Industrial Strategies and Solutions for 3D Printing E-Book
158,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
INDUSTRIAL STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS FOR 3D PRINTING Multidisciplinary, up-to-date reference on 3D printing from A to Z, including material selection, in-process monitoring, process optimization, and machine learning Industrial Strategies and Solutions for 3D Printing: Applications and Optimization offers a comprehensive overview of the 3D printing process, covering relevant materials, control factors, cutting-edge concepts, and applications across various industries such as architecture, engineering, medical, jewelry, footwear, and industrial design. While many published books and review papers have explored various aspects of 3D printing, they often approach the topic from a specific perspective. This book instead views 3D printing as a multidisciplinary field, extending beyond its rapid growth into emerging areas like data science and artificial intelligence. Written by three highly qualified academics with significant research experience in related fields, Industrial Strategies and Solutions for 3D Printing: Applications and Optimization includes information on: * Role of various 3D printing features in optimization and how machine learning can be used to further enhance optimization processes * Specific optimization techniques including physico-chemical, mechanical, thermal, and rheological characteristics * Steps for transitioning of 3D printing from the laboratory scale to industrial applications in fields such as biology, turbomachinery, automotive, and aerospace * Challenges related to the controlling factors for in the optimization purpose, along with in-process monitoring of 3D printing for optimal results and output Industrial Strategies and Solutions for 3D Printing: Applications and Optimization is a valuable and up-to-date reference on the subject for researchers, scholars, and professionals in biomedical, chemical, and mechanical engineering seeking to understand foundational concepts related to the free-form fabrication approach and how to achieve optimal results.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 507
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright
List of Contributors
Preface
1 3D Printing as a Multidisciplinary Field
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Unveiling the Foundations: Grasping the Essential Features of 3D Printing
1.3 Multiphysics Behavior in 3D Printing Process
1.4 3D Printing Perfection: Unveiling the Power of Optimization
1.5 Future Outlook
1.6 Summary and Outlooks: Pioneering a Multidisciplinary Renaissance
References
2 Potential of 3D Printing from Lab to Industry
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Architecture and Construction Industry
2.3 Healthcare and Medical Industry
2.4 Textile and Fashion Industry
2.5 Food Industry
2.6 Aerospace Industry
2.7 Conclusions and Future Perspectives
References
3 Applicable Materials and Techniques in 3D Printing
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Materials in 3D Printing
3.3 Techniques in 3D Printing
3.4 Summary and Outlook
References
4 Diverse Application of 3D Printing Process
4.1 Introduction
4.2 3D Printing: Transforming Manufacturing Landscapes
4.3 Application of 3D Printing: Different Manufacturing Technology
4.4 Application of 3D Printing: Industrial Sector
4.5 Summary
References
5 Redefining Fabrication: Emerging Challenges in the Evaluation of 3D‐printed Parts
5.1 Introduction: Scope and Definition
5.2 Historical Review
5.3 Technological Challenges in ME‐3DP
5.4 Future Perspective: Potential Roadmaps Toward Solving the Key Challenges of ME‐3DP
5.5 High Building Rate ME‐3DP Process
5.6 Big Area Additive Manufacturing (BAAM) System
5.7 Faster FFF 3D Printing System
5.8 Improvement of Interfacial Bonding and Strength in
Z
‐direction
5.9 Conclusions
References
6 Importance of Multi‐objective Evaluation in 3D Printing
6.1 Introduction
6.2 The Current State of Multi‐Objective Evaluation of 3DP
6.3 Decision Support System for 3DP Under Multi‐Objective Evaluation
6.4 Discussion and Managerial Implication
6.5 Conclusion
References
7 Role of Controlling Factors in 3D Printing
7.1 Introduction
7.2 FFF Process Parameters
7.3 Controlling Factors as a Source of Heat Transfer
7.4 Impact of Controlling Factors on Mechanical Features of 3D‐Printed Parts
7.5 Role of Controlling Factors on Interfacial Bonding of 3D‐Printed Parts
7.6 Role of Controlling Factors on Optimization of 3D‐Printed Parts
7.7 Summary and Outlook
References
8 Physico‐chemical Features of 3D‐printed Parts
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Fused Filament Fabrication
8.3 Different Types of Applicable Materials in FFF
8.4 Physicochemical Characterization of 3D‐printed Parts
8.5 Effect of Phase Change on the Quality of 3D‐Printed Parts
References
9 3D Printing Optimization: Importance of Rheological Evaluation in 3D Printing
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Fundamentals of Viscosity
9.3 Resistance of Materials to Flow
9.4 Materials with Different Rheological Behaviors
9.5 Different Rheological Behaviors at Constant Pressure and Temperature
9.6 Viscoelastic Behavior
9.7 3D Printing of Thermoplastic Polymers
9.8 Rheology and Optimization in 3D Printing Process
9.9 Summary
References
10 Investigating the Mechanical Performance of 3D‐printed Parts
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Mechanical Properties of 3D‐Printed Parts
10.3 Conclusion
References
11 Thermal Modeling of Material Extrusion Additive Manufacturing (MEX)
11.1 Introduction
11.2 Thermal Modeling of MEX
11.3 A Thermal Model for Heat Transfer and Bonding
11.4 Printing a Tensile Test Specimen
11.5 Conclusions
References
12 In‐Process Temperature Monitoring in 3D Printing
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Heat Transfer in 3D Printing
12.3 The Impact of Cyclic Temperature Profile in 3D‐Printing Process
12.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Global–Local In‐Process Monitoring
12.5 Summary and Outlook
References
13 Optimizing the Controlling Factors and Characteristics of 3D‐printed Parts
13.1 Introduction
13.2 Controlling Factors of FFF Process
13.3 Overview of Optimization
13.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of the Optimization
13.5 Optimization in 3D‐Printing Perspective
13.6 Optimization of 3D‐Printing FFF Controlling Factors
References
14 Machine Learning in 3D Printing
14.1 Introduction
14.2 Literature Review
14.3 3D Printing: Applications and Obstacles
14.4 AI/ML and 3D Printing
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 3
Table 3.1 Summary of different 3D printing techniques, materials, applicatio...
Chapter 4
Table 4.1 A summary of different AM methods with respect to their applicatio...
Chapter 6
Table 6.1 Summary of current research for multiple‐criteria/objective evalua...
Table 6.2 Summary of data in an experimental design.
Table 6.3 Comparison of the analyzed ranking list for orientation alternativ...
Table 6.4 AM printer alternatives and material specifications.
Table 6.5 Analyzed results obtained from integrated FAHP and TOPSIS.
Table 6.6 Results of the case study based on each objective function.
Chapter 7
Table 7.1 Representation of FFF‐based research in consideration of process p...
Chapter 8
Table 8.1 Mechanical properties of typical polymers and polymers composite f...
Chapter 9
Table 9.1 The signification of different models and behaviors in viscosity e...
Table 9.2 The signification of different parameters.
Chapter 11
Table 11.1 Simulation studies reported in the literature (sorted by publicat...
Table 11.2 Main MEX processing parameters and heat transfer coefficients.
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 Summary of the most common modeling related to heat transfer in F...
Table 12.2 Summary of in‐process monitoring of temperature variation using I...
Table 12.3 Summary of in‐process monitoring of temperature variation techniq...
Chapter 14
Table 14.1 ML applications in the 3D printing research.
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Process variations in 3D printing.
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 The potential of 3D printing in different industries.
Figure 2.2 3D‐printed office in Dubai called Office of the Future (a) Side v...
Figure 2.3 3D bioprinting process of multicellular scaffold. (a) An illustra...
Figure 2.4 3D‐printed doughs with different formulations: (a) flour with pro...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 An example regarding the part distortion in 3D printing of object...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Process variations in 3D printing.
Figure 5.2 An example regarding the part distortion in 3D printing of object...
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1 A framework of decision support system for 3DP production plannin...
Figure 6.2 Orientation alternatives of the part orientation case study.
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Cause and effect diagram of FFF process variables.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 The diagram of fused filament fabrication process: (a) direct ext...
Figure 8.2 An overview of polymer filaments for FFF.
Figure 8.3 Typical DSC curve for a polymer.
Figure 8.4 Different crystallinity of 3D‐printed PEEK samples.
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1 (a) Swelling, (b) Weissenberg, and (c) Siphon without tube phenom...
Figure 9.2 Different physical properties of the polymer having an influence ...
Figure 9.3 Temperature evolution of a filament during the FFF process.
Figure 9.4 Heat transfer of filament during FFF process.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 The stresses
σ
and
τ
of the weak point and flexural st...
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 Main approaches usually adopted to model cooling in MEX. (a) the...
Figure 11.2 (a) Part to build and sequence of deposition; (b) Temperature ev...
Figure 11.3 General flowchart of the computer code (Reproduced from Ref. [25...
Figure 11.4 (a) Part to build and corresponding deposition sequence; (b) eff...
Figure 11.5 Effect of extrusion temperature on the extent of bonding.
Figure 11.6 Effect of build platform temperature on the extent of bonding.
Figure 11.7 Effect of infill density
λ
i
on the extent of bonding.
λ
...
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Schematic representation of location of the thermocouples and th...
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1 (a) Schematic of key parameters of FFF manufacturing process, (b...
