4.7 Article

Mechanical properties of 3D printed ceramic cellular materials with triply periodic minimal surface architectures

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 1481-1489

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2020.09.062

关键词

Ceramics; DLP; Triply periodic minimal surfaces; Young's modulus

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFB1103500, 2017YFB1103502]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study implemented four types of triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) via digital light processing technology to create cellular ceramics and experimentally investigated their mechanical properties. Results showed that compressive strength of TPMS structures increases with relative density, with s14 structure exhibiting the highest compressive strength among the tested structures. The porosity dependence of Young's modulus of sintered zirconia TPMS suggests a better prediction using the Pabst-Gregorova exponential relation compared to the classical Gibson-Ashby model.
In this study, four types of triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) were implemented to create cellular ceramics via digital light processing (DLP) technology, namely p-cell, gyroid, IWP and s14. The mechanical properties of these TPMS structures were investigated experimentally. Results showed that compressive strength of TPMS structures increases with relative density. IWP and s14 structures exhibit similar mechanical response under stress. In general, all TPMS structures can sustain >2% strain without failure and the compressive strength followed the order of s14 > IWP > gyroid >p-cell. The s14 structure can reach a high compressive strength of 105 MPa at a structural density of 30.5 % while gyroid structure can provide a compressive strength of 5.6 MPa at a very low structural density of 6.7 %. The porosity dependence of Young's modulus of sintered zirconia TPMS demonstrated that the Pabst-Gregorova exponential relation can provide a better prediction than the classical Gibson-Ashby model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据