applied

sciences
Review
Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing of Stainless Steels:
A Review
Wanwan Jin 1,2,† , Chaoqun Zhang 1, *,† , Shuoya Jin 3 , Yingtao Tian 4 , Daniel Wellmann 1,4 and
Wen Liu 5
1 Shanghai Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacture for Thin-Walled Structures, School of Mechanical
Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China; jinwanwankdl@163.com (W.J.);
daniel.wellmann@t-online.de (D.W.)
2 School of Materials Science and Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
3 School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Cranfield University, College Road, Cranfield,
Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, UK; jinshuoya@sina.com
4 Department of Engineering, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4YW, UK; y.tian12@lancaster.ac.uk
5 Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0FS, UK; wl322@cam.ac.uk
* Correspondence: chaoqunzhang@sjtu.edu.cn or acezcq@gmail.com; Tel.: +86-21-34206543
† These authors contributed equally to this work.




Received: 22 January 2020; Accepted: 21 February 2020; Published: 25 February 2020


Featured Application: Wire arc additive manufacturing has been applied in aerospace (such as
stiffened panels, wing ribs), nuclear energy, marine (such as ship’s propeller) and architecture
(such as steel bridge) industries.

Abstract: Wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) has been considered as a promising technology
for the production of large metallic structures with high deposition rates and low cost. Stainless steels
are widely applied due to good mechanical properties and excellent corrosion resistance. This paper
reviews the current status of stainless steel WAAM, covering the microstructure, mechanical properties,
and defects related to different stainless steels and process parameters. Residual stress and distortion
of the WAAM manufactured components are discussed. Specific WAAM techniques, material
compositions, process parameters, shielding gas composition, post heat treatments, microstructure,
and defects can significantly influence the mechanical properties of WAAM stainless steels. To achieve
high quality WAAM stainless steel parts, there is still a strong need to further study the underlying
physical metallurgy mechanisms of the WAAM process and post heat treatments to optimize the
WAAM and heat treatment parameters and thus control the microstructure. WAAM samples often
show considerable anisotropy both in microstructure and mechanical properties. The new in-situ
rolling + WAAM process is very effective in reducing the anisotropy, which also can reduce the residual
stress and distortion. For future industrial applications, fatigue properties, and corrosion behaviors of
WAAMed stainless steels need to be deeply studied in the future. Additionally, further efforts should
be made to improve the WAAM process to achieve faster deposition rates and better-quality control.

Keywords: WAAM; microstructure; mechanical properties; residual stress; heat treatment; distortion;
shielding gas; anisotropy; interpass rolling; defects

1. Introduction
Additive manufacturing (AM) techniques adopt layer-by-layer accumulation with the aid of
CAD/CAM model to develop three dimensional (3D) products. Based on the ISO/ASTM 52900-15
standard, AM processes include vat photo-polymerization (VP), binder jetting (BJ), material extrusion
(ME), material jetting (MJ), sheet lamination (SL), powder bed fusion (PBF), and directed energy

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563; doi:10.3390/app10051563 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 2 of 28

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 28

deposition (DED) [1]. Compared with traditional manufacturing, AM (abbreviations used in the
standard, AM processes include vat photo-polymerization (VP), binder jetting (BJ), material
paper are summarized in Table 1) techniques have the ability to produce complex components with
extrusion (ME), material jetting (MJ), sheet lamination (SL), powder bed fusion (PBF), and directed
less waste of materials and energy, and shorter processing cycle [2,3]. To date, AM has successfully
energy deposition (DED) [1]. Compared with traditional manufacturing, AM (abbreviations used in
processed a variety of metal components [4–9]. Metal additive manufacturing processes utilize laser
the paper are summarized in Table 1) techniques have the ability to produce complex components
beam, electron beam, or arc as the heat source and the feedstock material is in the form of powder,
with less waste of materials and energy, and shorter processing cycle [2,3]. To date, AM has
wire, or sheet [1,10].
successfully processed AMaprocesses
variety of used
metalfor metals mainly
components [4–9].include powdermanufacturing
Metal additive bed fusion (PBF) [11–15],
processes
directed energy deposition (DED) and sheet lamination (SL) [10]. The
utilize laser beam, electron beam, or arc as the heat source and the feedstock material is in the formcommonly used metal AM
processes
of powder,include
wire,PBF-L
or sheet(powder
[1,10]. bed
AM fusion
processesutilizing
used for a laser
metals as mainly
the heatinclude
source)powder
[16–25],bed DED-GMA
fusion
(directed energy deposition with gas metal arc), and DED-L (directed
(PBF) [11–15], directed energy deposition (DED) and sheet lamination (SL) [10]. The commonly used energy deposition using laser
beam as the heat source) [26,27]. According to the material feedstock,
metal AM processes include PBF-L (powder bed fusion utilizing a laser as the heat source) [16–25], commonly used metal AM
processes
DED-GMA can (directed
be classified as powder-based
energy deposition withand wire-based
gas metal arc), and systems
DED-L[28]. Additive
(directed energy manufacturing
deposition
processes based
using laser beamon as metal powders,
the heat source)which mainly
[26,27]. use antoelectron
According the materialbeamfeedstock,
or laser as the heat used
commonly source,
aremetal
usually
AMconfined
processes in can
a sealed chamberasdue
be classified to the high reactivity
powder-based and wire-based of the melt pool[28].
systems andAdditive
the health
andmanufacturing
safety issuesprocesses
with the based on metal powders,
fine powders, which limitswhich themainly use an of
dimension electron beamthat
the parts or laser
can beas the
built.
In heat source,
addition, theare usually
cost of the confined in a sealed
fine powder is muchchamber
higherdue to the
than highand
wires reactivity
the buildof the
ratemelt pool and
is rather slow,
the health and safety issues with the fine powders, which limits the
so that it is only suitable for small to medium sized high value components which require a betterdimension of the parts that can
be built. In
resolution addition,
[29]. As comparedthe cost toof the
the fine powder is much
powder-based higher than
AM process, thewires
wire and the buildmanufacturing
arc additive rate is rather
slow, so that it is only suitable for small to medium sized high
(WAAM) technique, which employs an electric arc as the heat source and the building capacityvalue components which require cana be
better resolution
expanded [29]. Ashas
to tens of meters, compared to the
the potential powder-based
to fabricate AM process,
fully dense and largethe wire arc additive
dimensional parts with
manufacturing (WAAM) technique, which employs an electric arc as the heat source and the building
relatively low forming costs and high manufacturing efficiencies [30]. In general, the primary cost of
capacity can be expanded to tens of meters, has the potential to fabricate fully dense and large
metal wire is roughly ten percent of the same weight of metal powder [28]. Besides, WAAM machines
dimensional parts with relatively low forming costs and high manufacturing efficiencies [30]. In
can be easily adapted from arc welding robots, which are usually much cheaper than L-PBF machines
general, the primary cost of metal wire is roughly ten percent of the same weight of metal powder
and laser-DED machines. In the WAAM process, the wire is heated, then melted and transferred to
[28]. Besides, WAAM machines can be easily adapted from arc welding robots, which are usually
the melt pool, thereby solidifies at the boundary of the melt pool and forms the designed parts layer
much cheaper than L-PBF machines and laser-DED machines. In the WAAM process, the wire is
byheated,
layer [28],
thenasmelted
shownand in Figure
transferred1 [31]. WAAM
to the is derived
melt pool, thereby from traditional
solidifies at thearc weldingoftechnology
boundary the melt
and belongs to the direct energy deposition (DED) techniques
pool and forms the designed parts layer by layer [28], as shown in Figure 1 [31]. WAAM [10]. WAAM, also known as shape
is derived
welding (European arc
from traditional name) and structural
welding technology weldandbuild up (American
belongs to the direct name), has been
energy in use for
deposition a long
(DED)
time
techniques [10]. WAAM, also known as shape welding (European name) and structural weld buildby
[32]. Early in 1926 “Application of electric arc as the heat source to produce bulk objects
spraying moltenname),
up (American metalhas intobeentheindeposited layers”
use for a long timewas
[32].patented
Early in 1926 by Baker [32]. In
“Application of1983 Kussmaul
electric arc as
employed
the heatshape
sourcewelding
to produce to manufacture
bulk objectslarge-scale
by spraying products
molten from metalhigh intostrength 20MnMoNi5
the deposited layers” steel
was of
79 patented
ton weight by[32].
Baker WAAM (shape
[32]. In 1983welding)
Kussmaul was used to manufacture
employed shape welding primary nuclear components
to manufacture large-scale by
theproducts
Germanfrom in the high
latestrength 20MnMoNi5
20th century [32]. Up steel of 79WAAM
to now, ton weight has[32].
beenWAAMapplied(shape welding)
in aerospace was as
(such
used topanels,
stiffened manufacture
wing ribs),primary nuclear
nuclear components
energy, by theas
marine (such German
ship’s in the late 20th
propeller) and century
architecture[32]. (such
Up to as
now,
steel WAAM
bridge) has been[33].
industries applied
Some incommercial
aerospace (suchWAAM as stiffened
machines panels,
have wing
been ribs), nuclearasenergy,
developed, listed in
marine (such as ship’s propeller) and architecture (such as steel
Table 2. WAAM technology has attracted the attention of different research institutions around bridge) industries [33]. Somethe
commercial WAAM machines
world [34–49], as listed in Table 3. have been developed, as listed in Table 2. WAAM technology has
attracted the attention of different research institutions around the world [34–49], as listed in Table 3.

Figure1.1.Diagrammatic
Figure sketch of
Diagrammatic sketch of WAAM
WAAMprocess
process[31].
[31].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 3 of 28

Table 1. List of abbreviations.

Abbreviations Phrases
3D Three-dimensional
AD As-deposited
AD+H900 As-deposited plus H900 ageing treatment
AM Additive manufacturing
BJ Binder jetting
CGEF Complete grown equiaxed ferrite
CMT Cold metal transfer welding
DED Directed energy deposition
DED-GMA Directed energy deposition with gas metal arc
DED-L Directed energy deposition-laser
DSS Duplex stainless steel
DWF-PAM Double-wire feed and plasma additive manufacturing
EL Elongations
GMAW Gas metal arc welding
GMAW–CMT Gas metal arc welding with the cold metal transfer process
GTAW Gas tungsten arc welding
H Horizontal
IGEF Incomplete grown equiaxed ferrite
LMPD Laser metal powder deposition
ME Material extrusion
MJ Material jetting
PAW Plasma arc welding
PBF Powder bed fusion
PBF-L Powder bed fusion-laser
RP Rapid prototyping
SG Shielding gas
SG1 Shielding gas1
SG2 Shielding gas 2
SL Sheet lamination
SLM Selective laser melting
ST As-deposited followed by solution treatment only
ST+H900 As-deposited followed by solution treatment and H900 ageing
SWF-PAM Single-wire feed and plasma additive manufacturing
UTS Ultimate tensile strength
V Vertical
VP Vat photo-polymerization
WAAM wire arc additive manufacturing
YS Yield strength

Table 2. Commercial WAAM machines.

Company Model Details Country

GTarc3000-3 A three-axis system for the production of parts
Gefertec GmbH Germany
WAAM machine up to 3 m3 with a maximum mass of 3000 kg.
Applied to the production and repair of
Mazak VARIAXIS j-600AM aerospace parts, molds, and dies and Japan
oil-drilling components.
A closed loop control system and an inert
Addilan Addilan VO.1 chamber with a special loading and unloading Spain
system.
Nanjing Enigma Automation Building Dimensions: 400 × 400 × 600 mm
ArcMan-600 China
CO., Ltd.
Layer thickness resolution: 0.5–0.25 mm
Nanjing Zhongke Raycham Building Dimensions: 3000 × 2000 × 1000 mm
RC-WAAM-3000 China
Laser Technology Co., Ltd.
Max wire feed rate: 1–5 m/min
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 4 of 28

Table 3. Main research groups working on WAAM.

Synonyms of Wire Arc Additive

Country Research Groups Ref.
Manufacturing (WAAM)
Southern Methodist Rapid prototyping (RP) based on
Jandric et al. [34]
United States University gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW)
Tufts University Near-Net Shape Manufacturing Kwak et al. [37]
Korea Institute of Science and
South Korea 3D welding Song et al. [35,36]
Technology
Japan Osaka University 3D micro welding Katou et al. [38]
University of Sheffield Shaped metal deposition Baufeld et al. [39]
Cranfield University Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing Williams et al.
United Kingdom
University of Manchester Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing Prangnell et al.
Coventry University Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing Biswal et al.
University of Wales Swansea Shaped metal deposition Clark et al. [40]
GMAW-based rapid
Harbin Institute of Technology Xiong et al. [41,42]
manufacturing
China
GMAW based additive
Harbin Institute of Technology Yang et al. [43]
manufacturing
Xi An Jiao Tong University MPAW—based rapid prototyping Aiyiti et al. [44]
India Indian Institute of Technology Hybrid Layered Manufacturing Suryakumar et al. [45]
Wire and arc additive
Ding et al. [46,47]
manufacturing (WAAM)
Australia University of Wollongong
Wire-feed additive manufacturing Ding et al. [48]
GTAW based-additive
Ma et al. [49]
manufacturing

The WAAM process can be achieved through gas metal arc welding (GMAW), gas tungsten arc
welding (GTAW), plasma arc welding (PAW), or cold metal transfer welding (CMT) for melting metal
wires and constructing a 3D component layer by layer [50–54]. Among these, GMAW is limited by
the minimum wall thickness and coarse sidewall surface owing to its relatively large melt pool and
heat input [50,55,56]. To surpass the limitations, cold metal transfer welding (CMT) [57–59] can be
adopted to achieve a very smooth droplet detachment by minimizing the arc burn time and moving
the wire electrode back and forth at frequencies up to 150 Hz [60,61]. TIG-WAAM has very clean
deposition and can manufacture metal components with high quality [62,63]. In theory, metals with
good weldability could be potentially used for WAAM process and so far researchers have successfully
fabricated 3D objects in Ti-based [64–67], Al-based [68,69], steel-based [70,71], and Ni-based [72] alloys.
Stainless steels—such as austenitic, martensitic, and duplex stainless steels—are good candidates for
WAAM due to their excellent mechanical properties and high corrosion resistance [73]. Moreover,
studies on AM of stainless steel 316 indicate that the arc power of WAAM (also known as directed
energy deposition with gas-metal-arc, DED-GMA) is 5–10 times higher than that of laser in PBF-L and
DED-L [74–88], which leads to much higher printing speed of WAAM, as shown in Figure 2 [26].
Recently, there have been a number of investigations on wire arc additive manufacturing of
stainless steels, including filler metals’ chemical composition, process parameters, process modeling,
defects, residual stress and distortion, microstructure, and mechanical properties. Stainless steels are
usually classified as: ferritic stainless steel (409, 430, etc.), austenitic stainless steel (316, 304, etc.),
austenitic–ferritic duplex stainless steel (2205, 2209) and martensitic stainless steel (420, 17-4). Their
microstructure features and mechanical properties are quite different after WAAM. Stützer et al. found
that mixing different filler metals can reduce the nickel equivalent and increase the ferrite content in
GMAW duplex stainless steel specimens [89]. Moreover, appropriate process parameters can help to
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 5 of 28

achieve a high-quality WAAM structure. Heat input, cooling rate and reheating effect can impact the
morphology, microstructure, and mechanical properties in WAAM components [86,90]. Caballero
et al. found that the cooling rate during deposition has an essential influence on retained austenite
formation. Direct ageing on the as-deposited condition leads to a reduction of ductility by nearly
50% [91]. Mukherjee and DebRoy et al. studied the printability of 316 stainless steel by heat transfer
fluid flow model. They concluded that DED-GMA has deep penetration, which makes DED-GMA
components have the lowest probability of lack of fusion defects compared to PBF-L and DED-L
parts [26].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 28

Figure 2.2. Arc power and scanning speed of WAAM

Figure WAAM (also
(also called
called DED-GMA),
DED-GMA), DED-L,
DED-L, and
and PBF-L
PBF-L
processes for 316 stainless steel [26].
processes for 316 stainless steel [26].

Although successful
Recently, there have WAAM builds ofofvarious
been a number stainlessonsteel
investigations wireparts
arc have been
additive reported in the
manufacturing of
literature, there is
stainless steels, still lack filler
including of a holistic
metals’view on this
chemical topic. This paper
composition, processis parameters,
to provide a process
systematic review
modeling,
on WAAM
defects, of stainless
residual stress steels regardingmicrostructure,
and distortion, the macroscopicand characteristics and the microstructure
mechanical properties. of the
Stainless steels are
steels undergoing different WAAM processes and parameters. The causes and morphology of
usually classified as: ferritic stainless steel (409, 430, etc.), austenitic stainless steel (316, 304, etc.),defects,
residual stress, andduplex
austenitic–ferritic distortion in the
stainless WAAM
steel (2205,parts
2209)will
andbemartensitic
discussed stainless
as well. Then, the mechanical
steel (420, 17-4). Their
properties,
microstructure features and mechanical properties are quite different after WAAM. Stützerwill
including hardness and tensile strength, and the correlation with process parameters et be
al.
explored.
found that Finally,
mixing some suggestions
different on the future
filler metals study the
can reduce of WAAM of stainless and
nickel equivalent steelsincrease
were puttheforward.
ferrite
content in GMAW duplex stainless steel specimens [89]. Moreover, appropriate process parameters
2. Macroscopic Characteristics of Samples
can help to achieve a high-quality WAAM structure. Heat input, cooling rate and reheating effect can
WAAM
impact process parameters
the morphology, determine
microstructure, andthemechanical
heat input and thermalinaccumulation,
properties WAAM components thereby impact
[86,90].
the macro morphology
Caballero et al. found that[92,93]. Zhang et
the cooling al.during
rate [52] indicated thathas
deposition theanforming efficiency
essential influenceandonprecision
retained
could be improved
austenite formation.by starting
Direct andon
ageing ending the arc of each
the as-deposited layer through
condition leads toaaback-and-forth scanning
reduction of ductility by
strategy. In the study of GMAW forming characteristics, Xiong et al. [94,95] found
nearly 50% [91]. Mukherjee and DebRoy et al. studied the printability of 316 stainless steel by heat that higher wire
feeding
transfer rate
fluidreduces the stability
flow model. of the molten
They concluded pool and larger
that DED-GMA scanning
has deep speed which
penetration, makesmakes
the arcDED-
less
stable. Both can lead
GMA components haveto the
an increase in surfaceof
lowest probability roughness. However,
lack of fusion defects acompared
lower interlay temperature
to PBF-L and DED-
could
L partsdecrease
[26]. surface roughness. The research of Ding et al. [92], Yang et al. [93], Zhang et al. [52],
and Xiong
Althoughet al.successful
[94,95] showed
WAAM that the macroscopic
builds morphology
of various stainless of WAAM
steel parts have varies with different
been reported in the
forming parameters.
literature, The of
there is still lack process parameters
a holistic andtopic.
view on this their This
influence
paper onis tomacroscopic morphology
provide a systematic of
review
WAAM
on WAAM stainless steel parts
of stainless steelswill be introduced
regarding in detail later.
the macroscopic characteristics and the microstructure of the
steelsWu et al. [96] studied
undergoing theWAAM
different influenceprocesses
of the bottom current mode,
and parameters. Thescanning
causesspeed, and interlayer
and morphology of
cooling time on the macro morphologies of 316L stainless steel samples using
defects, residual stress, and distortion in the WAAM parts will be discussed as well. Then, the MIG (metal inert gas)
mechanical properties, including hardness and tensile strength, and the correlation with process
parameters will be explored. Finally, some suggestions on the future study of WAAM of stainless
steels were put forward.

2. Macroscopic Characteristics of Samples

welding additive manufacturing. The process parameters of different samples are listed in Table 4.
As presented in Figure 3, there were no significant defects between the layers of the samples. A thin
and tall sample, #GRBC-30 cm/min-10 s G3010 (gradual reduction of bottom current, scanning speed
was 30 cm/min, cooling time was 10 s), had uniform layer height, as demonstrated in Figure 3a.
Appl. Sci. 2020,
Through the10, 1563
samples 6 of 28
in Figure 3b, Wu et al. [96] found that gradual reduction of current improves
bottom formation.
welding additive manufacturing. The process parameters of different samples are listed in Table 4.
Table 4. Process parameters of different samples [96].
As presented in Figure 3, there were no significant defects between the layers of the samples. A thin
Sample
and Scanning
tall sample, G3010 Speed/cm.min
(gradual reduction−1 Cooling Time/s
of bottom Bottom
current, scanning speedCurrent Mode cooling
was 30 cm/min,
time was 10 s), had uniform
G3010 30 layer height, as demonstrated
10 in Figure
Gradual 3a. Through
reduction the samples
of bottom current in
Figure 3b,
T3010 Wu et al. [96] found
30 that gradual reduction
10 of current improves bottom formation.
Transient reduction of bottom current
G3510 35 10
G3000 30Table 4. Process parameters
0 of different samples [96].
Gradual reduction of bottom current
G3005
Sample Scanning 30Speed/cm.min−1 5 Time/s
Cooling Bottom Current Mode
G3015 30 15
G3010 30 10 Gradual reduction of bottom current
T3010 30 10 Transient reduction of bottom current
As shown in Figure 3a,c (samples G3010and G3510), the increase in scanning speed leads to a
G3510in the deposition35
decrease 10
rate, resulting in the unevenness on the outer surface. Compared with
G3000 30 0
sample G3000 whose cooling time is 0 s, the morphology of sample G3005
Gradual was improved;
reduction however,
of bottom current
G3005 30 5
both G3015
ends of the layers collapsed
30 due to the extremely
15 high temperature. However, formation of the
ends got better if cooling time was increased to 10 or 15 s [96].

Figure 3. Morphologies of different parts in samples prepared using different parameters [96]: (a) profile
Figure 3. Morphologies of different parts in samples prepared using different parameters [96]: (a)
of sample G3010; (b) the bottom parts of different deposited samples; (c) the upper-right parts of
profile of sample G3010; (b) the bottom parts of different deposited samples; (c) the upper-right parts
different deposited samples (the parts in (b) correspond to the bottom region of (a), and the parts in (c)
of different deposited samples (the parts in (b) correspond to the bottom region of (a), and the parts
correspond to the upper-right region of (a)).
in (c) correspond to the upper-right region of (a)).
As shown in Figure 3a,c (samples G3010and G3510), the increase in scanning speed leads to a
Compared
decrease to GMAWrate,
in the deposition and GTAW,in plasma
resulting arc welding
the unevenness on thebased additive Compared
outer surface. manufacturing
with
technology has a more concentrated arc, relatively higher energy density
sample G3000 whose cooling time is 0 s, the morphology of sample G3005 was improved;(as listed in Table 5), and
however,
shaping
both precision.
ends of the layers collapsed due to the extremely high temperature. However, formation of the
ends got better if cooling time was increased to 10 or 15 s [96].
Table 5. Linear energy density (heat input) of three different WAAM techniques
Compared to GMAW and GTAW, plasma arc welding based additive manufacturing technology
has a more
WAAMconcentrated arc, relatively higher energy density
Linear (as listed
Energy in Table 5), and shaping precision.
Density/Heat
Material Reported by
Techniques Input
Table 5. Linear energy density (heat input) of three different WAAM techniques

Linear Energy
WAAM Techniques Material Reported by
Density/Heat Input
GMAW-CMT Duplex stainless steel-G 25 94 0.4–0.87 KJ/mm Eriksson et al. [97]
GTAW Ti-6Al-4V 0.186–1.492 KJ/mm Bermingham et al. [98]
PAW Ti-6Al-4V 0.655–1.302 KJ/mm Lin et al. [99]

Feng et al. [100] investigated the forming quality of SWF-PAM (single-wire feed and plasma
additive manufacturing) and DWF-PAM (double-wire feed and plasma additive manufacturing)
processes. When using the same deposition current 130 A to prepare Cr-Ni (H00Cr21Ni10) stainless
steel samples, an increase in scanning speed decreases the layer height of the deposited walls but
 Bermingham et al.
GTAW Ti-6Al-4V 0.186–1.492 KJ/mm
[98]
PAW Ti-6Al-4V 0.655–1.302 KJ/mm Lin et al. [99]

Feng
Appl. Sci. et10,
2020, al.1563 investigated the forming quality of SWF-PAM (single-wire feed and plasma
[100] 7 of 28
additive manufacturing) and DWF-PAM (double-wire feed and plasma additive manufacturing)
processes. When using the same deposition current 130 A to prepare Cr-Ni (H00Cr21Ni10) stainless
improves the surface-quality
steel samples, an increase in and reduces
scanning waviness.
speed Thethe
decreases macrographs of of
layer height thethe
deposited samples
deposited are
walls but
presented in Figure 4. Although with the same deposition current and scanning speed,
improves the surface-quality and reduces waviness. The macrographs of the deposited samples are the surface
waviness
presented ofinSWF-PAM
Figure 4. samples
Althoughwas slightly
with betterdeposition
the same than that current
of DWF-PAM samples.speed,
and scanning However,
the
the detailed
surface surface condition of SWF-PAM and DWF-PAM samples was not studied.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Photographs
Photographsofofdifferent deposited
different wall
deposited samples
wall [100]:
samples (a), (b),
[100]: (a), and
(b), (c)
andshowing the DWF-
(c) showing the
PAM samples prepared at speeds of 30 cm/min, 50 cm/min, and 60 cm/min, respectively;
DWF-PAM samples prepared at speeds of 30 cm/min, 50 cm/min, and 60 cm/min, respectively; (d), (e), and
(d),
(f) demonstrate
(e), the SWF-PAM
and (f) demonstrate samples prepared
the SWF-PAM at speeds of
samples prepared at 30 cm/min,
speeds of 3050cm/min,
cm/min,50 and 60 cm/min,
cm/min, and
respectively.
60 cm/min, respectively.

The surface of CMT- base base additive

additive manufacturing parts is rather smooth as mentioned by the
work
work ofofFronius
FroniusInternational
InternationalGmbHGmbH[57,58], Bruckner
[57,58], Bruckner et al. [59],
et al. Zhang
[59], Zhanget al.
et [60], andand
al. [60], Pickin et al.et[61].
Pickin al.
To investigate
[61]. the ability
To investigate of CMT
the ability of CMTin terms of surface
in terms of surface condition,
condition, Posch
Poschetetal. al.[55]
[55]adopted
adopted CMT CMT to
manufacture
manufacture blade-like
blade-likegeometries
geometriesofofduplex
duplexstainless
stainless steel.
steel.With
Withconsistent
consistent welding
welding parameters
parameters for for
all
layers, theythey
all layers, achieved quitequite
achieved smooth surface
smooth comparable
surface comparableto thattoobtained by hot by
that obtained rolling, flame cutting,
hot rolling, flame
cutting,
or or sand The
sand casting. casting. The absolute
absolute surface roughness
surface roughness (Ra) ofstainless
(Ra ) of duplex duplex stainless steel geometry
steel geometry was 24.5 was µm,
24.5 the
and μm,average
and thedistance
averagebetween
distance between
the highest the
peakhighest
and lowestpeak valley
and lowest valley
(Rz ) was 135.3(Rµm,
z) was
which135.3
canμm, be
which
seen incan be seen
Figure 4 of in Figure 4 of [55].
[55].
factors,such
Other factors, suchasas deposition
deposition pathpath
andandwirewire material,
material, also the
also affect affect the surface
surface condition. condition.
During
During wire-arc
wire-arc additiveadditive manufacturing
manufacturing of duplexofstainless
duplex steel
stainless steel
blocks, anblocks, an alternating
alternating direction pathdirection path
generated
generated
the uniformthe uniform
layer height,layer height,
while while a one-direction
a one-direction deposition deposition
path yielded path yielded
uneven uneven
sides due tosides due
the heat
to the heat accumulation
accumulation at theduring
at the stop point stop point during theofdeposition
the deposition each layerof[101].
eachRodriguez
layer [101].etRodriguez et al.
al. [88] applied
[88] appliedCMT
multi-bead multi-bead CMTparameters
deposition depositiontoparameters
build 316Ltostainless
build 316Lsteelstainless
walls. The steelRwalls. The Rz of
z of CMT-based
CMT-based
WAAM partsWAAM
was 220parts
µm. was 220 μm.
summary, macroscopic
In summary, macroscopic characteristics
characteristics areare closely
closely related to wire feeding speed and scanning
current mode, cooling
speed, welding current cooling time, and interlay temperature.
temperature. The influences of main process
parameters on the macroscopic morphology morphology of of WAAM
WAAM stainless
stainless steel
steel parts
parts areare listed
listed inin Table
Table 6. 6.
Further studies
Further studieson onoptimizing
optimizing thethe above-mentioned
above-mentioned process
process parameters
parameters are needed
are needed for achieving
for achieving better
better dimensional
dimensional accuracyaccuracy and surface
and surface qualityquality
of WAAM of WAAM
parts. parts.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 8 of 28

Table 6. Process parameters affecting the macro morphology of WAAM stainless steel parts

WAAM
Material Process Parameters Macroscopic Characteristics Reported by
Techniques
Gradual reduction of
316L (austenitic) stainless Welding current mode Improves bottom formation
MIG bottom current Wu et al. [96]
steel
Increasing scanning speed Unevenness of both ends
Slightly better surface-quality than
SWF-PAM: single-wire feed and plasma additive
that of Double-wire feed and
PAM H00Cr21Ni10 (austenitic) manufacturing
plasma additive manufacturing Feng et al. [100]
stainless steel
DWF-PAM: double-wire feed and plasma additive
/
manufacturing
PAM: SWF-PAM,
Increasing scanning speed Better surface quality
DWF-PAM
Alternating direction
Type-2209 (duplex) Uniform layer height
GMAW Deposition path deposition path Hosseini et al. [101]
stainless steel
One-direction deposition Uneven sides: the start side was
path higher than the end side.
Decreasing interlay temperature Surface roughness decreases
H08Mn2Si low-carbon Xiong et al. [95]
GMAW Increasing scanning speed Surface roughness increases
steel
Increasing wire feeding speed Surface roughness increases
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 9 of 28

3. Microstructure
The microstructures of WAAM stainless steel are largely determined by the thermal history
during the processes. During WAAM processing, the thermal cycle—including repeated heating and
cooling [102,103]—creates non-equilibrium microstructures in the deposited parts [104].
Table 7 summarizes the microstructure, tensile strength, yield strength, and elongation of stainless
steels manufactured by different WAAM technologies. The process factors affecting microstructure
and mechanical properties are listed in Table 7. The microstructures of a H00Cr21Ni10 stainless
steel part prepared by DWF-PAM are illustrated Figure 5 [100]. Owing to different heating state and
thermal cycles in different areas of the deposited samples, the microstructures are characterized by
three different regions: the top, middle, and bottom sections. The macrostructure, microstructure, and
mechanical properties of the middle section are critical to the manufactured components. As presented
in Figure 5b, the ferrite (δ-Fe) phase are embedded on the fine austenite matrix and each layer consists
of a sequence of fine grain (C), columnar grain (B), and equiaxed grain (A) regions from the bottom to
the
Appl.top. In SWF-PAM
Sci. 2020, samples,
10, x FOR PEER the above microstructures were also observed.
REVIEW 9 of 28

Figure 5. (a) Macrostructure of the cross-section of a WAAMed H00Cr21Ni10 stainless steel part and
(b) three regions A, B, and C of each deposited layer, i.e.,
i.e., Equiaxed grain region (A), Columnar grain
region
region (B),
(B), and
and Fine
Fine grain
grain region
region (C)
(C) [100].
[100].

Feng
Feng etet al.
al. [100]
[100] investigated
investigated thethe microstructure
microstructure in in the
the adjacent
adjacent area
area between
between the
the 35th
35th layer
layer and
and
36th layer of DWF-PAM and SWF-PAM processed parts (Figure 6). They
36th layer of DWF-PAM and SWF-PAM processed parts (Figure 6). They pointed out that increasedpointed out that increased
scanning
scanning speed
speed can can produce
produce better
better grain
grain structures
structures (finer
(finer complete
complete growngrown equiaxed ferrite (CGEF)
equiaxed ferrite (CGEF)
grain structures), and two wires melting in the same melt pool can augment the cooling
grain structures), and two wires melting in the same melt pool can augment the cooling rate, resulting rate, resulting
in
in the
the formation
formation of of aa finer
finer complete
complete grown
grown equiaxed
equiaxed ferrite
ferrite (CGEF)
(CGEF) grain
grain structure.
structure. AsAs shown
shown in in
Figure 6, as the scanning speed increased from 30 cm/min to 60 cm/min, the
Figure 6, as the scanning speed increased from 30 cm/min to 60 cm/min, the number of completenumber of complete grown
equiaxed ferrite (CGEF)
grown equiaxed ferrite grains
(CGEF)significantly increases increases
grains significantly in DWF-PAM samples. However,
in DWF-PAM samples. in SWF-PAM
However, in
samples, there are some incomplete grown equiaxed ferrite (IGEF)
SWF-PAM samples, there are some incomplete grown equiaxed ferrite (IGEF) grains when grains when the scanning speed
the
increases
scanning from
speed 30increases
cm/min tofrom 50 cm/min. As thetoscanning
30 cm/min speedAs
50 cm/min. increases to 60 cm/min,
the scanning speed the IGEF grains
increases to 60
quantity reduces, and only a few CGEF grains appear. Due to the CGEF
cm/min, the IGEF grains quantity reduces, and only a few CGEF grains appear. Due to the CGEF grains distributed in the
interface region adjacent
grains distributed in the to next layer,
interface the adjacent
region ultimate to
strength of DWF-PAM
next layer, samples
the ultimate is higher
strength than that
of DWF-PAM
of SWF-PAM specimens. The ultimate tensile strength of DWF-PAM samples
samples is higher than that of SWF-PAM specimens. The ultimate tensile strength of DWF-PAM increases by an average
of 10.2%, roughly by 52.98 MPa, when compared with those of SWF-PAM specimens
samples increases by an average of 10.2%, roughly by 52.98 MPa, when compared with those of SWF- [100].
PAM specimens [100].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 10 of 28

Table 7. Microstructure and mechanical properties of stainless steels manufactured by WAAM.

Process Materials Process Factors Microstructure YS (MPa) UTS (MPa) EL (%) Hardness (HV) Reported by
About 550, similar in
A lot of complete grown
DWF-PAM H00Cr21Ni10 / the vertical and 44.7–58.7 ~193 Feng et al. [100]
Scanning speed equiaxed ferrite (CGEF) grains
(austenitic) horizontal directions
stainless steel
A number of incomplete Around 510, similar
SWF-PAM grown equiaxed ferrite (IGEF) / in the vertical and 20.5–35.4 ~187 Feng et al. [100]
grains, and a few CGEF grains horizontal directions
SpeedPulse Coarser secondary dendrite
316 (austenitic) Heat input, cooling Horizontal 418.0 Horizontal 550 ± 6 / / Wang et al. [90]
WAAM arm spacing
stainless steel rate
Higher than the
SpeedArc Smaller secondary dendrite hardness of
Horizontal 417.9 Horizontal 553 ± 2 / Wang et al. [90]
WAAM arm spacing SpeedPulse
WAAM parts
As the nickel content reduces,
Chemical
Duplex Stainless the austenite plates become Stützer et al.
GMAW–CMT composition of / / / /
Steel smaller in size and less in [89]
feedstock
content.
Higher percentage of retained
As-built, Shielding austenite: 0.85%, area
17-4 PH gas 1 (SG1): 38% He percentage. Mainly a dendritic / Average 994 Average 11.9 ~330 Caballero et al.
CMT (martensitic) + 2% CO2 + Ar martensite-δ ferrite [91]
stainless steel microstructure
As-built, Shielding
Lower percentage of retained
gas 2 (SG2)
austenite: 0.12%, area / / / ~340
composition: 2.5%
percentage
CO2 +Ar
SG1+post-deposition
17-4 PH Caballero et al.
CMT heat treatment: Columnar microstructure / Average 1208 Average 7.3 ~450
stainless steel [91]
AD+H900
SG1+post-deposition
17-4 PH Caballero et al.
CMT heat treatment: A columnar microstructure / Average 1352 Average 13.8 ~440
stainless steel [91]
ST+H900
17-4 PH SG1+ Solution Caballero et al.
CMT N/A / Average 1003 Average 12.6 ~330
stainless steel treated [91]
* The WAAM process was also referred as DWF-PAM, SWF-PAM, GMAW–CMT, and CMT in different papers.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 11 of 28
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 28

Figure6.6. Microstructures
Figure Microstructures in
in the
the adjacent area of
adjacent area of the
the middle
middle section
sectionofofthe
thedeposited
depositedwalls
walls[100]
[100]
(H00Cr21Ni10
(H00Cr21Ni10steel).
steel).

Similarly,
Similarly,Hejripour
Hejripouretetal. al.used
used GMA-WAAM
GMA-WAAM to fabricate 2209
to fabricate 2209duplex
duplexstainless
stainlesssteel
steel(DSS)
(DSS)walls
walls
and
andtubes,
tubes,and and indicated
indicated thatthatcalculation
calculationofofcooling
cooling rates
rates in deposited
in deposited layers
layers couldcould
help help forecast
forecast the
the formation of the phases [105]. Their numerical and experimental
formation of the phases [105]. Their numerical and experimental results revealed that austenite results revealed that austenite
formation
formationcould couldbe significantly
be significantly promoted by slow
promoted by cooling rates in the
slow cooling rateslayers at elevated
in the layers temperatures.
at elevated
Wang et al. reported that cooling rate significantly affected the scale
temperatures. Wang et al. reported that cooling rate significantly affected the scale of the of the solidification structure [90].
The relationship between cooling rate (GR, the cooling rate in K/s) and secondary
solidification structure [90]. The relationship between cooling rate (GR, the cooling rate in K/s) and dendrite arm spacing
(λsecondary
2 ) is givendendrite
in Equationarm(1).
spacing (λ2) is given in Equation (1).
λ2 = 50(GR)−0.4 (1)
λ2 = 50(GR)−0.4 (1)
According to Equation (1), SpeedArc WAAM could produce smaller secondary dendrite arm
According to Equation (1), SpeedArc WAAM could produce smaller secondary dendrite arm
spacing in 316L stainless steel components than SpeedPulse WAAM because of the higher cooling
spacing in 316L stainless steel components than SpeedPulse WAAM because of the higher cooling
rate
rate[90]. (SpeedArc:
[90]. (SpeedArc: the the
primary
primarymetalmetal
transfer mode ismode
transfer the short-circuited transfer mode.
is the short-circuited SpeedPulse:
transfer mode.
the primary metal transfer mode is a projected spray transfer
SpeedPulse: the primary metal transfer mode is a projected spray transfer mode.) mode.)
Other
Otherfactors
factorsalso
alsohave
have specific
specific effects
effectsononphase
phasebalance,
balance, including
including material
material composition
composition [105] and
[105]
heat treatments [91]. For instance, in the investigation of adjusting the ferrite–austenite
and heat treatments [91]. For instance, in the investigation of adjusting the ferrite–austenite ratio of ratio of WAAM
duplex
WAAM stainless
duplexsteel components,
stainless Stützer et Stützer
steel components, al. [89] mixed twomixed
et al. [89] differenttwofiller metalsfiller
different to decrease
metals to the
nickel
decrease equivalent,
the nickel thus increasedthus
equivalent, the ferrite content
increased in the specimens.
the ferrite content in the Thespecimens.
sample fabricated
The sample with
100% of the filler metal G 22 9 3 (see Figure 7a) contains large austenitic side
fabricated with 100% of the filler metal G 22 9 3 (see Figure 7a) contains large austenitic side plates. plates. From Figure 7a–f,
asFrom
the percentage of the filler metal GZ 22 5 3 increases, the nickel content reduces,
Figure 7a–f, as the percentage of the filler metal GZ 22 5 3 increases, the nickel content reduces, and the austenite
plates
and the become smaller
austenite in become
plates size andsmaller
less in incontent.
size and The sample
less fabricated
in content. with 100%
The sample of thewith
fabricated filler100%
metal
GZof 22the5filler
3 (see Figure
metal GZ 7f)
22 5contains relatively
3 (see Figure small austenite
7f) contains platelets.
relatively small However,
austenite the However,
platelets. investigationsthe
carried out by Stützer
investigations carriedetoutal.by
did not involve
Stützer anynot
et al. did post processing
involve any postheat treatments.
processing heat treatments.
Caballero et al. [91] researched the microstructures of CMT 17-4 PH stainless steel samples under
four different heat treatment conditions, including as-deposited (AD), as-deposited plus H900 ageing
treatment (AD + H900), and as-deposited followed by solution treatment and H900 ageing (ST + H900;
solution treatment: 1040 °C for 30 min; H900 ageing treatment: 480 °C for 1 h), as presented in Figure
 Additionally, most δ-ferite is transformed into austenite which thereafter transformed into
martensite
Appl. Sci. 2020,due
10, xto the
FOR slower
PEER REVIEW cooling rate when temperatures are above A3. As a result, the13 of 28
microstructure is mainly composed of martensite, as shown in Figure 8c (sample under ST+H900
condition) [91]. Caballero
8. The shielding gas waset al. [91] also
comprised ofreported
38% He the
andinfluence
2% CO2 ofin shielding gas (SG)
argon (SG1). composition
The Cr onof 17-
eq/Nieq ratio

the final microstructure. They found that a higher percentage of retained austenite was
4 PH stainless steel is greater than 1.55, which yields a primary ferrite solidification mode. Under observed
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 12 of 28
when using SG1
equilibrium (Shielding
cooling, phasegas 1: 38% He + 2%
transformation CO2 + Ar)
sequence ofcompared
alloy 17-4with using
PH is SG2 (Shielding
as follows: gas 2: → γ-
L → δ-ferrite
2.5% CO2+Ar).
austenite + δ-ferrite → martensite + δ-ferrite [106]. However, the high cooling rates during WAAM
processing limit the amount of δ-ferrite that can convert to γ-austenite. Thus, some of the δ-ferrite
will remain at room temperature. This is why a dendritic martensite-δ ferrite microstructure can be
observed in the AD condition sample (Figure 8a).
Additionally, most δ-ferite is transformed into austenite which thereafter transformed into
martensite due to the slower cooling rate when temperatures are above A3. As a result, the
microstructure is mainly composed of martensite, as shown in Figure 8c (sample under ST+H900
condition) [91]. Caballero et al. [91] also reported the influence of shielding gas (SG) composition on
the final microstructure. They found that a higher percentage of retained austenite was observed
when using SG1 (Shielding gas 1: 38% He + 2% CO2 + Ar) compared with using SG2 (Shielding gas 2:
2.5% CO2+Ar).

