2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-68024-4_7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanical Characterization of Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) 3D Printed Parts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparatively, FDM is a faster, single-step process, suitable for a wide range of thermoplastics as substrate materials, and requires minimum optimization of printing parameters. 38 Thus, this 3D printing-enabled nanoparticle assembly mechanism needs to be investigated in the FDM 3D printing technique for cost-efficient surface patterning and scalable nanoparticle assembly.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparatively, FDM is a faster, single-step process, suitable for a wide range of thermoplastics as substrate materials, and requires minimum optimization of printing parameters. 38 Thus, this 3D printing-enabled nanoparticle assembly mechanism needs to be investigated in the FDM 3D printing technique for cost-efficient surface patterning and scalable nanoparticle assembly.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Having good mechanical properties such as high strength, biocompatibility, stiffness, and thermoplasticity [32], but lower compressive strength and tending to be brittle, low cost, renewable feedstocks, and easy processability are the other characteristics of PLA. This polymeric material is one of the known materials suitable for fused deposition modeling (FDM) [33] that is the most applicable method in 3D printing of thermoplastic polymers [34]. In contrast, PCL is not only a suitable choice for melt-based extrusion printing due to consisting considerable rheological and viscoelastic properties but also shows excellent stiffness and extended degradation after printing.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is worth mentioning that 3D printing geometrical fidelity for 3D printed PVC can be affected mainly by the sample's geometry when the other printing parameters have been kept constant. [45,48] The sample's geometry determines the peak temperature and temperature distribution inside the sample, directly affecting shape fidelity. Smaller samples with a considerable height are at the risk of losing shape fidelity under the effect of higher peak temperature inside the sample close to the top.…”
Section: Shape Recoverymentioning
confidence: 99%