PEEK filament characteristics before and after extrusion within fused filament fabrication process
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The heating and extrusion process in fused filament fabrication (FFF) is significantly shorter than the conventional extrusion process where longer heating times and significant pressure are applied. For this reason, it is important to understand whether the crystal history of the feedstock is fully erased through the FFF process and whether the FFF process can be tailored further by engineering the crystallization of the feedstock filaments. In this context, a methodology for evaluating the influence of morphology and mechanical properties on different feedstock and extruded filaments is proposed. Filaments with three different PEEK 450G crystalline structures (standard crystallinity, drawn filament and amorphous filament) were selected and evaluated, before and after free extrusion. The resulting morphology, crystallinity and mechanical properties of the extruded filaments were compared against the feedstock properties. X-ray diffraction (XRD), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), differential and fast scanning calorimetry (DSC/FDSC) and tensile test were the techniques used to evaluate the materials. The results showed clear differences in the properties of the feedstock materials, while the analysis of the extruded filaments points to a homogenization of the resulting material producing mostly similar mechanical properties. However, the use of the drawn filament highlighted a statistically significant improvement in crystallinity and mechanical performance, especially in strain values. This conclusion suggests the innovative possibility of improving the quality of manufactured parts by tailoring the microstructure of the feedstock material used in the FFF process. Graphical abstract
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Injection Molding Process and Properties · Polymer crystallization and properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (65)
Show source-provided references
1. Popescu D, Zapciu A, Amza C et al (2018) FDM process parameters influence over the mechanical properties of polymer specimens: a review. Polym Test 69:157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.02010.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.020 ↗
2. Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL (2016) Mathematical modeling and FDM process parameters optimization using response surface methodology based on Q-optimal design. Appl Math Model 40:10052–10073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.06.05510.1016/j.apm.2016.06.055 ↗
3. Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL (2017) Process parameter optimization of viscoelastic properties of FDM manufactured parts using response surface methodology. Mater Today Proc 4:8250–8259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.07.16710.1016/j.matpr.2017.07.167 ↗
4. Raut S, Jatti VS, Khedkar NK, Singh TP (2014) Investigation of the effect of built orientation on mechanical properties and total cost of FDM parts. Procedia Mater Sci 6:1625–1630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mspro.2014.07.14610.1016/j.mspro.2014.07.146 ↗
5. Ceretti E, Ginestra P, Neto PI et al (2017) Multi-layered scaffolds production via Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) using an open source 3D printer: process parameters optimization for dimensional accuracy and design reproducibility. Procedia CIRP 65:13–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.04.04210.1016/j.procir.2017.04.042 ↗
6. De Ciurana J, Serenó L, Vallès È (2013) Selecting process parameters in RepRap additive manufacturing system for PLA scaffolds manufacture. Procedia CIRP 5:152–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.01.03110.1016/j.procir.2013.01.031 ↗
7. Khabia S, Jain KK (2019) Comparison of mechanical properties of components 3D printed from different brand ABS filament on different FDM printers. Mater Today Proc 26:2907–2914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.60010.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.600 ↗
8. Gebisa AW, Lemu HG (2019) Influence of 3D printing FDM process parameters on tensile property of ULTEM 9085. Procedia Manuf 30:331–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.02.04710.1016/j.promfg.2019.02.047 ↗
9. Bellini A, Guceri S, Bertoldi M (2004) Liquefier dynamics in fused deposition. J Manuf Sci Eng 126:237. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.168837710.1115/1.1688377 ↗
10. Sajan N, John TD, Sivadasan M, Singh NK (2018) An investigation on circularity error of components processed on Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM). Mater Today Proc 5:1327–1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.11.21810.1016/j.matpr.2017.11.218 ↗
11. Yin J, Lu C, Fu J et al (2018) Interfacial bonding during multi-material fused deposition modeling (FDM) process due to inter-molecular diffusion. Mater Des 150:104–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.04.02910.1016/j.matdes.2018.04.029 ↗
12. Mishra SB, Abhishek K, Satapathy MP, Mahapatra SS (2017) Parametric appraisal of compressive strength of FDM build parts. Mater Today Proc 4:9456–9460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.06.20310.1016/j.matpr.2017.06.203 ↗
13. Mohan N, Senthil P, Vinodh S, Jayanth N (2017) A review on composite materials and process parameters optimisation for the fused deposition modelling process. Virtual Phys Prototyp 12:47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2016.127449010.1080/17452759.2016.1274490 ↗
14. Cain P (2019) Selecting the optimal shell and infill parameters for FDM 3D Printing. https://www.3dhubs.com/knowledge-base/selecting-optimal-shell-and-infill-parameters-fdm-3d-printing. Accessed 10 Feb 2019
15. Cain P (2019) The impact of layer height on a 3D Print. https://www.3dhubs.com/knowledge-base/impact-layer-height-3d-print. Accessed 13 February 2019
16. Tran N, Nguyen V, Ngo A, Nguyen V (2017) Study on the effect of fused deposition modeling (FDM) process parameters on the printed part quality. Int J Eng Res Appl 7:71–77. https://doi.org/10.9790/9622-071202717710.9790/9622-0712027177 ↗
17. El Magri A, El Mabrouk K, Vaudreuil S et al (2020) Optimization of printing parameters for improvement of mechanical and thermal performances of 3D printed poly(ether ether ketone) parts. J Appl Polym Sci 137:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.4908710.1002/app.49087 ↗
18. El Magri A, Vanaei S, Vaudreuil S (2021) An overview on the influence of process parameters through the characteristic of 3D-printed PEEK and PEI parts. High Perform Polym. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954008321100996110.1177/09540083211009961 ↗
19. Wittbrodt B, Pearce JM (2015) The effects of PLA color on material properties of 3-D printed components. Addit Manuf 8:110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2015.09.00610.1016/j.addma.2015.09.006 ↗
20. Pires FQ, Alves-Silva I, Pinho LAG et al (2020) Predictive models of FDM 3D printing using experimental design based on pharmaceutical requirements for tablet production. Int J Pharm 588:119728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2020.11972810.1016/j.ijpharm.2020.119728 ↗
21. Srinivasan R, Pridhar T, Ramprasath LS et al (2020) Prediction of tensile strength in FDM printed ABS parts using response surface methodology (RSM). Mater Today Proc 27:1827–1832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.78810.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.788 ↗
22. de León AS, Domínguez-Calvo A, Molina SI (2019) Materials with enhanced adhesive properties based on acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS)/thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) blends for fused filament fabrication (FFF). Mater Des 182:108044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.10804410.1016/j.matdes.2019.108044 ↗
23. Khan MS, Mishra SB (2019) Minimizing surface roughness of ABS-FDM build parts: an experimental approach. Mater Today Proc 26:1557–1566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.32010.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.320 ↗
24. Corapi D, Morettini G, Pascoletti G, Zitelli C (2019) Characterization of a polylactic acid (PLA) produced by Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) technology. Procedia Struct Integr 24:289–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2020.02.02610.1016/j.prostr.2020.02.026 ↗
25. Geng P, Zhao J, Wu W et al (2019) Effects of extrusion speed and printing speed on the 3D printing stability of extruded PEEK filament. J Manuf Process 37:266–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2018.11.02310.1016/j.jmapro.2018.11.023 ↗
26. 3D Matter (2019) FDM 3D Printing materials compared. https://www.3dhubs.com/knowledge-base/fdm-3d-printing-materials-compared. Accessed 17 Jun 2019
27. Azimi P, Zhao D, Pouzet C et al (2016) Emissions of ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds from commercially available desktop three-dimensional printers with multiple filaments. Environ Sci Technol 50:1260–1268. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b0498310.1021/acs.est.5b04983 ↗
28. Kumar MA, Khan MS, Mishra SB (2020) Effect of machine parameters on strength and hardness of FDM printed carbon fiber reinforced PETG thermoplastics. Mater Today Proc 27:975–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.29110.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.291 ↗
29. Sathish Kumar K, Soundararajan R, Shanthosh G et al (2020) Augmenting effect of infill density and annealing on mechanical properties of PETG and CFPETG composites fabricated by FDM. Mater Today Proc, pp 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.10.07810.1016/j.matpr.2020.10.078 ↗
30. Ramesh M, Panneerselvam K (2020) Mechanical investigation and optimization of parameter selection for Nylon material processed by FDM. Mater Today Proc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.69710.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.697 ↗
31. Wang S, Ma Y, Deng Z et al (2020) Effects of fused deposition modeling process parameters on tensile, dynamic mechanical properties of 3D printed polylactic acid materials. Polym Test 86:106483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.10648310.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106483 ↗
32. Puigoriol-Forcada JM, Alsina A, Salazar-Martín AG et al (2018) Flexural fatigue properties of polycarbonate fused-deposition modelling specimens. Mater Des 155:414–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.06.01810.1016/j.matdes.2018.06.018 ↗
33. Rinaldi M, Ghidini T, Cecchini F et al (2018) Additive layer manufacturing of poly (ether ether ketone) via FDM. Compos Part B Eng 145:162–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.03.02910.1016/j.compositesb.2018.03.029 ↗
34. Tseng JW, Liu CY, Yen YK et al (2018) Screw extrusion-based additive manufacturing of PEEK. Mater Des 140:209–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.03210.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.032 ↗
35. DI Stepashkin C, Senatov FS et al (2018) 3D-printed PEEK-carbon fiber (CF) composites: structure and thermal properties. Compos Sci Technol 164:319–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.05.03210.1016/j.compscitech.2018.05.032 ↗
36. Arif MF, Kumar S, Varadarajan KM, Cantwell WJ (2018) Performance of biocompatible PEEK processed by fused deposition additive manufacturing. Mater Des 146:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.03.01510.1016/j.matdes.2018.03.015 ↗
37. Berretta S (2015) Poly Ether Ether Ketone (PEEK) polymers for High Temperature Laser Sintering (HT-LS) Doctoral. University of Exeter10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2015.04.003 ↗
38. Doumeng M, Ferry F, Delbe K et al (2019) Evolution of crystallinity of PEEK and glass fibre reinforced PEEK under tribological conditions using Raman spectroscopy. Wear 426–427:1040–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.12.07810.1016/j.wear.2018.12.078 ↗
39. Muthukumar M (2016) Communication: theory of melt-memory in polymer crystallization. J Chem Phys 145. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.495958310.1063/1.4959583 ↗
40. Mamun A, Umemoto S, Okui N, Ishihara N (2007) Self-seeding effect on primary nucleation of isotactic polystyrene. Macromolecules 40:6296–6303. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma070963j10.1021/ma070963j ↗
41. Supaphol P, Spruiell JE (2000) Crystalline memory effects in isothermal crystallization of syndiotactic polypropylene. J Appl Polym Sci 75:337–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(20000118)75:3%3c337::AID-APP1%3e3.0.CO;2-410.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(20000118)75:3<337::AID-APP1>3.0.CO;2-4 ↗
42. Erukhimovich I, de la Cruz MO (2004) Phase equilibria and charge fractionation in polydisperse polyelectrolyte solutions. J Polymer Sci, pp 1738–1750. https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.2130010.1002/polb.21300 ↗
43. Tlegenov Y, Wong YS, Hong GS (2017) A dynamic model for nozzle clog monitoring in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyp J 23:391–400. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-04-2016-005410.1108/RPJ-04-2016-0054 ↗
44. Srivastava M, Maheshwari S, Kundra TK (2015) Virtual modelling and simulation of functionally graded material component using FDM technique. Mater Today Proc 2:3471–3480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2015.07.32310.1016/j.matpr.2015.07.323 ↗
45. Victrex (2019) Victrex PEEK 450g
46. Wang P, Zou B, Xiao H et al (2019) Effects of printing parameters of fused deposition modeling on mechanical properties, surface quality, and microstructure of PEEK. J Mater Process Tech 271:62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.03.01610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.03.016 ↗
47. Duddleston LJL, Woznick K, Koch C, et al (2017) Extrudate mass flow rate analysis in Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF): a cursory investigation of the effects of printer parameters. In: Annu Tech Conf—NTEC, Conf Proc 2017-May, pp 43–48
48. Blundell DJ, Osborn BN (1983) The morphology of poly(aryl-ether-ether-ketone). Polymer (Guildf) 24:953–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-3861(83)90144-110.1016/0032-3861(83)90144-1 ↗
49. Sun Q, Rizvi GM, Bellehumeur CT, Gu P (2008) Effect of processing conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer filaments. Rapid Prototyp J 14:72–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/1355254081086202810.1108/13552540810862028 ↗
50. Tardif X, Pignon B, Boyard N et al (2014) Experimental study of crystallization of PolyEtherEtherKetone (PEEK) over a large temperature range using a nano-calorimeter. Polym Test 36:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2014.03.01310.1016/j.polymertesting.2014.03.013 ↗
51. Wang Y, Chen B, Evans K, Ghita O (2018) Enhanced ductility of PEEK thin film with self assembled fibre like crystals. Sci Rep 8:1314. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19537-110.1038/s41598-018-19537-1 ↗
52. Wang Y, Chen B, Evans KE et al (2016) Novel fibre-like crystals in thin films of Poly Ether Ether Ketone (PEEK). Mater Lett 184:112–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.08.02410.1016/j.matlet.2016.08.024 ↗
53. Ashby MF, Jones DRH (1991) Jones Materiaux: 2. mmicrostructures et mise en oeuvre, Dunod
54. Northolt MG, Decker P den, Picken SJ, et al (2005) The tensile strength of polymer fibres fibre modulus. In: Advances in Polymer Science book series (POLYMER, volume 178). pp 1–10810.1007/b104207 ↗
55. Gupta VB (1991) Nature of crystals and their influence on fibre properties. Indian J Fibre Text Res 16:100–115
56. Nogales A, Ezquerra TA, Denchev Z, Baltá-Calleja FJ (2001) Induction time for cold crystallization in semi-rigid polymers: PEN and PEEK. Polymer (Guildf) 42:5711–5715. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(00)00929-010.1016/S0032-3861(00)00929-0 ↗
57. Liu T, Mo Z, Wang S, Zhang H (1997) Nonisothermal melt and cold crystallization kinetics of poly(aryl ether ether ketone ketone). Polym Eng Sci 37:568–575. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.1170010.1002/pen.11700 ↗
58. Kadiyala AK, Bijwe J, Kalappa P (2018) Investigations on influence of nano and micron sized particles of SiC on performance properties of PEEK coatings. Surf Coatings Technol 334:124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2017.11.02610.1016/j.surfcoat.2017.11.026 ↗
59. Doumeng M, Makhlouf L, Berthet F et al (2021) A comparative study of the crystallinity of polyetheretherketone by using density, DSC, XRD, and Raman spectroscopy techniques. Polym Test, 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.10687810.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106878 ↗
60. Karacan I (2015) X-ray Diffraction Studies of Poly (aryl ether ether ketone) Fibers with different degrees of crystallinity and orientation. Fibers Polym 6:206–2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0287564410.1007/BF02875644 ↗
61. Blundell DJ (1987) On the interpretation of multiple melting peaks in poly(ether ether ketone). Polymer (Guildf) 28:2248–2251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-3861(87)90382-X10.1016/0032-3861(87)90382-X ↗
62. Cebe P (1988) Application of the Parallel Avrami Model to Crystallization of Poly( Etheretherketone). 2810.1002/pen.760281809 ↗
63. Bassett DC, Olley RH, Al Raheil IAM (1988) On crystallization phenomena in PEEK. Polymer (Guildf) 29:1745–1754. https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-3861(88)90386-210.1016/0032-3861(88)90386-2 ↗
64. Cheng SZD, Cao MY, Wunderlich B (1986) Glass transition and melting behavior of Poly(oxy-1,4-phenyleneoxy-1,4-phenylenecarbonyl-1,4-phenylene). Macromolecules 19:1868–1876. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00181a04010.1021/ma00181a040 ↗
65. Lee Y, Lin JS (1989) On the Double-melting behavior of poly (ether ether ketone). Macromolecules 1760:1756–176010.1021/ma00194a043 ↗