Manufacturing Rev.
Volume 7, 2020
Special Issue - The emerging materials and processing technologies
Article Number 6
Number of page(s) 9
Published online 28 February 2020

© V.V. Popov Jr. and A. Fleisher, Published by EDP Sciences 2020

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1 Introduction

Additive manufacturing (AM) of metals and alloys is currently hard for mass production, due to insufficient built rate, limited maximum build size, issues of surface roughness, support structures removal, etc. However, AM-techniques overtop the possibilities of traditional manufacturing (like casting, Computer Numerical Control (CNC), etc.) in manufacturing net-shape-like structures and complex cooling channel systems.

The idea of hybrid AM came from the fact that a combination of traditional (subtractive) and additive manufacturing could help to overcome the limitations of both processes and to provide a new manufacturing approach for mass production of medium/big components with high geometrical complicity and accuracy.

To have a complete understanding of the hybrid material or technology, it is necessary to understand what does it means this term, which comes initially from the agronomy and bio-sciences. According to Cambridge Dictionary “hybrid (noun) a plant or animal that has been produced from two different types of plant or animal, especially to get better characteristics” or “hybrid (adjective) combines two different things”. In the modern industrial world extremely sharp demand for new materials, which properties or combinations of properties expected to be beyond the state-of-the-art. This interest increased significantly in the past decade (see Fig. 1). To cover these needs is very often is not enough to use one single type of material or class of material or technology, but to use a combination of multiple of it. In material science in the previous decade was used mainly “composite” term for characterization of such materials. But having of combination materials from different classes, for example, organic-inorganic [1]; bio-based–rubber [2]; metal-polymer [3]; steel–glass [4,5] the term “hybrid” became more often used to declare nature of the material type. To achieve unique properties or properties combinations researchers pay attention to hybrid materials design: for lightweight ceramic materials [6], lightweight and high-temperature resistant materials [7,8], metal-ceramic lightweight hybrid materials [9], hybrid polymer matrix composites [10,11], and hybrid metal-based composites [1214]. The current extremely growing development of additive manufacturing processes allows starting implementing of combining different AM approaches together with traditional manufacturing to obtain hybrid materials with 3-dimensional sophisticated design. However, for the hybrid AM were published for a one order of magnitude less (2017–11; 2018–17 and 2019–24 papers, according to Science Direct database) in comparison with the Hybrid Technology and for two order of magnitude less than “Hybrid material” and “Hybrid Composites” (Fig. 1).

There are several 3D printing approaches that could be applied for industrial production of steel and other Fe-based alloys. The main two of them are Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) and Direct Energy Deposition (DED). Tables 1 and 2 present short classification of PBF and DED techniques, their benefits and applied materials.

Figure 2 schematically demonstrates the benefits of additive manufacturing (see Fig. 2c) in comparison with milling (see Fig. 2b) with high amount of wastes; and in comparison with casting (see Fig. 2a), where for each geometrical change of the component, new high-cost die-mold need to be developed and produced.

The current review aims to present the state-of-the-art in technological approaches, trends and limitations in steel materials hybrid additive manufacturing.

thumbnail Fig. 1

Statistical data of number of published papers, by “Hybrid structure”, “Hybrid material”, “Hybrid Composites” and “Hybrid Technology” keywords. Data source − ScienceDirect ®, by Elsevier B.V.

Table 1

PBF techniques.

Table 2

Direct Energy Deposition techniques.

thumbnail Fig. 2

Manufacturing techniques: 1–casting; 2–subtractive; 3 − additive manufacturing.

2 Hybrid additive manufacturing

Strong et al. discussed integrating additive manufacturing in supply chain together with traditional one. Authors demonstrated that such approach helps to implement freedom of design from AM into serial mass production [35]. However in spite of very positive results of integrating AM with traditional manufacturing for super alloys and steels, this integration is still limited in industry. It can be explained by challenging adopting of process 3D printing parameters for each specific material and calibration according to geometry of substrate CNC part.

Merklein et al. stated that customization of lightweight geometrically complex constructions, of big size and high accuracy can be produced with the combination of additive and subtractive manufacturing processes within one single machine [30].

Oter et al. also demonstrated experimental findings in application of Selective Laser Sintering (SLM)/Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) − technique for hybrid AM of aluminum extrusion dies from hard hot steel [36]. The die-parts produced using hybrid AM can be utilized even with no post-processing.

Additive manufacturing is still not competitive to subtractive one in terms of surface quality and geometrical accuracy. That is why CNC is already often used as a post-printing step in a hybrid process for AM-parts. For example, in [42] it was reported about AIMS − hybrid process for metallic parts, where additive manufacturing process was completed with machining steps for support structures removal and surface finishing to overcome the limitation of typical lack of accuracy and surface roughness of printed parts. Such hybrid approach − AM+CNC − allows to produce high precision parts via additive manufacturing.

In Table 3 are summarized different approaches in “hybridization” of manufacturing processes by combination of additive and subtractive, subtractive and additive, or additive and additive techniques.

Table 3

Hybrid additive manufacturing.

2.1 Powder Bed hybrid additive manufacturing

By PBF usually determined several 3D printing techniques (see Tab. 1) that have the same principle of manufacturing: the use as a precursor of powder that is deposited layer-by-layer to the same layer thickness fused by laser, electron beam or binder in selected areas according cross-section of the CAD model [18,48]. Such powder depositing used for polymers in Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), for metals in Selective Laser Melting (SLM) and Electron Beam Melting (EBM), for ceramic and metallic powders in Binder Jetting Printing (BJP) [18].

For SLM and EBM are used commonly pre-alloyed spherical gas/plasma atomized powders; for BJP both spherical and irregular powders could be applied.

BJP with further post-processing can be applied for production of hybrid CMC- and MMC-like materials [26,27].

Thus SLM (DMLS) process is beneficial for the manufacturing of small parts with relatively high accuracy, with the minimal size of elements up to 300 microns; internal channel geometry; lattices and similar lightweight net-shape structures, and complex heat-exchanger structures [18]. The applied heat treatment for stress relieving can be used for control of the final microstructure and mechanical properties.

In number of papers [3639,49] it was demonstrated that SLM technique (EOS © DMLS) can be effectively used for hybrid additive manufacturing of steel components for complex big size dies with internal cooling channel system.

Figure 3 illustrates the hybrid AM approach where the substrate part can be manufactured by traditional subtractive manufacturing, and the upper part with internal system of cooling channels − by additive manufacturing.

Paper [43] presents another SLM-integrated hybrid manufacturing process for production of biomedical dental implants. The mesh-shaped implants were manufactured from metal via SLM, with the further Stereolithography (SLA) process for coating of the mesh using liquid resin. This hybrid process with the use of two additive manufacturing techniques, allows to produce multi-materials with graded functional and structural properties.

SLM-manufactured parts can be also integrated in hybrid processes in combination with another AM-techniques. For example, in [44] it was shown how functional parts could be produced via SLM with Fusion Deposition Modelling (FDM). More than that it was demonstrated that not only metal+polymer structures could be produced, but even sandwich structures like metal+polymer+metal, which is beneficial for biomedical implants.

There were no found any reported data where EBM has been used in hybrid AM, as it is still seemed too complicated to print on some other substrate, except standard building platform, specific for each printed material. However PB-EBM using blended powders, including addition of ceramic nano-powder into metallic powder, can be the way for production of composite-like hybrid multi-materials [13,50,51].

thumbnail Fig. 3

Hybrid additive manufacturing.

2.2 Direct energy deposition hybrid additive manufacturing

According to the energy source used for direct metal deposition, wire-feed AM can be classified into three groups, namely: laser-based, arc welding based, and electron beam-based [52]. Arc welding based AM combines advantages of higher deposition rate, energy efficiency, safe operation, and lower cost, that made this system more promising comparing to laser-, and electron-beam-based systems [29] (see Tab. 4).

Gas Metal Arc-Welding (GMAW) 3D printing, also named as Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) [32], is closely related to single-layer multi-pass welding.

Table 4 demonstrates that energy efficiency of arc welding processes such as the Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) or Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) processes can be up to 90% [56]. That is much higher comparing with the poor energy efficiency of laser and electron beam [56,57].

The same situation can be observed with the deposition rate − for laser/electron beam it is in the order of 2–10 g/min, compared with 50–130 g/min for WAAM based technology.

The DED process, named as Laser Engineered Net Shaping (LENS®), became attractive and promising due to multiple nozzles, that resulted in a higher effectiveness of powder delivery, and enabled the use of several powders in one built [60,61]. Powder-based LENS® can provide higher accuracy and lower surface roughness then WAAM-techniques. Moreover different powder compositions can be supplied using different nozzles for manufacturing hybrid and composite-like structures [62].

Electron beam has a slightly higher energy efficiency then LENS-process, but it requires a high vacuum working environment [59]. That fact limits the maximum size of the build by the size of building chamber.

One of the common advantages of DED-techniques in comparison with PBF techniques is the possibility to print on different substrates. It can be a different material, and also a non-flat surface. That enables the application of DED-techniques for repairing high-valuable components for critical safety applications like aerospace. Figure 4 schematically shows how the blade-like component can be re-newed using DED.

It can be concluded, that DED techniques using WAAM, DEBW, and LENS® are beneficial for hybrid AM in terms of surface defects repairing [40,41], productivity, rapid processing of weldable materials; manufacturing of medium and big components with complex geometry and internal configuration; and cost competitiveness [29,32,61].

Table 4

Comparison of energy efficiency and deposition rate of DED processes.

thumbnail Fig. 4

Schematic view of repairing of turbine blade using DED technique.

3 Steel and other Fe-based materials

Steels and alloys with high iron concentration have strategical value for wide range of applications, like construction building, automotive, gas and oil industry, etc.

Iron-based alloys and high-alloyed steels remain attractive for many industries due too high mechanical properties, cutting, corrosion and wear resistance, ductility and hardness. These properties can be tailored according to application needs using alloying of additional elements in steels, and by different heat treatments.

3.1 Stainless steels

Additively manufactured stainless steel, mostly SS316L has been already reported in many papers [24,25]. Stainless steel manufactured by EBM even with no post-processing could be utilized for nuclear application [63].

SLM-made steels followed with the necessary post-heat-treatment for stress relief and hardening, are used for medical components [64].

Stainless components can be either produced by BJP with the following post-sintering [27] for bone scaffolds or using infiltration for rotor and stator components [26,28].

All PBF techniques can be applied for components with complex net-shape structures. However, only SLM can be used for printing on the substrate part. EBM- and BJP-made parts can be used in hybrid AM as an alternative to traditional manufacturing in the production of substrate basic part. For example for composite or ceramic-based materials that are not possible (hardly possible) by SLM.

3.2 Maraging and tool steels

Tool steels are used for the production of wear-resistant and hard tools, and have significant differences from structural steels. By “tool steel” is considered such steel, which contain at least 0.7 percent carbon.

Between themselves, they differ in the presence of secondary carbides (they are not in hypereutectoid alloys). Moreover, carbides formed during eutectoid modifications or during the decay of martensite are necessarily present in all structures.

Tool steel can be used for:

  • Cold and hot deformation (stamping);

  • High precision products;

  • Cutting tool;

  • Measuring products;

  • High-pressure die-casting molds.

Maraging steels, typically containing Fe-65%, Ni-18%, Co-8%, are widely used in the tool and die industry due to their high specific strength, high fracture toughness and weldability. They are used for many tooling applications including plastic injection molding, high pressure die-casting, stumping, and extrusion dies [35,37].

Investigation of hybrid additive manufacturing of maraging and tool steel has been already reported by several papers [3739,49,61,65]. SLM / DMLS was used for 3D printing. Hybrid AM of such type of steels used e.g. for die-casting inserts with complex cooling channels system: the substrate relatively simple shape part produced by machining, and then is put into SLM machine; calibration is performed according to cross-section of this part and building AM model.

3.3 Protective coatings

Application of protective coatings may bring an increase of corrosion and chemical resistance [66,67], increase of working temperature of the products [68], improved wear resistance [69,70] and, thus, longer lifetime of the product. Very high interest nowadays is on multi-layered structures [7173] and high entropy alloy (HEA) coatings [73,74].

Deposition of such coatings also can be considered as a type of hybrid manufacturing where the part is produced by forging, milling or casting, and then thermal spray [75], or powder DED is applied.

In PBF approach deposition of metal coating on another alloy in one metallic component can be realized by filling the vertical hopper with two different powders (see Fig. 5) [51].

However this approach is far from industrialization, as it provides “coating” from the one specific layer, and it is more effective on flat objects. Actually it can be considered as a coating only on the flat objects, otherwise, it is a composite object with a gradient zone between two different metals (see Fig. 5).

thumbnail Fig. 5

Schematic view of hybrid PBF process using EBM system: 1-powder #1; 2–powder #2; 3–powder hopper for small amounts of powder; 4–building platform; 5–deposited powder layer; 6–rake blades for powder deposition; 7–part built from powder #1; 8–part built from powder #2; 9–gradient zone built from blended powder #1 + #2.

3.4 Hybrid and graded materials

Manufacturing of hybrid-like compositionally and functionally graded materials is one of the modern unique options provided by the PBF-systems [13,7678]. It can be achieved by simultaneous process parameters control and feeding of blended powders. Besides blended powders can contain different fractions, together metallic, ceramic, or polymer particles.

For such hybrid-like graded materials, additive manufacturing acts as a production technology. However, for homogeneous mixing of the blended powder before PBF again auxiliary traditional methods are applied.

Steel based Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs) can be produced by PBF techniques using blended powders [13,50]. Such an approach for manufacturing composite-like structures with hard abrasive surface and ductile inner part with reinforcement is discussed in [13].

4 Summary

The main common development trends of the state-of-the-art of steel-based materials hybrid additive manufacturing routes can be extracted from the current review.

  • Steel based materials are rapidly developing by PBF and DED techniques.

  • There were reported several attempts to produce steel-based hybrid and composite materials using PBF techniques.

  • DED techniques are more flexible in integration with the traditional CNC process. Such combination is beneficial for hybrid manufacturing, protective coatings and for parts repairing.

  • Laser-based PBF allows hybrid additive manufacturing: the substrate simple-shape part is produced by traditional manufacturing and the complex shape one is printed directly on it.

In conclusion, it can be said, that hybrid additive manufacturing supposed to be a process that combines advantages of additive and subtractive manufacturing integrates AM into traditional production chain with compensating of AM limitations, resulting in an increase of AM processes industrialization.


We want to thank for the kind support and financial funding: COST Action CA15102, and the Office of the Chief Scientist of Israeli Ministry of Science and Technology.


  1. D.K. Jesthi, R.K. Nayak, Evaluation of mechanical properties and morphology of seawater aged carbon and glass fiber reinforced polymer hybrid composites, Compos. B Eng. 174 (2019) 106980 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. S.A. Kurnosenko, O.I. Silyukov, A.S. Mazur, I.A. Zvereva, Synthesis and thermal stability of new inorganic-organic perovskite-like hybrids based on layered titanates HLnTiO4 (Ln = La, Nd), Ceram. Int. 4 (2019) 5058–5068 [Google Scholar]
  3. V. Lapkovskis, V. Mironovs, K. Irtiseva, D. Goljandin, Study of devulcanised crumb rubber-peat bio-based composite for environmental applications, Key Eng. Mater. 799 (2019) 148–152 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. D.D. Luong, V.C. Shunmugasamy, N. Gupta, D. Lehmhus, J. Weise, J. Baumeister, Quasi-static and high strain rates compressive response of iron and Invar matrix syntactic foams, Mater. Des. 66 (2015) 516–531 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. L. Peroni et al., High strain rate tensile and compressive esting and performance of mesoporous invar (FeNi36) matrix syntactic foams produced by feedstock extrusion, Adv. Eng. Mater. 19 (2017) 1600474 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. K. Rugele, D. Lehmhus, I. Hussainova, J. Peculevica, M. Lisnanskis, A. Shishkin, Effect of ly-ash cenospheres on properties of clay-ceramic syntactic foams, Materials 10 (2017) 828 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. A. Shishkin, M. Drozdova, V. Kozlov, I. Hussainova, D. Lehmhus, Vibration-assisted sputter coating of cenospheres: a new approach for realizing Cu-based metal matrix syntactic foams, Metals 7 (2017) 16 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. A. Shishkin, I. Hussainova, V. Kozlov, M. Lisnanskis, P. Leroy, D. Lehmhus, Metal-coated cenospheres obtained via magnetron putter coating: a new precursor for syntactic foams, JOM 70 (2018) 1319–1325 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. A. Shishkin, V. Mironov, V. Zemchenkov, M. Antonov, I. Hussainova, Hybrid syntactic foams of metal − fly ash cenosphere − clay, Key Eng. Mater. 674 (2016) 35–40 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. P. Vignesh, G. Venkatachalam, A. Gautham Shankar, A. Singh, R. Pagaria, A. Prasad, Studies on tensile strength of sugarcane fiber reinforced hybrid polymer matrix composite, Mater. Today Proc. 5 (2018) 13347–13357 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. J. Weise, A.F. Queiroz Barbosa, O. Yezerska, D. Lehmhus, J. Baumeister, Mechanical behavior of particulate aluminium-epoxy hybrid foams based on cold-setting polymers, Adv. Eng. Mater. 19 (2017) 1700090 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Lapovok et al., Architectured hybrid conductors: aluminium with embedded copper helix, Mater. Des. 187 (2019) 108398. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. A. Koptyug et al., Compositionally-tailored steel-based materials manufactured by electron beam melting using blended pre-alloyed powders, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 771 (2019) 138587. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. I. Todaro, R. Squatrito, S. Essel, H. Zeidler, High conductive aluminium metal matrix composites with carbon inserts obtained by casting processes, Mater. Today Proc. 10 (2019) 277–287 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. S. Song, Z. Gao, B. Lu, C. Bao, B. Zheng, L. Wang, Performance optimization of complicated structural SiC/Si composite ceramics prepared by selective laser sintering, Ceram. Int. 46 (2020) 568–575 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Singamneni et al., Selective laser sintering responses of keratin-based bio-polymer composites, Mater. Des. 183 (2019) 108087 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. R. Hong, Z. Zhao, J. Leng, J. Wu, J. Zhang, Two-step approach based on selective laser sintering for high performance carbon black/ polyamide 12 composite with 3D segregated conductive network, Compos. B Eng. 176 (2019) 107214 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. A. Katz-Demyanetz, V.V. Popov, A. Kovalevsky, D. Safranchik, A. Koptyug, Powder-bed additive manufacturing for aerospace application: Techniques, metallic and metal/ceramic composite materials and trends, Manuf. Rev. 6 (2019) 5. [Google Scholar]
  19. A. Adeyemi, E.T. Akinlabi, R.M. Mahamood, Powder bed based laser additive manufacturing process of stainless steel: a review, Mater. Today Proc. 5 (2018) 18510–18517 [Google Scholar]
