Controlling Morphing Behavior in 4D Printing: A Review About Microstructure and Macrostructure Changes in Polylactic Acid
Source abstract
Abstract
Four-dimensional (4D) printing combines stimulus-responsive materials with additive manufacturing (AM) technologies. This new concept of printing three-dimensional (3D) objects opens the possibility for solving processing issues, through the production of complex geometries that can undergo programmed temporal changes in response to external stimuli. However, as 4D technology emerges from AM, various challenges still need to be explored, such as the controlled morphing effect. Understanding the aspects related to this behavior, both at the macroscopic level of the structure and at the microscopic level of the polymeric chain, is fundamental. Focused on thermoplastic poly(lactic acid) (PLA) printed by fused deposition modeling, this review addressed the influence of molecular weight, polymeric chain modifications, and 3D printing parameters on the shape change effect of a PLA-based material. The glass transition temperature proved to be a highly important parameter, which can be modified by molecular weight changes. Nozzle temperature, fill density, print patterns, and raster angle are 3D printing parameters that influence the material shape change. Shape recovery is highly dependent on the recovery temperature. Potential applications for shape memory structures are also addressed in this review.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Polymer composites and self-healing · Advanced Materials and Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Center for Mechanical Technology and Automation (TEMA), University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
Department of Materials and Ceramic Engineering, Aveiro Institute of Materials (CICECO), University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Gao W, , Zhang Y, , Ramanujan D, et al. The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering. Comput Des, 2015; 69:65–89.
2. 10.1089/3dp.2015.003910.1089/3dp.2015.0039 ↗
3. 10.1002/adem.20200029610.1002/adem.202000296 ↗
4. 10.1007/s00170-019-03871-310.1007/s00170-019-03871-3 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.06810.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.068 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.cad.2020.10281710.1016/j.cad.2020.102817 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.cej.2020.12616210.1016/j.cej.2020.126162 ↗
8. Bacciaglia A Ceruti A Liverani A. Additive manufacturing challenges and future developments in the next ten years. In: Rizzi C Andrisano A Leali F et al. (eds.). Design Tools and Methods in Industrial Engineering. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Cham: Springer 2020; pp. 891–902.10.1007/978-3-030-31154-4_76 ↗
9. 10.3390/mi1109079610.3390/mi11090796 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.cej.2019.02.08510.1016/j.cej.2019.02.085 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2020.10977110.1016/j.eurpolymj.2020.109771 ↗
12. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/ASTM 52900 Additive manufacturing—General principles—Terminology. 2015. https://www.iso.org/standard/69669.html Accessed October7 2022.
13. 10.1002/pat.502010.1002/pat.5020 ↗
14. 10.1007/s00170-019-03332-x10.1007/s00170-019-03332-x ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.05.00810.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.05.008 ↗
16. Abeykoon C, , Sri-Amphorn P, , Fernando A. Optimization of fused deposition modeling parameters for improved PLA and ABS 3D printed structures. Int J Light Mater Manuf, 2020; 3(3):284–297.
17. 10.1557/jmr.2018.39710.1557/jmr.2018.397 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2015.04.00210.1016/j.progpolymsci.2015.04.002 ↗
19. 10.1007/s10462-020-09876-910.1007/s10462-020-09876-9 ↗
20. 10.1002/app.4976110.1002/app.49761 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.cej.2019.05.16710.1016/j.cej.2019.05.167 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.03610.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.036 ↗
23. 10.1016/S1369-7021(07)70047-010.1016/S1369-7021(07)70047-0 ↗
24. 10.1002/adma.20200071310.1002/adma.202000713 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.apmt.2019.10049010.1016/j.apmt.2019.100490 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2015.04.00110.1016/j.progpolymsci.2015.04.001 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ces.2019.07.02210.1016/j.ces.2019.07.022 ↗
28. 10.3390/polym1212293910.3390/polym12122939 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.polymer.2020.12263710.1016/j.polymer.2020.122637 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.msec.2017.11.00810.1016/j.msec.2017.11.008 ↗
31. 10.1088/1361-665X/ab471c10.1088/1361-665X/ab471c ↗
32. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.06.03910.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.06.039 ↗
33. Gao X, , Qi S, , Zhang D, et al. The role of poly (ethylene glycol) on crystallization, interlayer bond and mechanical performance of polylactide parts fabricated by fused filament fabrication. Addit Manuf, 2020; 35:101414.
34. 10.3390/polym1304062710.3390/polym13040627 ↗
35. Rhoades A Pantani R. Poly(lactic acid): Flow-induced crystallization. In: Di Lorenzo ML Androsch R (eds.). Thermal Properties of Bio-based Polymers. Advances in Polymer Science. Cham: Springe 2019; pp. 87–117.10.1007/12_2019_49 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.apmt.2020.10061110.1016/j.apmt.2020.100611 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.09.00610.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.09.006 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.10769210.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107692 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.04.00110.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.04.001 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.10793510.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107935 ↗
41. 10.3390/ma1317375410.3390/ma13173754 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.matlet.2020.12919710.1016/j.matlet.2020.129197 ↗
43. 10.3390/ma1008097010.3390/ma10080970 ↗
44. 10.1080/17452759.2017.134181510.1080/17452759.2017.1341815 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.eml.2020.10079310.1016/j.eml.2020.100793 ↗
46. 10.1002/admt.20190029310.1002/admt.201900293 ↗
47. 10.1039/C9AN01926J10.1039/C9AN01926J ↗
48. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.10786610.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107866 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.cej.2020.12524210.1016/j.cej.2020.125242 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.03.01810.1016/j.compscitech.2018.03.018 ↗