Microstructure and corrosion behavior of 316L stainless steel prepared using different additive manufacturing methods: A comparative study bringing insights into the impact of microstructure on their passivity

Reynier I. Revilla, Matthieu Van Calster, Marc Raes, Galid Arroud, Francesco Andreatta, Lincy Pyl, Patrick Guillaume, Iris De Graeve

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

67 Citations (Scopus)
291 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This work compares the microstructure and corrosion resistance of 316 L stainless steel samples prepared using two different additive manufacturing methods: selective laser melting (SLM), and laser metal deposition (LMD). A wrought material was used as reference. The specimens showed marked differences in their microstructure, as a result of the specific manufacturing conditions. All samples displayed similar corrosion potential and passive current density values. However, variations were seen in their potential passive range (SLM > LMD > Wrought). The wider passivity of the SLM specimen can be associated with its finer microstructure, which leads to a more stable native oxide.

Original languageEnglish
Article number108914
JournalCorrosion Science
Volume176
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2020

Keywords

  • 316L stainless steel
  • Additive manufacturing
  • Laser metal deposition
  • Selective laser melting

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Microstructure and corrosion behavior of 316L stainless steel prepared using different additive manufacturing methods: A comparative study bringing insights into the impact of microstructure on their passivity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this