3.4 5.

Review

Metallic Coatings through Additive

Manufacturing: A Review

Shalini Mohanty and Konda Gokuldoss Prashanth

Topic Collection
Additive Manufacturing: Alloy Design and Process Innovations
Edited by
Prof. Dr. Prashanth Konda Gokuldoss and Prof. Dr. Zhi Wang

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16062325
 materials
Review
Metallic Coatings through Additive Manufacturing: A Review
Shalini Mohanty 1 and Konda Gokuldoss Prashanth 1,2, *

1 Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Tallinn University of Technology,

12818 Tallinn, Estonia
2 CBCMT, School of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore 630014, Tamil Nadu, India
* Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]

Abstract: Metallic additive manufacturing is expeditiously gaining attention in advanced industries

for manufacturing intricate structures for customized applications. However, the inadequate surface
quality has inspired the inception of metallic coatings through additive manufacturing methods.
This work presents a brief review of the different genres of metallic coatings adapted by industries
through additive manufacturing technologies. The methodologies are classified according to the type
of allied energies used in the process, such as direct energy deposition, binder jetting, powder bed
fusion, hot spray coatings, sheet lamination, etc. Each method is described in detail and supported
by relevant literature. The paper also includes the needs, applications, and challenges involved in
each process.

Keywords: additive manufacturing; coatings; metallic coating; powder bed fusion; direct energy
deposition; spray coating

1. Introduction
The advent of technology has led to an upsurge in the demand for more personalized
products according to customer needs. In the age of the industrial revolution, there is a
need for economically viable components without compromising the quality of several
applications. The size and distribution of manufactured goods have challenged industries.
Citation: Mohanty, S.; Gokuldoss
Additive manufacturing (AM) is an emerging technology that provides flexibility in pro-
Prashanth, K. Metallic Coatings
ducing intricate parts at nominal costs, unlike conventional methods [1]. The technology
through Additive Manufacturing: A has been filling the gap between conventional manufacturing methods and subtractive
Review. Materials 2023, 16, 2325. technologies for a decade. To explore the possible applications of AM processes, hybridiza-
https://doi.org/10.3390/ tion with conventional methods offers merged advantages. The higher material efficacy
ma16062325 offered by AM technologies over the subtractive processes suppresses the expensive equip-
ment costs [2]. Several attempts have been made by the research community to delve into
Academic Editor: Guozheng Quan
different prospects of AM for metallic materials.
Received: 18 January 2023 The idea of manufacturing parts through AM has been prevalent for a decade, and the
Revised: 24 February 2023 applications include rapid prototyping, the generation of models for large-scale production,
Accepted: 27 February 2023 conducting different tests, and the validation of such models [3]. With the inception of the
Published: 14 March 2023 fourth industrial revolution, the direct manufacturing of products through AM emerged,
including in the automotive, electronics, nuclear, aerospace, and bio-medical sectors. Unlike
the available strategies such as servitization [4], presumption [5], and personalization [6],
AM technology stands out as an effective manufacturing method among the leading
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
industries. The AM process has gained popularity among researchers for the direct printing
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
of parts, microstructure–property correlation, materials design, product design, and end
distributed under the terms and
utilization of the product [7–9]. Lately, AM has been used in conjunction with conventional
conditions of the Creative Commons
manufacturing methods. Subtractive manufacturing accounts for controlled material
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// removal from the substrate to obtain the final product, whereas in AM, layer-by-layer
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ deposition takes place on the end surface [10]. As compared to traditional manufacturing
4.0/).

Materials 2023, 16, 2325. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16062325 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2023, 16, 2325 2 of 29

methods, AM is intrinsically less harmful to the environment and leads to zero waste in
terms of socio-economical value addition.
According to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM International)
standards, AM is classified based on the material used as feedstock, the state of fusion,
the distribution of material, and the type of process [11]. As per ASTM standards, metal
additive manufacturing (MAM) methods are broadly classified into direct energy depo-
sition (DED)/powder-fed fusion (PFF) and powder bed fusion (PBF) processes. Apart
from these, sheet lamination and binder jetting are also counted by ASTM as alternative
MAM methods [12,13]. Some of the other potential methods include friction stir additive
manufacturing [6,7], cold spraying [8,9], direct metal writing [10,11], and diode-based
processes [14]. However, these techniques are still under consideration by ASTM to be
included in the AM classification list. A generalized classification of the AM techniques is
presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Generalized classification of the different additive manufacturing technologies.

The metallic parts manufactured through AM processes often have irregular surface
morphology when compared to those produced by conventional methods. The irregu-
larities are the result of layer-by-layer deposition and fusion occurring on the material
surfaces [15]. These drive the motivation to develop different alloy-rich layers or coatings
on irregularly finished surfaces. The performance limitations of engineering materials for
different applications have encouraged researchers to process them through AM coatings.
In this regard, different AM methods are used in conjunction with the available conven-
tional methods. Figure 2 indicates a broad outline of coatings on engineering materials
through additive manufacturing technologies [16].
The factors that affect the irregularity of the surfaces include the staircase effect, the
agglomeration of partially fused material, spattering, splashed particles (evaporation and
balling effect), the instability of molten pool (wetting effect), etc. [17–19]. For instance,
–
the addition of zinc in powder bed fusion processes enhances the wetting properties,
whereas the uncontrollability in the movement of the molten pool at the boundaries is quite
challenging [20,21]. Studies indicate the presence of irregularity in surface roughness on
intricate geometries with inclined surfaces [22,23]. A change in inclination angle affects the
surface roughness. The supporting structures when removed from the part geometry also
alter the surface quality. The features formed on the surfaces become stress concentration
sites for crack formation. In addition to this, the size of feedstock, deposition parameters,
and surface morphology affect the surface morphology of the AM components [24–26].
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 3 of 29

–
For example, in the direct energy deposition (DED) process, the surface waviness is a
result of the weld beads generated due to a large molten metal pool that is difficult to
control [25]. Owing to the issues in the conventional AM processes, the interest among
the research community in providing innovative solutions has accelerated. To minimize
the manufacturing costs as well as to address the issues, AM methods were developed
for coatings or surface modification. The urge to obtain diverse surface properties on a
single component drove researchers to adapt additive manufacturing as a tool for coatings
and surface modification. Different engineering materials are subjected to AM methods
to modulate their surface morphologies and incorporate multiple properties in a single
component. The present review article sheds light on the different AM methods adapted
to carry out the deposition process. The advancements in AM coatings, technologies,
challenges, and future opportunities are highlighted.

Figure 2. Broad classification of metallic additive manufacturing processes.

2. Need of Metallic Coatings

Thin film coatings usually possess a thickness of less
less than
than 0.10.1
μm,µm, whereas
whereas thick
thick film
film coatings have a thickness of more than 0.1 mm. As discussed earlier, coatings are
made through AM to obtain enhanced properties on different components. Some of the
significant advantages of coatings are as follows [27]:
•• Ease of controlling the surface chemistry.
•• Improving mechanical properties such as hardness, toughness, adhesion strength, etc.
• Inducing hydrophobicity or hydrophilicity to the surfaces.
•• Enhancing anti-corrosive properties.
•• Increasing bioactivities and improve biocompatibility.
•• Improving tribological performance in terms of wear and friction.
•
3. Applications of Metallic Coatings
Some of the major functionalized applications of the AM metallic coatings are as follows:
• Aerospace, automotive, and missiles: parts to prevent loss in wear and corrosion.
• Automotive: brakes, bolted joints, etc.
• Electronics: fuel cells, sensors, MEMS/NEMS, field effect devices.
•
• Bio-medical: sterilization, cell adhesion, bio-implants such as pacemakers, and stents
•
for dental application.
•
• Textile: self-cleaning fabrics, biofilms, anti-microbial surfaces, UV-protective materials
•
(roofs, curtains, awnings, tents).
• Machine tools: cutting tools, electrodes, AFM tip, die, and molds.
•
• Power sector: turbine blades, heat exchangers, valves, and boiler parts.

•
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 4 of 29

4. Different Metallic Coatings through Additive Manufacturing

As discussed earlier, the classification of the metallic additive manufacturing methods
is based on the type of allied energies used in the process. However, only a few of them are
used for metallic coatings, some of which are described in the following sections.

4.1. Powder Bed Fusion

Powder bed fusion (PBF) includes the fusion of powders on the bed due to the in-
troduction of a high amount of thermal energy. The high-dimensional stability obtained
through this method whilst producing intricate and complex shapes makes it the most pop-
ular method in the metallic coating AM technologies. A wide range of printable powders
(materials composition including Al-based [28–41], Fe-based [42–51], Cu-based [52–57],
Ni-based [58–70], Ti-based [68–74], Mo-based [75–78], Co-based [79–82], Si-based [83], jew-
elry materials [84], etc.) can also be used in this method, which means components with
multiple properties can be prepared. PBF is one of the popular methods commercially
adapted from the group of AM technologies. Selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective
laser melting (SLM) are the two most industrially acclaimed powder bed fusion processes
that have been commercialized to date [12]. Some new technologies have also emerged,
such as direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) [85], electron beam melting (EBM) [86], and
laser curing [87].
The printing procedure for the PBF process is shown in Figure 3. The energy source
(laser or electron beam) allows the fusion of powder particles after each layer feeding,
thereby resulting in the formation of 3D structures (layer-by-layer deposition). However,
prior to the printing process, preheating is required until the temperature is slightly lower
than the glass transition temperature or the melting point of the powder. This cuts down the
energy source power requirement during the printing process and expedites the fusion [12].
Moreover, preheating reduces the thermal gradient as well as the thermal distortion in the
finished component [88–90]. Another important aspect of the process is that it needs an
oxygen-free environment to undergo the fusion process. If there is a presence of oxygen in
the chambers, the feedstock powders might oxidize before the actual start of the printing,
which alters the final product’s surface properties. As an alternative to an oxygen-free
environment, some inert gases such as nitrogen (for non-reactive powders), argon (for
reactive powders), and vacuum (for electron beam) are used in the PBF process [91,92].
According to the type of energy source, PBF can be classified into laser-based PBF and
electron-beam-based PBF.

Figure 3. Schematic diagram illustrating the powder bed fusion process.

Materials 2023, 16, 2325 5 of 29

4.1.1. Laser-Based PBF

The laser PBF can be subdivided into selective laser sintering (SLS) and selective laser
melting (SLM), the difference being the material preference and fusion mechanism of the
powders [93]. On one hand, SLM melts the powder completely to form a homogeneous
part, while SLS uses a point-based heating phenomenon and allows only molecular fusion
at the surface. However, both processes can be used for coating purposes; SLM is preferred
for the complete coating of surfaces whereas SLS is preferred for the localized deposition of
engineering materials.

Selective Laser Sintering

Selective laser sintering (SLS) is a typical AM method wherein layer-by-layer deposi-
tion takes place by spreading the powders, followed by their selective sintering. Figure 4 is
a typical schematic diagram of the SLS process constituting a powder layering setup, laser
source, system interface, and other accessories (i.e., preheating unit and inert gas protection
system). The types of lasers used in the SLS process include Nd:YAG [94], CO2 [95], fiber
lasers [96], disc lasers [97], etc. The appropriate choice of lasers affects the strengthening of
the powders for the following reasons:
i. The laser absorptivity of the materials depends greatly on the laser wavelength.
ii. The laser power energy determines the metallurgical changes occurring during pow-
der densification.

Figure 4. Schematic diagram illustrating the selective laser sintering process.

The working procedure for the SLS process is as follows:

a. The part to be fabricated is leveled and fixed on the platform bed.
b. An inert-gas-filled atmosphere is created in the sealed building chamber to restrict
the presence of oxygen during the process.
c. Layering mechanism and laser beam scans enable the deposition of a thin layer of loose
powder particles on the substrate material, allowing for selective molecular diffusion.
d. The repetitive process of the above-mentioned steps helps in building the final part
in a layer-by-layer fashion.
During SLS, the time of exposure of the laser beam depends on the scan speed and
the beam size, which are usually 25 ms and 0.5 µm, respectively [98]. Owing to the need
for a short thermal cycle, diffusion is the preferred means to combine the powders during
the SLS process [99,100]. Partial melting of powders (or liquid-phase sintering) takes
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 6 of 29

place in the process, and a semi-solid consistency of materials solidifies to be deposited

on the substrate. SLS has recently demonstrated its efficiency in producing coated and
alloyed components [101]. The metallurgical transformations taking place during the SLS
process depend on the powder properties and the laser processing parameters. To obtain
multiple attributes in a single component through SLS, the multicomponent powders
used must possess a high melting point metallic component (acting as a structural unit),
a low melting point metallic component (binder), and traces of additives, i.e., flux and
deoxidizer [102,103]. The operative temperature for the SLS process is chosen between
the two melting temperatures, and process parameters are fixed accordingly. The binder
material completely melts into a liquid phase whilst the structural material retains its solid
structural phase. The rearrangement of powder particles due to the capillary action of the
wetting liquid results in the densification of the solid–liquid phase and the determination
of the particle re-arrangement rate [104].
Zhu et al. [105] built multi-material components using pure Cu + SCuP (pre-alloyed)
powders. SCuP powders act as binders owing to their lower melting point (i.e., 645 ◦ C),
whereas Cu takes the role of structural material due to its high melting temperature,
1083 ◦ C, as shown in Figure 5a. In another study by Gu and Shen [106], a combination of
higher-melting-point tungsten metal powders with copper metallic powders was fabricated
through SLS. The densification behavior and the microstructural changes taking place
during the SLS process were studied. Figure 5b shows the SEM images of the morpho-
logical changes occurring on the sintered samples at different line scan spacings. During
melting and solidification, the pure metals with compatible melting points of pre-alloyed
powders have a mushy (semi-solid) zone amidst the solidus and liquidus phases. With the
optimization of the laser process parameters, it can be noted that the laser sintering temper-
ature lies within the limits of the semi-solid zone, a process also known as supersolidus
liquid-phase sintering (SLPS) [107]. As shown in Figure 6, the pre-alloyed power particles
undergo extraneous melting and turn mushy as soon as an adequate amount of liquid is
accumulated along the grain boundaries. The liquid wets the solid particles as well as
the grain boundaries, thereby densifying the semi-solid system by the re-arrangement of
the solid particles and precipitation of the solution. It is to be noted that the SLPS of the
powders requires stern laser processing parameters to control the mushy zone. Localized
and expeditious thermal cycles are generated during the laser sintering process. However,
there are certain difficulties in controlling the laser sintering parameters, especially the
temperature between the solidus and liquidus region, which seizes the SLPS mechanism.
The problems encountered during the laser sintering operation, such as heterogeneity
of microstructure, poor densification, an improper adaption of properties, etc., occur in
the pre-alloyed powders. Thus, the post-processing of such parts manufactured through
the laser sintering process needs careful attention. In this regard, several methods have
been adapted to enhance the mechanical properties of the processed components. Some
of the methods include hot iso-static pressing [108], furnace sintering [109], or secondary
infiltration (in association with low-melting-point material) [110].

Figure 5. Scanning electron microscopy images of sintered samples prepared with (a) Cu-SCuP [105]
– and (b–d) W-Cu [106].
 –

Materials 2023, 16, 2325 7 of 29

–

Figure 6. Schematic representation illustrating the densification process of the pre-alloyed powders
during the SLPS process.

Selective Laser Melting (SLM)

The urge to obtain densified components with enhanced mechanical properties forced
the research community to develop the laser melting process. The process stands out for its
ability to produce parts with minimal post-processing cycles and material waste. SLM has the
same procedure and apparatus as the SLS process. The only difference is that the complete
melting and solidification of powders take place during the SLM process, whereas in the
SLS process, just sintering takes place. The continuous improvement in the laser processing
parameters, such as focused spot size, high laser power, smaller layer thickness, etc., has
altered the metallurgical and mechanical properties [111]. As a result, SLM is best suited
for producing parts with 99.99% relative density without any post-processing methods [112].
Li et al. [113] and Santos et al. [114] processed steel components using SLM and found that
high scan speeds result in porosity in samples, along with a reduction in tensile strength.
Figure 7 indicates the variation in porosity and microstructure in stainless steel samples
prepared through SLM at different scanning speeds, wherein a significant difference in the
morphology of the melt pool boundaries is visible.

Figure 7. Microstructure showing the presence of porosity in stainless steel samples fabricated by the
SLM process as a function of different laser scanning speeds: (a) 200 mm/s and (b) 400 mm/s [114].

Another advancement in the SLM process is its ability to process different categories
of materials such as crystalline (high-entropy alloys), quasicrystalline, and amorphous
systems [115–127], which is difficult through the partial melting SLS process. The earlier at-
tempts to process the pure metals were unsuccessful through SLS, the reason being that the
high viscosity of liquid material caused a balling effect that restricted the process [128,129].
On the contrary, the product manufactured through the SLM process is denser and can be
controlled as desired [130,131]. However, SLM employs higher energy, which depends on
laser power, the type of laser beam, exposure time, and layer thickness. Owing to such
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 8 of 29

high energy input, instability in the molten pool may be observed, leading to a high degree
of shrinking and internal stresses in the final component [24,132].
The residual stresses that arise during the SLM process due to rapid cooling also cause
the distortion and/or delamination of the part. In a study conducted by Pogson et al. [133],
it was affirmed that the incorporation of Cu into the tool steel imparts high energy input
during the SLM process. This leads to the generation of austenite grain boundaries that
might lead to cracking by hot tearing. The unstable melting may result in spheroidization
of the melt pool, known as the balling effect, and can cause internal porosity in the samples.
Some of the defects that arise during the SLM processes are shown in Figure 8. Therefore,
suitable process parameters must be chosen to yield a moderate temperature, thereby
avoiding the overheating of the SLM system [134].

(e)

Figure 8. Defects generated during the SLM process: (a) porosity [135], (b) inadequate fusion between
layers [136], (c) balling effect [137], (d) hot tear [133], and (e) fish scaling [138].

4.1.2. Electron-Beam-Based PBF

Electron beam powder bed fusion (E-PBF) uses a high-power electron beam to fuse
metallic powder in a layer-by-layer manner into the final bulk component [93,139,140].
During the process, electrons emitted from the heated filament (W or LaB6 ) cathode are
accelerated towards the substrate material at half the speed of light with 30–60 kV [141].
The process takes place under vacuum (He pressure < 1 Pa) to reduce the probable collision
between the swift-moving electrons and the air molecules and to restrict the oxidation of
metallic powders [142,143]. Electromagnetic lenses are used to focus the electron beam
that can move at a deflection speed of about 10 km/s and a power of 5–10 mA, thereby
allowing innovative heating and melting approaches. Once the electrons are bombarded to
the powder bed, more of the kinetic energy is converted to heat energy, thus enabling local
sintering of the powders. Figure 9 shows a schematic diagram of the E-PBF system. When
compared to lasers, the electron beams penetrate significantly deeper (101 to 102 ) into the
powder particles [144].
The powder bed is maintained at high temperatures, i.e., more than 870 K, and requires
overnight cooling after job completion. E-PBF involves comparatively more processing
parameters than LBPF technology. Some of the parameters include electron beam focus,
power, scan speed, diameter, beam spacing, plate temperature, pre-heating temperature,
contouring systems, and scan strategies [93]. The process parameter optimization is compar-
atively more difficult in the case of the E-PBF process than SLM; thus, only a limited number
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 9 of 29

of materials can be processed through this method, i.e., CoCrMo [145], Ti grade 2 [146],
Inconel-718 [147], Ti grade 5 [148], etc. The restrictions during the manufacture of intricate
lattice structures (honeycomb) and low processing time make the process challenging.
However, larger-sized products can be manufactured easily through this process irrespec-
f the substrate
tive of the substrate plate’s size. Inplate’s size.
a recent In a recent
study, study, AlN
AlN coatings werecoatings wereover
produced pro-
Ti6Al4V substrate through EB-PBF technology [149]. The authors achieved an adherent
adherent
coating oncoating on the without
the substrate substratealtering
withoutthealtering
core’s the core’s microstructure.
microstructure. The hybrid-
The hybridization of
EB-PBF with other methods such as chemical vapor deposition and atomic layer deposition
allows for improved coating properties [150,151]. It is not advised to produce parts that
constitute volatile components such as Mg, Zn, Bi, Pb, etc., through the E-PBF process. It
is effective enough to process brittle materials, unlike SLM. The poor thermal expansion
and contraction of intermetallic (brittle) materials tend to induce the formation of defects
(solidification cracks) by restricting them to cool down at a slower rate. In this regard,
SLM fails to slow down the cooling rate, thereby leading to crack propagation, while
E-PBF allows the drop in cooling rates by increasing the temperature of the powder bed
(~870 K) [152]. Thus, intermetallic materials such as TiAl and high-entropy alloys can be
processed through the E-PBF process with careful consideration of temperature.

Figure 9. Schematic representation of the electron beam powder bed fusion technique [153].

4.2. Binder Jetting

Binder jetting is a type of AM technology that involves multiple steps for the fabri-
cation of 3D parts. The process was introduced in the early 1990s by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) and was commercialized in 2010 [154]. This technology
can process almost all metals/alloys/ceramic materials (glass, graphite, sand, etc.) from
powder form. The process requires a base material (metal/alloy/ceramic) of which the part
is to be made, along with a binding agent (liquid phase) for gluing the material in layers.
The printing technique is like any other AM printing process that takes place layer by layer.
The powder (metallic/ceramic) material is spread over the bed by a roller according to a
computer-aided design (CAD). The printing head allows the recurrent deposition of the
binder adhesive as dictated by the CAD data over the powder bed [155,156]. As shown
in Figure 10, the bed platform is adjusted or lowered based on the set layer thickness. As
soon as the powder is bound to the binder adhesive, another layer of material is spread
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 10 of 29

onto the previous layer, tending towards the final part. The loose powders that are unused
or do not adhere to the layer surround the part until the final product is achieved.

Figure 10. Schematic diagram illustrating the binder jetting process.

Despite the simplicity of the binder jetting process, it involves several lengthy post-
processing operations, such as sintering, de-powdering, curing, annealing, infiltration,
and finishing [157,158]. One major advantage of this process is that there is no need
for support structures while printing parts. The built parts remain on the powder bed
without being bonded to each other. Thus, the entire volume of the built part can be
stacked together, with many other parts to be printed with a small gap between them [159].
Because of the use of adhesives, this process is not recommended for structural applications
(i.e., aerospace/automotive) since it might lead to porous parts. As compared to SLM/E-
PBF, the binder jetting process is faster and can be further accelerated by implementing
multiple printing heads/holes for deposition. It also allows multi-material deposition to
obtain desired surface properties on a single component by changing the ratios of powder to
binder. Coarser powders can also be used in this process, thereby cutting the manufacturing
costs of finer powder particles. One more advantage of this process is the non-involvement
of heat during the deposition process, thereby eliminating the formation of residual stresses
in the final part [160]. Since the strengthening mechanism involved in the process is due to
sintering, which may account for porosities, one may obtain varying shapes, volumes, and
sizes of the pores in the final batch of products [161]. Furthermore, the final components are
prone to having a coarse microstructure because of the post-processing operations. Thus,
the parts produced through binder jetting lack suitable mechanical properties.

4.3. Direct Energy Deposition

4.3.1. Laser-Based Material Deposition
Laser-based material deposition (LBMD) is a type of DED technique wherein the
pre-spreading of powder on the bed is absent, and instead, coaxial feeding is executed. A
schematic representation of the LBMD process is shown in Figure 11. In this method, the
substrate is melted using the heat source (laser), thereby forming a melt pool that traps
and melts the powder particles through a nozzle. The particles are driven away and mixed
with a jet of gases (Ag or He). As the laser source is withdrawn from the bed, the molten
material is solidified due to gradual heat dissipation. The nozzle head moves along the
appropriate path (as dictated by the CAD model) and hence, the deposition takes place on
the substrate [162]. After one layer of deposition, the nozzle head moves upward, and then
again, another layer is formed. The previous layer acts as a substrate material for the next
layer of deposition through the nozzle. The process of repetitive layer-by-layer deposition
produces the final product [163]. The LBMD comprises DED and laser-engineered net
shaping. Among all the laser-based AM technologies, LBMB has gained popularity owing
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 11 of 29

to its ability to coat surfaces with ceramics or CMCs. The method is widely adopted for
the surface modification of bulk materials to obtain enhanced properties, i.e., tribological,
mechanical, chemical, or biological [164]. Due to the use of high-energy beam lasers, LBMD
technology has the ability to process materials irrespective of their hardness at high melting
temperatures [165]. The LBMD process thus has the ability to conduct selective surface
modification, which can hardly be achieved through SLM and SLS techniques [166].
The repair and re-manufacturing of worn-out components are cost-effective when
compared to buying new parts. LBMD has the potential to rebuild worn-out parts, which
were previously considered un-repairable through conventional methods [167]. The process
is most suitable for repairing turbine blades or vane tips with minimal distortion [12]. The
closed-loop feedback and the vision system do not demand post-processing, thereby
producing quality-based precision parts. The repair of driving shafts, bearings, couplers,
and seals which are un-repairable by conventional welding methods can also be processed
through the LBMD method [168]. The process facilitates metallurgical bonding between
the deposition and the substrate, unlike other mechanical or chemical processes. In this
regard, cladding and hard facing are also types of repair that build a protective or modified
layer over the substrate through LBMD technology.

Figure 11. Schematic representation of the LBMD process [169].

Multi-layer coatings and surface modification can be carried out over complex ge-
ometries using the laser-based cladding technique [170,171]. In a study conducted by
Kumar et al. [172], a hard coating of cBN was formed on a Ti6Al4V substrate using a laser
cladding technique wherein hard phases of AlTi3 N, TiN, and TiB2 were observed. From
the microstructural analysis (Figure 12), they confirmed that fishbone (Figure 12a–c) and
–
columnar (Figure 12d–f) structures and the presence of TiO2 nanoflakes reduce the crack
–
susceptibility of the cladded area. Composite coating through laser cladding improves the
surface properties in terms of tribological, mechanical, chemical, corrosive, and biological
characteristics [173–175].
–
4.3.2. Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM)
Wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) is a wire-based AM technology that in-
volves the direct deposition of weld beads in a layer-by-layer manner, thereby forming
a metallic wall (minimum width: 1–2 mm). The wall formation is followed by building
machining and then achieving a smooth surface [176]. The process looks like cladding
carried out in subsequent melting and deposition of the wire feedstock over the substrate.
This deposited part can be the final product or can be removed through conventional
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 12 of 29

methods to obtain the final feature. The technologies that can be employed in WAAM
are MIG [177], TIG [178], or plasma arc welding [179], as shown in Figure 13. One of the
major advantages of the WAAM process is the low capital for initial investment since the
machine assembling is sourced from welding industries [180]. Moreover, the processing
characteristics of WAAM make it a preferable solution for other available fusion processes,
as it does not use any vacuum environment, unlike the electron beam methods. Thus,
the over-aging in precipitate-hardened materials can be avoided [181]. However, inert
shielding is required in the case of WAAM to avoid contamination, whereas electron beam
direct energy deposition does not require this [182–184]. The laser beam methods induce
a high-power electrical arc as a source of fusion which is beneficial for reflective metal
alloys (Mg, Cu, Al, etc.) [185]. The maximum layer height, roughness, and deposition rates
that could be achieved through the WAAM technique are 1–2 mm, 500 µm, and 10 kg/h,
–
respectively –
[186]. The advancement in WAAM technologies makes the processing of
superalloys (Ti, Ni, Ta, etc.) easy.

– 500 μm, and 10 kg/h, re-

Figure 12. FESEM images indicating different microstructures on the prepared cladded samples
– – upper portion (d–f) middle portion [172].
showing (a–c)

Figure 13. Wire arc additive manufacturing working principle using (a) MIG, (b) TIG, and (c) plasma
arc welding [187].
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 13 of 29

The process is advantageous as it offers high deposition rates, the ability to manu-
facture intricate structures, and is adjustable with different torch movements and heat
sources [188]. Nevertheless, the problems arising due to residual stress and distortion
in WAAM, such as the welding or AM process, make the material processing challeng-
ing [186,189]. Ding et al. [189] contemplated surface finish as one of the concerns associated
with the WAAM parts that lead to dimensional inaccuracy and premature part failures.
Many attempts have been made to mitigate such issues but were limited whilst addressing
the residual stresses. Pan et al. [190] discussed the mechanical properties of samples pro-
duced through WAAM along with the welding technology and process parameters used;
however, they did not provide much detail on the mechanism. The work identifies an entire
range of processing parameters, including heat treatment and inter-cooling procedures.
Further research may explore the possibilities of using WAAM as a viable method for
functional material grinding and generating parts with intricate designs.

4.4. Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing

The ultrasonic AM (UAM) process is classified as sheet lamination AM by ASTM
(ISM/ASTM52900-15, 2015). Unlike the solid-state joining (friction stir and ultrasonic
metal welding) process, UAM does not deal with welding; rather, high-frequency plastic
deformation amidst the metallic foils assists the joining phenomena. Since mechanical
forces control the UAM process, intricate structures cannot be manufactured. In this regard,
UAM can manufacture parts with solid structures that can counterbalance the applied
forces [191]. The manufacturing of heat transfer devices and embedded electronics is
possible using UAM when embedded with the CNC stage (Figure 14). The process allows
the incorporation of multiple properties into a single material through cladding, transition
joining, and surface modification. The low processing temperature used in UAM allows
direct assimilation of heat-sensitive electronics with the metal structures, such as sensors
for health-monitoring applications.

Figure 14. Ultrasonic additive stage illustrating the different components present.

A schematic representation of the UAM joining process is presented in Figure 15. Dur-
ing the process, the sonotrode (tool/horn) generates micro-asperities in the form of surface
roughness. Subsequently, the asperities collapse, shear, and material deposition takes place
over the interfacial zone (<10 mm). Ref. [191] claims the roughness occurs due to shearing
action which develops over the recrystallized zone. One of the advantages of the UAM
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 14 of 29

process is the minimal heat generation at the deformation zone since localized deposition
takes place in this process. The temperature is around 150 ◦ C for Al- and Cu-based alloys,
which could be used for fast-response thermocouples [192]. The deposition process can be
carried out in an ambient atmosphere, and thus, solidification microstructures are absent.

Figure 15. Schematic representation of UAM process for welding [193].

4.5. Other Methods

4.5.1. Cold Spraying
One of the most viable technologies used for addressing the failures in turbine and
compressor blades is cold spray additive manufacturing (CSAM). The process makes
sure the underlying crystal structures are not altered. It can coat new layers with wall
thickness ≥ 1”, such as manufacturing gears, by controlling the motion of the spray nozzle
and the external motor drive [194]. In the CSAM process, the substrate is impinged with a
stream of metallic particles accelerated (velocity = 300–1200 m/s) by a highly compressed
≥ 1″ supersonic jet of gas at a temperature within the melting point of the powders. Effective
bonding can be obtained by adjusting the process parameters and defining the critical
–
velocity [195,196]. The interfacial bonding phenomena proposed by the research community
are (i) surface adhesion because of interface-instability-induced physical anchoring effects,
(ii) partial melting and fusion of metallic materials in the severely deformed region, and
(iii) the defects caused by the oxidic layers formed over the substrate and the particles [197].
The other viewpoints regarding the metallurgical bond and the mechanical inter-locking
explain the metallic bonding in CSAM [198]. A schematic representation of the process is
shown in Figure 16.
The figure shows that the compaction, deformation, and plastic flow of the sprayed par-
ticles remove the oxidic layer from the surfaces, thereby exposing a larger portion of the area
for metallic interaction. The low temperature involved in the process prevents the perni-
cious effects of the oxidic phase transformation, decomposition, grain growth, etc. [199,200].
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 15 of 29

These many advantages make CSAM a promising technology for surface modification and
coatings of a wide range of materials, including metal matrix composites [201–203]. As
discussed earlier, CSAM coatings do not possess thickness constraints, a reason why CSAM
is the most popular solid-state process for coating new parts or repairing structures with
ease [204].

Figure 16. Schematic representation of the cold spray deposition process (a) impacting, (b) break up,
(c) extruding, (d) inclusion [205].

4.5.2. Magnetron Sputtering

The increasing demand to produce functionalized coated materials for diverse in-
dustrial applications has led to the emergence of magnetron sputtering. The process falls
under the umbrella of physical vapor deposition (PVD). Deposition through sputtering is a
complex method and at times, expensive [206]. However, the process allows controlling
the composition during multilayer deposition and better flexibility in the type of material
to be used [207]. Figure 17 shows the PVD reactors confined within a vacuum system with
two electrodes passed through a high-voltage power source. A magnetron is placed in
close proximity to the target while an ionic gas is flushed into the vacuum chamber, thereby
bombarding the target with atomic-sized particles. Upon projection, these particles become
stuck to the substrate and thus, deposition occurs.

Figure 17. Schematic representation of magnetron sputtering process.

The process allows the cleaning (cathodic cleaning) of previously contaminated sur-
faces and maintains potential differences between the target and the substrate [207]. Fewer
stresses are developed on the substrate as the operating temperature for the deposition
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 16 of 29

is within 50 ◦ C [206,208]. Better film densification makes it a cleaner process [209]. How-
ever, the process yields a low deposition rate, film thickness, ionization efficacy in plasma,
and issues with substrate pre-heating. These limitations led to the advancement of the
process by introducing unbalanced magnetron sputtering, bipolar pulsed dual-magnetron
sputtering, dual-anode sputtering, modulated pulsed power magnetron sputtering, etc.

4.5.3. Electro-Spark Deposition

Electro-spark additive manufacturing (ESAM) or deposition is a type of low-energy
(pulsed micro-arc) welding, better known for its minimal HAZ (heat-affected zones), low
elemental diffusion, coatings with adequate metallurgical bonding, surface modification of
conductive materials, and the ability to fuse dissimilar metallic materials [210]. Here, a high
current and shorter pulse allow the melting of electrode material and droplet formation,
–10 μm
and then droplets adhere forsubstrate
to the repairing purposes.
surfaces With Proper
[211,212]. the inception of of process
optimization
parameters (pulse frequency and movement of electrodes) generates multi-layer coatings
of 5–10 µm for repairing purposes. With the inception of the initial deposited layer, a thin
layer of mixed dilution is formed at the junction of the substrate and the coated region. The
subsequently coated layers recede the effect of this mixed boundary layer, and thus, there is
no contamination of the substrate with the electrode after the third layer of deposition [211].
A sharp thermal profile with narrow HAZ is generated at the interface when the molten
droplet is transferred alongside the pulse discharge arc. Cathodic etching occurs on the
base material, leading to metallurgical transformations, and the low mass transfer results
in high cooling rates, minimal HAZ, and thermal stresses. Fine-grained microstructures
are formed because of high cooling rates that curtail the elemental diffusion and formation
of brittle inter-metallics [211]. The type of HAZ depends on the thermal characteristics of
the substrate and the process parameters. ESAM imparts a low deposition rate because of
the formation of discrete discharge that transfers a minute volume of molten material to
the substrate surface. As the deposition thickness increases, the surface quality (roughness
parameter) degrades, and the deposition rate decreases. Thus, to maintain the quality of
the deposited layer, the surface roughness is maintained by grinding the samples using
burr remover or sanding discs.
The process has been traditionally used for coatings and surface modification of metal-
lic samples (tool steels, low- and medium-carbon steels, cast irons, die steels, cast steels,
stainless steels, Al-alloys, Cu-alloys, and Ti-alloys) combined with ceramics. However, the
coatings produced with high hardness and improved tribological properties need to be
evolved. Irrespective of the discussed applications, ESAM is used for the post-processing
operation of laser powder bed and fed processes. In a study by Enrique et al. [213], Inconel
625 samples prepared through binder jetting were subjected to AA4043 coating through
the ESAM process using different parameters. Figure 18 shows the visuals of the coated
surfaces produced through ESAM after the binder jetting of Inconel 625.

Figure 18. Post-processed Inconel 625-coated parts prepared though the ESAM process using the
) 600
following parameters: (a) 600 mJ,mJ,
120120
µF,μF,
andand ( ) 400
(b) 400 mJ,µF
mJ, 80 80after
μF after binder
binder jetting
jetting [213].
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 17 of 29

4.5.4. Electrochemical Additive Manufacturing

Electrochemical additive manufacturing (ECAM) has gained popularity for objects
having features of scale from mesoscale to nanoscale. Several applications are required to
have features from the size of a few microns to 1 mm. Research [214,215] shows the rele-
vance of these 3D-printed components for spatial applications. PCB manufacturing is one of
the examples where there is feature size varying from → the micron to− mm range→ [216]. ECAM −
uses the principle of electrochemical cell reaction to print in metal at room temperature. An
XYZ stage is required to carry out the localized 3D printing.− → − →

At anode (oxidation): M →Mn+ +ne− and Cu → Cu 2+ +2e− (1)

At cathode (reduction): Mn+ +ne− → M and Cu2+ +2e− → Cu (2)

Here, the electrochemical cell reaction occurs in the presence of an electrolyte when
the electrodes are supplied with a rated current. The tool head of the 3D printer holds
the anode (positive electrodes) at which oxidation occurs to reduce the metallic electrode
M to oxidize it into Mn+ , as in the case of Cu, which is oxidized into Cu2+ with two
−
electrons. Simultaneously, at the cathode (negative electrode), reduction takes place with
the deposition of the metal ion Mn+ , and acceptance of the negative electrode takes place,
as in the case of copper Cu2+ , which reduces to Cu by accepting 2e− , and the circuit is
driven by the flow of electrons using an external power supply [215]. Figure 19 shows a
schematic of an electrochemical 3D printer. Here, a syringe is employed to hold a certain
concentration of electrolytes. The nozzle of a given diameter allows the flow of electrolytes
and thus forms an electrolyte channel between the anode and cathode [215]. When supplied
with DC electrical power supply, the redox reaction occurs at the junction, resulting in the
deposition of the metal on the cathode. Using this method, localized deposition can be
achieved, and thus, the process can be automated to print the features [217].

Figure 19. Development of lab-scale ECAM (a) setup, (b) syringe arrangement, and (c) nozzle
tip [215].

5. Materials Suitable for Metallic Coatings

The metallic coatings produced through additive manufacturing technologies are not
limited to high-end alloys, i.e., Ti6Al4V [153,218], stainless steels [112,156], AlSi10Mg [219,220],
Maraging steels [221,222], CoCrMo [145], and Ni-based alloys (IN718, IN625, etc.) [213,223].
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 18 of 29

New candidates are emerging to make the processes readily available to end users. In
addition to the above-mentioned materials, some precious metals (gold, platinum, and
silver) have been expanding into the AM market through SLM technology. Various factors
control the use of limited engineering materials according to the extent of their weldability
and castability to be used in different AM technologies [224].

6. Challenges in Coatings through Additive Manufacturing

The inception of different MAM technologies has benefited different industries, but
there are several issues associated with these methods. The challenges can be categorized
based on material and/or processing issues. An extensive discussion of the major issues in
manufacturing metallic components is presented in this section.

6.1. Material Compatibility Issues

A wide spectrum of materials is utilized using MAM processes, including pure met-
als, alloys, ceramics, and composites, and further development of new materials is in
progress [7,8]. The compatibility of the materials with a certain AM process is based on
their mechanical and chemical properties along with their manufacturing ability. With dis-
similar metal joining, mixing, or alloying, there is a chance of the formation of brittle phases,
induced stresses, and interfacial defects [225–227]. When designing parts with multiple ma-
terials, the performance of the final components is of utmost interest. The process itself may
have disadvantages such as dimensional accuracy, the need for post-processing operations,
inability to address certain combinations of materials, difficulty in altering the working
environment, and so on. The formation of an intermetallic bond layer while designing parts
with different powder combinations involves complexity in the mixing and distribution
of the materials [60,228,229]. Therefore, the selection of a compatible bond material is
essential to fabricate parts with minimal or zero imperfections. In this regard, the study of
the alloy phase diagrams is the baseline for comprehending the alloy compositions and
material compatibility. A ternary phase diagram indicates the multiple equilibrium regions
of different elemental compositions and eutectic temperatures [16,227]. These regions are
quite difficult to assess in terms of determining relevant alloy compositions that will avoid
the formation of brittle intermetallic phases. Therefore, sensible knowledge of materials
science is desirable for envisioning ternary phase diagrams and equilibrium crystallization.
Moreover, there is a need to expand the scope of a comprehensive database for specific
materials, such as super alloys, that would be compatible with other available materials.