  20. S. Afkhami, M. Dabiri, S.H. Alavi, T. Björk, A. Salminen, Fatigue characteristics of steels manufactured by selective laser melting, Int. J. Fatigue 122 (2019) 72–83 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. V.V. Popov, A. Katz-Demyanetz, A. Garkun, M. Bamberger, The effect of powder recycling on the mechanical properties and microstructure of electron beam melted Ti-6Al-4 V specimens, Addit. Manuf. 22 (2018) 834–843. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. V.V. Popov et al., Effect of the hatching strategies on mechanical properties and microstructure of SEBM manufactured Ti-6Al-4V specimens, Lett. Mater. 8 (2018) 468–472. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. C.J. Smith et al., Dimensional accuracy of electron beam melting (EBM) additive manufacture with regard to weight optimized truss structures, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 229 (2016) 128–138 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. A. Koptioug, L.E. Rännar, M. Bäckström, S.Z. Jian, New metallurgy of additive manufacturing in metal: experiences from the material and process development with electron beam melting technology (EBM), Mater. Sci. Forum 879 (2016) 996–1001 [Google Scholar]
  25. L.-E. Rännar, A. Koptyug, J. Olsén, K. Saeidi, Z. Shen, Hierarchical structures of stainless steel 316L manufactured by Electron Beam Melting, Addit. Manuf. 17 (2017) 106–112 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. A. Fleisher et al., Reaction bonding of silicon carbides by Binder Jet 3D-Printing, phenolic resin binder impregnation and capillary liquid silicon infiltration, Ceram. Int. 45 (2019) 18023–18029. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. S. Vangapally, K. Agarwal, A. Sheldon, S. Cai, Effect of lattice design and process parameters on dimensional and mechanical properties of binder jet additively manufactured stainless steel 316 for bone scaffolds, Procedia Manuf. 10 (2017) 750–759 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. M. Doyle, K. Agarwal, W. Sealy, K. Schull, Effect of layer thickness and orientation on mechanical behavior of binder jet stainless steel 420 + bronze Parts, Procedia Manuf. 1 (2015) 251–262 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. S.M. Thompson, L. Bian, N. Shamsaei, A. Yadollahi, An overview of Direct Laser Deposition for additive manufacturing; Part I: Transport phenomena, modeling and diagnostics, Addit. Manuf. 8 (2015) 36–62 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. M. Merklein, D. Junker, A. Schaub, F. Neubauer, Hybrid additive manufacturing technologies − an analysis regarding potentials and applications, Phys. Procedia 83 (2016) 549–559 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. E.M. White, A.G. Kassen, E. Şimşek, W. Tang, R.T. Ott, I.E. Anderson, Net shape processing of alnico magnets by additive manufacturing, IEEE Transac. Magn. 53 (2017) 1–6 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. D. Ding, Z. Pan, D. Cuiuri, H. Li, A multi-bead overlapping model for robotic wire and arc additive manufacturing (WAAM), Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 31 (2015) 101–110 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. M.T. Stawovy, Comparison of LCAC and PM Mo deposited using Sciaky EBAMTM, Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 73 (2018) 162–167 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Sciaky Inc., Official web-site of Sciaky Inc. [Online]. Available: [Google Scholar]
  35. D. Strong, M. Kay, B. Conner, T. Wakefield, G. Manogharan, Hybrid manufacturing − integrating traditional manufacturers with additive manufacturing (AM) supply chain, Addit. Manuf. 21 (2018) 159–173 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Z.C. Oter et al., Benefits of laser beam based additive manufacturing in die production, Optik 176 (2019) 175–184 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. H. Azizi et al., Metallurgical and mechanical assessment of hybrid additively-manufactured maraging tool steels via selective laser melting, Addit. Manuf. 27 (2019) 389–397 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. A. Ebrahimi, M. Mohammadi, Numerical tools to investigate mechanical and fatigue properties of additively manufactured MS1-H13 hybrid steels, Addit. Manuf. 23 (2018) 381–393 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. S. Shakerin, A. Hadadzadeh, B.S. Amirkhiz, S. Shamsdini, J. Li, M. Mohammadi, Additive manufacturing of maraging steel-H13 bimetals using laser powder bed fusion technique, Addit. Manuf. 29 (2019) 100797 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. M. Praniewicz, T. Kurfess, C. Saldana, Adaptive geometry transformation and repair for hybrid manufacturing, Procedia Manufacturing 26 (2018) 228–236 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Y. Li, Q. Han, I. Horváth, G. Zhang, Repairing surface defects of metal parts by groove machining and wire + arc based filling, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 274 (2019) 116268 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. G. Manogharan, R. Wysk, O. Harrysson, R. Aman, AIMS − A metal additive-hybrid manufacturing system: system architecture and attributes, Procedia Manuf. 