Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of flexural strength of parts fabricated by vacuum casting with different fillers and fused deposition modeling with different printing angles

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Vacuum casting (VC) is a promising technique used for the production of functional plastic parts due to its fast production of high-quality prototypes. However, the mechanical properties of the fabricated products are affected by the composition of the molding materials. Additive manufacturing (AM) is also widely applied for low-volume prototyping applications. However, the mechanical properties of the fabricated products are affected by both build directions and printing angles. To investigate the difference in flexural strength of parts between vacuum casting and fused deposition modeling, glass fiber (GF) and carbon fiber (CF) are added to the matrix materials of polyurethane (PU) for improving the flexural strength of the molded products and three different printing angles and two build directions were applied in AM process. It was found that the flexure strength of the specimen fabricated by VC is generally greater than that of the specimen fabricated by AM. The highest flexure strength of the specimen fabricated by VC is 141 MPa, whereas the highest flexure strength of the specimen fabricated by FDM is only 102.7 MPa. The addition of short GF to the PU will increase the flexural strength. The flexural strength can be increased by about 41% when the PU is added with 4 wt.% short GF. The flexural strength can be increased by about 4.8% when the PU is added with 1 wt.% long GF. In contrast to above results, the flexural strength will be reduced when the PU is added with more than 2 wt.% long GF. On the contrary, the flexural strength can not be improved when the short CF or long CF is added to the PU. Finally, the flexural strength of the plastic prototype made by VC technology is superior to that of the plastic prototype made by FDM since the mechanical properties of the plastic prototype made by the FDM are affected by the build direction and printing angle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhan SA, Song JT, Ding MH, Guo J, Liu HH (2017) A study of thin-walled ZL105A casting manufactured by vacuum differential pressure casting. Advanced in Engineering Research 135:574–582

    Google Scholar 

  2. Puerta APV, Sanchez DM, Batista M, Salguero J (2018) Criteria selection for a comparative study of functional performance of Fused Deposition Modelling and Vacuum Casting processes. J Manuf Process 35:721–727

  3. Thian SCH, Tang Y, Tan WK, Fuh JYH, Wong YS, Loh HT, Lu L (2008) The manufacture of micromould and microparts by vacuum casting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 38(9–10):944–948

  4. Zhao DY, Huang ZP, Wang MJ, Wang T, Jin Y (2012) Vacuum casting replication of micro-riblets on shark skin for drag-reducing applications. J Mater Process Technol 212(1):198–202

  5. Zhang HG, Hu QX (2016) Study of the filling mechanism and parameter optimization method for vacuum casting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83(5–8):711–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kai CC, Howe CT, Hoe EK (1998) Integrating rapid prototyping and tooling with vacuum casting for connectors. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 14:617–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Xu B, Wei M-Y, Wu X-Y, Fu L-Y, Luo F, Lei J-G (2021) fabrication of micro-groove on the surface of CFRP to enhance the connection strength of composite part. Polymers 13:4039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hornig A, Winkler A, Bauerfeind E, Gude M, Modler N (2021) Delamination behaviour of embedded polymeric sensor and actuator carrier layers in epoxy based CFRP laminates—a study of energy release rates. Polymers 13:3926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Yu Y, Pan Y, Zhou R, Miao X (2021) Effects of water and alkaline solution on durability of carbon-glass hybrid fiber reinforced polymer bars. Polymers 13:3844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rochardjo HSB, Budiyantoro C (2021) Manufacturing and analysis of overmolded hybrid fiber polyamide 6 composite. Polymers 13:3820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hong Y, Goh M (2021) Advances in liquid crystalline epoxy resins for high thermal conductivity. Polymers 13:1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen G, Liu J, Zhang W, Han Y, Zhang D, Li J, Zhang S (2021) Lignin-based phenolic foam reinforced by poplar fiber and isocyanate-terminated polyurethane prepolymer. Polymers 13:1068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nanaki SG, Christodoulou E, Bikiaris ND, Kapourani A, Kontogiannopoulos KN, Vergkizi-Nikolakaki S, Barmpalexis P (2021) Leflunomide sustained skin delivery based on sulfobetaine-modified chitosan nanoparticles embedded in biodegradable polyesters films. Polymers 13:960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kuo CC, Liu HA, Chang CM (2020) Optimization of vacuum casting process parameters to enhance tensile strength of components using design of experiments approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 106:3775–3785

  15. White J (2010) A gas lubrication equation for high Knudsen number flows and striated rough surfaces. J Tribol-Trans ASME 132(2):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ehrmann G, Ehrmann A (2021) Pressure orientation-dependent recovery of 3D-printed PLA objects with varying infill degree. Polymers 13:1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Benkhelladi A, Laouici H, Bouchoucha A (2020) Tensile and flexural properties of polymer composites reinforced by flax, jute and sisal fibres. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 108:895–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dhavalikar P, Shenoi J, Salhadar K, Chwatko M, Rodriguez-Rivera G, Cheshire J, Foudazi R, Cosgriff-Hernandez E (2021) Engineering toolbox for systematic design of polyHIPE architecture. Polymers 13:1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dhimole VK, Serrao P, Cho C (2021) Review and suggestion of failure theories in voids scenario for VARTM processed composite materials. Polymers 13:969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ramanavicius S, Jagminas A, Ramanavicius A (2021) Advances in molecularly imprinted polymers based affinity sensors (review). Polymers 13:974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lalegani Dezaki M, Mohd Ariffin MKA (2020) The effects of combined infill patterns on mechanical properties in FDM process. Polymers 12:2792

  22. Morales MA, Atencio Martinez CL, Maranon A, Hernandez C, Michaud V, Porras A (2021) Development and characterization of rice husk and recycled polypropylene composite filaments for 3D printing. Polymers 13:1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Torres-Alba A, Mercado-Colmenero JM, Caballero-Garcia JDD, Martin-Doñate C (2021) Application of new triple hook-shaped conformal cooling channels for cores and sliders in injection molding to reduce residual stress and warping in complex plastic optical parts. Polymers 13:2944

  24. Golmakani ME, Wiczenbach T, Malikan M, Mahoori SM, Eremeyev VA (2021) Experimental and numerical investigation of tensile and flexural behavior of nanoclay wood-plastic composite. Materials 14:2773

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study received financial support by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan under contract nos. MOST 110–2221-E-131–023 and MOST 109–2637-E-131–004.-

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ming Chi University of Technology, No. 84, Gungjuan Road, 24301, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chil-Chyuan Kuo, Hsueh-An Liu, Zhi-Ming Chang, Cheng-You Yu & Hong-Yi Lian

  2. Research Center for Intelligent Medical Devices, Ming Chi University of Technology, No. 84, Gungjuan Road, 24301, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chil-Chyuan Kuo

Authors
  1. Chil-Chyuan Kuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hsueh-An Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhi-Ming Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cheng-You Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hong-Yi Lian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Chil-Chyuan Kuo: wrote the paper, conceived and designed the analysis, performed the analysis/conceptualization. Hsueh-An Liu, Zhi-Ming Chang, Cheng-You Yu, Hong-Yi Lian: collected the data, contributed data or analysis tools.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chil-Chyuan Kuo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kuo, CC., Liu, HA., Chang, ZM. et al. Comparison of flexural strength of parts fabricated by vacuum casting with different fillers and fused deposition modeling with different printing angles. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 119, 4693–4712 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-08491-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-08491-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation