3D-printed poly(oxymethylene): Improving printability via PMMA sacrificial substrates and characterization of the mechanical and thermal properties
Source abstract
Abstract
The fabrication of poly(oxymethylene) by means of additive manufacturing is still a problematic procedure due to the low adhesion with standard printing plates and extended warping. The use of polymers as alternative substrates is an effective way, especially if their glass-transition temperature is below the processing temperatures. Using poly(methyl methacrylate) sheets as sacrificial substrate, standard samples of poly(oxymethylene) are successfully printed, a result achieved in the past only by means of expensive and complex equipment. Furthermore, the mechanical and thermal properties of poly(oxymethylene) upon UV aging up to 500 h are investigated. Our results demonstrate that aging of 3D-printed poly(oxymethylene) causes chain scission and weakening of intermolecular bonds, crystallization of part of the amorphous areas, and results in the embrittlement of the material. The intermolecular structure of poly(oxymethylene) has been investigated by means of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · 3D Printing in Biomedical Research · Injection Molding Process and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. T.D. Ngo, A. Kashani, G. Imbalzano, K.T.Q. Nguyen, D. Hui, Additive manufacturing (3D printing): a review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Composites B 143, 172–196 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.01210.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012 ↗
2. J.Y. Lee, J. An, C.K. Chua, Fundamentals and applications of 3D printing for novel materials. Appl. Mater. Today. 7, 120–133 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.02.00410.1016/j.apmt.2017.02.004 ↗
3. L.E. Murr, Frontiers of 3D printing/additive manufacturing: from human organs to aircraft fabrication. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 32, 987–995 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2016.08.01110.1016/j.jmst.2016.08.011 ↗
4. S.C. Ligon, R. Liska, J. Stampfl, M. Gurr, R. Mülhaupt, Polymers for 3D printing and customized additive manufacturing. Chem. Rev. 117, 10212–10290 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b0007410.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00074 ↗
5. K.R. Hart, R.M. Dunn, J.M. Sietins, C.M. Hofmeister Mock, M.E. Mackay, E.D. Wetzel, Increased fracture toughness of additively manufactured amorphous thermoplastics via thermal annealing. Polymer 144, 192–204 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2018.04.02410.1016/j.polymer.2018.04.024 ↗
6. H.J. O’Connor, A.N. Dickson, D.P. Dowling, Evaluation of the mechanical performance of polymer parts fabricated using a production scale multi jet fusion printing process. Addit. Manuf. 22, 381–387 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.05.03510.1016/j.addma.2018.05.035 ↗
7. R.J. Zaldivar, D.B. Witkin, T. McLouth, D.N. Patel, K. Schmitt, J.P. Nokes, Influence of processing and orientation print effects on the mechanical and thermal behavior of 3D-Printed ULTEM ® 9085 Material. Addit. Manuf. 13, 71–80 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.11.00710.1016/j.addma.2016.11.007 ↗
8. T.E. Shelton, Z.A. Willburn, C.R. Hartsfield, G.R. Cobb, J.T. Cerri, R.A. Kemnitz, Effects of thermal process parameters on mechanical interlayer strength for additively manufactured Ultem 9085. Polym. Test. 81, 106255 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.10625510.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.106255 ↗
9. B. Sun, F. Jiang, D. Yang, M. Li, Y. Ren, Q. Feng, C. Qian, The debonding failure mechanism analysis and performance experiments of 3D printed wiring boards, in 2020 21st Int. Conf. Electron. Packag. Technol. ICEPT 2020. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEPT50128.2020.9202423.10.1109/ICEPT50128.2020.9202423 ↗
10. F.A. Doronin, I.V. Nagornova, G.O. Rytikov, L.G. Varepo, V.G. Nazarov, The general approach to the 3D-printing process quality estimation on the modified polymer substrates. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1546/1/01200710.1088/1742-6596/1546/1/012007 ↗
11. F.L. Redondo, M.C. Giaroli, M.A. Villar, A.G.O. de Freitas, A.E. Ciolino, M.D. Ninago, Direct 3D printing of poly(lactic acid) on cotton fibers: characterization of materials and study of adhesion properties of the resulting composites. Macromol. Symp. 394, 1–7 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.20190019010.1002/masy.201900190 ↗
12. F. Kotz, M. Mader, N. Dellen, P. Risch, A. Kick, D. Helmer, B.E. Rapp, Fused deposition modeling of microfluidic chips in polymethylmethacrylate. Micromachines. 11, 5–8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/mi1109087310.3390/mi11090873 ↗
13. I. Muro-Fraguas, E. Sainz-García, A. Pernía-Espinoza, F. Alba-Elías, Atmospheric pressure air plasma treatment to improve the 3D printing of polyoxymethylene. Plasma Process. Polym. 16, 1–14 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/ppap.20190002010.1002/ppap.201900020 ↗
14. E.M. Liston, L. Martinu, M.R. Wertheimer, Plasma surface modification of polymers for improved adhesion: a critical review. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 7, 1091–1127 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1163/156856193X0060010.1163/156856193X00600 ↗
15. A. Das, C.A. Chatham, J.J. Fallon, C.E. Zawaski, E.L. Gilmer, C.B. Williams, M.J. Bortner, Current understanding and challenges in high temperature additive manufacturing of engineering thermoplastic polymers. Addit. Manuf. 34, 101218 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.10121810.1016/j.addma.2020.101218 ↗
16. S. Mohd Yusuf, S. Cutler, N. Gao, Review: the impact of metal additive manufacturing on the aerospace industry. Metals 9, 1286 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/met912128610.3390/met9121286 ↗
17. E.A. Slejko, A. Gregorio, V. Lughi, Material selection for a CubeSat structural bus complying with debris mitigation. Adv. Sp. Res. 67, 1468–1476 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.11.03710.1016/j.asr.2020.11.037 ↗
18. C. Casavola, A. Cazzato, V. Moramarco, G. Pappalettera, Influence of printing constraints on residual stresses of FDM parts, in: Conf. Proc. Soc. Exp. Mech. Ser., 2018, pp. 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62899-8_18.10.1007/978-3-319-62899-8_18 ↗
19. M.A. Nazan, F.R. Ramli, M.R. Alkahari, M.A. Abdullah, M.N. Sudin, An exploration of polymer adhesion on 3D printer bed. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/210/1/01206210.1088/1757-899X/210/1/012062 ↗
20. M. Spoerk, J. Gonzalez-Gutierrez, C. Lichal, H. Cajner, G.R. Berger, S. Schuschnigg, L. Cardon, C. Holzer, Optimisation of the adhesion of polypropylene-based materials during extrusion-based additive manufacturing. Polymers (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1005049010.3390/polym10050490 ↗
21. O.S. Carneiro, A.F. Silva, R. Gomes, Fused deposition modeling with polypropylene. Mater. Des. 83, 768–776 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.05310.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.053 ↗
22. M. Mohammadi, H. Fazli, M. Karevan, J. Davoodi, The glass transition temperature of PMMA: a molecular dynamics study and comparison of various determination methods. Eur. Polym. J. 91, 121–133 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.03.05610.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.03.056 ↗
23. G. Palm, R.B. Dupaix, J. Castro, Large strain mechanical behavior of poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) near the glass transition temperature. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. Trans. ASME. 128, 559–563 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.234544710.1115/1.2345447 ↗
24. D. Mathiesen, D. Vogtmann, R.B. Dupaix, Characterization and constitutive modeling of stress-relaxation behavior of Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) across the glass transition temperature. Mech. Mater. 71, 74–84 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2014.01.00310.1016/j.mechmat.2014.01.003 ↗
25. R.B. Dupaix, M.C. Boyce, Constitutive modeling of the finite strain behavior of amorphous polymers in and above the glass transition. Mech. Mater. 39, 39–52 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2006.02.00610.1016/j.mechmat.2006.02.006 ↗
26. D. Ahn, K.R. Shull, Effects of substrate modification on the interfacial adhesion of acrylic elastomers. Langmuir 14, 3646–3654 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1021/la971396410.1021/la9713964 ↗
27. M. Spoerk, J. Gonzalez-Gutierrez, J. Sapkota, S. Schuschnigg, C. Holzer, Effect of the printing bed temperature on the adhesion of parts produced by fused filament fabrication. Plast. Rubber Compos. 47, 17–24 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/14658011.2017.139953110.1080/14658011.2017.1399531 ↗
28. J. Zhang, X.Z. Wang, W.W. Yu, Y.H. Deng, Numerical investigation of the influence of process conditions on the temperature variation in fused deposition modeling. Mater. Des. 130, 59–68 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.05.04010.1016/j.matdes.2017.05.040 ↗
29. N.G. Tanikella, B. Wittbrodt, J.M. Pearce, Tensile strength of commercial polymer materials for fused filament fabrication 3D printing. Addit. Manuf. 15, 40–47 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.03.00510.1016/j.addma.2017.03.005 ↗
30. M.F. Afrose, S.H. Masood, P. Iovenitti, M. Nikzad, I. Sbarski, Effects of part build orientations on fatigue behaviour of FDM-processed PLA material. Prog. Addit. Manuf. 1, 21–28 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-015-0002-310.1007/s40964-015-0002-3 ↗
31. T.M. Mower, M.J. Long, Mechanical behavior of additive manufactured, powder-bed laser-fused materials. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 651, 198–213 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2015.10.06810.1016/j.msea.2015.10.068 ↗
32. D. Popescu, A. Zapciu, C. Amza, F. Baciu, R. Marinescu, FDM process parameters influence over the mechanical properties of polymer specimens: a review. Polym. Test. 69, 157–166 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.02010.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.020 ↗
33. D.Y. Perera, Physical ageing of organic coatings. Prog. Org. Coat. 47, 61–76 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9440(03)00037-710.1016/S0300-9440(03)00037-7 ↗
34. S. Lüftl, V.P.M., S. Chandran, eds., Polyoxymethylene Handbook (Wiley, Hoboken, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914458.10.1002/9781118914458 ↗
35. P. Hu, T. Shang, M. Jiang, M. Chen, Investigation of the thermal decomposition properties of polyoxymethylene. J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. Mater. Sci. Ed. 22, 171–173 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11595-005-1171-610.1007/s11595-005-1171-6 ↗
36. B. Fayolle, J. Verdu, D. Piccoz, A. Dahoun, J.M. Hiver, C. G’sell, Thermooxidative aging of polyoxymethylene, part 2: embrittlement mechanisms. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 111, 469–475 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/app.2912610.1002/app.29126 ↗
37. B. Fayolle, J. Verdu, M. Bastard, D. Piccoz, Thermooxidative ageing of polyoxymethylene, part 1: chemical aspects. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 107, 1783–1792 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/app.2664810.1002/app.26648 ↗
38. J.M. Hutchinson, Physical aging of polymers, in Prog. Polym. Sci. (Springer, Dordrecht, 1995), pp. 703–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/0079-6700(94)00001-I10.1016/0079-6700(94)00001-I ↗
39. M. Celina, E. Linde, D. Brunson, A. Quintana, N. Giron, Overview of accelerated aging and polymer degradation kinetics for combined radiation-thermal environments. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 166, 353–378 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2019.06.00710.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2019.06.007 ↗
40. Y. Shu, L. Ye, T. Yang, Study on the long-term thermal-oxidative aging behavior of polyamide 6. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 110, 945–957 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/app.2864710.1002/app.28647 ↗
41. K. Tashiro, Molecular dynamics calculation to clarify the relationship between structure and mechanical properties of polymer crystals: the case of orthorhombic polyethylene. Comput. Theor. Polym. Sci. 11, 357–374 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1089-3156(01)00005-810.1016/S1089-3156(01)00005-8 ↗
42. B. Fayolle, E. Richaud, X. Colin, J. Verdu, Review: degradation-induced embrittlement in semi-crystalline polymers having their amorphous phase in rubbery state. J. Mater. Sci. 43, 6999–7012 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-008-3005-310.1007/s10853-008-3005-3 ↗
43. A.S.D. Shackleford, R.J. Williams, R. Brown, J.R. Wingham, C. Majewski, Degradation of laser sintered polyamide 12 parts due to accelerated exposure to ultraviolet radiation. Addit. Manuf. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.10213210.1016/j.addma.2021.102132 ↗
44. M.S. Rahman, U. Shaislamov, J.K. Yang, J.K. Kim, Y.H. Yu, S. Choi, H.J. Lee, Effects of electron beam irradiation on tribological and physico-chemical properties of Polyoxymethylene copolymer (POM-C). Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 387, 54–62 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2016.10.00110.1016/j.nimb.2016.10.001 ↗
45. K. Król-Morkisz, E. Karaś, T.M. Majka, K. Pielichowski, K. Pielichowska, Thermal stabilization of polyoxymethylene by PEG-functionalized hydroxyapatite: examining the effects of reduced formaldehyde release and enhanced bioactivity. Adv. Polym. Technol. 2019, 1–17 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/972863710.1155/2019/9728637 ↗
46. Y. Li, T. Zhou, Z. Chen, J. Hui, L. Li, A. Zhang, Non-isothermal crystallization process of polyoxymethylene studied by two-dimensional correlation infrared spectroscopy. Polymer (Guildf). 52, 2059–2069 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2011.03.00710.1016/j.polymer.2011.03.007 ↗
47. J.R.C. Dizon, A.H. Espera, Q. Chen, R.C. Advincula, Mechanical characterization of 3D-printed polymers. Addit. Manuf. 20, 44–67 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.12.00210.1016/j.addma.2017.12.002 ↗
48. V.D. Sagias, K.I. Giannakopoulos, C. Stergiou, Mechanical properties of 3D printed polymer specimens. Procedia Struct. Integr. 10, 85–90 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2018.09.01310.1016/j.prostr.2018.09.013 ↗