Additive manufacturing of copper-stainless steel hybrid components using laser-aided directed energy deposition

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2020.11.048

Abstract

Abstract:

Combining dissimilar materials in a single component is an effective solution to integrate diverse material properties into a single part. Copper-stainless steel hybrid components are attracting more and more attention since the high thermal conductivity of copper can greatly enhance the thermal performance of stainless steel, which benefits its applications in many industries. However, direct joining of copper and stainless steel such as SS316 L is challenging since they preserve significant dissimilarities in physical, chemical, and thermo-mechanical properties. This paper aims to fabricate well-bonded copper-SS316 L hybrid parts using a laser-aided directed energy deposition (DED) process. A nickel-based alloy Deloro 22 (D22) is introduced between copper and SS316 L to address the detrimental issues in copper-SS316 L direct joints. Using this technique, defect-free interfaces are achieved at both the D22-SS316 L and copper-D22 transition zones. Tensile testing of Cu-D22-SS316 L and D22-SS316 L hybrid parts shows the fracture occurs at pure copper and SS316 L region, respectively, indicating an excellent bonding at the interfaces. Ascending in the building direction, a transition of grain structure is observed. A significant diffusion zone is obtained at both the D22-SS316 L and the Cu-D22 interfaces. The large diffusion distance results in a smooth variation in microhardness over the dissimilar materials. The microhardness increases from SS316 L to D22 with the highest value of 240 HV and then decreases from D22 to Cu with the lowest value of 63 ± 4 HV. Testing of thermophysical properties of the Cu-D22-SS316 L system indicates there is a ∼300 % increase in thermal diffusivity and a ∼200 % increase in thermal conductivity when compared to pure SS316 L. The significant increase in thermal diffusivity and conductivity validates the enhanced thermal performance of SS316 L when it is joined with pure copper.

Key words: Additive manufacturing, Directed energy deposition, Multi-material components, Dissimilar materials, Copper, Stainless steel

Xinchang Zhang, Tan Pan, Yitao Chen, Lan Li, Yunlu Zhang, Frank Liou. Additive manufacturing of copper-stainless steel hybrid components using laser-aided directed energy deposition[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 80: 100-116.

Figures/Tables 25

Fig. 1. Schematic of (a) subsystems in the DED system and (b) material deposition process.

Fig. 2. Images of (a) SS316 L, (b) D22, and (c) Cu powder; Particle size distribution of (d) SS316 L, (e) D22, and (f) Cu powder.

Fig. 3. Phase diagrams for (a) Fe-Cu, (b) Fe-Ni, and (c) Cu-Ni.

Table 1 Chemical composition of SS304 L, SS316 L, D22 and Cu (wt.%).

Materials	Fe	Cr	Ni	Mn	Mo	P	S	Si	N	C	B	Cu
SS304L	Bal.	19	11	1.62	-	0.02	0.01	0.50	0.07	0.02	-	-
SS316L	Bal.	17	12	1.8	2.5	0.03	0.02	0.5	0.05	0.02	-	-
D22	0.2	-	Bal.	-	-	-	-	2.5	-	0.04	1.4	-
Cu	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	>99.99

Table 2 Physical and thermal properties of SS304 L, SS316 L, D22, and Cu.

	SS304L	SS316L	D22	Cu
Density (g/cm³)	8.03	7.99	8.49	8.96
Melting point (°C)	1399-1454	1375-1400	1070-1160	1085
Thermal conductivity (W/(m K))	14.0	13.6	27.5	400
Thermal expansion coefficient (×10^-6/°C)	17.3	14.8	13.4	17

Fig. 4. Schematic of (a) CDSTW, (b) DSTW, and (c) CDSB structures; (d) Sectioned vertical cross-section from the CDSTW; (e) Dimensions of tensile test specimens (unit: mm).

Table 3 DED processing parameters for fabricating the multi-material structures.

Parameters	CDSTW			DSTW		CDSB
Parameters	SS	D22	Cu	SS	D22	SS	D22	Cu
Laser power (W)	600	500	550	600	500	600	500	550
Laser beam size (mm)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2
Scan speed (mm/min)	210	210	210	210	210	210	210	210
Layer thickness (mm)	0.5	0.25	0.3	0.5	0.25	0.5	0.25	0.3
Number of layers	16	10	16	16	32	6	2	5
Deposit length (mm)	36	36	36	36	36	20	20	20
Deposit height (mm)	8	2.5	4.8	8	8	3	0.5	1.5

Fig. 5. Images of the DED-fabricated CDSTW (a), DSTW (b), and CDSB (c) structures.

