Next Article in Journal
Concrete Damaged Plasticity-Based Analysis of Damage and Stiffness Degradation in Cooling Tower Shells Under Spatially Variable Seismic Loading
Previous Article in Journal
Hydrogen Embrittlement and Failure Mechanisms in Fe–18Mn–8Al–1C–5Ni Steel with Dual B2/κ-Carbide Precipitates
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparative Study of Different Additive Manufacturing Methods for H13 Tool Steel
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels

by
Róbert Bidulský
1,* and
Jana Bidulská
2
1
Bodva Industry and Innovation Cluster, Budulov 174, 04501 Moldava nad Bodvou, Slovakia
2
Department of Plastic Deformation and Simulation Processes, Institute of Materials and Quality Engineering, Faculty of Materials, Metallurgy and Recycling, Technical University of Kosice, Park Komenského 11, 04200 Košice, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2026, 19(10), 2140; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma19102140
Submission received: 6 May 2026 / Accepted: 18 May 2026 / Published: 20 May 2026

1. Introduction and Scope

Recent developments in the additive manufacturing (AM) of steels focus on microstructural engineering to overcome traditional trade-offs between strength and ductility, often utilising high-speed machine learning or mathematical simulation for alloy discovery and hybrid manufacturing techniques to optimise performance. The topic of microstructure and mechanical properties always targets a material’s properties. It is therefore useful to focus on the parameters that link properties and microstructure [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11] and on how to drive them using simulation and modelling [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20], including joining, metal forming and AM techniques. Advanced AM steels are now reaching or exceeding the performance of their conventionally manufactured (CM) counterparts through specific strengthening mechanisms [1,21,22,23].

2. An Overview of the Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels

The Special Issue on the Microstructure, Mechanical Properties, and Additive Manufacturing (AM) of Steels contributes to developments in the field of AM [24,25,26,27,28]. Reading the collected papers, some conclusions can be drawn.
The paper [24] examines the microstructural characteristics and corrosion resistance of super duplex stainless steel (SDSS) produced via Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF). It utilises X-ray diffraction (XRD), microstructural analysis (SEM), potentiodynamic polarisation tests and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). The results established that solution annealing and stress relieving at 400 °C improve resistance, while treatment at 550 °C reduces it due to the precipitation of chromium nitrides. The authors also explain the physical nature of the changes (e.g., the effect of dislocation density on XRD peak width or the impact of nitrides on the passive layer).
The study by Pereira et al. [25] focuses on the design and analysis of eco-friendly, fluorine-free mould fluxes intended for the continuous casting of peritectic steels, aiming to replace toxic CaF2 with alternative oxides such as Na2O, TiO2 and B2O3 while maintaining essential thermophysical properties. To achieve this, the authors employed a comprehensive methodology combining a 24 factorial design with thermodynamic modelling via FactSage 8.3, complemented by experimental verification through viscosity measurements, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) for crystallisation kinetics, and phase identification using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM-EDS). The research findings demonstrated that a specific fluorine-free formulation (Sample A) exhibits intense precipitation of merwinite and perovskite, effectively replacing cuspidine in controlling horizontal heat transfer. Furthermore, the study proves that an optimised combination of Na2O and TiO2 yields a balanced viscosity and crystallisation behaviour comparable to traditional fluorine-based fluxes. This work represents a highly relevant advancement for sustainable “Green Steelmaking” by eliminating hazardous emissions and equipment corrosion while addressing the specific technological risks associated with the non-uniform solidification of peritectic steels in industrial practice.
The study by Sang et al. [26] investigates the effects of plate thicknesses (2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm) on the microstructure and mechanical properties of laser-welded 22MnB5 hot-forming steel, aiming to expand its applications from thin automotive components to heavy-duty machinery and the military sector. The researchers employed a comprehensive experimental methodology that involved direct hot-forming of the base metal to a martensitic state, followed by fibre-laser butt-welding and advanced characterisation through tensile testing, Vickers microhardness measurements, and high-resolution imaging techniques such as SEM, TEM and EBSD. The results revealed that as plate thickness increased from 2 mm to 4 mm, the tensile strength of the welded joints decreased from 1489 MPa to 1275 MPa, representing a drop from 96% to 88% of the base metal strength. This reduction in mechanical performance is attributed to the growth of martensite grains, a transition from fine acicular to larger island-like structures, and a significant decrease in dislocation density within the heat-affected zone, which was identified as the weakest region where fractures occurred. Despite these changes, the finding that all joint thicknesses maintained over 85% of the base metal’s strength confirms the strong industrial potential for laser welding thicker hot-forming steels. This research provides highly relevant and timely data for optimising high-power laser welding parameters for advanced structural applications.
The study by Mroziński et al. [27] analyses the impact of microstructural anisotropy on the low-cycle fatigue (LCF) of S420M structural steel, specifically comparing samples collected parallel and perpendicular to the rolling direction. The research methodology integrated static tensile testing (Z-tensile test), Rockwell hardness measurements across the plate cross-section, and low-cycle fatigue tests under both constant-amplitude and programmed loading conditions, supplemented by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for microstructural and fracture surface characterisation. The results demonstrated that while the rolling direction has a negligible effect on basic static strength parameters such as tensile and yield strength, it exerts a profound influence on fatigue properties, with perpendicular samples exhibiting a dramatic reduction in fatigue life ranging from 50% to nearly 300% depending on the strain level. Furthermore, experimental verification of the Palmgren–Miner linear hypothesis confirmed that using fatigue data from longitudinal samples to calculate the life of components loaded in the transverse direction leads to dangerously overestimated results. This research is highly relevant because it addresses a critical safety gap in current engineering standards, demonstrating that meeting static requirements for through-thickness properties does not guarantee adequate fatigue resistance in heavy-duty welded structural nodes.
The study by Widomski et al. [28] presents a comparative analysis of five distinct additive manufacturing technologies—Fused Deposition Modelling and Sintering (FDMS) via Desktop Metal and Zetamix systems, Binder Jetting (BJ), Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF), and Directed Energy Deposition (DED)—applied to H13 tool steel, which is essential for hot-work tooling applications. The research focuses on evaluating microstructure, porosity levels and the material’s response to post-processing heat treatments such as quenching and tempering. The experimental methodology involved utilising light optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive spectroscopy, Vickers microhardness testing, and quantitative porosity analysis. The findings indicated that LPBF and DED achieved the highest densities with porosity levels below 0.1%, whereas sinter-based FDMS methods exhibited significantly higher porosity, ranging from 6.0% to 9.3%, thereby limiting their suitability for functional tooling. After specialised heat treatment, high-density samples (BJ, LPBF and DED) achieved satisfactory hardness levels between 600 and 700 HV0.5, with Binder Jetting specifically demonstrating a secondary hardening effect due to the precipitation of vanadium and chromium carbides during tempering at 550 °C. This research is highly relevant as it addresses a critical research gap by providing a direct comparison of diverse additive manufacturing methods under unified experimental conditions, offering vital insights for the development of advanced tools with conformal cooling channels.

