Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 53, Issue 9, pp 6819–6830 | Cite as

Piezoelectric behavior of three-dimensionally printed acrylate polymer without filler or poling

  • Patatri Chakraborty
  • Chi Zhou
  • D. D. L. Chung
Energy materials


We report the piezoelectric behavior of three-dimensionally layer-by-layer printed (bottom-up stereolithography, 21–46-µm layer thickness) polymer without filler or poling, using unmodified ultraviolet-curable resins (acrylate ester for Resin 1, and methacrylated monomers/oligomers for Resin 2) that are not known to be piezoelectric. The smaller is the layer thickness, the greater is the shear stress in printing, the more is the molecular alignment, the higher is the out-of-plane electric permittivity, and the stronger is the out-of-plane direct piezoelectric effect, as shown by the electric field output decreasing reversibly and the capacitance increasing reversibly upon out-of-plane compression (stress ≥ 0.3 kPa). The piezoelectric effect is not merely due to the applied stress increasing the permittivity. The decrease in the electric field output is quite linear up to a stress of ~ 33 kPa. Decrease in the layer thickness from 46 to 26 µm increases the relative permittivity from 5.3 to 6.1 and increases the piezoelectric coupling coefficient d from 0.13 to 0.24 pC/N. Resin 2 gives a higher d than Resin 1 (0.43 vs. 0.24 pC/N), probably due to the higher viscosity and consequent higher shear stress during printing. The fractional change in capacitance due to the applied stress increases with decreasing layer thickness, is greater for Resin 2 than Resin 1, and increases with decreasing applied electric field, which causes a converse piezoelectric effect. The capacitance increases with increasing applied electric field used to measure the capacitance. The fractional change in capacitance due to the applied electric field decreases with increasing stress.


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Lee J, An J, Chua CK (2017) Fundamentals and applications of 3D printing for novel materials. Appl Mater Today 7:120–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    MacDonald E, Wicker R (2016) Multiprocess 3D printing for increasing component functionality. Science 353(6307):aaf2093-1–aaf2093-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mondschein RJ, Kanitkar A, Williams CB, Verbridge SS, Long TE (2017) Polymer structure-property requirements for stereolithographic 3D printing of soft tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomaterials 140:170–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jeong CG, Atala A (2015) 3D printing and biofabrication for load bearing tissue engineering. Adv Exp Med Biol 881:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ratheesh G, Venugopal JR, Chinappan A, Ezhilarasu H, Sadiq A, Ramakrishna S (2017) 3D fabrication of polymeric scaffolds for regenerative therapy. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 3(7):1175–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Low Z, Chua YT, Ray BM, Mattia D, Metcalfe IS, Patterson DA (2017) Perspective on 3D printing of separation membranes and comparison to related unconventional fabrication techniques. J Membr Sci 523:596–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim K, Zhu W, Qu X, Aaronson C, McCall WR, Chen S, Sirbuly DJ (2014) 3D optical printing of piezoelectric nanoparticle-polymer composite materials. ACS Nano 8(10):9799–9806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim H, Torres F, Villagran D, Stewart C, Lin Y, Tseng TB (2017) 3D printing of BaTiO3/PVDF composites with electric in situ poling for pressure sensor applications. Macromol Mater Eng 302:1700229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen Z, Song X, Lei L, Chen X, Fei C, Chiu CT, Qian X, Ma T, Yang Y, Shung K, Chen Y, Zhou Q (2016) 3D printing of piezoelectric element for energy focusing and ultrasonic sensing. Nano Energy 27:78–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Song X, Chen Z, Lei L, Shung K, Zhou Q, Chen Y (2017) Piezoelectric component fabrication using projection-based stereolithography of barium titanate ceramic suspensions. Rapid Prototyp J 23(1):44–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bodkhe S, Turcot G, Gosselin FP, Therriault D (2017) One-step solvent evaporation-assisted 3D printing of piezoelectric pvdf nanocomposite structures. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9:20833–20842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chabok H, Zhou C, Chen Y, Eskandarinazhad A, Zhou Q, Shung K (2012) Proceedings of ASME 2012 international symposium on flexible automation 2012, ISFA2012-7119Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim H, Torres F, Wu Y, Villagran D, Lin Y, Tseng T (2017) Integrated 3D printing and corona poling process of PVDF piezoelectric films for pressure sensor application. Smart Mater Struct 26:085027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee C, Tarbutton JA (2014) Electric poling-assisted additive manufacturing process for PVDF polymerbased piezoelectric device application. Smart Mater Struct 23:095044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ramadan KS, Sameoto D, Evoy S (2014) A review of piezoelectric polymers as functional materials for electromechanical transducers. Smart Mater Struct 23(3):033001/1–033001/26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang Q, Cheng Z, Bharti V, Xu T, Xu HS, Mai TX, Gross SJ (2000) Piezoelectric and electrostrictive polymeric actuator materials. In: Proceedings of SPIE—international society for optical engineering (electroactive polymer actuators and devices (EAPAD)), vol 3987, pp 34–50Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blaeser A, Duarte C, Daniela F, Puster U, Richtering W, Stevens MM, Fischer H (2016) Controlling shear stress in 3D bioprinting is a key factor to balance printing resolution and stem cell integrity. Adv Healthc Mater 5(3):326–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gundrati NB, Chakraborty P, Zhou C, Chung DDL (2018) Effects of printing conditions on the molecular alignment of three-dimensionally printed polymer. Compos B 134:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chakraborty P, Gundrati NB, Zhou C, Chung DDL (2017) Effect of stress on the capacitance and electric permittivity of three-dimensionally printed polymer, with relevance to capacitance-based stress monitoring. Sens Actuators A 263C:380–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bootsma K, Fitzgerald MM, Free B, Dimbath E, Conjerti J, Reese G, Sparks JL (2017) 3D printing of an interpenetrating network hydrogel material with tunable viscoelastic properties. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 70:84–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vitale A, Cabral JT (2016) Frontal conversion and uniformity in 3D printing by photopolymerisation. Materials 9(9):760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Acrylic (Polymerization of Acrylic Esters). Viewed 22 April 2017
  23. 23.
    Chung DDL (2010) Functional materials. World scientific, chapter 3Google Scholar
  24. 24.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Composite Materials Research Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations