Advertisement

Mechanical Testing of 3D Printed Materials

  • Nicole WagnerEmail author
  • Dika Handayani
  • Victor Okhuysen
  • Kyle Garibaldi
  • Michael Seitz
Conference paper
  • 628 Downloads
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)

Abstract

Fused deposition modeling (FDM) has been a rapidly growing 3D printing technology for polymer-based products. Additive manufacturing technologies have seen an expansion into printing various polymers, including acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and polylactic acid (PLA) on various printers and print conditions. In this study, we evaluate the tensile strength characteristics of FDM printed ABS and PLA parts. Specimens with a dog bone geometry were printed on a FlashForge Creator Pro 3D printer, using the ASTM D638 standard test method. Along with the two types of material, build orientation, wall thickness, infill percentage, and infill geometry were varied in this study. An Instron tensile testing machine was used to evaluate the stress–strain characteristics of each specimen and determine the tensile strength of the parts. It was found that the material type and wall thickness had the greatest effects on the tensile strength of 3D printed parts. In addition, the authors identified an optimal printing parameter to maximize the strength, but also to minimize the printing time and amount of material used to make each part.

Keywords

3D printing Fused deposition modeling Design of experiments Tensile test 

References

  1. 1.
    Bhalodi D, Zalavadiya K, Gurrala PK (2019) Influence of temperature on polymer parts manufactured by fused deposition modeling process. J Braz Soc 41(113):1–11Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dawoud M, Taha I, Ebeid SJ (2016) Mechanical behavior of ABS: an experimental study using FDM and injection moulding techniques. J Manuf Process 21:39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Casavola C, Cazzato A, Moramarco V, Pappalettare C (2016) Orthotropic mechanical properties of fused deposition modelling parts described by classical laminate theory. Mater Des 90:453–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stephens B, Azimi P, El Orch Z, Ramos T (2013) Ultrafine particle emissions from desktop 3D printers. Atmos Environ 79:334–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Raut S, Jatti VKS, Khedkar NK, Singh TP (2014) Investigation of the effect of built orientation on mechanical properties and total cost of FDM parts. Proc Mater Sci 6:1625–1630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vega V, Clements J, Lam T, Abad A, Fritz B, Ula N, Es-Said OS (2011) The effect of layer orientation on the mechanical properties and microstructure of a polymer. J Mater Eng Perform 20(6):978–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ebel E, Sinnemann T (2014) Fabrication of FDM 3D objects with ABS and PLA and determination of their mechanical properties. RTejournal. https://www.rtejournal.de/ausgabe11/3872. Accessed 9 Sept 2019
  8. 8.
    Alvarez KL, Lagos RF, Aizpun M (2016) Investigating the influence of infill percentage on the mechanical properties of fused deposition modelled ABS parts. Ing Invest 36(3):110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ASTM International (2004) Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics. Annual Book of ASTM StandardsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole Wagner
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dika Handayani
    • 1
  • Victor Okhuysen
    • 1
  • Kyle Garibaldi
    • 1
  • Michael Seitz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Manufacturing EngineeringCal Poly PomonaPomonaUSA

Personalised recommendations