3. Conclusions

The research published in the Special Issue Microstructure, Mechanical Properties, and AM of Steels confirms that additive manufacturing and advanced metallurgical processes are fundamentally transforming the design of steel components. In conclusion, the synergy among experimental characterisation, mathematical simulation and additive technologies enables the overcoming of traditional limits in metallurgy, paving the way for a new generation of high-performance and environmentally sustainable steel structures.

Funding

Funded by the EU Next Generation EU through the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Slovakia under the project No. 09I03-03-V04-00694.

Acknowledgments

As Guest Editors, we are grateful to the entire MDPI staff for their valuable collaboration. We also express our gratitude to all the contributing authors and reviewers; without your excellent work, it would not have been possible to accomplish this Topic, which we hope will provide reading and reference literature of both interest and lasting importance.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Yan, J.-h.; Feng, X.-y.; Feng, Y.-l.; Sun, X.; Du, J.-l.; Liu, S. Recent progress in regulating microstructure and properties of laser additive manufacturing steels via post-heat treatment. Mater. Today Commun. 2025, 44, 111803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wang, S.; Zhou, L.; Zhong, S.; Li, G.; Zhang, L.; Wang, X.; Li, Z.; Lu, J. Recent Advances in Metal Additive Manufacturing: Materials Design and Artificial Intelligence Applications. Engineering, 2026; in press. [CrossRef]
  3. Liu, H.; Yu, H.; Guo, C.; Chen, X.; Zhong, S.; Zhou, L.; Osman, A.; Lu, J. Review on Fatigue of Additive Manufactured Metallic Alloys: Microstructure, Performance, Enhancement, and Assessment Methods. Adv. Mater. 2024, 36, 2306570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Jandaghi, M.R.; Pouraliakbar, H.; Iannucci, L.; Fallah, V.; Pavese, M. Department of Applied Science and TechnoComparative assessment of gas and water atomized powders for additive manufacturing of 316 L stainless steel: Microstructure, mechanical properties, and corrosion resistance. Mater. Charact. 2023, 204, 113204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Adak, D.; Sreeramagiri, P.; Roy, S.; Balasubramanian, G. Advances and Challenges in Predictive Modeling for Additive Manufacturing of Dissimilar Metals and Complex Alloys. Materials 2023, 16, 5680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zitelli, C.; Folgarait, P.; Di Schino, A. Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Stainless Steel Grades: A Review. Metals 2019, 9, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, Z.D.; Ibhadode, O.; Shahabad, S.I.; Zhai, X.Y.; Yu, D.Y.; Gao, T.; Zhu, J.H.; Zhang, W.H. High-resolution inherent strain method using actual layer thickness in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing with experimental validations. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2024, 30, 6576–6595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rizza, G.; Galati, M.; Luliano, L. A multiscale framework for the evaluation of thermal conductivity of sintered powder at the powder bed fusion with electron beam conditions. Progr. Addit. Manuf. 2024, 9, 1467–1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pourabdollah, P.; Mehr, F.F.; Cockcroft, S.L.; Maijer, D.M. A new variant of the inherent strain method for the prediction of distortion in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing processes. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2024, 131, 4575–4594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Brytan, Z.; Dagnaw, M.; Bidulska, J.; Bidulsky, R. Corrosion evaluation of LPBF-manufactured duplex stainless steel. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2024, 30, 34–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gubicza, J. Strength-Ductility Synergy: An Incorrectly Used Term in Materials Science. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2025, 31, 64–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kascak, L.; Varga, J.; Jezný, T.; Kvačkaj, T. Numerical simulation–based optimisation of Clinching Processes for High-Strength Steel Sheets. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2025, 31, 259–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Peng, X.; Kong, L.; Fuh, J.Y.H.; Wang, H. A Review of Post-Processing Technologies in Additive Manufacturing. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Weber, S.; Montero, J.; Bleckmann, M.; Paetzold, K. Support-free metal additive manufacturing: A structured review on the state of the art in academia and industry. Proc. Des. Soc. 2021, 1, 2811–2820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Xie, D.; Lv, F.; Yang, Y.; Shen, L.; Tian, Z.; Shuai, C.; Chen, B.; Zhao, J. A Review on Distortion and Residual Stress in Additive Manufacturing. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. Addit. Manuf. Front. 2022, 1, 100039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Panwisawas, C.; Qui, C.; Anderson, M.J.; Sovani, Y.; Turner, R.P.; Attalah, M.M.; Brooks, J.W.; Basoalto, H.C. Mesoscale modelling of selective laser melting: Thermal fluid dynamics and microstructural evolution. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2017, 126, 479–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kaščák, L.; Varga, J.; Bidulská, J.; Bidulský, R.; Manfredi, D. Weight Factor as a Parameter for Optimal Part Orientation in the L-PBF Printing Process Using Numerical Simulation. Materials 2024, 17, 3604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kascak, L.; Varga, J.; Bidulská, J.; Bidulský, R.; Grande, M.A. Simulation tool for material behaviour prediction in additive manufacturing. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2023, 29, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kascak, L.; Mucha, J.; Varga, J.; Slota, J.; Kaščáková, E. Analysis of hybrid joining of microalloyed steel sheets HX300LAD. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2024, 30, 188–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arinova, S.; Aubakirov, D.; Dospayev, M.; Tuganbayeva, A. The Nanomodifier Effect on the Structure and Properties of 40CrNi3MoV Steel. Acta Metal. Slovaca 2025, 31, 108–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Haghdadi, N.; Laleh, M.; Moyle, M.; Primig, S. Additive manufacturing of steels: A review of achievements and challenges. J. Mater. Sci. 2021, 56, 64–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yue, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zheng, Z.; Lai, Y. Hybrid Laser Additive Manufacturing of Metals: A Review. Coatings 2024, 14, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dwi Yudanto, S.; Nita Deslia Sari, D.; Fitriandhani, R.; Imaduddin, A.; Widya Pramono, A. Novel insights into phase formation and electrical resistivity of FeSe alloy prepared by powder metallurgy method. Acta Metall. Slovaca 2024, 30, 72–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Brytan, Z.; Dagnaw, M.; Bidulská, J.; Bidulský, R.; Muhamad, M.R. Post-Processing Effect on the Corrosion Resistance of Super Duplex Stainless Steel Produced by Laser Powder Bed Fusion. Materials 2024, 17, 2807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pereira, M.M.d.S.M.; Tavernier, H.; dos Santos Junior, T.; Vernilli, F. Design and Analysis of Fluorine-Free Mold Fluxes for Continuous Casting of Peritectic Steels. Materials 2024, 17, 5947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sang, K.; Li, X.; Zhang, Y.; Yi, L.; Chen, J.; Lu, Y.; Gu, Z. Effect of Plate Thickness on the Laser-Welded Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of 22MnB5 Hot-Forming Steel. Materials 2024, 17, 6138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mroziński, S.; Golański, G.; Jagielska-Wiaderek, K.; Szarek, A. Impact of Microstructural Anisotropy on the Low-Cycle Fatigue of S420M Steel. Materials 2025, 18, 2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Widomski, P.; Kaszuba, M.; Dobras, D.; Terefinko, D.; Kołodziński, M. Comparative Study of Different Additive Manufacturing Methods for H13 Tool Steel. Materials 2025, 18, 5299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bidulský, R.; Bidulská, J. Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels. Materials 2026, 19, 2140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma19102140

AMA Style

Bidulský R, Bidulská J. Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels. Materials. 2026; 19(10):2140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma19102140

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bidulský, Róbert, and Jana Bidulská. 2026. "Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels" Materials 19, no. 10: 2140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma19102140

APA Style

Bidulský, R., & Bidulská, J. (2026). Microstructure, Mechanical Properties and Additive Manufacturing of Steels. Materials, 19(10), 2140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma19102140

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop