Evaluation of Surface Roughness of 3D Printed Objects
Source abstract
Abstract
Lower surface roughness is a good quality indicator as it is directly related to mechanical strength, permeability, and aesthetic properties of printed three-dimensional (3D) objects. This study evaluated the effect of nanoclay and laser power on the surface properties of laser-sintered (LS) objects. LS specimens created from polyamide 12 (PA12) and composites were tested for surface roughness on top and bottom surfaces. Scanning electron microscopy with surface roughness tester were used to evaluate the surface morphology like surface roughness, melt-ability, and homogeneity of dispersion of nanoclay in the LS fused polymer matrix. This study’s findings demonstrate the importance of nanoclay as a filler in LS polymer-based 3D objects. Nanoclay particles interact with polymer particles via physical and chemical cross-links. These interactions increase the packing density of particles in 3D objects, which increases their surface smoothness. Thus, this study demonstrated that the addition of nanoclay to the LS polymeric powder with optimized laser power exhibited improved surface properties with an expectation to emerge new applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Manufacturing Process and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Basrah Technical Institute, Southern Technical University, Basrah, Iraq.
Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science, HUN-REN Centre for Energy Research, Konkoly-Thege Miklós Str. 29-33, 1121 Budapest, Hungary.
Department of Materials Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Basrah, Basrah, Iraq.
Doctoral School of Materials Science and Technologies, Óbuda University, Bécsi Str. 96/B, 1030 Budapest, Hungary.
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/polym1416332010.3390/polym14163320 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.addma.2014.09.00310.1016/j.addma.2014.09.003 ↗
3. 10.1007/s40192-019-00146-310.1007/s40192-019-00146-3 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.mattod.2017.07.00110.1016/j.mattod.2017.07.001 ↗
5. 10.1533/9780857097217.110.1533/9780857097217.1 ↗
6. 10.1108/RPJ-01-2019-002110.1108/RPJ-01-2019-0021 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.12510.1016/j.procir.2015.02.125 ↗
8. 10.1080/14658011.2017.141376010.1080/14658011.2017.1413760 ↗
9. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b0007410.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00074 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.cirp.2007.10.00410.1016/j.cirp.2007.10.004 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.aiepr.2021.07.00310.1016/j.aiepr.2021.07.003 ↗
12. 10.1007/s00170-015-6994-510.1007/s00170-015-6994-5 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.11.00110.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.11.001 ↗
14. 10.1557/jmr.2014.13810.1557/jmr.2014.138 ↗
15. 10.1177/095440541244006610.1177/0954405412440066 ↗
16. 10.1590/S1516-1439200700020001910.1590/S1516-14392007000200019 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.07810.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.078 ↗
18. 10.1243/14644207JMDA6510.1243/14644207JMDA65 ↗
19. 10.3139/217.245210.3139/217.2452 ↗
20. 10.1088/2053-1591/abcc5d10.1088/2053-1591/abcc5d ↗
21. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.10.00110.1016/j.addma.2018.10.001 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.11.01610.1016/j.addma.2018.11.016 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.phpro.2014.08.15710.1016/j.phpro.2014.08.157 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2021.10745010.1016/j.polymertesting.2021.107450 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.10609410.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.106094 ↗
26. 10.1108/RPJ-06-2012-005210.1108/RPJ-06-2012-0052 ↗
27. 10.1007/s40964-017-0020-410.1007/s40964-017-0020-4 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2011.04.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2011.04.001 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.05610.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.056 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.09.00710.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.09.007 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.06510.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.065 ↗
32. 10.1007/s11837-017-2408-510.1007/s11837-017-2408-5 ↗
33. 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00060-210.1016/S0924-0136(02)00060-2 ↗
34. 10.1007/s00170-017-0137-010.1007/s00170-017-0137-0 ↗
35. 10.24425/mms.2021.13713310.24425/mms.2021.137133 ↗
36. 10.1007/s12206-014-0637-x10.1007/s12206-014-0637-x ↗
37. 10.1007/s00170-012-4118-z10.1007/s00170-012-4118-z ↗
38. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2016.01.02210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2016.01.022 ↗
39. Eidt W Tatman E-P McCarther J et al. Surface roughness characterization in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing. In: 2019 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium University of Texas at Austin; 2019.
40. 10.1108/RPJ-02-2020-002710.1108/RPJ-02-2020-0027 ↗
41. 10.1002/jrs.277110.1002/jrs.2771 ↗
42. 10.1108/RPJ-08-2012-007010.1108/RPJ-08-2012-0070 ↗
43. 10.1007/s00170-020-06261-210.1007/s00170-020-06261-2 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2004.01.01410.1016/j.polymertesting.2004.01.014 ↗
45. 10.1080/20550324.2016.122187610.1080/20550324.2016.1221876 ↗
46. 10.1002/adma.20190033210.1002/adma.201900332 ↗
47. Perera KY, , Hopkins M, , Jaiswal AK, et al. Nanoclays-containing bio-based packaging materials: Properties, applications, safety, and regulatory issues. J Nanostructure Chem, 2023; 1–23.