6.2. Defects, Flaws, and Dimensional Stability

Defect formation is one of the obvious issues in metal AM processes. Although the
metal AM process is a mature technology owing to its ability to produce multi-material
components with multiple inherent surface properties, the printed part is never free from
interfacial defects. The commonly found defects in single-material-printed parts are micro-
cracks, porosity, unmelted or solidified particles, etc. [16]. The issue with multiple-material
printing is the compositional imbalances arising due to the metallurgical transformations
occurring in the structures. A summary of the cause and type of defects formed in AM parts
is presented in Table 1. Bonding defects occur due to insufficient energy input that might
cause the generation of pores in the interface [162]. Cavities and micro-cracks are the results
of shrinkage, while pores are a result of unusual gas filling in the molten material. In the
case of deposition during cold spray AM technology, poor bonding between particles and
inefficient plastic deformation may result in the generation of micro-pores and inter-particle
boundaries at a lower impact velocity [3]. However, when the impact velocity is increased,
the plastic deformation of powders is improved, thereby minimizing the inter-particle
boundaries and the micro-pores. Another way to improve the plastic deformation is by
heat treatment of the samples after the deposition process. Several heat treatment proce-
dures have been adapted to introduce recrystallization along the inter-particle boundaries.
Figure 20 shows the microstructural comparison between the Cu-deposited etched samples
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 19 of 29

and heat-treated ones. The as-printed Cu deposition shows minimal pores and inter-particle
grain boundaries. After the heat treatment (annealing), recrystallization occurs, wherein
the particles assist in restoring the defects in grain boundaries (Figure 20b). Additionally,
this repairing mechanism aids in improving the thermal and electrical conductivities of
CSAM-deposited material [230].

Table 1. Some defects associated with AM parts.

Type of Defect Cause of Defect

Differences in thermal gradient result in
Micro-cracks or distortion residual stresses, thermal expansion, and
shrinkage during quenching cycles.
Entrapment of gaseous molecules during
powder atomization; shielding gas entrapment
Gas porosities
in the molten pool at a high powder flow rate;
or moisture in the powders.
Molten balls formed due to thermal gradients,
unstable capillarity of the molten pool,
hydrodynamic instability, spattering and
Roughened surfaces
denudation, splashing of molten material due
to ejection, and change in the melt
flow direction.
Insufficient energy passing through the
Lack of fusion and incomplete material melting
powders and surfaces.
In fusion-based MAM processes, vaporization
Keyholes
of constituent materials at high energy density.

Figure 20. Comparison of microstructure of CSAM part (a) without and (b) with heat treatment
(annealing) [3].

6.3. Optimization of Process Parameters

The process parameters involved in the AM technology control the quality and per-
formance of the produced component. Proper selection and optimization of the process
parameters are necessary for addressing metallic materials, especially novel materials. In
the case of the laser-based AM process, the user-defined parameters such as laser scan
speed, feed, and power control the process [11]. Multi-objective strategies can be employed
to fabricate parts with multiple powders. However, there exist certain challenges that
control the selection of process parameters. The unavailability of proper standards is a
major challenge in AM technologies. The processing parameters are either dependent on
–
material, method, or machine [231–233]. For example, a laser-based process with the same
metallic material and parameters will yield different results with varying machines. In the
case of laser processing of Ti6Al4V through SLM, a higher scan speed and lower power
are required as compared to the DED process. As per current industrial needs, SLM is
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 20 of 29

the preferable AM technology over other available technologies; however, the processing
time needs to be addressed [234]. Another challenge is the optimization of the process
parameters, which requires a series of experiments. It is even more challenging to optimize
the parameters for coatings through AM technologies. Owing to the dissimilarity in thermal
properties between the substrate and coating, there is a chance that the interfacial region
will generate flaws. To avoid these defects, proper optimization of the process parameters
is necessary [177,235]. At present, optimizing the process parameters for coatings through
AM technologies is a challenging task for the research community.

6.4. Environmental Hazard

The environmental impact is measured in terms of design for the environment, scoring
systems, and lifecycle assessment. With the advancement in AM technologies, there is
not much research evidence on the impact of environmental issues [225]. A joint effort
of the designers, process control engineers, and environmental specialists is the need of
the hour to assess environmental issues [236]. The environmental impact of laser-based
AM technologies was discussed by Morrow et al. [237] through different case studies for
quantitative analysis of energy and emissions. They concluded that laser AM technology
has the potential to reduce the environmental impact alongside cost-cutting. The energy
efficiencies of SLM and SLM processes were evaluated using cooperative efforts on process
emissions in manufacturing [225]. The quantitative information on waste flows, emissions,
and energy consumption is limited and needs in-depth exploration. Energy efficiency is
often described as a ratio of output energy by the component to the total energy used up by
the fabrication process [238]. The estimated energy efficiency of these processes accounts
for 8.6% of the total energy consumed by the component itself. Although such information
is valid and valuable, a holistic lifecycle assessment is often desirable.
The laser transfer energy efficiency ranges between 30% and 50% for fabricating parts
of H13 tool steel and Cu powders. At optimal conditions, the deposition efficiency reaches
14% [239]. In one study [240], it was concluded that the SLS process is a sustainable AM sys-
tem owing to its power consumption strategies, i.e., average power consumption = 19.6 kW,
energy consumption by chamber heater = 36%, stepper motors = 26%, roller drivers = 16%,
and laser source = 16%. The SLS process also has minimal waste and favorable energy
indicators [241]. In addition to this, AM technology is a potential candidate for reduc-
ing carbon footprints through design optimization and waste management. As per the
ATIKINS project, material and weight saving (by 100 kg) of almost 40% could be achieved
for long-range aircraft [236]. There could be fuel savings of 2.5 MUSD and 1.3 Mt CO2 for
an aircraft throughout its lifetime. Thus, the environmental aspect of AM technologies
needs further exploration.

7. Conclusions and Outlook

Additive manufacturing is the most promising manufacturing method for process-
ing materials with desired surface properties. This technology is moving towards value
addition, sustainability, and cost optimization, thereby appealing to industries and the
academic research community. To date, several AM technologies have been adapted for
the manufacturing of metallic 3D complex features, but these are not free from limitations,
including material compatibility, defects, dimensional instability, difficulty in incorporating
desired properties, process parameter optimization, and environmental concerns. These
flaws force the development of in situ monitoring processes and closed-loop process control
to pre-qualify parts prior to post-processing operations and assembling. This aids in the
further enhancement of AM technologies. The challenges of different AM processes for
different applications have not been systematically detailed and require further research.
Thus, there is a need for hybridization of the AM processes along with the implementation
of new optimization methods, which might add value to industries and facilitate infiltra-
tion into the market. However, with the evolution of technology, challenges are evident.
Therefore, the collective endeavor of scientists, researchers, engineers, and decision makers
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 21 of 29

is necessary to iron out the technological, scientific, and economical issues associated with
metallic additive manufacturing.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.M. and K.G.P.; writing—original draft preparation,

S.M.; writing—review and editing, S.M.; supervision, K.G.P.; project administration, K.G.P.; funding
acquisition, K.G.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors acknowledge financial support from the Baltic Research Programme project
no. EEA-RESEARCH-85 “Waste-to-resource: eggshells as a source for next generation biomaterials
for bone regeneration (EGGSHELL)” under the EEA Grant of Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway
no. EEZ/BPP/VIAA/2021/1.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Gipperich, M.; Riepe, J.; Day, R.; Bergs, T. Express Wire Coil Cladding as an Advanced Technology to Accelerate Additive
Manufacturing and Coating. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 2022, 144, 021003. [CrossRef]
2. Kurth, R.; Tehel, R.; Päßler, T.; Wagner, H.; Beihofer, D. Methodology for the design of recursively axially formed rotor shafts
made of two or more combined segments. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 27, 13–20. [CrossRef]
3. Prashar, G.; Vasudev, H. A comprehensive review on sustainable cold spray additive manufacturing: State of the art, challenges
and future challenges. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 310, 127606. [CrossRef]
4. Kowalkowski, C.; Gebauer, H.; Kamp, B.; Parry, G. Servitization and deservitization: Overview, concepts, and definitions. Ind.
Mark. Manag. 2017, 60, 4–10. [CrossRef]
5. Fox, S.; Li, L. Expanding the scope of prosumption: A framework for analysing potential contributions from advances in materials
technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 79, 721–733. [CrossRef]
6. Zhou, F.; Ji, Y.; Jiao, R.J. Affective and cognitive design for mass personalization: Status and prospect. J. Intell. Manuf. 2012, 24,
1047–1069. [CrossRef]
7. Gokuldoss, P.K. Design of next-generation alloys for additive manufacturing. Mater. Des. Process. Commun. 2019, 1, 19–22.
[CrossRef]
8. Prashanth, K.G.; Wang, Z. Additive Manufacturing: Alloy Design and Process Innovations. Materials 2020, 13, 542. [CrossRef]
9. Cooper, D.E.; Stanford, M.; Kibble, K.A.; Gibbons, G.J. Additive Manufacturing for product improvement at Red Bull Technology.
Mater. Des. 2012, 41, 226–230. [CrossRef]
10. Gebler, M.; Schoot Uiterkamp, A.J.M.; Visser, C. A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy
2014, 74, 158–167. [CrossRef]
11. Maleki, E.; Bagherifard, S.; Bandini, M.; Guagliano, M. Surface post-treatments for metal additive manufacturing: Progress,
challenges, and opportunities. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 37, 101619. [CrossRef]
12. Gu, D.D.; Meiners, W.; Wissenbach, K.; Poprawe, R.; Gu, D.D.; Meiners, W.; Wissenbach, K.; Poprawe, R. Components: Materials,
Processes and Mechanisms Laser Additive Manufacturing of Metallic Components: Materials, Processes and Mechanisms. Int.
Mater. Rev. 2012, 57, 133–164. [CrossRef]
13. Thompson, S.M.; Aspin, Z.S.; Shamsaei, N.; Elwany, A.; Bian, L. Additive manufacturing of heat exchangers: A case study on a
multi-layered Ti–6Al–4V oscillating heat pipe. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 8, 163–174. [CrossRef]
14. Atthews, M.A.J.M.; Uss, G.A.B.E.G.; Rachenberg, D.E.R.D.; Emuth, J.A.A.D.; Eebner, J.O.H.N.E.H.; Uoss, E.R.I.C.B.D.; Oshua, J.D.;
Untz, K.; Padaccini, C.H.M.S. Diode-based additive manufacturing of metals using an optically-addressable light valve. Opt.
Express 2017, 25, 11788–11800. [CrossRef]
15. Yadroitsev, I.; Smurov, I. Surface Morphology in Selective Laser Melting of Metal Powders. Phys. Procedia 2011, 12, 264–270.
[CrossRef]
16. Bandyopadhyay, A.; Zhang, Y.; Onuike, B. Additive manufacturing of bimetallic structures. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2022, 17,
256–294. [CrossRef]
17. Nasab, M.H.; Gastaldi, D.; Lecis, N.F.; Vedani, M. On morphological surface features of the parts printed by selective laser melting
(SLM). Addit. Manuf. 2018, 24, 373–377. [CrossRef]
18. Zhang, Z.; Sun, C.; Xu, X.; Liu, L. Surface quality and forming characteristics of thin-wall aluminium alloy parts manufactured by
laser assisted MIG arc additive manufacturing. Int. J. Light. Mater. Manuf. 2018, 1, 89–95. [CrossRef]
19. Sames, W.J.; List, F.A.; Pannala, S.; Dehoff, R.R.; Babu, S.S. The metallurgy and processing science of metal additive manufacturing.
Int. Mater. Rev. 2016, 61, 315–360. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 22 of 29

20. Wen, P.; Qin, Y.; Chen, Y.; Voshage, M.; Jauer, L.; Poprawe, R.; Schleifenbaum, J.H. Laser additive manufacturing of Zn porous
scaffolds: Shielding gas flow, surface quality and densification. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2019, 35, 368–376. [CrossRef]
21. Zhou, Y.; Wang, J.; Yang, Y.; Yang, M.; Zheng, H.; Xie, D.; Wang, D.; Shen, L. Laser Additive Manufacturing of Zinc Targeting for
Biomedical Application. Int. J. Bioprinting 2022, 8, 74–95. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Solberg, K.; Berto, F. A diagram for capturing and predicting failure locations in notch geometries produced by additive
manufacturing. Int. J. Fatigue 2020, 134, 105428. [CrossRef]
23. Nicoletto, G. Directional and notch effects on the fatigue behavior of as-built DMLS Ti6Al4V. Int. J. Fatigue 2018, 106, 124–131.
[CrossRef]
24. DebRoy, T.; Wei, H.L.; Zuback, J.S.; Mukherjee, T.; Elmer, J.W.; Milewski, J.O.; Beese, A.M.; Wilson-Heid, A.; De, A.; Zhang, W.
Additive manufacturing of metallic components—Process, structure and properties. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2018, 92, 112–224. [CrossRef]
25. 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]
26. Bidare, P.; Bitharas, I.; Ward, R.M.; Attallah, M.M.; Moore, A.J. Fluid and particle dynamics in laser powder bed fusion. Acta
Mater. 2018, 142, 107–120. [CrossRef]
27. Mohanty, S.; Das, A.K.; Dixit, A.R. Surface modification of high-performance alloys through microelectrical discharge machining
processes. Micro Electro-Fabr. 2021, 137–157. [CrossRef]
28. Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Klauss, H.J.; Surreddi, K.B.; Löber, L.; Wang, Z.; Chaubey, A.K.; Kühn, U.; Eckert, J. Microstructure
and mechanical properties of Al–12Si produced by selective laser melting: Effect of heat treatment. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2014, 590,
153–160. [CrossRef]
29. Ma, P.; Ji, P.; Jia, Y.; Shi, X.; Yu, Z.; Prashanth, K.G. Effect of Substrate Plate Heating on the Microstructure and Properties of
Selective Laser Melted Al-20Si-5Fe-3Cu-1Mg Alloy. Materials 2021, 14, 330. [CrossRef]
30. Ma, P.; Jia, Y.; Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Yu, Z.; Eckert, J. Microstructure and phase formation in Al–20Si–5Fe–3Cu–1Mg
synthesized by selective laser melting. J. Alloy. Compd. 2016, 657, 430–435. [CrossRef]
31. Ma, P.; Prashanth, K.; Scudino, S.; Jia, Y.; Wang, H.; Zou, C.; Wei, Z.; Eckert, J. Influence of Annealing on Mechanical Properties of
Al-20Si Processed by Selective Laser Melting. Metals 2014, 4, 28–36. [CrossRef]
32. Zhang, S.; Ma, P.; Jia, Y.; Yu, Z.; Sokkalingam, R.; Shi, X.; Ji, P.; Eckert, J.; Prashanth, K.G. Microstructure and Mechanical Properties
of Al-(12-20)Si Bi-Material Fabricated by Selective Laser Melting. Materials 2019, 12, 2126. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Aboulkhair, N.T.; Simonelli, M.; Parry, L.; Ashcroft, I.; Tuck, C.; Hague, R. 3D Printing of Aluminium Alloys: Additive Man-
ufacturing of Aluminium Alloys Using Selective Laser Melting. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2019, 106, 100578. [CrossRef]
34. Prashanth, K.G.; Shahabi, H.S.; Attar, H.; Srivastava, V.C.; Ellendt, N.; Uhlenwinkel, V.; Eckert, J.; Scudino, S. Production of high
strength Al85Nd8Ni5Co2 alloy by selective laser melting. Addit. Manuf. 2015, 6, 1–5. [CrossRef]
35. Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Chaubey, A.K.; Löber, L.; Wang, P.; Attar, H.; Schimansky, F.P.; Pyczak, F.; Eckert, J. Processing of
Al–12Si–TNM composites by selective laser melting and evaluation of compressive and wear properties. J. Mater. Res. 2016, 31,
55–65. [CrossRef]
36. Tang, S.; Ummethala, R.; Suryanarayana, C.; Eckert, J.; Prashanth, K.G.; Wang, Z. Additive Manufacturing of Aluminum-Based
Metal Matrix Composites—A Review. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2021, 23, 2100053. [CrossRef]
37. Wang, Z.; Ummethala, R.; Singh, N.; Tang, S.; Suryanarayana, C.; Eckert, J.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective Laser Melting of Aluminum
and Its Alloys. Materials 2020, 13, 4564. [CrossRef]
38. Xi, L.; Gu, D.; Guo, S.; Wang, R.; Ding, K.; Prashanth, K.G. Grain Refinement in Laser Manufactured Al-Based Composites with
TiB2 Ceramic. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 2611–2622. [CrossRef]
39. Xi, L.; Xu, J.; Gu, D.; Feng, L.; Lu, Q.; Prashanth, K.G. A novel crack-free and refined 2195-Ti/CeB6 composites prepared by laser
powder bed fusion. Mater. Lett. 2023, 333, 133572. [CrossRef]
40. Xi, L.; Feng, L.; Gu, D.; Prashanth, K.G.; Kaban, I.; Wang, R.; Xiong, K.; Sarac, B.; Eckert, J. Microstructure formation and
mechanical performance of micro-nanoscale ceramic reinforced aluminum matrix composites manufactured by laser powder bed
fusion. J. Alloy. Compd. 2023, 939, 168803. [CrossRef]
41. Xi, L.X.; Zhang, H.; Wang, P.; Li, H.C.; Prashanth, K.G.; Lin, K.J.; Kaban, I.; Gu, D.D. Comparative investigation of microstructure,
mechanical properties and strengthening mechanisms of Al-12Si/TiB2 fabricated by selective laser melting and hot pressing.
Ceram. Int. 2018, 44, 17635–17642. [CrossRef]
42. Jung, H.Y.; Choi, S.J.; Prashanth, K.G.; Stoica, M.; Scudino, S.; Yi, S.; Kühn, U.; Kim, D.H.; Kim, K.B.; Eckert, J. Fabrication of
Fe-based bulk metallic glass by selective laser melting: A parameter study. Mater. Des. 2015, 86, 703–708. [CrossRef]
43. Suryawanshi, J.; Prashanth, K.G.; Ramamurty, U. Mechanical behavior of selective laser melted 316L stainless steel. Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2017, 696, 113–121. [CrossRef]
44. Kumar, D.; Shankar, G.; Prashanth, K.G.; Suwas, S. Texture dependent strain hardening in additively manufactured stainless steel
316L. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2021, 820, 141483. [CrossRef]
45. Kumar, D.; Jhavar, S.; Arya, A.; Prashanth, K.G.; Suwas, S. Mechanisms Controlling Fracture Toughness of Additively Man-
ufactured Stainless Steel 316L. Int. J. Fract. 2021, 235, 61–78. [CrossRef]
46. Shukla, R.; Prashanth, K.G. Ti6Al4V Coating on 316L Substrate by Laser-based Fusion Process. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 2022, 1–11.
[CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 23 of 29

47. Prashanth, K.; Gokuldoss, P.K. Comment on the paper ‘Thermal stability of the Al70Ni10Ti10Zr5Ta5 amorphous alloy powder
fabricated by mechanical alloying’ by Xiu Wei, Xinfu Wang, Fusheng Han, Haowen Xie, Cui’e Wen, J. Alloys Compd. 496 (2010)
313–316. J. Alloy. Compd. 2010, 507, L32–L34. [CrossRef]
48. Prashanth, K.G.; Löber, L.; Klauss, H.-J.; Kühn, U.; Eckert, J. Characterization of 316L Steel Cellular Dodecahedron Structures
Produced by Selective Laser Melting. Technologies 2016, 4, 34. [CrossRef]
49. Salman, O.O.; Gammer, C.; Eckert, J.; Salih, M.Z.; Abdulsalam, E.H.; Prashanth, K.G.G.; Scudino, S. Selective laser melting of 316L
stainless steel: Influence of TiB2 addition on microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater. Today Commun. 2019, 21, 100615.
[CrossRef]
50. Salman, O.O.; Brenne, F.; Niendorf, T.; Eckert, J.; Prashanth, K.; He, T.; Scudino, S. Impact of the scanning strategy on the
mechanical behavior of 316L steel synthesized by selective laser melting. J. Manuf. Process. 2019, 45, 255–261. [CrossRef]
51. Suryawanshi, J.; Prashanth, K.G.; Ramamurty, U. Tensile, fracture, and fatigue crack growth properties of a 3D printed maraging
steel through selective laser melting. J. Alloy. Compd. 2017, 725, 355–364. [CrossRef]
52. Scudino, S.; Unterdörfer, C.; Prashanth, K.G.; Attar, H.; Ellendt, N.; Uhlenwinkel, V.; Eckert, J. Additive manufacturing of Cu–10Sn
bronze. Mater. Lett. 2015, 156, 202–204. [CrossRef]
53. Zhao, C.; Wang, Z.; Li, D.; Kollo, L.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, W.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective laser melting of Cu–Ni–Sn: A comprehensive
study on the microstructure, mechanical properties, and deformation behavior. Int. J. Plast. 2021, 138, 102926. [CrossRef]
54. Zhao, C.; Wang, Z.; Li, D.; Kollo, L.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, W.; Prashanth, K.G. Cu-Ni-Sn alloy fabricated by melt spinning and selective
laser melting: A comparative study on the microstructure and formation kinetics. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 13097–13105.
[CrossRef]
55. Zhao, C.; Wang, Z.; Li, D.; Xie, M.; Kollo, L.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, W.; Prashanth, K.G. Comparison of additively manufacturing
samples fabricated from pre-alloyed and mechanically mixed powders. J. Alloy. Compd. 2020, 830, 154603. [CrossRef]
56. Liu, Z.H.; Zhang, D.Q.; Sing, S.L.; Chua, C.K.; Loh, L.E. Interfacial characterization of SLM parts in multi-material processing:
Metallurgical diffusion between 316L stainless steel and C18400 copper alloy. Mater. Charact. 2014, 94, 116–125. [CrossRef]
57. Mao, Z.; Zhang, D.Z.; Jiang, J.; Fu, G.; Zhang, P. Processing optimisation, mechanical properties and microstructural evolution
during selective laser melting of Cu-15Sn high-tin bronze. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2018, 721, 125–134. [CrossRef]
58. Lu, Y.; Wu, S.; Gan, Y.; Huang, T.; Yang, C.; Junjie, L.; Lin, J. Study on the microstructure, mechanical property and residual stress
of SLM Inconel-718 alloy manufactured by differing island scanning strategy. Opt. Laser Technol. 2015, 75, 197–206. [CrossRef]
59. Promakhov, V.; Zhukov, A.; Ziatdinov, M.; Zhukov, I.; Schulz, N.; Kovalchuk, S.; Dubkova, Y.; Korsmik, R.; Klimova-Korsmik, O.;
Turichin, G.; et al. Inconel 625/TiB2 Metal Matrix Composites by Direct Laser Deposition. Metals 2019, 9, 141. [CrossRef]
60. Onuike, B.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Additive manufacturing of Inconel 718—Ti6Al4V bimetallic structures. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 22,
844–851. [CrossRef]
61. Mumtaz, K.; Hopkinson, N. Selective laser melting of Inconel 625 using pulse shaping. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2010, 16, 248–257.
[CrossRef]
62. Bond, D.M.; Zikry, M.A. Effects of electron beam manufacturing induced defects on fracture in Inconel 718. Addit. Manuf. 2020,
32, 101059. [CrossRef]
63. Amato, K.N.; Gaytan, S.M.; Murr, L.E.; Martinez, E.; Shindo, P.; Hernandez, J.; Collins, S.; Medina, F.W. Microstructures and
mechanical behavior of Inconel 718 fabricated by selective laser melting. Acta Mater. 2012, 60, 2229–2239. [CrossRef]
64. Ehtemam-Haghighi, S.; Prashanth, K.G.; Attar, H.; Chaubey, A.K.; Cao, G.H.; Zhang, L.C. Evaluation of mechanical and wear
properties of Ti xNb 7Fe alloys designed for biomedical applications. Mater. Des. 2016, 111, 592–599. [CrossRef]
65. Attar, H.; Prashanth, K.G.; Zhang, L.-C.; Calin, M.; Okulov, I.V.; Scudino, S.; Yang, C.; Eckert, J. Effect of Powder Particle Shape
on the Properties of In Situ Ti–TiB Composite Materials Produced by Selective Laser Melting. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2015, 31,
1001–1005. [CrossRef]
66. Attar, H.; Löber, L.; Funk, A.; Calin, M.; Zhang, L.C.; Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Zhang, Y.S.; Eckert, J. Mechanical behavior of
porous commercially pure Ti and Ti–TiB composite materials manufactured by selective laser melting. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2015,
625, 350–356. [CrossRef]
67. Okulov, I.V.; Bönisch, M.; Okulov, A.V.; Volegov, A.S.; Attar, H.; Ehtemam-Haghighi, S.; Calin, M.; Wang, Z.; Hohenwarter, A.;
Kaban, I.; et al. Phase formation, microstructure and deformation behavior of heavily alloyed TiNb- and TiV-based titanium
alloys. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2018, 733, 80–86. [CrossRef]
68. Attar, H.; Prashanth, K.G.; Chaubey, A.K.; Calin, M.; Zhang, L.C.; Scudino, S.; Eckert, J. Comparison of wear properties of
commercially pure titanium prepared by selective laser melting and casting processes. Mater. Lett. 2015, 142, 38–41. [CrossRef]
69. Prashanth, K.G.; Damodaram, R.; Maity, T.; Wang, P.; Eckert, J. Friction welding of selective laser melted Ti6Al4V parts. Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2017, 704, 66–71. [CrossRef]
70. Qin, P.T.; Damodaram, R.; Maity, T.; Zhang, W.W.; Yang, C.; Wang, Z.; Prashanth, K.G. Friction welding of electron beam melted
Ti-6Al-4V. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2019, 761, 138045. [CrossRef]
71. Prashanth, K.G.; Damodaram, R.; Scudino, S.; Wang, Z.; Rao, K.P.; Eckert, J. Friction welding of Al–12Si parts produced by
selective laser melting. Mater. Des. 2014, 57, 632–637. [CrossRef]
72. Karimi, J.; Antonov, M.; Kollo, L.; Prashanth, K. Role of laser remelting and heat treatment in mechanical and tribological
properties of selective laser melted Ti6Al4V alloy. J. Alloy. Compd. 2022, 897, 163207. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 24 of 29

73. Karimi, J.; Suryanarayana, C.; Okulov, I.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective laser melting of Ti6Al4V: Effect of laser re-melting. Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2020, 805, 140558. [CrossRef]
74. Karimi, J.; Xie, M.S.; Wang, Z.; Prashanth, K.G. Influence of substructures on the selective laser melted Ti-6Al-4V alloy as a
function of laser re-melting. J. Manuf. Process. 2021, 68, 1387–1394. [CrossRef]
75. Alinejadian, N.; Wang, P.; Kollo, L.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective Laser Melting of Commercially Pure Molybdenum by Laser
Rescanning. 3d Print. Addit. Manuf. 2022. [CrossRef]
76. Bai, P.-K.; Wang, W.-F. Selective laser sintering mechanism of polymer-coated molybdenum powder. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc.
China 2007, 17, 543–547. [CrossRef]
77. Faidel, D.; Jonas, D.; Natour, G.; Behr, W. Investigation of the selective laser melting process with molybdenum powder. Addit.
Manuf. 2015, 8, 88–94. [CrossRef]
78. Alinejadian, N.; Kazemi, S.H.; Grossberg-Kuusk, M.; Kollo, L.; Odnevall, I.; Prashanth, K.G. Importance of the micro-lattice
structure of selective laser melting processed Mo/Mo(x)S(x+1) composite: Corrosion studies on the electrochemical performance
in aqueous solutions. Mater. Today Chem. 2022, 26, 101219. [CrossRef]
79. Wang, Z.; Tang, S.Y.; Scudino, S.; Ivanov, Y.P.; Qu, R.T.; Wang, D.; Yang, C.; Zhang, W.W.; Greer, A.L.; Eckert, J.; et al. Additive
manufacturing of a martensitic Co–Cr–Mo alloy: Towards circumventing the strength–ductility trade-off. Addit. Manuf. 2020,
37, 101725. [CrossRef]
80. Guoqing, Z.; Junxin, L.; Xiaoyu, Z.; Jin, L.; Anmin, W. Effect of Heat Treatment on the Properties of CoCrMo Alloy Manufactured
by Selective Laser Melting. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2018, 27, 2281–2287. [CrossRef]
81. Bandyopadhyay, A.; Shivaram, A.; Isik, M.; Avila, J.D.; Dernell, W.S.; Bose, S. Additively manufactured calcium phosphate
reinforced CoCrMo alloy: Bio-tribological and biocompatibility evaluation for load-bearing implants. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 28,
312–324. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
82. Zhang, M.; Yang, Y.; Song, C.; Bai, Y.; Xiao, Z. Effect of the heat treatment on corrosion and mechanical properties of CoCrMo
alloys manufactured by selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2018, 24, 1235–1244. [CrossRef]
83. Lai, Z.; Guo, T.; Zhang, S.; Kollo, L.; Attar, H.; Wang, Z.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective Laser Melting of Commercially Pure Silicon.
J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. Sci. Ed. 2022, 37, 1155–1165. [CrossRef]
84. Wang, Z.; Xie, M.; Li, Y.; Zhang, W.; Yang, C.; Kollo, L.; Eckert, J.; Prashanth, K.G. Premature failure of an additively manufactured
material. NPG Asia Mater. 2020, 12, 1–10. [CrossRef]
85. Venkatesh, K.V.; Nandini, V.V. Direct Metal Laser Sintering: A Digitised Metal Casting Technology. J. Indian Prosthodont. Soc. 2013,
13, 389–392. [CrossRef]
86. Murr, L.E.; Gaytan, S.M.; Ramirez, D.A.; Martinez, E.; Hernandez, J.; Amato, K.N.; Shindo, P.W.; Medina, F.R.; Wicker, R.B. Metal
Fabrication by Additive Manufacturing Using Laser and Electron Beam Melting Technologies. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2012, 28,
1–14. [CrossRef]
87. Lee, H.; Lim, C.H.J.; Low, M.J.; Tham, N.; Murukeshan, V.M.; Kim, Y.J. Lasers in additive manufacturing: A review. Int. J. Precis.
Eng. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 4, 307–322. [CrossRef]
88. Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Eckert, J. Defining the tensile properties of Al-12Si parts produced by selective laser melting. Acta
Mater. 2017, 126, 25–35. [CrossRef]
89. Schwab, H.; Bönisch, M.; Giebeler, L.; Gustmann, T.; Eckert, J.; Kühn, U. Processing of Ti-5553 with improved mechanical
properties via an in-situ heat treatment combining selective laser melting and substrate plate heating. Mater. Des. 2017, 130, 83–89.
[CrossRef]
90. Karimi, J.; Ma, P.; Jia, Y.D.; Prashanth, K.G. Linear patterning of high entropy alloy by additive manufacturing. Manuf. Lett. 2020,
24, 9–13. [CrossRef]
91. Bhavar, V.; Kattire, P.; Patil, V.; Khot, S.; Gujar, K.R.S. Additive Manufacturing Handbook, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2017.
92. Mani, M.; Lane, B.M.; Donmez, M.A.; Feng, S.C.; Moylan, S.P. A review on measurement science needs for real-time control of
additive manufacturing metal powder bed fusion processes. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2016, 55, 1400–1418. [CrossRef]
93. Gokuldoss, P.K.; Kolla, S.; Eckert, J. Additive Manufacturing Processes: Selective Laser Melting, Electron Beam Melting and
Binder Jetting—Selection Guidelines. Materials 2017, 10, 672. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
94. Glardon, R.; Karapatis, N.; Romano, V.; Levy, G. Influence of Nd:YAG Parameters on the Selective Laser Sintering of Metallic
Powders. CIRP Ann. 2001, 50, 133–136. [CrossRef]
95. Gueche, Y.A.; Sanchez-Ballester, N.M.; Bataille, B.; Aubert, A.; Leclercq, L.; Rossi, J.-C.; Soulairol, I. Selective Laser Sintering of
Solid Oral Dosage Forms with Copovidone and Paracetamol Using a CO2 Laser. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 160. [CrossRef]
96. Yamauchi, Y.; Kigure, T.; Niino, T. Low Temperature Laser Sintering of PA Powder Using Fiber Laser. Solid Freeform Fabrication
2016. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium—An Additive Manufacturing
Conference, SFF 2016, Austin, TX, USA, 8–10 August 2016; pp. 2204–2216.
97. Ahmed, G.M.S.; Algarni, S. Design, Development and FE Thermal Analysis of a Radially Grooved Brake Disc Developed through
Direct Metal Laser Sintering. Materials 2018, 11, 1211. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
98. Guo, N.; Leu, M.C. Additive manufacturing: Technology, applications and research needs. Front. Mech. Eng. 2013, 8, 215–243.
[CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 25 of 29

99. Chatterjee, A.N.; Kumar, S.; Saha, P.; Mishra, P.K.; Roy Choudhury, A. An experimental design approach to selective laser
sintering of low carbon steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2003, 136, 151–157. [CrossRef]
100. Yap, C.Y.; Chua, C.K.; Dong, Z.L.; Liu, Z.H.; Zhang, D.Q.; Loh, L.E.; Sing, S.L. Review of selective laser melting: Materials and
applications. Appl. Phys. Rev. 2015, 2, 041101. [CrossRef]
101. Olakanmi, E.O.; Cochrane, R.F.; Dalgarno, K.W. A review on selective laser sintering/melting (SLS/SLM) of aluminium alloy
powders: Processing, microstructure, and properties. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2015, 74, 401–477. [CrossRef]
102. Kruth, J.P.; Froyen, L.; Rombouts, M.; Van Vaerenbergh, J.; Mercells, P. New Ferro Powder for Selective Laser Sintering of Dense
Parts. CIRP Ann. 2003, 52, 139–142. [CrossRef]
103. Khaing, M.W.; Fuh, J.Y.H.; Lu, L. Direct metal laser sintering for rapid tooling: Processing and characterisation of EOS parts.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2001, 113, 269–272. [CrossRef]
104. Anand, M.; Das, A.K. Issues in fabrication of 3D components through DMLS Technique: A review. Opt. Laser Technol. 2021,
139, 106914. [CrossRef]
105. Zhu, H.H.; Lu, L.; Fuh, J.Y.H. Development and characterisation of direct laser sintering Cu-based metal powder. J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 2003, 140, 314–317. [CrossRef]
106. Gu, D.; Shen, Y. Effects of processing parameters on consolidation and microstructure of W–Cu components by DMLS. J. Alloy.
Compd. 2009, 473, 107–115. [CrossRef]
107. Liu, J.; Kannan, R.; Zhang, D.; Liu, T.; Nandwana, P.; Devaraj, A. Multi-scale characterization of supersolidus liquid phase
sintered H13 tool steel manufactured via binder jet additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 2022, 56, 102834. [CrossRef]
108. Das, S.P.; Wohlert, M.; Beaman, J.J.; Bourell, D.L. Producing metal parts with selective laser sintering/hot isostatic pressing. Jom
1998, 50, 17–20. [CrossRef]
109. Kruth, J.; Wang, X.; Laoui, T.; Froyen, L. Lasers and materials in selective laser sintering. Assem. Autom. 2003, 23, 357–371.
[CrossRef]
110. Liu, J.; Ryneson, M.L. Blended Powder Solid-Supersolidus Liquid Phase Sintering. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ExOne Co
2006. U.S. Patent 7070734, 12 July 2002.
111. Kruth, J.-P.; Mercelis, P.; Van Vaerenbergh, J.; Froyen, L.; Rombouts, M. Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and
selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2005, 11, 26–36. [CrossRef]
112. Zitelli, C.; Folgarait, P.; Di Schino, A. Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Stainless Steel Grades: A Review. Metals 2019, 9, 731. [CrossRef]
113. Li, R.; Shi, Y.; Wang, Z.; Wang, L.; Liu, J.; Jiang, W. Densification behavior of gas and water atomized 316L stainless steel powder
during selective laser melting. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2010, 256, 4350–4356. [CrossRef]
114. Santos, L.M.S.; Ferreira, J.A.M.; Jesus, J.S.; Costa, J.M.; Capela, C. Fatigue behaviour of selective laser melting steel components.
Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 2016, 85, 9–15. [CrossRef]
115. Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S. Quasicrystalline Composites by Additive Manufacturing. Key Eng. Mater. 2019, 818, 72–76. [CrossRef]
116. Kang, N.; El Mansori, M.; Lin, X.; Guittonneau, F.; Liao, H.L.; Huang, W.D.; Coddet, C. In-situ synthesis of aluminum/nano-
quasicrystalline Al-Fe-Cr composite by using selective laser melting. Compos. B Eng. 2018, 155, 382–390. [CrossRef]
117. Zhang, C.; Ouyang, D.; Pauly, S.; Liu, L. 3D printing of bulk metallic glasses. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2021, 145, 100625. [CrossRef]
118. Pauly, S.; Löber, L.; Petters, R.; Stoica, M.; Scudino, S.; Kühn, U.; Eckert, J. Processing metallic glasses by selective laser melting.
Mater. Today 2013, 16, 37–41. [CrossRef]
119. Li, X.P.; Kang, C.W.; Huang, H.; Zhang, L.C.; Sercombe, T.B. Selective laser melting of an Al86Ni6Y4.5Co2La1.5 metallic glass:
Processing, microstructure evolution and mechanical properties. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2014, 606, 370–379. [CrossRef]
120. Singh, N.; Hameed, P.; Ummethala, R.; Manivasagam, G.; Prashanth, K.; Eckert, J. Selective laser manufacturing of Ti-based
alloys and composites: Impact of process parameters, application trends, and future prospects. Mater. Today Adv. 2020, 8, 100097.
[CrossRef]
121. Prashanth, K.G. Processing of Al-based composite material by selective laser melting: A perspective. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 57,
498–504. [CrossRef]
122. Maurya, H.S.; Juhani, K.; Sergejev, F.; Prashanth, K.G. Additive manufacturing of TiC-based cermet with stainless steel as a binder
material. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 57, 824–828. [CrossRef]
123. Aramian, A.; Sadeghian, Z.; Prashanth, K.G.; Berto, F. In situ fabrication of TiC-NiCr cermets by selective laser melting. Int. J.
Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 2020, 87, 105171. [CrossRef]
124. Maurya, H.S.; Kollo, L.; Tarraste, M.; Juhani, K.; Sergejev, F.; Prashanth, K.G. Effect of the Laser Processing Parameters on the
Selective Laser Melting of TiC–Fe-Based Cermets. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2022, 6, 35. [CrossRef]
125. Maurya, H.S.; Kollo, L.; Tarraste, M.; Juhani, K.; Sergejev, F.; Prashanth, K.G. Selective Laser Melting of TiC-Fe via Laser Pulse
Shaping: Microstructure and Mechanical Properties. 3d Print. Addit. Manuf. 2021. [CrossRef]
126. Aramian, A.; Sadeghian, Z.; Razavi, S.M.J.; Prashanth, K.G.; Berto, F. Effect of selective laser melting process parameters on
microstructural and mechanical properties of TiC–NiCr cermet. Ceram. Int. 2020, 46, 28749–28757. [CrossRef]
127. Maurya, H.S.; Kollo, L.; Juhani, K.; Sergejev, F.; Prashanth, K.G. Effect of preheating and cooling of the powder bed by laser pulse
shaping on the microstructure of the TiC based cermets. Ceram. Int. 2022, 48, 20612–20618. [CrossRef]
128. Tolochko, N.K.; Mozzharov, S.E.; Yadroitsev, I.A.; Laoui, T.; Froyen, L.; Titov, V.I.; Ignatiev, M.B. Balling processes during selective
laser treatment of powders. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2004, 10, 78–87. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 26 of 29

