4.0 Article

Masked stereolithography of wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramics from novel silicone-based liquid feedstock

Journal

OPEN CERAMICS
Volume 16, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.oceram.2023.100474

Keywords

Stereolithography; Preceramic polymers; Wollastonite-diopside; Emulsion; Liquid feedstock

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study presents a new approach for incorporating CaO and MgO into silicone/acrylate blend for the fabrication of silicate bioceramic scaffolds. The scaffolds with fine crystal distribution were successfully produced by direct firing at 1100 degrees C. The strength-to-density ratio was controlled by modifying the scaffold's topology or adjusting the firing atmosphere.
Silicate bioceramics, including systems based on the simultaneous presence of wollastonite (CaSiO3) and diopside (CaMgSi2O6), are of great interest in bone tissue engineering applications, especially in form of variously shaped three-dimensional scaffolds, as determined by application of several additive manufacturing technologies. In this framework, silicone resins, properly modified with CaO- and MgO-based fillers and blended with photocurable acrylates, are attractive both as precursors and as feedstock for additive manufacturing technologies, including stereolithography. The use of powder fillers, however, may lead to issues with homogeneity or with printing resolution (owing to light scattering). The present paper aims at presenting the first results from a new concept of incorporation of CaO and MgO, relying on salts dispersed in emulsion within a photocurable silicone/acrylate blend. Direct firing at 1100 degrees C of printed scaffolds successfully produced wollastonite-diopside glass-ceramic scaffolds, with a very fine crystal distribution. The strength-to-density was tuned by operating either on the topology of scaffolds or on the firing atmosphere (passing from air to N2).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available