1 (2015) 273–286 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. M. Silva, R. Felismina, A. Mateus, P. Parreira, C. Malça, Application of a hybrid additive manufacturing methodology to produce a metal/polymer customized dental implant, Procedia Manuf. 12 (2017) 150–155 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. Y.-H. Chueh, C. Wei, X. Zhang, L. Li, Integrated laser-based powder bed fusion and fused filament fabrication for three-dimensional printing of hybrid metal/polymer objects, Addit. Manuf. 31 (2020) 100928 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. X. Shi et al., Selective laser melting-wire arc additive manufacturing hybrid fabrication of Ti-6Al-4V alloy: Microstructure and mechanical properties, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 684 (2017) 196–204 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. C.J. Huang et al., Additive manufacturing hybrid Ni/Ti-6Al-4V structural component via selective laser melting and cold spraying, Vacuum 151 (2018) 275–282 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. T. Yamazaki, Development of a hybrid multi-tasking machine tool: integration of additive manufacturing technology with CNC machining, Procedia CIRP 42 (2016) 81–86 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. A. Leon, G.K. Levy, T. Ron, A. Shirizly, E. Aghion, The effect of hot isostatic pressure on the corrosion performance of Ti-6Al-4V produced by an electron-beam melting additive manufacturing process, Addit. Manuf. (2020) 101039 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. E. Cyr, H. Asgari, S. Shamsdini, M. Purdy, K. Hosseinkhani, M. Mohammadi, Fracture behaviour of additively manufactured MS1-H13 hybrid hard steels, Mater. Lett. 212 (2018) 174–177 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  50. A. Koptyug, M. Bäckström, C.A. Botero Vega, V.V. Popov, E. Chudinova, Developing new materials for electron beam melting: experiences and challenges, Mater. Sci. Forum 941 (2018) 2190–2195. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  51. A. Koptyug, L.-E. Rännar, C. Botero, M. Bäckström, V. Popov, Blended powders can be successfully used in Electron Beam Melting yielding unique material compositions, in EuroPM2018 Proceedings, EPMA, Shrewsbury, 2018 [Google Scholar]
  52. K.P. Karunakaran, S. Suryakumar, V. Pushpa, S. Akula, Low cost integration of additive and subtractive processes for hybrid layered manufacturing, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 26 (2010) 490–499 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  53. J. Mazumder, D. Dutta, N. Kikuchi, A. Ghosh, Closed loop direct metal deposition: art to part, Opt. Lasers Eng. 34 (2000) 397–414 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  54. P. Wanjara, M. Brochu, M. Jahazi, Electron beam freeforming of stainless steel using solid wire feed, Mater. Des. 28 (2007) 2278–2286 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  55. A. Sreenathbabu, K.P. Karunakaran, C. Amarnath, Statistical process design for hybrid adaptive layer manufacturing, Rapid Prototyp. J. 11 (2005) 235–248 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  56. J.N. DuPont, A.R. Marder, Thermal efficiency of arc welding processes, Weld. J. 74 (1995) 406 [Google Scholar]
  57. N. Stenbacka, I. Choquet, K. Hurtig, Review of Arc Efficiency Values for Gas Tungsten Arc Welding, IIW Commission IV-XII-SG212 Intermediate Meeting, Berlin, Germany, 2012, pp. 1–21 [Google Scholar]
  58. R.R. Unocic, J.N. DuPont, Process efficiency measurements in the laser engineered net shaping process, Metall. Mater. Trans. B Process Metall. Mater. Process. Sci. 35 (2004) 143–152 [Google Scholar]
  59. L.E. Rannar, A. Glad, C.G. Gustafson, Efficient cooling with tool inserts manufactured by electron beam melting, Rapid Prototyp. J. 13 (2007) 128–135 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  60. K.-H. Chang, K.-H. Chang, Rapid Prototyping, e-Design, Academic Press, Boston, MA, 2015, pp. 743–786 [Google Scholar]
  61. X. Zhang, G. Mi, C. Wang, Microstructure and performance of hybrid laser-arc welded high-strength low alloy steel and austenitic stainless steel dissimilar joint, Opt. Laser Technol. 122 (2020) 105878 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  62. Y. Zhang, A. Bandyopadhyay, Direct fabrication of compositionally graded Ti-Al2O3 multi-material structures using Laser Engineered Net Shaping, Addit. Manuf. 21 (2018) 104–111 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  63. Y. Zhong et al., Additive manufacturing of 316L stainless steel by electron beam melting for nuclear fusion applications, J. Nucl. Mater. 486 (2017) 234–245 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  64. T. Zhong, K. He, H. Li, L. Yang, Mechanical properties of lightweight 316L stainless steel lattice structures fabricated by selective laser melting, Mater. Des. 181 (2019) 108076 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  65. F. Klocke, K. Arntz, M. Teli, K. Winands, M. Wegener, S. Oliari, State-of-the-art Laser Additive Manufacturing for Hot-work Tool Steels, Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 58–63 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  66. A.D. Pogrebnyak et al., Properties and structure of oxidized coatings deposited onto Al-Cu and Al-Mg alloys, Tech. Phys. 57 (2012) 840–848 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  67. M.Y. Rekha, C. Srivastava, Microstructure and corrosion properties of zinc-graphene oxide composite coatings, Corros. Sci. 152 (2019) 234–248 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  68. O.V. Bondar et al., Fabrication and research of superhard (Zr-Ti-Cr-Nb)N Coatings, Acta Phys. Pol. A 128 (2015) 867–870 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  69. J. Nohava, P. Dessarzin, P. Karvankova, M. Morstein, Characterization of tribological behavior and wear mechanisms of novel oxynitride PVD coatings designed for applications at high temperatures, Tribol. Int. 81 (2015) 231–239 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  70. Z. Lei et al., Corrosion performance of ZrN/ZrO2 multilayer coatings deposited on 304 stainless steel using multi-arc ion plating, Appl. Surf. Sci. 431 (2018) 170–176 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  71. B.O. Postolnyi, P. Konarski, F.F. Komarov, O.V. Sobol', O.V. Kyrychenko, D.S. Shevchuk, Study of elemental and structural phase composition of multilayer nanostructured TiN / MoN coatings, their physical and mechanical properties, J. Nano- Electron. Phys. 6 (2014) 4 [Google Scholar]
  72. Y. Shi, B. Yang, P.K. Liaw, Corrosion-resistant high-entropy alloys: A review, Metals 7 (2017) 1–18 [Google Scholar]
  73. W. Li, P. Liu, P. K. Liaw, Microstructures and properties of high-entropy alloy films and coatings: A review, Mater. Res. Lett. 6 (2018) 199–229 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  74. A. López-Ortega, J.L. Arana, E. Rodríguez, R. Bayón, Corrosion, wear and tribocorrosion performance of a thermally sprayed aluminum coating modified by plasma electrolytic oxidation technique for offshore submerged components protection, Corros. Sci. 143 (2018) 258–280 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  75. Y. Wang, L. Zhang, S. Daynes, H. Zhang, S. Feih, M.Y. Wang, Design of graded lattice structure with optimized mesostructures for additive manufacturing, Mater. Des. 142 (2018) 114–123 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  76. V.V. Popov, A. Katz-Demyanetz, A. Koptyug, M. Bamberger, Selective electron beam melting of Al0.5CrMoNbTa0.5 high entropy alloys using elemental powder blend, Heliyon 5 (2019) e01188. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  77. S. Yin, X. Yan, C. Chen, R. Jenkins, M. Liu, R. Lupoi, Hybrid additive manufacturing of Al-Ti6Al4V functionally graded materials with selective laser melting and cold spraying, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 255 (2018) 650–655 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  78. C. Tan, K. Zhou, W. Ma, L. Min, Interfacial characteristic and mechanical performance of maraging steel-copper functional bimetal produced by selective laser melting based hybrid manufacture, Mater. Des. 155 (2018) 77–85 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Vladimir V. Popov Jr., Alexander Fleisher, Hybrid additive manufacturing of steels and alloys, Manufacturing Rev. 7, 6 (2020)

All Tables

Table 1

PBF techniques.

Table 2

Direct Energy Deposition techniques.

Table 3

Hybrid additive manufacturing.

Table 4

Comparison of energy efficiency and deposition rate of DED processes.

All Figures

thumbnail Fig. 1

Statistical data of number of published papers, by “Hybrid structure”, “Hybrid material”, “Hybrid Composites” and “Hybrid Technology” keywords. Data source − ScienceDirect ®, by Elsevier B.V.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 2

Manufacturing techniques: 1–casting; 2–subtractive; 3 − additive manufacturing.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 3

Hybrid additive manufacturing.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 4

Schematic view of repairing of turbine blade using DED technique.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 5

Schematic view of hybrid PBF process using EBM system: 1-powder #1; 2–powder #2; 3–powder hopper for small amounts of powder; 4–building platform; 5–deposited powder layer; 6–rake blades for powder deposition; 7–part built from powder #1; 8–part built from powder #2; 9–gradient zone built from blended powder #1 + #2.

In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.