## 1 Introduction
MSS measures indentation modulus and indentation yield strength of the material, from which one can estimate the values of Young's modulus and uniaxial yield strength for the tested sample. MSS has the capability of measuring these properties in a minimally invasive manner, while utilizing a very small volume of material. While MSS protocols share several details with standard hardness measurements, such as the ability to be performed on a metallography sample, they also exhibit many distinct differences. The MSS method presented by [PERSON] et al. [14] exhibited a distinct difference in that the MSS protocols utilize multiple progressively higher load cycles on the samples and utilize each unloading segment to extract one datapoint on the indentation stress-strain curve. The MSS protocols are described in greater detail in Section 2.4. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [17] utilized FE models to establish a conversion factor of 2.2 to convert from the indentation yield strengths calculated using MSS protocols to UTT yield strength. [PERSON] et al. [18] utilized the scaling factors established by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [17] to compare nanoindentation stress-strain data to UTT for two martensitic Fe-Ni-C steels. Their findings showed that these scaling factors resulted in reasonable agreement between the nanoindentation and UTT data. [PERSON] et al. [19] applied experimental MSS protocols to a limited set of microstructurally graded samples of Al-6061 and identified a similar conversion factor through direct comparison with UTT. In contrast to MSS protocols, SPT protocols have been conventionally employed to estimate the plastic properties of the material such as tensile yield strength and UTS. [PERSON] et al. [20] demonstrated the use of SPT load-displacement data to determine UTS and yield strength of powder metal products through linear regression. They argued that the small sample size required for SPT makes it well suited for situations where a standard UTT is not possible, such as in the final sintered products made using powder metallurgy. They were successful at determining the tensile properties of three different metal powders using SPT. [PERSON] [21] determined that experimental load-displacement data alone is not sufficient to determine material properties due to the non-uniform stresses experienced by the SPT sample while it is deformed to the point of failure by a spherical punch. The author suggested that FE simulations must be used in conjunction with experimental data to accurately predict material properties using SPT. SPT requires significantly less material volume and sample machining time compared to UTT. Both SPT and MSS are amenable to automated and high-throughput experimental assays. This paper critically evaluates the viability and effectiveness of MSS and SPT protocols in rapid evaluation of mechanical properties of SLM-produced Inconel 718 samples with different process parameters. More specifically, the combined stress-strain results obtained using the results from both MSS and SPT protocols were directly compared with those obtained from standardized UTT protocols in terms of accuracy. This comparison directly addressed the validity of both MSS and SPT with respect to widely accepted UTT protocols and is necessary to satisfy the concerns of industrial mechanical testing experts. To accommodate the growing need for AM material and process parameter development, high fidelity mechanical testing must be done more quickly and at a lower cost. The decision to adopt MSS and SPT protocols to achieve this need rests upon the trust of mechanical testing experts in these state-of-the-art testing methods.