## 3 Results and Discussion
### XRD and EDS Analysis
To have a more accurate characterization of \(\gamma\), \(\gamma^{\prime}\) and \(\gamma^{\prime\prime}\) phases, a smaller range of 20 (42-45\({}^{\circ}\)) was represented in Figure 5. As it is shown, once the different type of the support structures was concerned, the Pin-type (PT53G80) presented a broader and shallower diffraction peak compared to the other two types (CT53G80 and AT53G80). Also, reduction in the thickness of the supports resulted in shallower peaks when the samples fabricated on top of AT60G100 and AT80G80 supports were compared with the samples supported by AT33G100 and AT33G80, respectively. A similar trend was observed when the gap parameter (G) increased, with a considerable drop in peak intensity being detected for the sample supported by AT33G100 compared to the sample fabricated with AT33G80 support. In terms of the position of the peak angle, we can see that there is a variation for the \(\gamma\) (111) diffracted angle between samples. The 20 location of the detected \(\gamma\) peaks is listed in Figure 6. When comparing the samples fabricated with different types of supports, the highest increase in the diffraction angle can be seen for the Pin-type support (PT53G80), followed by the cone-type (CT53G80). The geometrical parameters (i.e., thickness and gap) also affected the position of the diffraction angle (20). Reduction in the thickness of the supports (T) led to the increase in the diffraction angle, for both cases of AT80G80 and AT33G80, and AT60G100 and AT33G100. By comparing the AT33G100 and AT33G80, it was found out that a decrease in the gap value reduced the angle of diffraction. Figure 5: The variation in the \(\gamma\) (111) peak position in the XRD diffractograms extracted for the samples. Figure 6: The displacement of identified \(\gamma\) (111) peaks and the lattice constant of the \(\gamma\) phase extracted from the XRD diffractograms of IN718 samples fabricated on top of different support structures. Based on the variation observed for the diffraction angle, the lattice parameter can be calculated for each sample using the Bragg's law equation which relates the interplanar distance and the lattice parameter:  
\[n\lambda=2d\;sin\theta \tag{6}\]  
where, \(\lambda\) is the wavelength of the X-ray used in the XRD analysis, d is the interplanar distance and \(\theta\) is the angle of diffraction. Figure 6 shows the lattice parameter values determined for each sample. Among the samples fabricated with different types of supports, the highest lattice parameter (0.35822 nm) belongs to the samples fabricated with the Angled-type supports (AT53G80) and the lowest lattice parameter (0.35729 nm) belongs to the Pin-type supports (PT53G80). Also, in terms of geometrical parameters of the supports, the highest value of lattice size (0.3592 nm) belonged to the sample fabricated on the densest support with higher thickness and less gap value (AT80G80). Conversely, the sample supported by AT33G100 with the lowest thickness and highest gap, was formed by unit cells with smaller size. Therefore, as the dissolution of secondary phases into the \(\gamma\) phase leads to an increase in the size of the lattice parameter of the matrix phase, it can be inferred that the sample supported by the angled-type (AT53G80) experienced the higher level of dissolution of secondary phases, but the formation of less precipitates. By contrast, the lowest lattice size belonged to the sample with pin-type support which shows a higher level of precipitation of secondary phases. The same comparison can be done for the samples fabricated on angled-type support with different geometrical parameters. In this case, the sample fabricated on the support with a lower gap value (AT33G80) had a higher lattice size compared to the sample supported by the higher gap value (AT33G100). This brings about more dissolution but less precipitation for the former.