Investigating the Effect of Processing Parameters on Mechanical Behavior of 3D Fused Deposition Modeling Printed Polylactic Acid
Source abstract
Abstract
Additive manufacturing by fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a simple and low-cost manufacturing technique for complex shapes and designs. The present study characterizes polylactic acid (PLA), printed by FDM, and analyzes the effect of processing parameters such as build orientation, infill density and infill pattern on the mechanical properties by uniaxial tensile and compression tests. The tensile and compression studies on different build orientations imply significant anisotropy of the printed parts. An increase in infill density (25, 50, and 75%), though increased printing time, resulting in a prominent enhancement of compressive properties. However, the compression test on different infill patterns has shown that these patterns have a small effect on mechanical properties. Among them, gyroid with 75% infill, printed along 90° orientation imparted significantly higher compressive properties (strength, 27 MPa and modulus, 658 MPa). The pore morphology and homogeneity in pore distribution have been studied to develop porous PLA parts for tissue engineering applications. The SEM analysis of gyroid patterns at different infill densities revealed the uniform pore distribution and effective inter-layer bonding with fewer voids. Microstructural studies on gyroid and CS patterns by micro-CT imaging have shown the positive correlation of obtained porosity with the theoretical values. Overall, the present study provides a comparative analysis of different processing parameters by mechanical property evaluation.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. F42 Committee Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies, ASTM International
2. A. Gebhardt and J.-S. Hötter, Additive Manufacturing: 3D Printing for Prototyping and Manufacturing, Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co, KG, München, 2016.10.3139/9781569905838 ↗
3. S. Vyavahare, S. Teraiya, D. Panghal, and S. Kumar, Fused Deposition Modelling: A Review, Rapid Prototyp. J., 2020, 26, p 176–201. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-04-2019-010610.1108/RPJ-04-2019-0106 ↗
4. P. Ahangar, M.E. Cooke, M.H. Weber, and D.H. Rosenzweig, Current Biomedical Applications of 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, Appl. Sci., 2019 https://doi.org/10.3390/app908171310.3390/app9081713 ↗
5. Y. He, Y. Wu, J. Fu et al., Developments of 3D Printing Microfluidics and Applications in Chemistry and Biology: a Review, Electroanalysis, 2016, 28, p 1658–1678. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.20160004310.1002/elan.201600043 ↗
6. S.C. Joshi and A.A. Sheikh, 3D printing in aerospace and its long-term sustainability, Virtual Phys. Prototyp., 2015, 10, p 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2015.111151910.1080/17452759.2015.1111519 ↗
7. S. Singh and S. Ramakrishna, Biomedical Applications of Additive Manufacturing: Present and Future, Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng., 2017, 2, p 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobme.2017.05.00610.1016/j.cobme.2017.05.006 ↗
8. H. Bikas, P. Stavropoulos, and G. Chryssolouris, Additive Manufacturing Methods and Modelling Approaches: A Critical Review, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2016, 83, p 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7576-210.1007/s00170-015-7576-2 ↗
9. S. Singh, G. Singh, C. Prakash, and S. Ramakrishna, Current Status and Future Directions of Fused Filament Fabrication, J. Manuf. Process, 2020, 55, p 288–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.04.04910.1016/j.jmapro.2020.04.049 ↗
10. N.A.S. Mohd Pu’ad, R.H. Abdul Haq, H. Mohd Noh et al., Review on the Fabrication of Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) Composite Filament for Biomedical Applications, Mater. Today Proc., 2020, 29, p 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.53510.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.535 ↗
11. S.C. Daminabo, S. Goel, S.A. Grammatikos et al., Fused Deposition Modeling-Based Additive Manufacturing (3D printing): Techniques for Polymer Material Systems, Mater. Today Chem., 2020, 16, p 100248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.10024810.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100248 ↗
12. P.K. Penumakala, J. Santo, and A. Thomas, A Critical Review on the Fused Deposition Modeling of Thermoplastic Polymer Composites, Compos. Part B Eng., 2020, 201, p 108336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.10833610.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108336 ↗
13. P.A. Eutionnat-Diffo, Y. Chen, J. Guan et al., Stress, Strain and Deformation of Poly-Lactic Acid Filament Deposited Onto Polyethylene Terephthalate Woven Fabric Through 3D Printing Process, Sci Rep, 2019, 9, p 14333. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50832-710.1038/s41598-019-50832-7 ↗
14. A. Dey and N. Yodo, A Systematic Survey of FDM Process Parameter Optimization and Their Influence on Part Characteristics, J. Manuf. Mater. Process, 2019, 3, p 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp303006410.3390/jmmp3030064 ↗
15. Hambali RH, Celik HK, Smith PC, et al (2010) Effect of Build Orientation on FDM Parts: A Case Study for Validation of Deformation Behaviour by FEA. 6
16. Roger F, Krawczak P (2015) 3D-printing of thermoplastic structures by FDM using heterogeneous infill and multi-materials: An integrated design-advanced manufacturing approach for factories of the future. 7
17. I.J. Solomon, P. Sevvel, and J. Gunasekaran, A Review on the Various Processing Parameters in FDM, Mater. Today. Proc., 2021, 37, p 509–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.48410.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.484 ↗
18. D. Syrlybayev, B. Zharylkassyn, A. Seisekulova et al., Optimisation of Strength Properties of FDM Printed Parts—A Critical Review, Polymers, 2021, 13, p 1587. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1310158710.3390/polym13101587 ↗
19. Department of Mechatronics Engineering, KTO Karatay University, Meram A, Sözen B, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Selçuk University (2020) Investigation on the manufacturing variants influential on the strength of 3D printed products. Res Eng Struct Mater. https://doi.org/10.17515/resm2019.171me311210.17515/resm2019.171me3112 ↗
20. F.M. Mwema and E.T. Akinlabi, Basics of Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM), Fused Deposition Modeling: Strategies for Quality Enhancement. F.M. Mwema, E.T. Akinlabi Ed., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020, p 1–1510.1007/978-3-030-48259-6 ↗
21. D. Zhao, T. Zhu, J. Li et al., Poly(Lactic-Co-Glycolic Acid)-Based Composite Bone-Substitute Materials, Bioact. Mater., 2021, 6, p 346–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.01610.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.016 ↗
22. K. Liu, L. Yan, R. Li et al., 3D Printed Personalized Nerve Guide Conduits for Precision Repair of Peripheral Nerve Defects, Adv Sci, 2022, 9, p 2103875. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.20210387510.1002/advs.202103875 ↗
23. E. Baran and H. Erbil, Surface Modification of 3D Printed PLA Objects by Fused Deposition Modeling: A Review, Colloids Interfaces, 2019, 3, p 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/colloids302004310.3390/colloids3020043 ↗
24. D. Popescu, A. Zapciu, C. Amza et al., FDM Process Parameters Influence Over the Mechanical Properties of Polymer Specimens: A Review, Polym Test, 2018, 69, p 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.02010.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.020 ↗
25. D. Corapi, G. Morettini, G. Pascoletti, and C. Zitelli, Characterization of a Polylactic Acid (PLA) Produced by Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) Technology, Procedia. Struct. Integr., 2019, 24, p 289–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2020.02.02610.1016/j.prostr.2020.02.026 ↗
26. M.-M. Pastor-Artigues, F. Roure-Fernández, X. Ayneto-Gubert et al., Elastic Asymmetry of PLA Material in FDM-Printed Parts: Considerations Concerning Experimental Characterisation for Use in Numerical Simulations, Materials, 2019, 13, p 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1301001510.3390/ma13010015 ↗
27. S.A. Raj, E. Muthukumaran, and K. Jayakrishna, A Case Study of 3D Printed PLA and Its Mechanical Properties, Mater. Today. Proc., 2018, 5, p 11219–11226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.01.14610.1016/j.matpr.2018.01.146 ↗
28. M. Heidari-Rarani, N. Ezati, P. Sadeghi, and M. Badrossamay, Optimization of FDM Process Parameters for Tensile Properties of Polylactic Acid Specimens Using Taguchi Design of Experiment Method, J. Thermoplast Compos. Mater., 2020 https://doi.org/10.1177/089270572096456010.1177/0892705720964560 ↗
29. E. Asmatulu, A. Alonayni, B. Subeshan, and M.M. Rahman, Investigating compression strengths of 3D printed polymeric infill specimens of various geometries, Nano-, Bio-, Info-Tech Sensors, and 3D Systems II. V.K. Varadan Ed., SPIE, Denver, United States, 2018, p 2110.1117/12.2296651 ↗
30. H. Gonabadi, A. Yadav, and S.J. Bull, The Effect of Processing Parameters on the Mechanical Characteristics of PLA Produced by a 3D FFF Printer, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2020, 111, p 695–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06138-410.1007/s00170-020-06138-4 ↗
31. J. Yin, C. Lu, J. Fu et al., Interfacial Bonding During Multi-Material Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) Process Due to Inter-Molecular Diffusion, Mater Des, 2018, 150, p 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.04.02910.1016/j.matdes.2018.04.029 ↗
32. X. Zhang, and J. Wang, Controllable Interfacial Adhesion Behaviors of Polymer-On-Polymer Surfaces During Fused Deposition Modeling 3D Printing Process, Chem Phys Lett, 2020, 739, p 136959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2019.13695910.1016/j.cplett.2019.136959 ↗
33. Lam R, Orozco M, Mendieta E, et al Compressive Mechanical Properties of Three-Dimensional (3D) Printed Thermoplastics. 15
34. W. Wu, P. Geng, G. Li et al., Influence of Layer Thickness and Raster Angle on the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PEEK and a Comparative Mechanical Study between PEEK and ABS, Materials, 2015, 8, p 5834–5846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma809527110.3390/ma8095271 ↗
35. A. Özen, B.E. Abali, C. Völlmecke et al., Exploring the Role of Manufacturing Parameters on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties in Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) Using PETG, Appl Compos Mater, 2021, 28, p 1799–1828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-021-09940-910.1007/s10443-021-09940-9 ↗
36. S. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell et al., Anisotropic Material Properties of Fused Deposition Modeling ABS, Rapid Prototyp J, 2002, 8, p 248–257. https://doi.org/10.1108/1355254021044116610.1108/13552540210441166 ↗
37. Cantrell J, Rohde S, Damiani D, et al Experimental Characterization of the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed ABS and Polycarbonate Parts. 19
38. A. Özen, D. Auhl, C. Völlmecke et al., Optimization of Manufacturing Parameters and Tensile Specimen Geometry for Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) 3D-Printed PETG, Materials, 2021, 14, p 2556. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1410255610.3390/ma14102556 ↗
39. S. Ding, B. Zou, P. Wang, and H. Ding, Effects of Nozzle Temperature and Building Orientation on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of PEEK and PEI Printed by 3D-FDM, Polym Test, 2019, 78, p 105948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.10594810.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.105948 ↗
40. D20 Committee Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics. ASTM International
41. D20 Committee Test Method for Compressive Properties of Rigid Plastics. ASTM International
42. V. Karageorgiou, and D. Kaplan, Porosity of 3D Biomaterial Scaffolds and Osteogenesis, Biomaterials, 2005, 26, p 5474–5491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.00210.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002 ↗
43. S. Bertoldi, S. Farè, and M.C. Tanzi, Assessment of Scaffold Porosity: The New Route of Micro-CT, J. Appl. Biomater. Biomech., 2011, 9, p 165–175. https://doi.org/10.5301/JABB.2011.886310.5301/JABB.2011.8863 ↗
44. M.F. Afrose, S.H. Masood, M. Nikzad and P. Iovenitti, Effects of Build Orientations on Tensile Properties of PLA Material Processed by FDM, Adv. Mater. Res., 2014, 1044–1045, p 31–34. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1044-1045.3110.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1044-1045.31 ↗
45. X. Peng, M. Zhang, Z. Guo et al., Investigation of Processing Parameters on Tensile Performance for FDM-Printed Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polyamide 6 Composites, Compos. Commun., 2020, 22, 100478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coco.2020.10047810.1016/j.coco.2020.100478 ↗
46. Eryildiz M (2021) Effect of Build Orientation on Mechanical Behaviour and Build Time of FDM 3D-Printed PLA Parts: An Experimental Investigation. Eur Mech Sci. 5:116–120. https://doi.org/10.26701/ems.88125410.26701/ems.881254 ↗