Fig. 6. Microstructure of (a) SS316L-substrate transition zone and (b) upper layers of SS316 L.

Fig. 7. Microstructure of (a) D22-SS transition zone and (b) middle layers of D22.

Fig. 8. Microstructure of (a) Cu-D22 transition zone and (b) middle layers of Cu; EDS quantitative analysis result of (c) 1 st, (d) 2nd, and (e) 3rd layer of Cu.

Fig. 9. IPF maps of SS316L-substrate transition zone at (a1) y-z, (a2) x-z, and (a3) x-y plane; IPF maps of middle layers of SS316 L at (b1) y-z, (b2) x-z, and (b3) x-y plane; IPF maps of D22-SS316 L transition zone at (c1) y-z, (c2) x-z, and (c3) x-y plane.

Fig. 10. IPF maps of middle layers of D22 at (a1) y-z, (a2) x-z, and (a3) x-y plane; IPF maps of Cu-D22 transition zone at (b1) y-z, (b2) x-z, and (b3) x-y plane; IPF maps of upper layers of Cu at (c1)y-z, (c2) x-z, and (c3) x-y plane.

Fig. 11. (a1) Cu-D22 transition zone and (a2, a3) elemental mapping over this area; (b1) D22-SS316 L transition zone and (b2-b6) elemental mapping over this area.

Fig. 12. Composition plot along the building direction in the CDSTW.

Fig. 13. Schematic illustration of Marangoni convection in molten pool: (a) convection and (b) the corresponding convection mechanism.

Fig. 14. Stress-strain curves of the DED-fabricated CuD22SS, D22SS, D22, and SS316 L structures.

Table 4 YS, UTS, and strain at fracture for the DED-fabricated CuD22SS, D22SS, D22, and SS.

Structure	YS (MPa)	UTS (MPa)	Strain at fracture
CuD22SS	125	250	0.36
D22SS	336	619	0.32
D22	-	754	0.07
SS	374	699	0.57

Fig. 15. In-situ DIC strain field in tensile testing of (a) CuD22SS and (b) D22SS.

Fig. 16. Micrographs and elemental maps of a broken CuD22SS. Images of materials at (a) the fracture region and (d) CuD22 transitional zone; Elemental maps of (b) Cu and (c) Ni near the fracture region, and (e) Cu and (f) Ni at the CuD22 transitional zone.

Fig. 17. Tensile fracture surface of the CuD22SS (a, b), D22SS (c, d), and D22 (e, f).

Table 5 Comparison of tensile properties obtained in this study to reference values.

Material and reference	Technique	YS (MPa)	UTS (MPa)
>99.9 wt.% Cu, this study	DED	125 ± 6	250 ± 17
>99.2 wt.% Cu, [44]	SLM	n/a	195 (parallel)
>99.2 wt.% Cu, [44]	SLM	n/a	210 (vertical)
>99.2 wt.% Cu, [19]	SLM	n/a	49 ± 10 (pores, unmelted particles)
>94.9 wt.% Cu, [45]	BJ	n/a	117 (porosity)
CP copper, [46]	CS	n/a	125
>99.9 wt.% Cu, [47]	MFAM	140	220
>99.5 wt.% Cu, [48]	Hot rolled	110	260
SS316 L, this study	DED	374 (parallel)	699 (parallel)
SS316 L, this study	DED	336 (vertical)	619 (vertical)
SS316 L, [42]	LENS	576 (parallel)	776 (parallel)
SS316 L, [42]	LENS	479 (vertical)	703 (vertical)
SS316, [31]	LMDS	558 (parallel)	639 (parallel)
SS316, [31]	LMDS	352 (vertical)	536 (vertical)
SS316 L, [49]	LM	456	703
SS316, [50]	LAM	207	539
SS316 L, [51]	DED	295	561
SS316, [31]	Anneal rod	241	586
SS316, [52]	Wrought	220-270	520-680

Fig. 18. Micrographs and elemental maps of a broken D22SS. Images of materials at (a) the fracture region and (d) D22SS transitional zone; Elemental maps of (b) Fe and (c) Ni near the fracture region, and (e) Fe and (f) Ni at the D22SS transitional zone.

Fig. 19. Vickers hardness measurements across the CDSTW sample from the substrate to the copper.

