4.7 Article

Dimensional considerations on the mechanical properties of 3D printed polymer parts

Journal

POLYMER TESTING
Volume 90, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106656

Keywords

3D printing; 3D printed material characterisation; Infill percentage; PLA; TPU; ISO standard; Dimensional variation

Funding

  1. School of Science and Technology at Nottingham Trent University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Additive manufacturing offers a useful and accessible tool for prototyping and manufacturing small volume functional parts. Polylactic acid (PLA) and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) are amongst the most commonly used materials. Characterising 3D printed PLA and TPU is potentially important for both designing and finite element modelling of functional parts. This work explores the mechanical properties of additively manufactured PLA/TPU specimens with consideration to design parameters including size, and infill percentage. PLA/TPU specimens are 3D-printed in selected ISO standard geometries with 20%, 60%, 100% infill percentage. Tensile and compression test results suggest that traditional ISO testing standards might be insufficient in characterising 3D printed materials for finite element modelling or application purposes. Infill percentage in combination to design size, may significantly affect the mechanical performance of 3D printed parts. Dimensional variation may cause inhomogeneity in mechanical properties between large and small cross section areas of the same part. The effect was reduced in small cross section parts where reducing the nominal infill had less effect on the resulting specimens. The results suggest that for 3D printed functional parts with significant dimensional differences between sections, the material properties are not necessarily homogeneous. This consideration may be significant for designers using 3D printing for applications, which include mechanical loading.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available