47. J.M. Chacón, M.A. Caminero, E. García-Plaza, and P.J. Núñez, Additive Manufacturing of PLA Structures using Fused Deposition Modelling: Effect of Process Parameters on Mechanical Properties and their Optimal Selection, Mater. Des., 2017, 124, p 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.06510.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.065 ↗
48. G. Domínguez-Rodríguez, J.J. Ku-Herrera, and A. Hernández-Pérez, An Assessment of the Effect of Printing Orientation, Density, and Filler Pattern on the Compressive Performance of 3D Printed ABS Structures by Fuse Deposition, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2018, 95, p 1685–1695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1314-x10.1007/s00170-017-1314-x ↗
49. H. Dou, W. Ye, D. Zhang et al., Compression Performance with Different Build Orientation of Fused Filament Fabrication Polylactic Acid, Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene, and Polyether Ether Ketone, J. Mater. Eng. Perform, 2021 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-021-06363-210.1007/s11665-021-06363-2 ↗
50. Melenka GW, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey DJP Desktop 3D Printer Material Properties and Dimensional Accuracy. 23
51. N. Alharbi, R. Osman, and D. Wismeijer, Effects of Build Direction on the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Complete Coverage Interim Dental Restorations, J. Prosthet. Dent., 2016, 115, p 760–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.00210.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.002 ↗
52. M. Moradi, A. Aminzadeh, D. Rahmatabadi and A. Hakimi, Experimental Investigation on Mechanical Characterization of 3D Printed PLA Produced by Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), Mater. Res. Express., 2021, 8, p 035304. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/abe8f310.1088/2053-1591/abe8f3 ↗
53. B. Pernet, J.K. Nagel, and H. Zhang, Compressive Strength Assessment of 3D Printing Infill Patterns, Procedia CIRP, 2022, 105, p 682–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.11410.1016/j.procir.2022.02.114 ↗
54. Parab S, Zaveri N (2020) Investigating the Influence of Infill Pattern on the Compressive Strength of Fused Deposition Modelled PLA Parts. pp 239–24710.1007/978-981-15-4485-9_25 ↗
55. Fernandez-Vicente M, Calle W, Ferrandiz S, Conejero A (2016) Effect of Infill Parameters on Tensile Mechanical Behavior in Desktop 3D Printing. 3D Print Addit Manuf. 3:183–192. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2015.003610.1089/3dp.2015.0036 ↗
56. Perez DB, Celik E, Karkkainen RL (2021) Investigation of Interlayer Interface Strength and Print Morphology Effects in Fused Deposition Modeling 3D-Printed PLA. 3D Print Addit Manuf 8:23–32. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2020.010910.1089/3dp.2020.0109 ↗
57. V. Shanmugam, O. Das, K. Babu et al., Fatigue Behaviour of FDM-3D Printed Polymers, Polymeric Composites and Architected Cellular Materials, Int. J. Fatigue, 2021, 143, p 106007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10600710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106007 ↗
58. Espinal L (2012) Porosity and Its Measurement. In: Characterization of Materials. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp 1–1010.1002/0471266965.com129 ↗
59. Y. Liao, C. Liu, B. Coppola et al., Effect of Porosity and Crystallinity on 3D Printed PLA Properties, Polymers, 2019, 11, p 1487. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1109148710.3390/polym11091487 ↗
60. A.Y. Al-Maharma, S.P. Patil, and B. Markert, Effects of Porosity on the Mechanical Properties of Additively Manufactured Components: A Critical Review, Mater Res Express, 2020, 7, p 122001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/abcc5d10.1088/2053-1591/abcc5d ↗
61. M. Ahumada, E. Jacques, C. Calderon, and F. Martínez-Gómez, Porosity in Biomaterials: A Key Factor in the Development of Applied Materials in Biomedicine, Handbook of Ecomaterials. L.M.T. Martínez, O.V. Kharissova, B.I. Kharisov Ed., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2019, p 3503–352210.1007/978-3-319-68255-6_162 ↗
62. T. Zhu, Y. Cui, M. Zhang et al., Engineered Three-Dimensional Scaffolds for Enhanced Bone Regeneration in Osteonecrosis, Bioact. Mater., 2020, 5, p 584–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.04.00810.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.04.008 ↗