Abstract
The thermal stability of dislocation cellular structures in three additively manufactured (AM) austenitic stainless steels (SSs), 316L SS, 304L SS, and Al modified 316L SS (316L(Al)), were studied. Minor alloying elements, Mo and Al, were found affecting the stability of the cellular structures in AM austenitic SS, resulting in a stability ranking of AM 316L SS > AM 304L SS > AM 316L(Al) SS. As a result, their abilities towards recrystallization also differed. Owing to the high stacking fault energy (SFE) due to Al addition, AM 316L(Al) SS had the least stable subgrain cellular structure and exhibited the lowest recovery temperature. Although 316L SS possessed slightly higher SFE than 304L SS, the pinning effect due to Mo segregation at the cellular walls in AM 316L SS significantly enhanced its thermal stability. While the low-SFE AM 316L SS and AM 304L SS recovered their cellular structures via the equiaxed cell growth, the dislocation cellular walls in high-SFE AM 316L(Al) SS continuously vanished along a preferred direction. The fast recovery of cellular structures led to recrystallization retardation. The Hall–Petch model was found incapable of correlating cell size to strength because of the continuous weakening of cellular walls during heat treatment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