Figure 7. Micrographs of the structures fabricated with different mixing ratios at 500 x magnification,
Figure 7. Micrographs of the structures fabricated with different mixing ratios at 500 x magnification,
taken in layer 10, etching: Beraha II, white: austenite, blue/brown: ferrite [89]. (WAAMed duplex
taken in layer 10, etching: Beraha II, white: austenite, blue/brown: ferrite [89]. (WAAMed duplex
stainless steel components by mixing two different filler metals)
stainless steel components by mixing two different filler metals)
Caballero et al. [91] researched the microstructures of CMT 17-4 PH stainless steel samples under
four different heat treatment conditions, including as-deposited (AD), as-deposited plus H900 ageing
treatment (AD + H900), and as-deposited followed by solution treatment and H900 ageing (ST +
H900; solution treatment: 1040 ◦ C for 30 min; H900 ageing treatment: 480 ◦ C for 1 h), as presented in
Figure 8. The shielding gas was comprised of 38% He and 2% CO2 in argon (SG1). The Creq /Nieq ratio
of 17-4 PH stainless steel is greater than 1.55, which yields a primary ferrite solidification mode. Under
equilibrium cooling, phase transformation sequence of alloy 17-4 PH is as follows: L → δ-ferrite →
γ-austenite + δ-ferrite → martensite + δ-ferrite [106]. However, the high cooling rates during WAAM
processing
Figurelimit the amount
7. Micrographs of structures
of the δ-ferrite that can convert
fabricated to γ-austenite.
with different Thus,
mixing ratios some
at 500 of the δ-ferrite
x magnification,
will remain
Figure inatMicrographs
taken 8. room10,
layer temperature. This
[91]: (a)Beraha
etching: Sample iswhite:
why austenite,
II,fabricated awith
dendritic martensite-δ
SG1 (Shielding
blue/brown: ferrite
gasferrite
1: 38% He +microstructure
[89]. 2% CO2 + Ar),
(WAAMed can be
duplex
observed in the
As-deposited AD condition
condition; (b) sample
Sample (Figure
for tensile 8a).
testing, AD
stainless steel components by mixing two different filler metals) + H900 condition; (c) Sample for tensile
testing, ST+H900 condition (Material: 17-4 steel).

Figure8.8.Micrographs
Figure Micrographs[91]:
[91]:(a)
(a)Sample
Samplefabricated
fabricatedwith
withSG1
SG1(Shielding
(Shieldinggas
gas1:1:38%
38%HeHe++2% CO2 2++ Ar),
2%CO Ar),
As-deposited
As-depositedcondition;
condition;(b)
(b)Sample
Samplefor
fortensile
tensiletesting, AD++H900
testing,AD H900condition;
condition;(c)
(c)Sample
Samplefor
fortensile
tensile
testing,
testing,ST+H900
ST+H900 condition
condition(Material:
(Material: 17-4
17-4 steel).
steel).

Additionally, most δ-ferite is transformed into austenite which thereafter transformed into
martensite due to the slower cooling rate when temperatures are above A3 . As a result, the microstructure
is mainly composed of martensite, as shown in Figure 8c (sample under ST+H900 condition) [91].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 13 of 28

Caballero et al. [91] also reported the influence of shielding gas (SG) composition on the final
microstructure. They found that a higher percentage of retained austenite was observed when using
SG1 (Shielding gas 1: 38% He + 2% CO2 + Ar) compared with using SG2 (Shielding gas 2: 2.5%
CO2 +Ar).
Different heating cycles in different areas produce an inconsistent solid phase transformation,
leading to different microstructures of H00Cr21Ni10 stainless steel part [100]. Cooling rates and
temperatures of different heat treatments have a significant impact on phase transformation of alloy
17-4 PH [91]. For duplex stainless steels, the ratio of austenite to ferrite phase crucially affects the
properties in strength and corrosion resistance [107]. The high content of austenite and the formation
of secondary austenite can significantly lower corrosion resistance and strength of stainless steel [89].
In summary, thermal history in WAAM processes play an important role in controlling the
microstructure, such as the ratio of austenite and ferrite phases. It is feasible to control the microstructure,
such as promoting the nucleation and growth of precipitates in δ-ferrite, which can influence the
mechanical properties [91], by controlling the process parameters. Modifying the material compositions,
such as using double wires [89], is another effective approach to achieve desirable final microstructures.
Post heat treatments also can significantly influence and change the final microstructure. Therefore,
in order to obtain desirable microstructures in WAAM stainless steel parts, it is very necessary to
thoroughly understand the solidification behaviors [105] and phase transformations in complex WAAM
thermal cycles, and the correlation between material compositions, process parameters, heat treatment
parameters and the final microstructure. Besides, the WAAM samples often show considerable
anisotropy in terms of tensile strength and microstructure due to the directionality of the layer wise
deposition process. It is useful to develop new processes, such as in-situ rolling + WAAM, to solve the
anisotropy problems caused by the coarse columnar crystals in the deposition direction.

4. Residual Stresses and Distortion

Similar to welding and other additive manufacturing process, residual stress and distortion are
inevitable to WAAM processes [33,108,109]. Ding et al. [108] reported that the stresses generated
during the WAAM process led to large distortion of the parts after clamp removal. Post heat treatment
is usually necessary to relieve these stresses. Besides, high residual stresses can have a substantial
effect on mechanical properties of the manufactured structures. The residual stresses higher than the
local UTS (ultimate tensile strength) of the material can lead to cracking, while the ones between the
local YS (yield strength) and UTS can cause warpage or plastic deformation [110]. According to Ding
et al. [108], the residual stress distribution across the WAAM fabricated wall was uniform and the
residual stress in the former layer rarely affected the subsequent layers. However, after the clamping
was released, the value of the rebalanced internal stress at the top of the integral component became
much lower than that at the interface to the substrate because of bending deformation of the sample.
Apart from the above-mentioned residual stresses caused by the thermal history of WAAM
process, for WAAM of steels, solid-state phase transformation is an important factor that one must
consider in studying stress evolution [111]. In multi-pass laser metal powder deposition (LMPD)
process of martensitic stainless steel (16 wt % Cr-4.5 wt % Ni-1.6 wt % Mo-0.9 wt % B-0.6 wt % Mn-0.12
wt % C), Fang et al. [111] studied the influences of solid-state phase transformation on residual stress
by the numerical simulation and XRD residual stress measurement. When phase transformation is
ignored, the simulated residual longitudinal stress is around 1100 MPa. However, it is just about
253 MPa when phase transformation is considered. The residual longitudinal stress measured by
XRD method is 390 MPa. With phase transformation and stress influence considered, the longitudinal
residual stress is about 296 MPa, which is closer to the measured data (390 MPa). The results show that
phase transformation can result in lower residual stresses. The austenite (high temperature phase) is
the weaker phase. As the temperature decreases, the strain induced or stresses assisted martensitic
transformation occurs. Transformation induced plasticity (TRIP) and the density change can result in
the large stress reduction [111].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 14 of 28

There are several types of distortion in WAAM parts, including bending deformation, shrinkage
in the longitudinal and transverse directions [112]. The repeated heating and cooling can 15
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
cause
of 28
thermal expansion and shrinkage of the deposited parts, leading to deformation, especially in large
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER
thin-walled REVIEW 15 of 28
in WAAM components[113,114]. Lee [109]. Residual
et al. stresses and
[114] reported thatdistortion are closely
a bidirectional toolrelated
path to deposition
with paths
180° rotation
in WAAM [113,114]. Lee et al. [114] reported that a bidirectional tool path with 180 ◦ rotation decreased
decreased the residual stress by around 50% at the bottom corner of the sample, which potentially
in residual
the WAAMstress [113,114]. Lee et50%
by around al. at[114]
the reported
bottom that of
corner a the
bidirectional tool potentially
sample,stainless
which path with 180° rotation
reduces
reduces the cracking susceptibility. When fabricating martensitic steel samples by thethe
decreased
cracking the residual
susceptibility. stress
When by around 50% at the bottom corner of the sample, which potentially
oscillation pass (Figure 9) [115],fabricating
high distortion martensitic
occurred stainless
in the steel samples
substrate by the
because oscillation
of high pass
heat input,
reduces
(Figure the
9) in
[115],cracking
high susceptibility. When fabricating martensitic stainless steel samples by inthe
as shown Figure 10.distortion
Gordon etoccurred in the
al. [116] reported substrate
that when because of high
deposition pathheatwasinput, as shown
one-direction from
oscillation
Figure pass
10. Gordon (Figure 9) [115],
et al.stresses high
[116] reported distortion occurred in the substrate because of high heat input,
left to right, the residual resultedthat in awhen deposition
distinctive curvaturepathofwas one-direction
a single-bead wall,from leftcan
which to
as shown
right, the in Figurestresses
residual 10. Gordon et al.in
resulted [116]
a reported that
distinctive when deposition
curvature of a path was
single-bead one-direction
wall, which can from
be
be seen in Figure 1 of [116]. The cooler left-end at the beginning makes the sample beginning a little
left in
seen to Figure
right, the1 ofresidual
[116]. stresses
The coolerresulted
left-end in at
a distinctive
thebuild
beginningcurvature
makes of a single-bead wall, which can
higher than desired. However, the right-end of the is lower than the sample beginning
anticipated, a little
because residual
be
higherseen in
thanthe Figure
desired. 1 of [116].
However, The cooler
the right-end left-end at
of thethe the
buildbeginning
is lower makes
than the sample
anticipated, beginning a little
heat from previous deposited layers causes metal to flow more [116]. Inbecause
general,residual
proper
higher
heat from than
the desired.
previous However,
deposited thelayers
right-endcausesof the
the build
metal istolower
flow than
more anticipated,
[116]. In because proper
general, residual
deposition paths can notably reduce residual stresses and deformation, particularly in large scale
heat frompaths
deposition the previous
can deposited
notably reduce layers
residual causes
stressesthe and
metal to flow more
deformation, [116]. In general,
particularly in large proper
scale
WAAM fabrication [33,114].
deposition
WAAM paths [33,114].
fabrication can notably reduce residual stresses and deformation, particularly in large scale
WAAM fabrication [33,114].

Figure 9. Diagram of the oscillation pass [115].

Figure 9. Diagram of the oscillation pass [115].
Figure 9. Diagram of the oscillation pass [115].

Figure 10. Deformation

Figure 10. Deformation during
during oscillation
oscillation [115].
[115].

In summary, thermal history and10.residual

Figure stresses
Deformation have
during a significant
oscillation [115]. impact on the distortion of
In summary, thermal history and residual stresses have a significant impact on the distortion of
WAAM parts, and the effect of both becomes more pronounced as the component volume increases [116].
WAAM parts, and the effect of both becomes more pronounced as the component volume increases
In summary,
The residual thermal
stresses history
can cause and residual
deformation, stressesinhave
decrease a significant
dimensional impactdefects,
accuracy, on the distortion
as well asof
[116]. The residual stresses can cause deformation, decrease in dimensional accuracy, defects, as well
WAAM parts, and the effect of both becomes more pronounced as the component
worsening of mechanical properties of the components. Phase transformation (especially martensitic volume increases
as worsening of mechanical properties of the components. Phase transformation (especially
[116].transformation)
phase The residual stresses
has acan cause deformation,
significant decrease in
impact on reducing dimensional
residual stress accuracy,
[111]. In defects, asthe
theory, if well
martensitic phase transformation) has a significant impact on reducing residual stress [111]. In theory,
as worsening
martensite of mechanical
transformation properties
is controlled of thewithin
to occur components.
a certainPhase transformation
temperature and time (especially
domain,
if the martensite transformation is controlled to occur within a certain temperature and time domain,
martensitic
the phase can
residual stress transformation)
be controlled has
toaasignificant
lower levelimpact
[111].onProper
reducing residual stress
deposition [111]. In theory,
path planning can
the residual stress can be controlled to a lower level [111]. Proper deposition path planning can
if the martensite transformation is controlled to occur within a certain temperature and time domain,
significantly reduce residual stresses [114]. Therefore, further efforts should be made to optimize the
the residual stress can be controlled to a lower level [111]. Proper deposition path planning can
WAAM deposition path, the thermal history and control the phase transformation during WAAM to
significantly reduce residual stresses [114]. Therefore, further efforts should be made to optimize the
reduce the residual stress and distortion through both modelling and experimental studies. Besides,
WAAM deposition path, the thermal history and control the phase transformation during WAAM to
in-situ rolling + WAAM is an effective approach for reducing the residual stress in WAAM parts.
reduce the residual stress and distortion through both modelling and experimental studies. Besides,
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 15 of 28