129. Tolochko, N.K.; Arshinov, M.K.; Gusarov, A.V.; Titov, V.I.; Laoui, T.; Froyen, L. Mechanisms of selective laser sintering and heat
transfer in Ti powder. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2003, 9, 314–326. [CrossRef]
130. Basak, A.; Das, S. Epitaxy and Microstructure Evolution in Metal Additive Manufacturing. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 2016, 46,
125–149. [CrossRef]
131. Gu, D. Laser Additive Manufacturing of High-Performance Materials; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; ISBN
9783662460894.
132. Leuders, S.; Thöne, M.; Riemer, A.; Niendorf, T.; Tröster, T.; Richard, H.A.; Maier, H.J. On the mechanical behaviour of titanium
alloy TiAl6V4 manufactured by selective laser melting: Fatigue resistance and crack growth performance. Int. J. Fatigue 2013, 48,
300–307. [CrossRef]
133. Pogson, S.; Fox, P.; O’Neill, W.; Sutcliffe, C.J. The direct metal laser remelting of copper and tool steel powders. Mater. Sci. Eng. A
2004, 386, 453–459. [CrossRef]
134. Prashanth, K.G.; Scudino, S.; Maity, T.; Das, J.; Eckert, J. Is the energy density a reliable parameter for materials synthesis by
selective laser melting? Mater. Res. Lett. 2017, 5, 386–390. [CrossRef]
135. Echeta, I.; Feng, X.; Dutton, B.; Leach, R.; Piano, S. Review of defects in lattice structures manufactured by powder bed fusion. Int.
J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 106, 2649–2668. [CrossRef]
136. Das, S. Physical Aspects of Process Control in Selective Laser Sintering of Metals. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2003, 5, 701–711. [CrossRef]
137. Attar, H.; Calin, M.; Zhang, L.C.; Scudino, S.; Eckert, J. Manufacture by selective laser melting and mechanical behavior of
commercially pure titanium. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2014, 593, 170–177. [CrossRef]
138. Sochalski-Kolbus, L.M.; Payzant, E.A.; Cornwell, P.A.; Watkins, T.R.; Babu, S.S.; Dehoff, R.R.; Lorenz, M.; Ovchinnikova, O.; Duty,
C. Comparison of Residual Stresses in Inconel 718 Simple Parts Made by Electron Beam Melting and Direct Laser Metal Sintering.
Met. Mater. Trans. A 2015, 46, 1419–1432. [CrossRef]
139. Murr, L.E.; Martinez, E.; Pan, X.M.; Gaytan, S.M.; Castro, J.A.; Terrazas, C.A.; Medina, F.A.; Wicker, R.B.; Abbott, D.H. Microstruc-
tures of Rene 142 nickel-based superalloy fabricated by electron beam melting. Acta Mater. 2013, 61, 4289–4296. [CrossRef]
140. Bian, H.; Aoyagi, K.; Zhao, Y.; Maeda, C.; Mouri, T.; Chiba, A. Microstructure refinement for superior ductility of Al–Si alloy by
electron beam melting. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 32, 100982. [CrossRef]
141. Sigl, M.; Lutzmann, S.; Zaeh, M.F. Transient Physical Effects in Electron Beam Sintering. In Proceedings of the 17th Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium, SFF 2006, Austin, TX, USA, 14–16 August 2006; pp. 464–477.
142. Scharowsky, T.; Bauereiß, A.; Körner, C. Influence of the hatching strategy on consolidation during selective electron beam
melting of Ti-6Al-4V. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 92, 2809–2818. [CrossRef]
143. Pasang, T.; Kirchner, A.; Jehring, U.; Aziziderouei, M.; Tao, Y.; Jiang, C.-P.; Wang, J.C.; Aisyah, I.S. Microstructure and Mechanical
Properties of Welded Additively Manufactured Stainless Steels SS316L. Met. Mater. Int. 2019, 25, 1278–1286. [CrossRef]
144. Klassen, A.; Forster, V.E.; Juechter, V.; Körner, C. Numerical simulation of multi-component evaporation during selective electron
beam melting of TiAl. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2017, 247, 280–288. [CrossRef]
145. Gong, X.; Li, Y.; Nie, Y.; Huang, Z.; Liu, F.; Huang, L.; Jiang, L.; Mei, H. Corrosion behaviour of CoCrMo alloy fabricated by
electron beam melting. Corros. Sci. 2018, 139, 68–75. [CrossRef]
146. Tang, H.P.; Qian, M.; Liu, N.; Zhang, X.Z.; Yang, G.Y.; Wang, J. Effect of Powder Reuse Times on Additive Manufacturing of
Ti-6Al-4V by Selective Electron Beam Melting. Jom 2015, 67, 555–563. [CrossRef]
147. Helmer, H.E.; Körner, C.; Singer, R.F. Additive manufacturing of nickel-based superalloy Inconel 718 by selective electron beam
melting: Processing window and microstructure. J. Mater. Res. 2014, 29, 1987–1996. [CrossRef]
148. Yang, G.; Jia, W.; Zhao, P.; Jia, L.; Liu, N.; Wang, J.; Tang, H. Microstructures of as-Fabricated and Post Heat Treated Ti-47Al-2Nb-
2Cr Alloy Produced by Selective Electron Beam Melting (SEBM). Rare Met. Mater. Eng. 2016, 45, 1683–1686. [CrossRef]
149. Moll, A.; Blandin, J.-J.; Dendievel, R.; Gicquel, E.; Pons, M.; Jimenez, C.; Blanquet, E.; Mercier, F. Coupling powder bed additive
manufacturing and vapor phase deposition methods for elaboration of coated 3D Ti-6Al-4V architectures with enhanced surface
properties. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2021, 415, 127130. [CrossRef]
150. Ghorbani, H.R.; Mosallanejad, M.H.; Atapour, M.; Galati, M.; Saboori, A. Hybrid additive manufacturing of an electron beam
powder bed fused Ti6Al4V by transient liquid phase bonding. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 20, 180–194. [CrossRef]
151. Grigoriev, S.; Peretyagin, N.; Apelfeld, A.; Smirnov, A.; Yanushevich, O.; Krikheli, N.; Kramar, O.; Kramar, S.; Peretyagin, P.
Investigation of MAO Coatings Characteristics on Titanium Products Obtained by EBM Method Using Additive Manufacturing.
Materials 2022, 15, 4535. [CrossRef]
152. Körner, C. Additive manufacturing of metallic components by selective electron beam melting—A review. Int. Mater. Rev. 2016,
61, 361–377. [CrossRef]
153. Tamayo, J.A.; Riascos, M.; Vargas, C.A.; Baena, L.M. Additive manufacturing of Ti6Al4V alloy via electron beam melting for the
development of implants for the biomedical industry. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06892. [CrossRef]
154. Gaytan, S.M.; Cadena, M.A.; Karim, H.; Delfin, D.; Lin, Y.; Espalin, D.; MacDonald, E.; Wicker, R. Fabrication of barium titanate
by binder jetting additive manufacturing technology. Ceram. Int. 2015, 41, 6610–6619. [CrossRef]
155. Du, W.; Ren, X.; Ma, C.; Pei, Z. Ceramic binder jetting additive manufacturing: Particle coating for increasing powder sinterability
and part strength. Mater. Lett. 2019, 234, 327–330. [CrossRef]
156. Tillmann, W.; Filipe, N.; Dias, N.F.L.; Stangier, D.; Schaak, C. Coatability of diamond-like carbon on 316L stainless steel printed by
binder jetting. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 44, 102064. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 27 of 29

157. Wong, K.V.; Hernandez, A. A Review of Additive Manufacturing. ISRN Mech. Eng. 2012, 2012, 208760. [CrossRef]
158. Meteyer, S.; Xu, X.; Perry, N.; Zhao, Y.F. Energy and Material Flow Analysis of Binder-jetting Additive Manufacturing Processes.
Procedia CIRP 2014, 15, 19–25. [CrossRef]
159. Kumar, A.; Mandal, S.; Barui, S.; Vasireddi, R.; Gbureck, U.; Gelinsky, M.; Basu, B. Low temperature additive manufacturing of
three dimensional scaffolds for bone-tissue engineering applications: Processing related challenges and property assessment.
Mater. Sci. Eng. R 2016, 103, 1–39. [CrossRef]
160. Mostafaei, A.; Stevens, E.L.; Hughes, E.T.; Biery, S.D.; Hilla, C.; Chmielus, M. Powder bed binder jet printed alloy 625: Densifica-
tion, microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater. Des. 2016, 108, 126–135. [CrossRef]
161. Mostafaei, A.; Elliott, A.M.; Barnes, J.E.; Li, F.; Tan, W.; Cramer, C.L.; Nandwana, P.; Chmielus, M. Binder jet 3D printing—Process
parameters, materials, properties, modeling, and challenges. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2020, 119, 100707. [CrossRef]
162. Cavaliere, P. Laser Cladding of Metals; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; ISBN 9783030531942.
163. Hu, Y.; Ning, F.; Wang, H.; Cong, W.; Zhao, B. Laser engineered net shaping of quasi-continuous network microstructural
TiB reinforced titanium matrix bulk composites: Microstructure and wear performance. Opt. Laser Technol. 2018, 99, 174–183.
[CrossRef]
164. Mahmood, M.A.; Popescu, A.C.; Mihailescu, I.N. Metal Matrix Composites Synthesized by Laser-Melting Deposition: A Review.
Materials 2020, 13, 2593. [CrossRef]
165. Kumar, S.; Kumar, M.; Mandal, A.; Das, A. Ni–WS2 –Ti–6Al–4V self-lubricating coating on TC4 alloy by laser cladding. Surf. Eng.
2022, 38, 313–323. [CrossRef]
166. Arbor, A. Additive Manufacturing by Direct Metal Deposition. Adv. Mater. Process. 2011, 11.
167. Yakout, M.; Elbestawi, M.; Veldhuis, S.C. A Review of Metal Additive Manufacturing Technologies. Solid State Phenom. 2018, 278,
1–14. [CrossRef]
168. Garibay, J.P.; Kaakkunen, J.J.J.; Penttilä, R.; Harris, J.; McIntyre, J.; Laakso, P.; Kujanpää, V. Rapid laser sintering of alkaline fuel
cell substrates using integrating mirror. J. Laser Appl. 2015, 27, S29207. [CrossRef]
169. Mahmood, M.; Bănică, A.; Ristoscu, C.; Becherescu, N.; Mihăilescu, I. Laser Coatings via State-of-the-Art Additive Manufacturing:
A Review. Coatings 2021, 11, 296. [CrossRef]
170. Zhong, M.; Liu, W. Laser surface cladding: The state of the art and challenges. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2009,
224, 1041–1060. [CrossRef]
171. Kumar, V.; Rakshit, R.; Das, A.K. Mechanical and tribological performance of fiber laser cladded h-BN + SS316 composite on
SS316 surface. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2019, 278, 116509. [CrossRef]
172. Kumar, S.; Mandal, A.; Das, A.K. The effect of process parameters and characterization for the laser cladding of cBN based
composite clad over the Ti6Al4V alloy. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2022, 288, 126410. [CrossRef]
173. Wang, C.; Dong, C. Design and laser cladding of Ti–Fe–Zr alloy coatings. Mater. Today Commun. 2015, 3, 43–51. [CrossRef]
174. Zhai, Y.; Liu, X.; Qiao, S.; Wang, M.; Lu, X. Characteristics of laser clad α-Ti/TiC+(Ti,W)C1−x /Ti2 SC+TiS composite coatings on
TA2 titanium alloy. Opt. Laser Technol. 2017, 89, 97–107. [CrossRef]
175. Zhao, W.; Zha, G.C.; Kong, F.X.; Wu, M.L.; Feng, X.; Gao, S.Y. Strengthening Effect of Incremental Shear Deformation on Ti Alloy
Clad Plate with a Ni-Based Alloy Laser-Clad Layer. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2017, 26, 2411–2416. [CrossRef]
176. 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]
177. Xia, C.; Pan, Z.; Polden, J.; Li, H.; Xu, Y.; Chen, S.; Zhang, Y. A review on wire arc additive manufacturing: Monitoring, control
and a framework of automated system. J. Manuf. Syst. 2020, 57, 31–45. [CrossRef]
178. 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]
179. Dhinakaran, V.; Ajith, J.; Yasin, A.F.; Jagadeesha, T.; Sathish, T.; Stalin, B. Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) process of
nickel based superalloys—A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 21, 920–925. [CrossRef]
180. Anzalone, G.C.; Zhang, C.; Wijnen, B.; Sanders, P.G.; Pearce, J.M. A Low-Cost Open-Source Metal 3-D Printer. IEEE Access 2013, 1,
803–810. [CrossRef]
181. Sames, W.J.; Unocic, K.A.; Helmreich, G.W.; Kirka, M.M.; Medina, F.; Dehoff, R.R.; Babu, S.S. Feasibility of in situ controlled
heat treatment (ISHT) of Inconel 718 during electron beam melting additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 2017, 13, 156–165.
[CrossRef]
182. Singh, S.; Jinoop, A.N.; Palani, I.A.; Paul, C.P.; Tomar, K.P.; Prashanth, K.G. Microstructure and mechanical properties of NiTi-SS
bimetallic structures built using Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing. Mater. Lett. 2021, 303, 130499. [CrossRef]
183. Singh, S.; Jinoop, A.N.; Tarun Kumar, G.T.A.; Palani, I.A.; Paul, C.P.; Prashanth, K.G. Effect of Interlayer Delay on the Microstruc-
ture and Mechanical Properties of Wire Arc Additive Manufactured Wall Structures. Materials 2021, 14, 4187. [CrossRef]
184. Singh, S.; Jinoop, A.N.; Kumar, G.T.A.V.T.; Shukla, A.; Palani, I.A.; Resnina, N.; Paul, C.P.; Prashanth, K.G. Laser Hybrid Wire Arc
Additive Manufacturing for Fabricating Thin Sections. Trans. Indian Natl. Acad. Eng. 2021, 7, 175–183. [CrossRef]
185. Jackson, M.A.; Van Asten, A.; Morrow, J.D.; Min, S.; Pfefferkorn, F.E. A Comparison of Energy Consumption in Wire-based and
Powder-based Additive-subtractive Manufacturing. Procedia Manuf. 2016, 5, 989–1005. [CrossRef]
186. Williams, S.W.; Martina, F.; Addison, A.C.; Ding, J.; Pardal, G.; Colegrove, P.; Martina, F.; Addison, A.C.; Ding, J.; Pardal, G.; et al.
Wire + Arc Additive Manufacturing. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2016, 32, 641–647. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 28 of 29

187. Liew, J.; Li, Z.; Alkahari, M.R.; Ana, N.; Rosli, B.; Hasan, R. Review of Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing for 3D Metal Printing.
Int. J. Autom. Technol. 2019, 13, 346–353.
188. Michel, F.; Lockett, H.; Ding, J.; Martina, F.; Marinelli, G.; Williams, S. A modular path planning solution for Wire + Arc Additive
Manufacturing. Robot. Comput. Manuf. 2019, 60, 1–11. [CrossRef]
189. 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]
190. Pan, Z.; Ding, D.; Wu, B.; Cuiuri, D. Arc Welding Processes for Additive Manufacturing: A Review. In Transactions on Intelligent
Welding Manufacturing; Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Feng, Z., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2018; pp. 3–24. [CrossRef]
191. Hehr, A.; Norfolk, M. A comprehensive review of ultrasonic additive manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp. J. 2020, 26, 445–458.
[CrossRef]
192. Sriraman, M.; Gonser, M.; Fujii, H.T.; Babu, S.; Bloss, M. Thermal transients during processing of materials by very high power
ultrasonic additive manufacturing. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2011, 211, 1650–1657. [CrossRef]
193. Fujii, H.T.; Shimizu, S.; Sato, Y.S.; Kokawa, H. High-strain-rate deformation in ultrasonic additive manufacturing. Scr. Mater.
2017, 135, 125–129. [CrossRef]
194. Li, W.; Yang, K.; Yin, S.; Yang, X.; Xu, Y.; Lupoi, R. Solid-state additive manufacturing and repairing by cold spraying: A review.
J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2018, 34, 440–457. [CrossRef]
195. Vilardell, A.M.; Cinca, N.; Concustell, A.; Dosta, S.; Cano, I.G.; Guilemany, J.M. Cold spray as an emerging technology for
biocompatible and antibacterial coatings: State of art. J. Mater. Sci. 2015, 50, 4441–4462. [CrossRef]
196. Luo, X.-T.; Li, C.-X.; Shang, F.-L.; Yang, G.-J.; Wang, Y.-Y.; Li, C.-J. High velocity impact induced microstructure evolution during
deposition of cold spray coatings: A review. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2014, 254, 11–20. [CrossRef]
197. Kim, K.; Li, W.; Guo, X. Applied Surface Science Detection of Oxygen at the Interface and Its Effect on Strain, Stress, and
Temperature at the Interface between Cold Sprayed Aluminum and Steel Substrate. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2015, 357, 1720–1726.
[CrossRef]
198. Chen, C.; Xie, Y.; Huang, R.; Deng, S.; Ren, Z.; Liao, H. On the role of oxide film’s cleaning effect into the metallurgical bonding
during cold spray. Mater. Lett. 2018, 210, 199–202. [CrossRef]
199. Xie, Y.; Chen, C.; Planche, M.-P.; Deng, S.; Huang, R.; Ren, Z.; Liao, H. Strengthened Peening Effect on Metallurgical Bonding
Formation in Cold Spray Additive Manufacturing. J. Therm. Spray Technol. 2019, 28, 769–779. [CrossRef]
200. Bagherifard, S.; Guagliano, M. Fatigue performance of cold spray deposits: Coating, repair and additive manufacturing cases. Int.
J. Fatigue 2020, 139, 105744. [CrossRef]
201. Kumar, S.; Bae, G.; Lee, C. Influence of substrate roughness on bonding mechanism in cold spray. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2016, 304,
592–605. [CrossRef]
202. Huang, C.; Li, W.; Zhang, Z.; Fu, M.; Planche, M.-P.; Liao, H.; Montavon, G. Modification of a cold sprayed SiC p /Al5056
composite coating by friction stir processing. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2016, 296, 69–75. [CrossRef]
203. Kang, K.; Bae, G.; Won, J.; Lee, C. Mechanical property enhancement of kinetic sprayed Al coatings reinforced by multi-walled
carbon nanotubes. Acta Mater. 2012, 60, 5031–5039. [CrossRef]
204. Champagne, V.; Helfritch, D. The unique abilities of cold spray deposition. Int. Mater. Rev. 2016, 61, 437–455. [CrossRef]
205. Li, W.-Y.; Li, C.-J.; Liao, H. Significant influence of particle surface oxidation on deposition efficiency, interface microstructure and
adhesive strength of cold-sprayed copper coatings. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2010, 256, 4953–4958. [CrossRef]
206. Kelly, P.J.; Arnell, R.D. Magnetron sputtering: A review of recent developments and applications. Vacuum 2000, 56, 159–172.
[CrossRef]
207. Mattox, D.M. The Foundations of Vacuum Coating Technology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003; ISBN 9780815519270.
208. Chudinova, E.; Surmeneva, M.; Koptioug, A.; Scoglund, P.; Surmenev, R. Additive manufactured Ti6Al4V scaffolds with the RF-
magnetron sputter deposited hydroxyapatite coating. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2016, 669, 012004. [CrossRef]
209. Bass, R.; Lichtenberger, L.; Lichtenberger, A. Effects of substrate preparation on the stress of Nb thin films. IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond. 2003, 13, 3298–3300. [CrossRef]
210. What is Electrospark Deposition (ESD)? Available online: https://www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/faqs/faq-what-is-
electrospark-deposition-esd (accessed on 17 January 2023).
211. Wood, W.E.; Adam, B.; Kadali, J.; Talla, R.; Langston, T. Heat-Affected Zone Formation in Electrospark-Deposition Additive
Manufacturing on Ultrahigh-Strength Steel. Mater. Perform. Charact. 2017, 6, 376–393. [CrossRef]
212. Lešnjak, A.; Tušek, J. Processes and properties of deposits in electrospark deposition. Sci. Technol. Weld. Join. 2002, 7, 391–396.
[CrossRef]
213. Enrique, P.D.; Marzbanrad, E.; Mahmoodkhani, Y.; Jiao, Z.; Toyserkani, E.; Zhou, N.Y. Surface modification of binder-jet additive
manufactured Inconel 625 via electrospark deposition. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 362, 141–149. [CrossRef]
214. Siddiqui, H.; Singh, N.; Chauhan, V.; Sathish, N.; Kumar, S. Electrochemical 3D printed copper garden for nitrate detection. Mater.
Lett. 2021, 305, 130795. [CrossRef]
215. Singh, M.; Mohanty, S.; Das, A.K. Parametric analysis to enhance the printability in metal with electrochemical additive
manufacturing. Mater. Lett. 2022, 322, 132518. [CrossRef]
216. Zhang, F.; Yao, Z.; Moliar, O.; Zhang, Z.; Tao, X. Ultra-low-power preparation of multilayer nanocrystalline Ni Co binary alloy
coating by electrochemical additive manufacturing. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2020, 403, 126404. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2325 29 of 29

217. Brant, A.; Sundaram, M. Electrochemical additive manufacturing of graded NiCoFeCu structures for electromagnetic applications.
Manuf. Lett. 2022, 31, 52–55. [CrossRef]
218. Wang, J.; Pan, Z.; Wang, L.; Su, L.; Carpenter, K.; Wang, J.; Wang, R.; Li, H. In-situ dual wire arc additive manufacturing of
NiTi-coating on Ti6Al4V alloys: Microstructure characterization and mechanical properties. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2020, 386, 125439.
[CrossRef]
219. Inberg, A.; Ashkenazi, D.; Kimmel, G.; Shacham-Diamand, Y.; Stern, A. Gold plating of AlSi10Mg parts produced by a laser
powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing technique. Prog. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 5, 395–404. [CrossRef]
220. Brandl, E.; Heckenberger, U.; Holzinger, V.; Buchbinder, D. Additive manufactured AlSi10Mg samples using Selective Laser
Melting (SLM): Microstructure, high cycle fatigue, and fracture behavior. Mater. Des. 2012, 34, 159–169. [CrossRef]
221. Chen, C.; Yan, X.; Xie, Y.; Huang, R.; Kuang, M.; Ma, W.; Zhao, R.; Wang, J.; Liu, M.; Ren, Z.; et al. Microstructure evolution and
mechanical properties of maraging steel 300 fabricated by cold spraying. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2019, 743, 482–493. [CrossRef]
222. Errico, V.; Posa, P.; Mazzarisi, M.; Angelastro, A.; Campanelli, S.L. Effects of Laser-Deposited Maraging Steel on L-PBF 316L
Component. Metals 2022, 12, 1669. [CrossRef]
223. Wang, Z.; Guan, K.; Gao, M.; Li, X.; Chen, X.; Zeng, X. The microstructure and mechanical properties of deposited-IN718 by
selective laser melting. J. Alloys Compd. 2012, 513, 518–523. [CrossRef]
224. Bourell, D.; Kruth, J.P.; Leu, M.; Levy, G.; Rosen, D.; Beese, A.M.; Clare, A. Materials for additive manufacturing. CIRP Ann. 2017,
66, 659–681. [CrossRef]
225. Frazier, W.E. Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2014, 23, 1917–1928. [CrossRef]
226. Ahuja, B.; Karg, M.; Schmidt, M. Additive manufacturing in production: Challenges and opportunities. Laser 3d Manuf. II 2015,
9353, 11–20. [CrossRef]
227. Bandyopadhyay, A.; Heer, B. Additive manufacturing of multi-material structures. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2018, 129, 1–16.
[CrossRef]
228. Onuike, B.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Functional bimetallic joints of Ti6Al4V to SS410. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 31, 100931. [CrossRef]
229. Hasanov, S.; Alkunte, S.; Rajeshirke, M.; Gupta, A.; Huseynov, O.; Fidan, I.; Alifui-Segbaya, F.; Rennie, A. Review on Additive
Manufacturing of Multi-Material Parts: Progress and Challenges. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2022, 6, 4. [CrossRef]
230. Seo, D.; Ogawa, K.; Sakaguchi, K.; Miyamoto, N.; Tsuzuki, Y. Parameter study influencing thermal conductivity of annealed pure
copper coatings deposited by selective cold spray processes. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2012, 206, 2316–2324. [CrossRef]
231. Li, N.; Huang, S.; Zhang, G.; Qin, R.; Liu, W.; Xiong, H.; Shi, G.; Blackburn, J. Progress in additive manufacturing on new
materials: A review. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2019, 35, 242–269. [CrossRef]
232. 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]
233. Liu, S.; Shin, Y.C. Additive manufacturing of Ti6Al4V alloy: A review. Mater. Des. 2019, 164, 107552. [CrossRef]
234. Simonelli, M.; Tse, Y.; Tuck, C. Effect of the build orientation on the mechanical properties and fracture modes of SLM Ti–6Al–4V.
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2014, 616, 1–11. [CrossRef]
235. Yan, L.; Chen, Y.; Liou, F. Additive manufacturing of functionally graded metallic materials using laser metal deposition. Addit.
Manuf. 2020, 31, 100901. [CrossRef]
236. Huang, S.H.; Liu, P.; Mokasdar, A.; Hou, L. Additive manufacturing and its societal impact: A literature review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 2013, 67, 1191–1203. [CrossRef]
237. Morrow, W.; Qi, H.; Kim, I.; Mazumder, J.; Skerlos, S. Environmental aspects of laser-based and conventional tool and die
manufacturing. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 932–943. [CrossRef]
238. Scott, J.; Leader, P. Additive Manufacturing: Status and Opportunities; Science and Technology Policy Institute: Washington, DC,
USA, 2017.
239. Unocic, R.; Dupont, J.N. Process efficiency measurements in the laser engineered net shaping process. Met. Mater. Trans. B 2004,
35, 143–152. [CrossRef]
240. Sreenivasan, R.; Bourell, D.L. Sustainability Study in Selective Laser Sintering—An Energy Perspective. In Proceedings of the
2009 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, TX, USA, 3–5 August 2009; pp. 257–265.
241. Baumers, M.; Tuck, C.; Bourell, D.L.; Sreenivasan, R.; Hague, R. Sustainability of additive manufacturing: Measuring the energy
consumption of the laser sintering process. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2011, 225, 2228–2239. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.