journal article·2020-11

3D-printed thermoset syntactic foams with tailorable mechanical performance

Nashat Nawafleh, William Wright, Nader Dariavach, Emrah Celik

Journal of Materials Science· Volume 55· Issue 33
Publisher page

Abstract

3D-printed syntactic foams have advantages over traditionally fabricated foams such as design flexibility, in-field fabrication and low investment cost. Current 3D printing methods developed for thermoplastic syntactic foams suffer from unavoidable porosity and low mechanical performance. In this study, we overcame these limitations by fabricating thermoset-based syntactic foams using direct-write 3D printing which allowed us to fabricate buoyant syntactic foams with unprecedented strength (> 100 MPa) and modulus (1.2 GPa). This study also showed that the mechanical performance of these materials can be tailored by reinforcing the thermoset foams via milled carbon fibers. 3D-printed thermoset-based syntactic foams with high scalability and tailored mechanical performance have great potential to find immediate applications where weight reduction, mechanical performance and component complexity are desired.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Polymer composites and self-healing · Cellular and Composite Structures · Pickering emulsions and particle stabilization

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (23)

Show source-provided references
1. Spowart JE, Gupta N, Lehmhus D (2018) 3D printing of composites and complex materials. JOM 70(3):272–27410.1007/s11837-018-2742-2 ↗
2. Peroni L et al (2012) Dynamic mechanical behavior of syntactic iron foams with glass microspheres. Mater Sci Eng A 552:364–37510.1016/j.msea.2012.05.053 ↗
3. Santa Maria JA et al (2014) Effect of hollow sphere size and size distribution on the quasi-static and high strain rate compressive properties of Al–A380–Al2O3 syntactic foams. J Mater Sci 49(3):1267–1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7810-y10.1007/s10853-013-7810-y ↗
4. Avalle M et al (2009) AlSi7 metallic foams–aspects of material modelling for crash analysis. Int J Crashworthiness 14(3):269–28510.1080/13588260802445836 ↗
5. Dou Z et al (2007) High strain rate compression of cenosphere-pure aluminum syntactic foams. Scr Mater 57(10):945–94810.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.07.024 ↗
6. Singh AK et al (2018) 3D printing of syntactic foams: part 1: development, properties, and recycling potential of filaments. JOM 70(3):303–30910.1007/s11837-017-2734-7 ↗
7. Singh AK et al (2018) 3D printing of syntactic foams: part 2: specimen printing and mechanical property characterization. JOM 70(3):310–31410.1007/s11837-017-2731-x ↗
8. Singh AK et al (2019) 3D printing of three-phase syntactic foams containing glass microballoons and air pores. JOM 71(4):1520–152710.1007/s11837-019-03355-5 ↗
9. Patil B, Bharath-Kumar BR, Doddamani M (2019) Compressive behavior of fly ash based 3D printed syntactic foam composite. Mater Lett 254:246–24910.1016/j.matlet.2019.07.080 ↗
10. Peroni L et al (2014) Investigation of the mechanical behaviour of AISI 316L stainless steel syntactic foams at different strain-rates. Compos B Eng 66:430–44210.1016/j.compositesb.2014.06.001 ↗
11. Gupta N, Nagorny R (2006) Tensile properties of glass microballoon-epoxy resin syntactic foams. J Appl Polym Sci 102(2):1254–126110.1002/app.23548 ↗
12. Yousaf Z et al (2019) Compression properties of polymeric syntactic foam composites under cyclic loading. Preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.00397
13. Kumar BB et al (2016) Processing of cenosphere/HDPE syntactic foams using an industrial scale polymer injection molding machine. Mater Des 92:414–42310.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.052 ↗
14. Nawafleh N et al (2019) Additive manufacturing of Kevlar reinforced epoxy composites. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2019 IMECE conference and exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah10.1115/IMECE2019-12215 ↗
15. Tagliavia G, Porfiri M, Gupta N (2010) Analysis of flexural properties of hollow-particle filled composites. Compos B Eng 41(1):86–9310.1016/j.compositesb.2009.03.004 ↗
16. Zhong W et al (2001) Short fiber reinforced composites for fused deposition modeling. Mater Sci Eng A 301(2):125–13010.1016/S0921-5093(00)01810-4 ↗
17. Pierson HA et al (2019) Mechanical properties of printed epoxy–carbon fiber composites. Exp Mech 59(6):843–85710.1007/s11340-019-00498-z ↗
18. Compton BG, Lewis JA (2014) 3D printing: 3D-printing of lightweight cellular composites. Adv Mater 26(34):5930–593510.1002/adma.201401804 ↗
19. Hmeidat NS, Kemp JW, Compton BG (2018) High-strength epoxy nanocomposites for 3D printing. Compos Sci Technol 160:9–2010.1016/j.compscitech.2018.03.008 ↗
20. Nawafleh N, Celik E (2020) Additive manufacturing of short fiber reinforced thermoset composites with unprecedented mechanical performance. Addit Manuf 33:101–109
21. Rizzi E, Papa E, Corigliano A (2000) Mechanical behavior of a syntactic foam: experiments and modeling. Int J Solids Struct 37(40):5773–579410.1016/S0020-7683(99)00264-4 ↗
22. Yu W, Xue H, Qian M (2017) Tensile and compressive properties of epoxy syntactic foams reinforced by short glass fiber. Indian J Eng Mater Sci 24:283–289
23. Fleck NA, Deshpande VS, Ashby MF (2010) Micro-architectured materials: past, present and future. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 466(2121):2495–251610.1098/rspa.2010.0215 ↗