journal article·2019-04-01

Fracture Improvement by Reinforcing the Structure of Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Parts Manufactured by Fused Deposition Modeling

Julien Gardan, Ali Makke, Naman Recho

Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Fused deposition modeling deposits a filament layer by layer and according to a trajectory. Based on stress criterion for filament deposition, this work suggests reproducing the principal directions of the stress in the sample through the control of the filament direction. A number of compact-tension (C-T) specimens have been printed with and without respecting this criterion. The fracture toughness test of these specimens was realized to compare the results. The results show that the suggested criterion leads to an improvement of 30% in the fracture toughness. Digital images correlation has been extensively used to study the local strain field in the specimens. Strain mapping reveals an important change in fracture behavior. The modification of filament direction leads to “ductile-like behavior” in crack extension, which is characterized by a large deformation zone associated with a slow crack growth rate during crack propagation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Cellular and Composite Structures · Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity

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

Affiliations

EPF, Engineering School, Troyes, France.

Institut Charles Delaunay, LASMIS, UTT, UMR CNRS 6281, Troyes, France.

Pascal Institute, Blaise Pascal University, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

References (18)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1080/00207543.2015.111590910.1080/00207543.2015.1115909 ↗
2. Beaman JJ Barlow JW Bourell DL Crawford RH Marcus HL McAlea KP. Solid freeform fabrication: A new direction in manufacturing. Norwell MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997; pp. 25–49.10.1007/978-1-4615-6327-3 ↗
3. 10.1108/1355254021044116610.1108/13552540210441166 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2010.09.00110.1016/j.polymertesting.2010.09.001 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.00910.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.009 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.07.01710.1016/j.compscitech.2009.07.017 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.10.02210.1016/j.compscitech.2009.10.022 ↗
8. 10.1016/S0020-7403(96)00025-210.1016/S0020-7403(96)00025-2 ↗
9. 10.1002/1097-4636(200105)55:2<203::AID-JBM1007>3.0.CO;2-710.1002/1097-4636(200105)55:2<203::AID-JBM1007>3.0.CO;2-7 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.07.02310.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.07.023 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.cad.2016.07.00610.1016/j.cad.2016.07.006 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.09.04510.1016/j.promfg.2015.09.045 ↗
13. 10.1080/16864360.2015.105919210.1080/16864360.2015.1059192 ↗
14. Deppe G, , Koch R. Exploring the influence of an additive manufacturing integration on future MRO processes in aeronautics. Navigation, 2014; 1:2.
15. 10.1016/j.procir.2013.03.09810.1016/j.procir.2013.03.098 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.prostr.2016.06.01910.1016/j.prostr.2016.06.019 ↗
17. ASTM E399-12e3 Standard Test Method for Linear-Elastic Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness KIc of Metallic Materials. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM International 2012.
18. ASTM E1820-17 Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM International.