat
treatment in air is simpler, cost-effective, and indust­
rially, a more attractive process than the use of
vacuum furnaces.
Microstructure and mechanical properties of the
implant
Microstructure was characterised across the thin
cross-section (≈ 0.8 mm) of the as-printed implant
and the SEM micrographs are presented in Figure
12. The microstructure of the implant resembled that
of the as-printed coupon comprising α′ martensite and
was uniform across the cross-section, systematically
taken from different regions from the left to the right
hand side, marked as L1, L2, C, R1 and R2, in Figure
12(a).
Thin strips of the implant were subjected to 800°C,
4 h heat treatment, in air or vacuum, and the respec­
tive SEM cross-section micrographs are compiled in
Figures 13 and 14. The α′ martensite transformed into
the α + β microstructure that was similar to the micro­
structure of the heat-treated coupons (Figure 5). The
microstructure was also found to be uniform across
the cross-section of the implant heat-treated in air and
vacuum. Notably, heat treatment of implant in air at
800°C did not influence the microstructure. The heat
treatment simply achieves the effect of stress relieving
 MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 9

Figure 12. Cross-sectional SEM micrographs of the as-printed implant.

Figure 13. Cross-sectional SEM micrographs of the implant after heat treatment at 800°C for 4 h in air.

Figure 14. Cross-sectional SEM micrographs of the implant after heat treatment at 800°C for 4 h in vacuum.

and eliminating the undesirable effects of deformation
of shape and loss of ductility.
The hardness along the cross-section of the as-
printed and heat-treated implants are plotted in
Figure 15. The hardness was slightly higher (≈ 8%)
along the surface (left and right edges) as compared
to the centre of the implant. This observation
contrasts with the similar surface and bulk hardness
of the as-printed coupon (Figure 11). The higher
surface hardness could be an outcome of the effect
of differing processing parameters of DMLS (such as
scan speed and laser power) that are typically used
during the layer by layer processing at the surface of
a part. The parameters of DMLS are varied from
10 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.
Figure 15. Vickers microhardness across the cross-section of the implant in as-printed and heat treated (800°C, air and vacuum)
conditions.
those used for the bulk. Therefore, all hardness mea­
surements of the coupons performed are those for the
alloy prepared under the conditions of the bulk as the
coupons had been prepared from the rectangular
blocks. In contrast, the measurements on the thin
section of the cranial implant would have significant
contributions from the surface regions prepared
using altered printing parameters, which likely
resulted in the small differences in the values
observed here.
Nevertheless, there were other similarities between
the coupons and implant. The bulk hardness of the
as-printed implant was comparable to the hardness
of the as-printed coupon. Heat treatment of the
implant in both air and vacuum reduced the hard­
ness. The relatively higher surface hardness than bulk
hardness in the as-printed implant was preserved
even after heat treatment in air and vacuum. This
observation suggests that oxygen diffusion in the
implant was limited during heat treatment in air
and therefore, is a viable processing route for the
implant. In a slight difference from coupons, heat
treatment of implant in air and vacuum produced
similar hardness, despite the difference in heat trans­
fer conditions. Overall, the results of this investiga­
tion show that the 800°C heat treatment of implant in
air poses no significant difference with respect to the
vacuum heat treatment and therefore, a preferred
processing route to enhance productivity and mini­
mise cost of production.
Conclusion
DMLS of Ti6Al4V alloy powder was used to prepare
blocks from which test coupons were prepared to
optimise heat treatment conditions and further
validated in a thin cranial implant. Change in layer
thickness of DMLS from 30 to 50 μm did not result in
a change in porosity or microstructure. The micro­
structure in the as-printed condition in the coupon as
well as the implant consisted of α’ martensitic laths.
Heat treatment of the as-printed coupon at 800°C
resulted in the transformation of α′ into α + β phases.
There were no discernable differences in the micro­
structure in the bulk or at the surface when the heat
treatment was done in air or vacuum. The hardness
decreased after heat treatment from the as-printed
condition but with minimal differences when heat
treated in air or vacuum, which was also reflected in
the UTS values from the tensile tests. The implant
exhibited similar microstructures and comparable
trends in hardness similar to the coupons in as-
printed condition and after heat treatment in air
and vacuum. These results suggest that it is feasible
to do heat treatment of DMLS parts of Ti6Al4V at
800°C in air without the need for vacuum furnaces
that can help in augmenting productivity and redu­
cing the costs.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge funding from Uchchatar Avishkar
Yojana program (UAY, Project number IISc_004).
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This work was supported by the Uchchatar Avishlkar
Yojana.

ORCID
Kaushik Chatterjee http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7204-
2926
References
[1] Calignano F, Galati M, Iuliano L, et al. Design of
additively manufactured structures for biomedical
applications: a review of the additive manufacturing
processes applied to the biomedical sector. J Healthc
Eng. 2019;2019:1–6.
[2] Ni J, Ling H, Zhang S, et al. Three-dimensional print­
ing of metals for biomedical applications. Mater
Today Bio. 2019;3. DOI:10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100024.
[3] Xie F, He X, Ji X, et al. Structural characterisation and
mechanical behaviour of porous Ti-7.5Mo alloy fab­
ricated by selective laser sintering for biomedical
applications. Mater Technol. 2017;32(4):219–224.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10667857.2016.1173169
[4] Wang Z, Yao R, Wang D, et al. Structure design and
biological evaluation of the mechanical-adaptive
titanium-based porous implants. Mater Technol.
2020;1–6. DOI:10.1080/10667857.2020.1800306
[5] Wang M, Lin X, Huang W. Laser additive manufac­
ture of titanium alloys. Mater Technol.
2016;31:90–97.
[6] Geetha M, Singh AK, Asokamani R, et al. Ti based
biomaterials, the ultimate choice for orthopaedic
implants – A review. Prog Mater Sci. 2009;54
(3):397–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.
06.004
[7] Bahl S, Suwas S, Chatterjee K. Comprehensive review
on alloy design, processing, and performance of β
Titanium alloys as biomedical materials. Int Mater
Rev. 2020:1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09506608.
2020.1735829
[8] Acharya S, Panicker AG, Laxmi DV, et al. Study of the
influence of Zr on the mechanical properties and
functional response of Ti-Nb-Ta-Zr-O alloy for
orthopedic applications. Mater Des. 2019;164:107555.
[9] Bodelón OG, Clemente C, Alobera MA, et al.
Osseointegration of TI6Al4V dental implants modi­
fied by thermal oxidation in osteoporotic rabbits.
Int J Implant Dent. 2016;2:8.
[10] Chandra A, Ryu JJ, Karra P, et al. Life expectancy of
modular Ti6Al4V hip implants: influence of stress
and environment. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater.
2011;4:1990–2001.
[11] Mierzejewska ZA, Hudák R, Sidun J. Mechanical
properties and microstructure of DMLS Ti6Al4V
alloy dedicated to biomedical applications. Materials
(Basel). 2019;12(1):176.
[12] Fan Z, Feng H. Study on selective laser melting and
heat treatment of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Results Phys.
2018;10:660–664.
[13] Mower TM, Long MJ. Mechanical behavior of addi­
tive manufactured, powder-bed laser-fused materials.
Mater Sci Eng A. 2016;651:198–213.
[14] Tunchel S, Blay A, Kolerman R, et al. 3D printing/
additive manufacturing single titanium dental
implants: a prospective multicenter study with 3
years of follow-up. Int J Dent. 2016;2016:1–9.
[15] Murr LE. Additive manufacturing of biomedical
devices: an overview. Mater Technol. 2018;33:57–70.
MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 11
[16] Popov VV, Muller-Kamskii G, Kovalevsky A, et al.
Design and 3D-printing of titanium bone implants:
brief review of approach and clinical cases. Biomed
Eng Lett. 2018;8:337–344.
[17] Chang Tu C, Tsai PI, Chen SY, et al. 3D laser-printed
porous Ti6Al4V dental implants for compromised
bone support. J Formos Med Assoc.
2020;119:420–429.
[18] Song P, Hu C, Pei X, et al. Dual modulation of
crystallinity and macro-/microstructures of 3D
printed porous titanium implants to enhance stabi­
lity and osseointegration. J Mater Chem B.
2019;7:2865–2877.
[19] Tedesco J, Lee BEJ, Lin AYW, et al. Osseointegration
of a 3D printed stemmed titanium dental implant:
a pilot study. Int J Dent. 2017;2017:1–11.
[20] Yang F, Chen C, Zhou Q, et al. Laser beam melting
3D printing of Ti6Al4V based porous structured den­
tal implants: fabrication, biocompatibility analysis
and photoelastic study. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1–12.
[21] Nune KC, Kumar A, Murr LE, et al. Interplay between
self-assembled structure of bone morphogenetic
protein-2 (BMP-2) and osteoblast functions in
three-dimensional titanium alloy scaffolds: stimula­
tion of osteogenic activity. J Biomed Mater Res - Part
A. 2016;104:517–532.
[22] Nune KC, Misra RD, Gaytan SM, et al. Biological
response of next-generation of 3d ti-6al-4v biomedi­
cal devices using additive manufacturing of cellular
and functional mesh structures. J Biomater Tissue
Eng. 2014;4:755–771.
[23] Willemsen K, Nizak R, Noordmans HJ, et al.
Challenges in the design and regulatory approval of
3D-printed surgical implants: a two-case series.
Lancet Digit Heal. 2019;1:e163–e171.
[24] Yadroitsava I, Grewar S, Hattingh D, et al. Residual
stress in SLM Ti6Al4V alloy specimens. Mater Sci
Forum. 2015;828–829:305–310.
[25] Ali H, Ghadbeigi H, Mumtaz K. Processing parameter
effects on residual stress and mechanical properties of
selective laser melted Ti6Al4V. J Mater Eng Perform.
2018;27:4059–4068.
[26] Simonelli M, Tse YY, Tuck C. Microstructure of
Ti-6Al-4V produced by selective laser melting.
J Phys Conf Ser. 2012;371:012084.
[27] Tao P, Li H, Huang B, et al. Tensile behavior of
Ti-6Al-4V alloy fabricated by selective laser melting:
effects of microstructures and as-built surface quality.
China Foundry. 2018;15:243–252. https://link.
springer.com/article/10.1007/s41230-018-8064-8.
[28] Facchini L, Magalini E, Robotti P, et al. Ductility of a
Ti-6Al-4V alloy produced by selective laser melting of
prealloyed powders. Rapid Prototyp J.
2010;16:450–459.
[29] Chastand V, Tezenas A, Cadoret Y, et al. Fatigue
characterization of Titanium Ti-6Al-4V samples pro­
duced by additive manufacturing. Procedia Struct
Integr. 2016;2:3168–3176.
[30] Reddy AS, Srinivasan D. Small scale mechanical test­
ing for additively manufactured (direct metal laser
sintered) monolithic and hybrid test samples.
Procedia Struct Integr. 2019;14:449–466.
[31] Sabban R, Bahl S, Chatterjee K, et al. Globularization
using heat treatment in additively manufactured
Ti-6Al-4V for high strength and toughness. Acta
Mater. 2019;162:239–254.
12 D. SRINIVASAN ET AL.

[32] Mezzetta J, Choi JP, Milligan J, et al. Microstructure- [33] Shunmugavel M, Polishetty A, Littlefair G.
properties relationships of Ti-6Al-4V parts fabricated Microstructure and mechanical properties of
by selective laser melting. Int J Precis Eng Manuf - wrought and additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V
Green Technol. 2018;5:605–612. https://doi.org/10. cylindrical bars. Procedia Technol.
1007/s40684-018-0062-1 2015;20:231–236.