Fig. 20. (a) Thermal diffusivity and (b) thermal conductivity as a function of temperature for the Cu-D22-SS structures, Cu, D22, and SS316 L.

References 54

[1]	J. Kar, S.K. Roy, G.G. Roy, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 233 (2016) 174-185. DOI URL
[2]	I. Sen, E. Amankwah, N.S. Kumar, E. Fleury, K. Oh-ishi, K. Hono, U. Ramamurty, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 528 (2011) 4491-4499. DOI URL
[3]	S.V. Gladkovsky, S.V. Kuteneva, S.N. Sergeev, Mater. Charact. 154 (2019) 294-303. DOI
[4]	S. Chen, J. Huang, J. Xia, X. Zhao, S. Lin, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 222 (2015) 43-51. DOI URL
[5]	I. Magnabosco, P. Ferro, F. Bonollo, L. Arnberg, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 424 (2006) 163-173. DOI URL
[6]	H. Sabetghadam, A.Z. Hanzaki, A. Araee, Mater. Charact. 61 (2010) 626-634. DOI URL
[7]	K. Martinsen, S.J. Hu, B.E. Carlson, CIRP Ann. 64 (2015) 679-699. DOI URL
[8]	C. Tan, K. Zhou, W. Ma, L. Min, Mater. Des. 155 (2018) 77-85. DOI URL
[9]	J. Li, Y. Cai, F. Yan, C. Wang, Z. Zhu, C. Hu, Opt. Laser Technol. 122 (2020), 105881. DOI URL
[10]	A. Mannucci, I. Tomashchuk, V. Vignal, P. Sallamand, M. Duband, Procedia CIRP 74 (2018) 450-455. DOI URL
[11]	S.V. Kuryntsev, A.E. Morushkin, A.K. Gilmutdinov, Opt. Lasers Eng. 90 (2017) 101-109. DOI URL
[12]	S. Chen, J. Huang, J. Xia, H. Zhang, X. Zhao, Metall. Mater. Trans. A Phys.Metall. Mater. Sci. 44 (2013) 3690-3696.
[13]	Q. Nguyen, A. Azadkhou, M. Akbari, A. Panjehpour, A. Karimipour, J. Manuf. Process. 56 (2020) 206-215. DOI URL
[14]	C.F. Tey, X. Tan, S.L. Sing, W.Y. Yeong, Addit. Manuf. 31 (2020), 100970.
[15]	A. Hinojos, J. Mireles, A. Reichardt, P. Frigola, P. Hosemann, L.E. Murr, R.B. Wicker, Mater. Des. 94 (2016) 17-27. DOI URL
[16]	B. Onuike, A. Bandyopadhyay, Addit. Manuf. 27 (2019) 576-585. DOI PMID
[17]	L.D. Bobbio, R.A. Otis, J.P. Borgonia, R.P. Dillon, A.A. Shapiro, Z.K. Liu, A.M. Beese, Acta Mater. 127 (2017) 133-142. DOI URL
[18]	B.E. Carroll, R.A. Otis, J.P. Borgonia, J. Suh, R.P. Dillon, A.A. Shapiro, D.C. Hofmann, Z.-K. Liu, A.M. Beese, Acta Mater. 108 (2016) 46-54. DOI URL
[19]	Z.H. Liu, D.Q. Zhang, S.L. Sing, C.K. Chua, L.E. Loh, Mater. Charact. 94 (2014) 116-125. DOI URL
[20]	C. Dharmendra, S. Shakerin, G.D.J. Ram, M. Mohammadi, Materialia 13 (2020), 100834. DOI URL
[21]	Y. Bai, J. Zhang, C. Zhao, C. Li, H. Wang, Mater. Charact. 167 (2020), 110489. DOI URL
[22]	F.F. Noecker, J.N. DuPont, J. Mater. Sci. 42 (2007) 510-521. DOI URL
[23]	K. Asano, M. Tsukamoto, Y. Sechi, Y. Sato, S. Masuno, R. Higashino, T. Hara, M. Sengoku, M. Yoshida, Opt. Laser Technol. 107 (2018) 291-296. DOI URL
[24]	X. Shu, G. Chen, J. Liu, B. Zhang, J. Feng, Mater. Lett. 213 (2018) 374-377. DOI URL
[25]	X. Zhang, C. Sun, T. Pan, A. Flood, Y. Zhang, L. Li, F. Liou, Addit. Manuf. 36 (2020), 101474.
[26]	Y. Zhang, T.T. Zuo, Z. Tang, M.C. Gao, K.A. Dahmen, P.K. Liaw, Z.P. Lu, Prog. Mater. Sci. 61 (2014) 1-93. DOI URL
[27]	G. Cacciamani, A. Dinsdale, M. Palumbo, A. Pasturel, Intermetallics 18 (2010) 1148-1162. DOI URL
[28]	M. Mukherjee, Materialia 7 (2019), 100359. DOI URL
[29]	X. Lin, T.M. Yue, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 402 (2005) 294-306. DOI URL
[30]	Y. Huang, M. Ansari, H. Asgari, M.H. Farshidianfar, D. Sarker, M.B. Khamesee, E. Toyserkani, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 274 (2019), 116286. DOI URL
[31]	K. Zhang, S. Wang, W. Liu, X. Shang, Mater. Des. 55 (2014) 104-119. DOI URL
[32]	G.F. Sun, S. Yao, Z.D. Wang, X.T. Shen, Y. Yan, R. Zhou, Z.H. Ni, Surf. Coatings Technol. 351 (2018) 198-211. DOI URL
[33]	N. Chen, H.A. Khan, Z. Wan, J. Lippert, H. Sun, S.-L. Shang, Z.-K. Liu, J. Li, Addit. Manuf. 32 (2020), 101037.
[34]	A. Basak, S. Das, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 46 (2016) 125-149. DOI URL
[35]	Z. Zhang, H. Zhou, L. Ren, X. Tong, H. Shan, X. Li, Appl. Surf. Sci. 254 (2008) 2548-2555. DOI URL
[36]	T. Mukherjee, J.S. Zuback, W. Zhang, T. DebRoy, Comput. Mater. Sci. 143 (2018) 325-337. DOI URL
[37]	B. Onuike, B. Heer, A. Bandyopadhyay, Addit. Manuf. 21 (2018) 133-140.
[38]	T. Pan, X. Zhang, T. Yamazaki, A. Sutton, W. Cui, L. Li, F. Liou, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 109 (2020) 1261-1274. DOI URL
[39]	P. Li, Y. Gong, Y. Xu, Y. Qi, Y. Sun, H. Zhang, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 19 (2019) 820-831. DOI URL
[40]	D.R. Feenstra, A. Molotnikov, N. Birbilis, J. Mater. Sci. 55 (2020) 13314-13328. DOI URL
[41]	Z. Wang, T.A. Palmer, A.M. Beese, Acta Mater. 110 (2016) 226-235. DOI URL
[42]	M. Ziętala, T. Durejko, M. Polański, I. Kunce, T. Płociński, W. Zieliński, M. Łazińska, W. Stępniowski, T. Czujko, K.J. Kurzydłowski, Z. Bojar, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 677 (2016) 1-10. DOI URL
[43]	M. Ni, C. Chen, X. Wang, P. Wang, R. Li, X. Zhang, K. Zhou, Mater. Sci. Eng. A701 (2017) 344-351.
[44]	A. Popovich, V. Sufiiarov, I. Polozov, E. Borisov, D. Masaylo, A. Orlov, Mater.Lett. 179 (2016) 38-41.
[45]	Y. Bai, C.B. Williams, Rapid Prototyp. J. 21 (2015) 177-185. DOI URL
[46]	K. Yang, W. Li, X. Guo, X. Yang, Y. Xu, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 34 (2018) 1570-1579. DOI URL
[47]	J. Butt, H. Mebrahtu, H. Shirvani, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 238 (2016) 96-107. DOI URL
[48]	S.C. Krishna, K.V. Radhika, K.T. Tharian, G.S. Rao, M.S. Kiranmayee, B. Pant, Mater. Sci. Forum 710 (2012) 626-631. DOI URL
[49]	K. Saeidi, X. Gao, Y. Zhong, Z.J. Shen, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 625 (2015) 221-229. DOI URL
[50]	M.S.F. de Lima, S. Sankaré, Mater. Des. 55 (2014) 526-532. DOI URL
[51]	X. Zhang, Y. Chen, F. Liou, Sci. Technol. Weld. Join. 24 (2019) 504-516. DOI URL
[52]	I. Tolosa, F. Garciandía, F. Zubiri, F. Zapirain, A. Esnaola, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 51 (2010) 639-647. DOI URL
[53]	W. Wu, J. Xue, L. Wang, Z. Zhang, Y. Hu, C. Dong, Metals (Basel) 9 (2019) 109. DOI URL
[54]	K.C. Mills, Elsevier Science, 2002.