significantly reduce residual stresses [114]. Therefore, further efforts should be made to optimize the
WAAM deposition
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FORpath,
PEER the thermal history and control the phase transformation during WAAM
REVIEW 16 of to
28
reduce the residual stress and distortion through both modelling and experimental studies. Besides,
5. Defects
in-situ rolling + WAAM is an effective approach for reducing the residual stress in WAAM parts.
Common defects and their formation reasons in WAAM metallic parts are listed in Table 8.
5. Defects
Porosity [116], cracks, and lack of fusion [101] are the typical defects found in stainless steel parts
Common
produced defects Process
by WAAM. and their formation such
parameters, reasons in WAAM paths
as deposition metallic
andparts
heat are listed
input, in Table
cause defects8.
Porosity [116], cracks, and lack of fusion [101] are the typical defects found in
during deposition. A complex deposition path is more likely to produce the spatter ejection or stainless steel parts
produced byfusion,
insufficient WAAM. Processvoids
creating parameters,
or gapssuch asaffected
in the deposition paths
areas and
[33]. heat input,
Compared tocause
GTAW- defects
and during
PAW-
deposition. A complex deposition path is more likely to produce the spatter ejection
based WAAM, GMAW have more problems of excessive heating, spattering, or porosity, because the or insufficient
fusion, creating
electric voids
current acts or gapson
directly inthe
thefeedstock
affected areas
[88].[33].
SomeCompared
porositiestoandGTAW-
lack ofand PAW-based
fusion appearsWAAM,
on the
GMAW
cross have of
section more problems
GMAW of excessive
duplex stainless heating, spattering,
steel samples, or porosity,
especially between because the electric
the beads, current
as shown in
acts directly on the feedstock [88]. Some porosities and lack of fusion appears on
Figure 11 [101]. Gordon et al. [116] investigated porosity data for three different locations in thethe cross section
of GMAW
WAAM duplexsteel
stainless stainless steel Thermal
304 build. samples,history
especially between
causes the porosity
different beads, asforshown in Figure
top-right, 11 [101].
top-left, and
Gordon et al. locations.
bottom-right [116] investigated
The dataporosity data for
for the three three different
locations locations
show obvious in the WAAM
multimodality stainless
(see Figuresteel
4 in
304 build. Thermal history causes different porosity for top-right, top-left, and bottom-right
[116]) because of gas generation or the insufficient energy for complete melting the layers during the locations.
The data for the three locations show obvious multimodality (see Figure 4 in [116]) because of gas
process.
generation or the insufficient energy for complete melting the layers during the process.
Table 8. Defects in WAAM components and the formation reasons
Table 8. Defects in WAAM components and the formation reasons
WAAM
Material Defects Reasons Reported by
Techniques
WAAM
Material Defects Reasons Reported by
Techniques 304 stainless Insufficient energy for complete Gordon et al.
WAAM Porosity
steel
304 stainless melting the layers; gas generation.
Insufficient energy for complete melting the Gordon [116]
et al.
WAAM Porosity
steel layers; gas generation.
Raw material- Contaminants of [116]
Raw induced wire and
Contaminants substrate
of wire and
Porosity
Metals (Steel, Porosity material-induced substrateInsufficient fusion
WAAM Metals (Steel, Process-induced Wu et al. [33]
WAAM Al, Ti, etc.) or fusion
spatterorejection Wu et al. [33]
Insufficient
Al, Ti, etc.) Process-induced
spatter ejection
Incomplete melting or insufficient re-
Delamination Incomplete
melting of the or
melting underlying
insufficientsolid between
re-melting
Delamination
of thelayers
underlying solid between layers
Solidification Existence
Solidification Existence of liquid
of liquid film atfilm at terminal
terminal Tian et al.
GTAW
GTAW Inconel625
Inconel 625 Tian et [117]
al. [117]
cracking
cracking solidification
solidification
Intermetallic
Intermetallic Grain
GrainboundaryIntermetallic
Intermetallic phase-equilibrium
phase-equilibrium is freelyis Dongetet
Dong al.al.
GTAW
GTAW Al/Cu
Al/Cu crack
boundary crack broken freely broken [118]
[118]

Figure 11. Typical cross-section of WAAM type-2205 duplex stainless steel samples. The brighter area
Figure 11. Typical cross-section of WAAM type-2205 duplex stainless steel samples. The brighter area
contains more austenitic and the darker more ferritic. A pattern may be seen in the deposited sample,
contains more austenitic and the darker more ferritic. A pattern may be seen in the deposited sample,
where lines 1 and 2 represent the brightest and darkest etched regions, respectively [101].
where lines 1 and 2 represent the brightest and darkest etched regions, respectively [101].

The raw material factor, such as contamination of the substrate and filler metal, is another cause
of defects. Dirt, moisture, and grease on the surface of substrate and filler metal can be easily absorbed
into the molten pool, thereby producing porosity after solidification [33].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 16 of 28

The raw material factor, such as contamination of the substrate and filler metal, is another cause
of defects. Dirt, moisture, and grease on the surface of substrate and filler metal can be easily absorbed
into the molten pool, thereby producing porosity after solidification [33].
In summary, defects—such as lack of fusion, cracks, and porosity—need to be controlled to a
minimum level to achieve sound mechanical properties. Precise control of heat input and thermal
history, proper shielding gas and tight gas seals, high quality feedstock, and clean substrate surfaces
are helpful to reduce defects during stainless steel WAAM process.

6. Mechanical Properties
Current studies on mechanical properties of stainless steel structures fabricated by WAAM mainly
focus on hardness and tensile strength. Although, in many cases, the mechanical properties of WAAM
parts can be comparable to those of conventional machined components, there is still a need to well
understand the correlation between process parameters and the mechanical properties of WAAM
manufactured parts [119].
Studies indicated that heat input during WAAM process has a significant impact on macro
morphology, microstructure of the parts, and mechanical properties [90]. Although the wire feeding
rate remains the same, the heat input will vary when using different arc modes [90]. Another factor
that affects mechanical properties of WAAM components is metal transfer mode, which leads to
different rate of liquid droplet transfer, even though the wire feeding rate remains the same [120–122].
In this sense, Wang et al. [90] studied the effects of arc modes on mechanical properties during wire
arc additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel. The relationship between forming parameters of
WAAM technique and hardness, tensile strength, and elongation rates of stainless steel parts has been
investigated [88,96,100].

6.1. Hardness Distribution

Hejripour et al. concluded that duplex stainless steel (wire 2209) WAAM-made parts had a lower
hardness value than the base metal (a 2205 duplex stainless steel substrate) due to the lower ferrite
content in the layers [105]. According to Wang et al., the Vickers hardness values of 316L stainless
steel components exceed 175 HV, obtained by both SpeedArc (the primary metal transfer mode is
the short-circuited transfer mode) and SpeedPulse (the primary metal transfer mode is a projected
spray transfer mode) additive manufactured process [90], as shown in Figure 12. Though scanning
speeds and deposition rates are the same for both processes, the SpeedArc WAAM can provide a more
exceptional solidified structure (smaller secondary dendrite arm spacing) in the deposition parts owing
to a lower heat input and higher cooling rate. As a result, the hardness values of SpeedArc WAAM
parts are higher than those of SpeedPulse WAAM parts. However, this article does not address the
hardness distribution of different layers of the same component.
Wu et al. found that the hardness value of the 316L stainless steel sample reduced slowly from
the bottom to top because of the heat accumulation. As described in Figure 13, the average hardness in
the bottom region ranges from 177.9 HV to 182.75 HV, which is slightly higher than that in the top
region, i.e., in the range of 169–174.35 HV [96].
 short-circuited transfer mode) and SpeedPulse (the primary metal transfer mode is a projected spray
transfer mode) additive manufactured process [90], as shown in Figure 12. Though scanning speeds
and deposition rates are the same for both processes, the SpeedArc WAAM can provide a more
exceptional solidified structure (smaller secondary dendrite arm spacing) in the deposition parts
owing to a lower heat input and higher cooling rate. As a result, the hardness values of SpeedArc
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 17 of 28
WAAM parts are higher than those of SpeedPulse WAAM parts. However, this article does not
address the hardness distribution of different layers of the same component.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 28

Figure 12. Vickers hardness of 316L stainless steel components prepared by SpeedPulse and SpeedArc
additive manufacturing. A 500 g load was applied for all indentations with a dwell time of 10 s [90].

Wu et al. found that the hardness value of the 316L stainless steel sample reduced slowly from
the bottom to top because of the heat accumulation. As described in Figure 13, the average hardness
in theFigure
bottom Vickersranges
12.region hardness of 316L
from 177.9stainless
HV tosteel components
182.75 HV, which prepared by SpeedPulse
is slightly andthat
higher than SpeedArc
in the top
additive manufacturing. A 500 g load was
region, i.e., in the range of 169–174.35 HV [96]. applied for all indentations with a dwell time of 10 s [90].

Figure 13. Micro-hardness of bottom, middle, and upper parts of sample G3010 (gradual reduction of
Figure 13. Micro-hardness of bottom, middle, and upper parts of sample G3010 (gradual reduction of
bottom current, scanning speed is 30 cm/min, cooling time is 10 s) [96].
bottom current, scanning speed is 30 cm/min, cooling time is 10 s) [96].
On the other hand, process parameters—such as the transient and gradual reduction of bottom
current, the
On other hand,
scanning speed,process parameters—such
and cooling as the
time—have little transient on
influences andthegradual reduction
hardness of bottom
of the deposited
current, scanning speed, and cooling time—have little influences on the hardness
samples. As seen in Figure 14, there is no significant difference in hardness values between different of the deposited
samples. As seen
samples (316L in Figure
stainless 14, [96].
steel) there In
is no
thesignificant difference
study of Feng in hardness
et al. [100], values between
the scanning speed also different
barely
samples (316L stainless steel) [96]. In the study of Feng et al. [100], the scanning
affect the hardness of WAAMed stainless steel samples (H00Cr21Ni10 stainless steel) (see Figure 13 speed also barely
affect the However,
in [100]). hardness of theWAAMed stainless steelvalues
average microhardness samples (H00Cr21Ni10
of samples G3510 stainless
and G3015 steel) (see Figure
are slightly 13
higher
in [100]).
than thatHowever,
of others,the average
since thesemicrohardness
two samples have values of samples
relatively G3510
small heatand G3015
inputs areAs
[96]. slightly higher
reported by
than that of others, since these two samples have relatively small heat inputs [96].
Caballero et al. [91], post processing heat treatment could adjust the final hardness of WAAM 17-4 PH As reported by
Caballero et al.components.,
stainless-steel [91], post processing
specimens heat treatmentH900
underwent could adjusttreatment
ageing the final (AD+H900
hardness ofand WAAM 17-4
ST+H900)
PH
havestainless-steel
higher hardness components.,
than the ones specimens underwent
treated without furtherH900 ageing
ageing treatmentin(AD+H900
(as presented and
Figure 15 [91]).
ST+H900) have higher hardness than the ones treated without further ageing
The maximum hardness value acquired for H900 ageing treatment is 448 HV30, while the maximum (as presented in Figure
15 [91]). The
hardness maximum
value obtainedhardness
for AD orvalue acquiredisfor
ST treatment H900
about 340ageing
HV30,treatment is 448
the hardness HV30,
value while32%
increased the
maximum hardness
after heat treatment [91]. value obtained for AD or ST treatment is about 340 HV30, the hardness value
increased 32% after heat treatment [91].
In summary, post heat treatments usually have much more significant influence on the hardness
of WAAMed samples than printing process parameters.
PH stainless-steel components., specimens underwent H900 ageing treatment (AD+H900 and
ST+H900) have higher hardness than the ones treated without further ageing (as presented in Figure
15 [91]). The maximum hardness value acquired for H900 ageing treatment is 448 HV30, while the
maximum hardness value obtained for AD or ST treatment is about 340 HV30, the hardness value
increased 32% after heat treatment [91].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 18 of 28
In summary, post heat treatments usually have much more significant influence on the hardness
of WAAMed samples than printing process parameters.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 28

Figure
Figure14.
14.Average
Averagemicro
microhardness
hardnessvalues
valuesofofdifferent
differentdeposited
depositedspecimens
specimens(316L
(316LStainless
StainlessSteel)
Steel)[96].
[96].

Figure 15. Hardness distribution of the oscillated pass samples (17-4 PH stainless) deposited in different
Figure 15. Hardness distribution of the oscillated pass samples (17-4 PH stainless) deposited in
shielding gas under different heat treatment conditions (SG1: 38% He + 2% CO2 + Ar; SG2: 2.5% CO2
different shielding gas under different heat treatment conditions (SG1: 38% He + 2% CO2 + Ar; SG2:
+ Ar; AD represents as-deposited; ST: as-deposited followed by solution treatment only; AD+H900:
2.5% CO2 + Ar; AD represents as-deposited; ST: as-deposited followed by solution treatment only;
as-deposited plus H900 ageing treatment; ST+H900: as-deposited followed by solution treatment and
AD+H900: as-deposited
H900 ageing) [91]. plus H900 ageing treatment; ST+H900: as-deposited followed by solution
treatment and H900 ageing) [91].
In summary, post heat treatments usually have much more significant influence on the hardness
6.2. Tensile
of WAAMed Strength
samples than printing process parameters.
High quality WAAM components can be achieved with proper process parameters and a
6.2. Tensile Strength
comprehensive understanding of the solidification phenomenon [105]. Thompson et al. [123] stated
High quality
that geometry of theWAAM
final part,components
the thermalcan be achieved
history, with proper
and the localized process parameters
solidifications phenomenaand havea
comprehensive
an understanding
essential influence of the solidification
on the microstructure, which phenomenon
in turn affects[105]. Thompsonproperties
the mechanical et al. [123]of
stated
the
that geometry
deposited parts.ofInthe final
this part,studies
sense, the thermal
have history, and the
been carried outlocalized solidifications
on the influence phenomena
of process have
parameters
antensile
on essential influence on the microstructure, which in turn affects the mechanical properties of the
strength.
deposited
Feng etparts. In thisstudied
al. [100] sense, studies have been carried
the relationship between outthe
on scanning
the influence of process
speed, parameters
microstructure andon
tensile strength.
ultimate tensile strength. They found that CGEF grains contributed to an increase in the ultimate
tensileFeng et al. [100]
strengths and studied the relationship
elongation rates of the between the scanning
Cr-Ni stainless steel speed,
samples microstructure
manufactured and byultimate
DWF-
tensile
PAM orstrength.
SWF-PAM, They found
while that CGEF
the scanning grainswere
speeds contributed to an 30
ranging from increase
cm/minintothe60ultimate
cm/min. tensile
Yield
strengths and elongation rates of the Cr-Ni stainless steel samples manufactured
strengths and ultimate tensile strengths are also dependent on the deposition direction, which leads by DWF-PAM or
SWF-PAM,
to the upward while the scanning
growth speeds
of the coarse were ranging
columnar from
crystals 30 cm/min
resulting to 60 cm/min.
in anisotropy Yield strengths
[124,125]. As stated and
by
Wu et al. [96], there is no obvious difference in the mean values of the horizontal and vertical tensile
strengths between samples. However, the tensile strengths are indeed different in the horizontal and
vertical orientations in the same build [88,96].
Tables 7 and 9 list the tensile strength of stainless steel structures from different WAAM
processes. The tensile strength of WAAM 316L steel is comparable to the wrought one. The 316
 Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 19 of 28

ultimate tensile strengths are also dependent on the deposition direction, which leads to the upward
growth of the coarse columnar crystals resulting in anisotropy [124,125]. As stated by Wu et al. [96],
there is no obvious difference in the mean values of the horizontal and vertical tensile strengths between
samples. However, the tensile strengths are indeed different in the horizontal and vertical orientations
in the same build [88,96].
Tables 7 and 9 list the tensile strength of stainless steel structures from different WAAM processes.
The tensile strength of WAAM 316L steel is comparable to the wrought one. The 316 stainless steel
samples fabricated by CMT and TopTIG with different current programs (continuous or pulsed)
have comparable elongations (EL). Besides, the elongation is similar in horizontal (X) and vertical
(Z) orientations [88]. However, samples deposited by MIG welding [96], CMT, and TopTIG based
WAAM [88] are anisotropic in terms of yield strength (YS) and ultimate tensile strength (UTS). Yield
strength of CMT samples in vertical orientation is lower than that in horizontal orientation owing to
preferential growth of austenite grains [88]. Furthermore, research on anisotropy of MIG welding
depositions shows that short heat dissipation time, severe heat accumulation, and cooling rate decline
made the structure more uniform. A higher scanning speed can accelerate the cooling rate, leading to
distinct
Appl. anisotropy
Sci. 2020, 10, x FORinPEER
sample G3510. Moreover, the relatively low thermal input of the bottom transient
REVIEW 20 of 28
current (sample T3010) can cause a more pronounced anisotropy [96]. According to Caballero et al. [91],
the bottom transient
post-deposition current (sample
heat treatment T3010)
can help can cause
to obtain a moretensile
the required pronounced anisotropy
properties. [96].direct
However, According
aging
to Caballero
(without prioretsolution
al. [91], post-deposition
treatment) heat treatment
on as-deposited conditioncan
canhelp to δ-ferrite
lead to obtain the required
phase tensile
embrittlement,
properties.
making theHowever,martensitic direct aging (without
stainless-steel (17-4prior solution treatment)
PH stainless-steel) partson as-deposited
brittle. condition
The localized can
brittle
lead to δ-ferrite phase embrittlement, making the martensitic stainless-steel (17-4 PH
facets found in the fractographs can serve as evidence of possible localized δ-ferrite embrittlement stainless-steel)
partsFigure
(see brittle.16).
The localized brittle facets found in the fractographs can serve as evidence of possible
localized δ-ferrite embrittlement (see Figure 16).

Figure 16.
Figure Fracture morphology
16. Fracture morphology of
of tensile
tensile fracture
fracture surfaces
surfaces of
of AD+H900 condition: as-deposited
AD+H900 condition: as-deposited plus
plus
H900 ageing
H900 ageing treatment
treatment [91].
[91].

The Table
anisotropy of strength
9. Tensile tensile of
strength
stainlesshas
steelan important
parts produced effect on the performance
using different WAAM processes of additive
manufacturing components. Even though some studies have been conducted on the anisotropy of
mechanical YS for deeper
UTS understanding
EL Reported
Process properties Materials
of WAAM stainless steels, Sample further studies are needed
(MPa) (MPa) (%) by
its mechanism and then properly control it. WAAM+in-situ rolling and post heat treatments could be
316 (austenitic) Wang et al.
useful approaches
SpeedPulse WAAM to reduce the anisotropy.
Horizontal As-deposited 418.0 550 ± 6 /
stainless steel [90]
In summary, WAAM techniques, material compositions, process parameters, shielding gas
316 (austenitic) Wang et al.
SpeedArc WAAMpost heat treatments, and
composition, Horizontal As-deposited
the microstructure and defects417.9 553 ± 2
can significantly /
influence the
stainless steel [90]
mechanical
Wrought (cold properties of WAAM
316 (austenitic)stainless steels. Further understanding on
255– the correlation
525– between the et
Yadollahi
above-mentioned factors and precise control/ of them,Cold finishedthe final microstructure, are
especially / important
finished) stainless steel 310 623 al. [87]
for better controlling the mechanical properties
T3010-H1 of WAAM stainless steels. 335.00 537.40 /
T3010-H2 310.00 498.77 /
T3010-H3 336.83 563.78 /
T3010-V1 370.33 628.19 /
T3010-V2 371.11 616.07 /
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 20 of 28

Table 9. Tensile strength of stainless steel parts produced using different WAAM processes

Process Materials Sample YS (MPa) UTS (MPa) EL (%) Reported by

SpeedPulse WAAM 316 (austenitic) stainless steel Horizontal As-deposited 418.0 550 ± 6 / Wang et al. [90]
SpeedArc WAAM 316 (austenitic) stainless steel Horizontal As-deposited 417.9 553 ± 2 / Wang et al. [90]
Wrought (cold finished) 316 (austenitic) stainless steel / Cold finished 255–310 525–623 / Yadollahi et al. [87]
T3010-H1 335.00 537.40 /
T3010-H2 310.00 498.77 /
T3010-H3 336.83 563.78 /
T3010-V1 370.33 628.19 /
T3010-V2 371.11 616.07 /
T3010-V3 342.56 585.83 /
G3010-H1 330.17 541.08 /
G3010-H2 345.67 561.38 /
Speed-cold-welding additive
316 (austenitic) stainless steel G3010-H3 As-deposited 327.17 570.56 / Wu et al. [96]
manufacturing
G3010-V1 369.17 628.04 /
G3010-V2 364.17 606.68 /
G3010-V3 339.50 574.68 /
G3510-H1 307.33 524.30 /
G3510-H2 306.17 525.75 /
G3510-H3 336.67 593.59 /
G3510-V1 359.56 634.47 /
G3510-V2 336.67 602.56 /
G3510-V3 336.67 621.44 /
G3015-H1 333.33 564.69 /
G3015-H2 335.83 558.86 /
G3015-H3 353.00 619.28 /
G3015-V1 373.00 637.98 /
G3015-V2 345.83 609.24 /
G3015-V3 365.50 595.88 /
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 21 of 28

Table 9. Cont.

Process Materials Sample YS (MPa) UTS (MPa) EL (%) Reported by

Horizontal 364.3 ± 13.9 577.3 ± 4.0 43.4 ± 4.7
CMT technology in continuous modes
Vertical 336.9 ± 1.7 574.1 ± 7.9 42.0 ± 3.7
316L (austenitic) stainless steel As-deposited Rodriguez et al. [88]
Horizontal 374.0 ± 11.2 588.0 ± 5.7 45.1 ± 3.5
CMT technology in pulsed modes
Vertical 331.7 ± 5.4 536.0 ± 15.3 45.6 ± 16.7
TopTIG technology in continuous Horizontal 365.5 ± 8.7 590.3 ± 3.6 42.3 ± 2.7
mode Vertical 322.2 ± 2.7 539.9 ± 14.7 43.1 ± 6.9
Post-deposition heat
Horizontal 1293 8.2
treatment: AD+H900 /
Post-deposition heat
Vertical 1124 6.5
17-4 PH (martensitic) stainless treatment: AD+H900
CMT Caballero et al. [91]
steel Post-deposition heat
Horizontal 1353 13.8
treatment: ST+H900 /
Post-deposition heat
Vertical 1351 13.8
treatment: ST+H900
Horizontal As-deposited (AD) 1009 11.6
/
Vertical As-deposited (AD) 979 12.2
Post-deposition heat
Horizontal 1000 12.8
treatment: ST /
Post-deposition heat
Vertical 1006 12.4
treatment: ST
H: horizontal; V: vertical; EL: elongations; YS: yield strength; UTS: ultimate tensile strength; T3010: transient reduction of bottom current, scanning speed 30 cm/min, cooling time 10 s;
G3010: gradual reduction of bottom current, scanning speed 30 cm/min, cooling time 10 s; G3510: gradual reduction of bottom current, scanning speed 35 cm/min, cooling time 10 s; G3015:
gradual reduction of bottom current, scanning speed 30 cm/min, cooling time 15 s; AD: as-deposited; AD+H900: as-deposited plus H900 ageing treatment; ST: as-deposited plus solution
treatment; ST+H900: as-deposited followed by solution treatment and H900 ageing.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 22 of 28

7. Summary and Outlook

WAAM has been proved to be a low-cost, high efficiency AM process (compared with PBF AM
processes) for producing large-scale stainless steel parts. Recent studies on WAAM of various stainless
steels have been reviewed from the aspects of macroscopic characteristics, microstructure evolution,
post heat treatments, residual stress and distortion, defects, and mechanical properties.

(1) Macroscopic characteristics of WAAMed stainless steel parts are closely related to wire feeding
speed and scanning speed, welding current mode, cooling time, and interlay temperature. Further
studies on optimizing the above-mentioned process parameters are needed for achieving better
dimensional accuracy and surface quality of WAAM parts.
(2) Thermal history in WAAM processes plays an important role in controlling the microstructure,
such as the ratio of austenite and ferrite phases. Thus, it is feasible to control the microstructure
by controlling the process parameters. Modifying the material compositions, such as using
double wires, is another effective approach to achieve desirable final microstructures. Post heat
treatments can also significantly influence and change the final microstructure. Therefore, in
order to obtain desirable microstructures in WAAM stainless steel parts, it is very necessary to
thoroughly understand the solidification behaviors [104] and phase transformations in complex
WAAM thermal cycles, and the correlation between material compositions, process parameters,
heat treatment parameters, and the final microstructure.
(3) Residual stresses and thermal history have a significant impact on the distortion of WAAM
parts. The effect of both becomes more pronounced as the component volume increases [116].
The residual stresses can cause deformation, decrease in dimensional accuracy, defects, as well
as worsening of mechanical properties of the components. Phase transformation (especially
martensitic phase transformation) has a significant impact on reducing residual stress [111].
Proper deposition path planning can also significantly reduce residual stresses [114]. Therefore,
further efforts should be made to optimize the WAAM deposition path, the thermal history, and
control the phase transformation during WAAM to reduce the residual stress and distortion
through both modelling and experimental studies.
(4) Defects, such as lack of fusion, cracks, and porosity, need to be controlled to a minimum level to
achieve sound mechanical properties. Precise control of heat input and thermal history, proper
shielding gas and tight gas seals, high quality feedstock, and clean substrate surfaces are helpful
to reduce defects during stainless steel WAAM process.
(5) WAAM techniques, material compositions, process parameters, shielding gas composition, post
heat treatments, microstructure, and defects can significantly influence the mechanical properties
of WAAM stainless steels. Further understanding on the correlation between these factors and
precise control of them, especially the final microstructure, are important for better controlling
the mechanical properties of WAAM stainless steels.
(6) WAAM samples often show considerable anisotropy in terms of tensile strength and microstructure
due to the directionality of layer wise deposition process. It is useful to develop new processes,
such as in-situ rolling + WAAM, to solve the anisotropy problems caused by the coarse columnar
crystals in the deposition direction. In-situ rolling + WAAM also can reduce the residual stress in
WAAM parts.
(7) The main limitation of the paper is that the numerical modelling of the WAAM process was not
sufficiently discussed in this paper.
(8) For future industrial applications, fatigue properties, and corrosion behaviors of WAAMed
stainless steels need to be deeply studied.
(9) Additionally, further efforts should be made to improve the WAAM process to achieve faster
deposition rates and better quality control.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 23 of 28

Author Contributions: Writing—original draft, W.J.; Writing—outline of the paper, review and editing,
supervision, funding acquisition, C.Z., W.J., and C.Z. contributed equally to this paper; Review and editing—S.J.,
Y.T., D.W., and W.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 51605287,
and Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai, grant number 16ZR1417100. This work was also supported by the
fund of State Key Laboratory of Long-Life High Temperature Materials.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. ASTM-International. ISO/ASTM52900-15 Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing—General
Principles—Terminology; ASTM-International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015; Volume 3, p. 5.
2. Ding, D.; Pan, Z.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H. A multi-bead overlapping model for robotic wire and arc additive
manufacturing (WAAM). Robot. Comput. Manuf. 2015, 31, 101–110. [CrossRef]
3. Chen, B.; Mazumder, J. Role of process parameters during additive manufacturing by direct metal deposition
of Inconel 718. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2017, 23, 919–929. [CrossRef]
4. Yusuf, S.M.; Cutler, S.; Gao, N. Review: The Impact of Metal Additive Manufacturing on the Aerospace
Industry. Metals 2019, 9, 1286. [CrossRef]
5. Martin, A.A.; Calta, N.P.; Khairallah, S.A.; Wang, J.; Depond, P.J.; Fong, A.Y.; Thampy, V.; Guss, G.M.;
Kiss, A.M.; Stone, K.H.; et al. Dynamics of pore formation during laser powder bed fusion additive
manufacturing. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1987. [CrossRef]
6. Seede, R.; Shoukr, D.; Zhang, B.; Whitt, A.; Gibbons, S.; Flater, P.; Elwany, A.; Arroyave, R.; Karaman, I.
An ultra-high strength martensitic steel fabricated using selective laser melting additive manufacturing:
Densification, microstructure, and mechanical properties. Acta Mater. 2020, 186, 199–214. [CrossRef]
7. Polonsky, A.; Lenthe, W.C.; Echlin, M.P.; Livescu, V.; Gray, G.T.; Pollock, T.M. Solidification-driven orientation
gradients in additively manufactured stainless steel. Acta Mater. 2020, 183, 249–260. [CrossRef]
8. Smith, T.; Sugar, J.D.; Marchi, C.S.; Schoenung, J.M. Strengthening mechanisms in directed energy deposited
austenitic stainless steel. Acta Mater. 2019, 164, 728–740. [CrossRef]
9. Hou, H.; Simsek, E.; Ma, T.; Johnson, N.S.; Qian, S.; Cissé, C.; Stasak, D.; Al Hasan, N.; Zhou, L.; Hwang, Y.; et al.
Fatigue-resistant high-performance elastocaloric materials made by additive manufacturing. Science 2019,
366, 1116–1121. [CrossRef]
10. Thapliyal, S. Challenges associated with the wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) of aluminum alloys.
Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 112006. [CrossRef]
11. Segura-Cárdenas, E.; Ramirez-Cedillo, E.; Robles, J.A.S.; Ruiz-Huerta, L.; Caballero-Ruiz, A.; Siller, H.
Permeability Study of Austenitic Stainless Steel Surfaces Produced by Selective Laser Melting. Metals 2017, 7,
521. [CrossRef]
12. Antunes, F.; Santos, L.; Capela, C.; Ferreira, J.; Costa, J.; Jesus, J.; Prates, P. Fatigue Crack Growth in Maraging
Steel Obtained by Selective Laser Melting. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4412. [CrossRef]
13. Everhart, W.; Newkirk, J. Grain Size Effects in Selective Laser Melted Fe-Co-2V. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3701.
[CrossRef]
14. Nguyen, D.-S.; Park, H.-S.; Lee, C.-M. Applying Selective Laser Melting to Join Al and Fe: An Investigation
of Dissimilar Materials. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3031. [CrossRef]
15. Santos, L.; Jesus, J.A.D.S.D.; Ferreira, J.; Costa, J.; Capela, C. Fracture Toughness of Hybrid Components with
Selective Laser Melting 18Ni300 Steel Parts. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1879. [CrossRef]
16. Barros, R.; Silva, F.; Gouveia, R.; Saboori, A.; Marchese, G.; Biamino, S.; Salmi, A.; Atzeni, E. Laser Powder
Bed Fusion of Inconel 718: Residual Stress Analysis Before and After Heat Treatment. Metals 2019, 9, 1290.
[CrossRef]
17. Denti, L.; Sola, A. On the Effectiveness of Different Surface Finishing Techniques on A357.0 Parts Produced by
Laser-Based Powder Bed Fusion: Surface Roughness and Fatigue Strength. Metals 2019, 9, 1284. [CrossRef]
18. Shi, X.; Ma, S.; Liu, C.; Chen, C.; Wu, Q.; Chen, X.; Jiping, L. Performance of High Layer Thickness in Selective
Laser Melting of Ti6Al4V. Materials 2016, 9, 975. [CrossRef]
19. Tian, Z.; Zhang, C.; Wang, D.; Liu, W.; Fang, X.; Wellmann, D.; Zhao, Y.; Tian, Y. A Review on Laser Powder
Bed Fusion of Inconel 625 Nickel-Based Alloy. Appl. Sci. 2019, 10, 81. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 24 of 28

20. Chen, H.; Zhang, C.; Jia, D.; Wellmann, D.; Liu, W. Corrosion Behaviors of Selective Laser Melted Aluminum
Alloys: A Review. Metals 2020, 10, 102. [CrossRef]
21. Mohr, G.; Altenburg, S.J.; Ulbricht, A.; Heinrich, P.; Baum, D.; Maierhofer, C.; Hilgenberg, K. In-Situ Defect
Detection in Laser Powder Bed Fusion by Using Thermography and Optical Tomography—Comparison to
Computed Tomography. Metals 2020, 10, 103. [CrossRef]
22. Debroy, T.; Mukherjee, T.; Milewski, J.O.; Elmer, J.W.; Ribic, B.; Blecher, J.J.; Zhang, W. Scientific, technological
and economic issues in metal printing and their solutions. Nat. Mater. 2019, 18, 1026–1032. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
23. Lin, T.-C.; Cao, C.; Sokoluk, M.; Jiang, L.; Wang, X.; Schoenung, J.M.; Lavernia, E.J.; Li, X. Aluminum with
dispersed nanoparticles by laser additive manufacturing. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 4124–4129. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
24. Zai, L.; Zhang, C.; Wang, Y.; Guo, W.; Wellmann, D.; Tong, X.; Tian, Y. Laser Powder Bed Fusion of
Precipitation-Hardened Martensitic Stainless Steels: A Review. Metals 2020, 10, 255. [CrossRef]
25. Yang, Y.; Zhang, C.; Wang, D.; Nie, L.; Wellmann, D.; Tian, Y. Additive manufacturing of WC-Co hardmetals:
A review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, in press.
26. Mukherjee, T.; Debroy, T. Printability of 316 stainless steel. Sci. Technol. Weld. Join. 2019, 24, 412–419.
[CrossRef]
27. Todaro, C.J.; Easton, M.A.; Qiu, D.; Zhang, D.; Bermingham, M.J.; Lui, E.W.; Brandt, M.; StJohn, D.H.; Qian, M.
Grain structure control during metal 3D printing by high-intensity ultrasound. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11,
142–149. [CrossRef]
28. Frazier, W.E. Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2014, 23, 1917–1928.
[CrossRef]
29. Sing, S.L.; An, J.; Yeong, W.Y.; Wiria, F.E. Laser and electron-beam powder-bed additive manufacturing of
metallic implants: A review on processes, materials and designs. J. Orthop. Res. 2015, 34, 369–385. [CrossRef]
30. Syed, W.U.H.; Pinkerton, A.; Li, L. A comparative study of wire feeding and powder feeding in direct diode
laser deposition for rapid prototyping. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2005, 247, 268–276. [CrossRef]
31. McAndrew, A.; Rosales, M.A.; Colegrove, P.; Hönnige, J.R.; Ho, A.; Fayolle, R.; Eyitayo, K.; Stan, I.;
Sukrongpang, P.; Crochemore, A.; et al. Interpass rolling of Ti-6Al-4V wire + arc additively manufactured
features for microstructural refinement. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 21, 340–349. [CrossRef]
32. Korzhyk, V.; Khaskin, V.; Voitenko, O.; Sydorets, V.; Dolianovskaia, O. Welding Technology in Additive
Manufacturing Processes of 3D Objects. Mater. Sci. Forum 2017, 906, 121–130. [CrossRef]
33. Wu, B.; Pan, Z.; Ding, D.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H.; Xu, J.; Norrish, J. A review of the wire arc additive manufacturing
of metals: Properties, defects and quality improvement. J. Manuf. Process. 2018, 35, 127–139. [CrossRef]
34. Jandric, Z.; Labudovic, M.; Kovacevic, R. Effect of heat sink on microstructure of three-dimensional parts
built by welding-based deposition. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2004, 44, 785–796. [CrossRef]
35. Song, Y.-A.; Park, S.; Choi, D.; Jee, H. 3D welding and milling: Part I–a direct approach for freeform
fabrication of metallic prototypes. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2005, 45, 1057–1062. [CrossRef]
36. Song, Y.-A.; Park, S.; Chae, S.-W. 3D welding and milling: Part II—Optimization of the 3D welding process
using an experimental design approach. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2005, 45, 1063–1069. [CrossRef]
37. Kwak, Y.-M.; Doumanidis, C. Geometry Regulation of Material Deposition in Near-Net Shape Manufacturing
by Thermally Scanned Welding. J. Manuf. Process. 2002, 4, 28–41. [CrossRef]
38. Katou, M.; Oh, J.; Miyamoto, Y.; Matsuura, K.; Kudoh, M. Freeform fabrication of titanium metal and
intermetallic alloys by three-dimensional micro welding. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 2093–2098. [CrossRef]
39. Baufeld, B.; Biest, O.; Gault, R. Additive manufacturing of Ti–6Al–4V components by shaped metal deposition:
Microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, S106–S111. [CrossRef]
40. Clark, D.; Bache, M.; Whittaker, M.T. Shaped metal deposition of a nickel alloy for aero engine applications.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 203, 439–448. [CrossRef]
41. Xiong, J.; Zhang, G.; Gao, H.; Wu, L. Modeling of bead section profile and overlapping beads with
experimental validation for robotic GMAW-based rapid manufacturing. Robot. Comput. Manuf. 2013, 29,
417–423. [CrossRef]
42. Xiong, J.; Zhang, G.; Qiu, Z.; Li, Y. Vision-sensing and bead width control of a single-bead multi-layer
part: Material and energy savings in GMAW-based rapid manufacturing. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 41, 82–88.
[CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 25 of 28

43. Yang, D.; He, C.; Zhang, G. Forming characteristics of thin-wall steel parts by double electrode GMAW based
additive manufacturing. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2016, 227, 153–160. [CrossRef]
44. Aiyiti, W.; Zhao, W.; Lu, B.; Tang, Y. Investigation of the overlapping parameters of MPAW-based rapid
prototyping. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2006, 12, 165–172. [CrossRef]
45. Suryakumar, S.; Karunakaran, K.; Bernard, A.; Chandrasekhar, U.; Raghavender, N.; Sharma, D. Weld bead
modeling and process optimization in Hybrid Layered Manufacturing. Comput. Des. 2011, 43, 331–344.
[CrossRef]
46. Ding, D.; Pan, Z.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H. A tool-path generation strategy for wire and arc additive manufacturing.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2014, 73, 173–183. [CrossRef]
47. Ding, D.; Pan, Z.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H. A practical path planning methodology for wire and arc additive
manufacturing of thin-walled structures. Robot. Comput. Manuf. 2015, 34, 8–19. [CrossRef]
48. Ding, D.; Pan, Z.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H.; Larkin, N. Adaptive path planning for wire-feed additive manufacturing
using medial axis transformation. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 942–952. [CrossRef]
49. Ma, Y.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H.; Pan, Z.; Shen, C. The effect of postproduction heat treatment on γ-TiAl alloys
produced by the GTAW-based additive manufacturing process. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2016, 657, 86–95.
[CrossRef]
50. Zhang, Y.M.; Li, P.; Chen, Y.; Male, A.T. Automated system for welding-based rapid prototyping. Mechatronics
2002, 12, 37–53. [CrossRef]
51. Wang, H.; Jiang, W.; Valant, M.; Kovacevic, R. Microplasma powder deposition as a new solid freeform
fabrication process. In Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture; SAGE Publications: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2003; Volume 217, pp. 1641–1650.
52. Zhang, Y.M.; Chen, Y.; Li, P.; Male, A.T. Weld deposition-based rapid prototyping: A preliminary study.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2003, 135, 347–357. [CrossRef]
53. Xiong, J.; Zhang, G. Adaptive control of deposited height in GMAW-based layer additive manufacturing.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2014, 214, 962–968. [CrossRef]
54. Ahn, D.-G. Direct metal additive manufacturing processes and their sustainable applications for green
technology: A review. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 3, 381–395. [CrossRef]
55. Posch, G.; Chladil, K.; Chladil, H. Material properties of CMT—Metal additive manufactured duplex stainless
steel blade-like geometries. Weld. World 2017, 61, 873–882. [CrossRef]
56. Spencer, J.D.; Dickens, P.M.; Wykes, C.M. Rapid prototyping of metal parts by three-dimensional welding.
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 1998, 212, 175–182. [CrossRef]
57. Fronius International GmbH. Schweißpraxis Aktuell: CMT-Technologie; WEKA Media GmbH: Kissing, Germany,
2013.
58. Fronius International GmbH. Current Welding Practice CMT Technology; DVS Media GmbH: Düsseldorf,
Germany, 2014.
59. Bruckner, J.; Himmelbauer, K. Cold Metal Transfer—Ein neuer Prozess in der Fügetechnik; DVS-Berichte Band
237; DVS Media GmbH: Düsseldorf, Germany, 2005.
60. Zhang, H.; Feng, J.; He, P.; Zhang, B.; Chen, J.; Wang, L. The arc characteristics and metal transfer behaviour
of cold metal transfer and its use in joining aluminium to zinc-coated steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2009, 499,
111–113. [CrossRef]
61. Pickin, C.; Williams, S.; Lunt, M. Characterisation of the cold metal transfer (CMT) process and its application
for low dilution cladding. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2011, 211, 496–502. [CrossRef]
62. Ayarkwa, K.; Williams, S.; Ding, J. Assessing the effect of TIG alternating current time cycle on aluminium
wire + arc additive manufacture. Addit. Manuf. 2017, 18, 186–193. [CrossRef]
63. Ma, Y.; Cuiuri, D.; Hoye, N.; Li, H.; Pan, Z. The effect of location on the microstructure and mechanical
properties of titanium aluminides produced by additive layer manufacturing using in-situ alloying and gas
tungsten arc welding. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2015, 631, 230–240. [CrossRef]
64. Williams, S.W.; Martina, F.; Addison, A.C.; Ding, J.; Pardal, G.R.; Colegrove, P. Wire + Arc Additive
Manufacturing. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2016, 32, 641–647. [CrossRef]
65. Leyens, C.; Peters, M. Titanium and Titanium Alloys: Fundamentals and Applications; John Wiley & Sons:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 26 of 28

66. Kim, T.B.; Yue, S.; Zhang, Z.; Jones, E.; Jones, J.R.; Lee, P. Additive manufactured porous titanium structures:
Through-process quantification of pore and strut networks. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2014, 214, 2706–2715.
[CrossRef]
67. Wu, B.; Pan, Z.; Li, S.; Cuiuri, D.; Ding, D.; Li, H. The anisotropic corrosion behaviour of wire arc additive
manufactured Ti-6Al-4V alloy in 3.5% NaCl solution. Corros. Sci. 2018, 137, 176–183. [CrossRef]
68. Gu, J.; Ding, J.; Williams, S.; Gu, H.; Bai, J.; Zhai, Y.; Ma, P. The strengthening effect of inter-layer cold working
and post-deposition heat treatment on the additively manufactured Al–6.3Cu alloy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2016,
651, 18–26. [CrossRef]
69. Brice, C.; Shenoy, R.; Kral, M.; Buchannan, K. Precipitation behavior of aluminum alloy 2139 fabricated using
additive manufacturing. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2015, 648, 9–14. [CrossRef]
70. Guo, N.; Leu, M. Additive manufacturing: Technology, applications and research needs. Front. Mech. Eng.
2013, 8, 215–243. [CrossRef]
71. Yan, L. Wire and Arc Addictive Manufacture (WAAM) Reusable Tooling Investigation. 2013. Available
online: https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/12308 (accessed on 23 February 2020).
72. Xu, F.; Lv, Y.; Liu, Y.; Shu, F.; He, P.; Xu, B. Microstructural Evolution and Mechanical Properties of Inconel
625 Alloy during Pulsed Plasma Arc Deposition Process. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2013, 29, 480–488. [CrossRef]
73. Bressan, J.; Daros, D.; Sokolowski, A.; Mesquita, R.; Barbosa, C. Influence of hardness on the wear resistance
of 17-4 PH stainless steel evaluated by the pin-on-disc testing. J. tianMater. Process. Technol. 2008, 205,
353–359. [CrossRef]
74. Knapp, G.; Mukherjee, T.; Zuback, J.; Wei, H.; Palmer, T.; De, A.; Debroy, T. Building blocks for a digital twin
of additive manufacturing. Acta Mater. 2017, 135, 390–399. [CrossRef]
75. Mukherjee, T.; Manvatkar, V.; De, A.; Debroy, T. Dimensionless numbers in additive manufacturing.
J. Appl. Phys. 2017, 121, 064904. [CrossRef]
76. Mukherjee, T.; Debroy, T. A digital twin for rapid qualification of 3D printed metallic components.
Appl. Mater. Today 2019, 14, 59–65. [CrossRef]
77. Xu, X.; Mi, G.; Luo, Y.; Jiang, P.; Shao, X.; Wang, C. Morphologies, microstructures, and mechanical properties
of samples produced using laser metal deposition with 316 L stainless steel wire. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2017, 94,
1–11. [CrossRef]
78. Gray, G.T.; Livescu, V.; Rigg, P.; Trujillo, C.; Cady, C.; Chen, S.; Carpenter, J.; Lienert, T.; Fensin, S.J.
Structure/property (constitutive and spallation response) of additively manufactured 316L stainless steel.
Acta Mater. 2017, 138, 140–149. [CrossRef]
79. Zhang, K.; Wang, S.; Liu, W.; Shang, X. Characterization of stainless steel parts by Laser Metal Deposition
Shaping. Mater. Des. 2014, 55, 104–119. [CrossRef]
80. Ma, M.; Wang, Z.; Zeng, X. A comparison on metallurgical behaviors of 316L stainless steel by selective laser
melting and laser cladding deposition. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2017, 685, 265–273. [CrossRef]
81. Wang, X.; Deng, D.; Yi, H.; Xu, H.; Yang, S.; Zhang, H. Influences of pulse laser parameters on properties
of AISI316L stainless steel thin-walled part by laser material deposition. Opt. Laser Technol. 2017, 92, 5–14.
[CrossRef]
82. Bertoli, U.S.; Guss, G.; Wu, S.; Matthews, M.; Schoenung, J.M. In-situ characterization of laser-powder
interaction and cooling rates through high-speed imaging of powder bed fusion additive manufacturing.
Mater. Des. 2017, 135, 385–396. [CrossRef]
83. Khairallah, S.A.; Anderson, A.T.; Rubenchik, A.; King, W.E. Laser powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing:
Physics of complex melt flow and formation mechanisms of pores, spatter, and denudation zones. Acta Mater.
2016, 108, 36–45. [CrossRef]
84. Manvatkar, V.; De, A.; Debroy, T. Heat transfer and material flow during laser assisted multi-layer additive
manufacturing. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 124905. [CrossRef]
85. Caiazzo, F.; Alfieri, V. Laser-Aided Directed Energy Deposition of Steel Powder over Flat Surfaces and Edges.
Materials 2018, 11, 435. [CrossRef]
86. Chen, X.; Li, J.; Cheng, X.; He, B.; Wang, H.; Huang, Z. Microstructure and mechanical properties of the
austenitic stainless steel 316L fabricated by gas metal arc additive manufacturing. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2017,
703, 567–577. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 27 of 28

87. Yadollahi, A.; Shamsaei, N.; Thompson, S.M.; Seely, D.W. Effects of process time interval and heat treatment
on the mechanical and microstructural properties of direct laser deposited 316L stainless steel. Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2015, 644, 171–183. [CrossRef]
88. Rodriguez, N.; Vázquez, L.; Huarte, I.; Arruti, E.; Tabernero, I.; Álvarez, P. Wire and arc additive
manufacturing: A comparison between CMT and TopTIG processes applied to stainless steel. Weld. World
2018, 62, 1083–1096. [CrossRef]
89. Stützer, J.; Totzauer, T.; Wittig, B.; Zinke, M.; Jüttner, S. GMAW Cold Wire Technology for Adjusting the
Ferrite–Austenite Ratio of Wire and Arc Additive Manufactured Duplex Stainless Steel Components. Metals
2019, 9, 564. [CrossRef]
90. Wang, L.; Xue, J.; Wang, Q. Correlation between arc mode, microstructure, and mechanical properties during
wire arc additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2019, 751, 183–190. [CrossRef]
91. Caballero, A.; Ding, J.; Ganguly, S.; Williams, S. Wire + Arc Additive Manufacture of 17-4 PH stainless steel:
Effect of different processing conditions on microstructure, hardness, and tensile strength. J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 2019, 268, 54–62. [CrossRef]
92. Ding, D.; Pan, Z.; Cuiuri, D.; Li, H. Wire-feed additive manufacturing of metal components: Technologies,
developments and future interests. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015, 81, 465–481. [CrossRef]
93. Yang, D.; Wang, G.; Zhang, G. Thermal analysis for single-pass multi-layer GMAW based additive
manufacturing using infrared thermography. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2017, 244, 215–224. [CrossRef]
94. Xiong, J. Forming Characteristics in Multi-Layer Single-Bead GMA Additive Manufacturing and Control for
Deposition Dimension. Master’s Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, 2014.
95. Xiong, J.; Li, Y.; Li, R.; Yin, Z. Influences of process parameters on surface roughness of multi-layer single-pass
thin-walled parts in GMAW-based additive manufacturing. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2018, 252, 128–136.
[CrossRef]
96. Wu, W.; Xue, J.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Hu, Y.; Dong, C. Forming Process, Microstructure, and Mechanical
Properties of Thin-Walled 316L Stainless Steel Using Speed-Cold-Welding Additive Manufacturing. Metals
2019, 9, 109. [CrossRef]
97. Eriksson, M.; Lervåg, M.; Sørensen, C.; Robertstad, A.; Brønstad, B.M.; Nyhus, B.; Aune, R.; Ren, X.;
Akselsen, O. Additive manufacture of superduplex stainless steel using WAAM. MATEC Web Conf. 2018,
188, 03014. [CrossRef]
98. Bermingham, M.J.; StJohn, D.H.; Krynen, J.; Tedman-Jones, S.; Dargusch, M. Promoting the columnar to
equiaxed transition and grain refinement of titanium alloys during additive manufacturing. Acta Mater.
2019, 168, 261–274. [CrossRef]
99. Lin, J.; Lv, Y.; Liu, Y.; Sun, Z.; Wang, K.; Li, Z.; Wu, Y.; Xu, B. Microstructural evolution and mechanical
property of Ti-6Al-4V wall deposited by continuous plasma arc additive manufacturing without post heat
treatment. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2017, 69, 19–29. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
100. Feng, Y.; Zhan, B.; He, J.; Wang, K. The double-wire feed and plasma arc additive manufacturing process for
deposition in Cr-Ni stainless steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2018, 259, 206–215. [CrossRef]
101. Hosseini, V.; Högström, M.; Hurtig, K.; Bermejo, M.A.V.; Stridh, L.-E.; Karlsson, L. Wire-arc additive
manufacturing of a duplex stainless steel: Thermal cycle analysis and microstructure characterization.
Weld. World 2019, 63, 975–987. [CrossRef]
102. Baufeld, B.; Biest, O.; Gault, R. Microstructure of Ti-6Al-4V specimens produced by shaped metal deposition.
Int. J. Mater. Res. 2009, 100, 1536–1542. [CrossRef]
103. Lippold, J.C.; Kotecki, D.J. Welding Metallurgy and Weldability of Stainless Steels; Wiley-VCH: Hoboken, NJ,
USA, 2005; p. 376.
104. Herzog, D.; Seyda, V.; Wycisk, E.; Emmelmann, C. Additive manufacturing of metals. Acta Mater. 2016, 117,
371–392. [CrossRef]
105. Hejripour, F.; Binesh, F.; Hebel, M.; Aidun, D.K. Thermal modeling and characterization of wire arc additive
manufactured duplex stainless steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2019, 272, 58–71. [CrossRef]
106. Ziewiec, A.; Zielinska-Lipiec, A.; Tasak, E. Microstructure of Welded Joints of X5CrNiCuNb16-4 (17-4 PH)
Martensitic Stainlees Steel after Heat Treatment. Arch. Met. Mater. 2014, 59, 965–970. [CrossRef]
107. Zhang, X.; Wang, K.; Zhou, Q.; Ding, J.; Ganguly, S.; Marzio, G.; Yang, D.; Xu, X.; Dirisu, P.; Williams, S.W.
Microstructure and mechanical properties of TOP-TIG-wire and arc additive manufactured super duplex
stainless steel (ER2594). Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2019, 762, 138097. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1563 28 of 28

108. Ding, J.; Colegrove, P.; Mehnen, J.; Ganguly, S.; Almeida, P.S.; Wang, F.; Williams, S. Thermo-mechanical
analysis of Wire and Arc Additive Layer Manufacturing process on large multi-layer parts. Comput. Mater. Sci.
2011, 50, 3315–3322. [CrossRef]
109. Colegrove, P.; Coules, H.; Fairman, J.; Martina, F.; Kashoob, T.; Mamash, H.; Cozzolino, L.D. Microstructure
and residual stress improvement in wire and arc additively manufactured parts through high-pressure
rolling. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2013, 213, 1782–1791. [CrossRef]
110. Sames, W.; List, F.A.; Pannala, S.; Dehoff, R.; Babu, S. The metallurgy and processing science of metal additive
manufacturing. Int. Mater. Rev. 2016, 61, 315–360. [CrossRef]
111. Fang, J.; Dong, S.; Wang, Y.; Xu, B.; Zhang, Z.; Xia, D.; He, P. The effects of solid-state phase transformation
upon stress evolution in laser metal powder deposition. Mater. Des. 2015, 87, 807–814. [CrossRef]
112. Masubuchi, K. Analysis of Welded Structures: Residual Stresses, Distortion, and Their Consequences; Elsevier:
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; Volume 33.
113. Deng, D.; Murakawa, H. FEM prediction of buckling distortion induced by welding in thin plate panel
structures. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2008, 43, 591–607. [CrossRef]
114. Lee, Y.; Bandari, Y.; Nandwana, P.; Gibson, B.; Richardson, B.; Simunovic, S. Effect of Interlayer Cooling Time,
Constraint and Tool Path Strategy on Deformation of Large Components Made by Laser Metal Deposition
with Wire. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5115. [CrossRef]
115. Martina, F.; Ding, J.; Williams, S.; Caballero, A.; Pardal, G.R.; Quintino, L. Tandem metal inert gas process
for high productivity wire arc additive manufacturing in stainless steel. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 25, 545–550.
[CrossRef]
116. Gordon, J.V.; Harlow, D.G. Statistical Modeling of Wire and Arc Additive Manufactured Stainless Steel 304:
Microstructure and Fatigue. Int. J. Reliab. Qual. Saf. Eng. 2019, 26, 1950016. [CrossRef]
117. Tian, Y.; Ouyang, B.; Gontcharov, A.; Gauvin, R.; Lowden, P.; Brochu, M. Microstructure evolution of Inconel
625 with 0.4 wt% boron modification during gas tungsten arc deposition. J. Alloy. Compd. 2017, 694, 429–438.
[CrossRef]
118. Dong, B.; Pan, Z.; Shen, C.; Ma, Y.; Li, H. Fabrication of Copper-Rich Cu-Al Alloy Using the Wire-Arc
Additive Manufacturing Process. Met. Mater. Trans. A 2017, 48, 3143–3151. [CrossRef]
119. Geng, H.; Li, J.; Xiong, J.; Lin, X.; Zhang, F. Optimization of wire feed for GTAW based additive manufacturing.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2017, 243, 40–47. [CrossRef]
120. Scotti, A.; Ponomarev, V.; Lucas, W. Interchangeable metal transfer phenomenon in GMA welding: Features,
mechanisms, classification. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2014, 214, 2488–2496. [CrossRef]
121. Scotti, A.; Ponomarev, V.; Lucas, W. A scientific application oriented classification for metal transfer modes
in GMA welding. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2012, 212, 1406–1413. [CrossRef]
122. Yi, H.; Qi, L.; Luo, J.; Zhang, D.; Li, N. Direct fabrication of metal tubes with high-quality inner surfaces via
droplet deposition over soluble cores. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2019, 264, 145–154. [CrossRef]
123. Thompson, S.M.; Bian, L.; Shamsaei, N.; Yadollahi, A. An overview of Direct Laser Deposition for additive
manufacturing; Part I: Transport phenomena, modeling and diagnostics. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 8, 36–62.
[CrossRef]
124. Wang, P.; Nai, M.L.S.; Tan, X.; Sin, W.J.; Tor, S.B.; Wei, J. Anisotropic Mechanical Properties in a Big-Sized
Ti-6Al-4V Plate Fabricated by Electron Beam Melting. In TMS 2016: 145th Annual Meeting & Exhibition:
Supplemental Proceedings; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 5–12. [CrossRef]
125. Cain, V.; Thijs, L.; Van Humbeeck, J.; Van Hooreweder, B.; Knutsen, R. Crack propagation and fracture
toughness of Ti6Al4V alloy produced by selective laser melting. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 5, 68–76. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).