Figure 13.2 Example of (a) main effects plots and (b) Pareto chart.
Figure 13.3 Example of 3D surface plot.
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1 Different type of machine learning categories based on the datas...
Figure 14.2 Input, hidden, and output layers in the MLP. Source: [3]/Elsevie...
Figure 14.3 Infill patterns (a) with defects (b) without any defects. Source...
Figure 14.4 CAMP‐BD model (a) thermal history, (b) process and design parame...
Figure 14.5 The procedure of find a distortion and compensation on the part ...
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright
List of Contributors
Preface
Begin Reading
Index
End User License Agreement
Pages
iii
iv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
xxi
xxii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
Industrial Strategies and Solutions for 3D Printing
Applications and Optimization
Edited by
Hamid Reza Vanaei
Ecole Supérieure d'Ingénieurs Léonard de Vinci (ESILV)
Léonard de Vinci University
Paris, France
Sofiane Khelladi
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
Paris, France
Abbas Tcharkhtchi
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
Paris, France
Copyright © 2024 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.Published simultaneously in Canada.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per‐copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750‐8400, fax (978) 750‐4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748‐6011, fax (201) 748‐6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762‐2974, outside the United States at (317) 572‐3993 or fax (317) 572‐4002.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data applied for:
Hardback ISBN: 9781394150304
Cover Design: WileyCover Image: © Xuanyu Han/Getty Images; Courtesy Hamid Reza Vanaei
List of Contributors
Sidonie F. Costa
Centre for Research and Innovation in Business Sciences and Information Systems
School of Management and Technology (ESTGF)
Porto Polytechnic Institute (IPP)
Felgueiras
Portugal
José A. Covas
Institute for Polymers and Composites (IPC)
University of Minho
Guimarães
Portugal
Michael Deligant
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Nicholas J. Dunne
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Centre for Medical Engineering Research
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (I‐Form)
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Biodesign Europe
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Advanced Processing Technology Research Centre
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
School of Pharmacy
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast
UK
and
School of Chemical Science
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Advanced Materials and Bioengineering Research Centre (AMBER)
Trinity College Dublin
Dublin
Ireland
and
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
School of Engineering
Trinity College Dublin
Dublin
Ireland
and
Trinity Centre for Biomedical Engineering
Trinity Biomedical Sciences Institute
Trinity College Dublin
Dublin
Ireland
Fernando M. Duarte
Institute for Polymers and Composites (IPC)
University of Minho
Guimarães
Portugal
Anouar El Magri
Euromed Polytechnic School
Euromed Research Center
Euromed University of Fes
Fès
Morocco
Mohammad Elahinia
Department of Mechanical
Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
University of Toledo
Toledo
OH
43606
USA
Abdulmajid Eslami
Department of Materials Engineering
Isfahan University of Technology
Isfahan
Iran
Reza Eslami Farsani
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
K. N. Toosi University of Technology
Tehran
Iran
Shahriar Hashemipour
Department of Material Engineering
Iran University of Science and Technology
Tehran
Iran
Wuzhen Huang
School of System Design and Intelligent Manufacturing
Southern University of Science and Technology
Shenzhen
PR China
Hamid Reza Javadinejad
Department of Materials Engineering
Isfahan University of Technology
Isfahan
Iran
Namhun Kim
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology
Ulsan
Republic of Korea
Sofiane Khelladi
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Tanya J. Levingstone
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Centre for Medical Engineering Research
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (I‐Form)
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Biodesign Europe
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Advanced Processing Technology Research Centre
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
Xiaofan Luo
Polymaker LLC
Houston
TX
USA
Amrid Mammeri
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
Paris
France
and
Valeo Thermal Systems
La verriere‐Paris
France
Mohammad Moezzibadi
Arts et Metiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Zohreh Mousavi Nejad
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
and
Centre for Medical Engineering Research
School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
Dublin City University
Dublin
Ireland
Kaddour Raissi
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Kasin Ransikarbum
Department of Industrial Engineering
Ubonratchathani University
Ubonratchathani
Thailand
and
Department of Industrial Engineering
Kasetsart University
Bangkok
Thailand
Mohammadali Rastak
Department of Mechanical Industrial and Aerospace Engineering
Concordia University
Montreal
Quebec
Canada
Abbas Tcharkhtchi
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNRS
CNAM
PIMM
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Hamid Reza Vanaei
ESILV
Léonard de Vinci Pôle Universitaire
92916
Paris La Défense
France
and
Léonard de Vinci Pôle Universitaire Research Center
92916
Paris La Défense
France
and
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNAM
LIFSE
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Saeedeh Vanaei
Department of Mechanical Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
University of Toledo
Toledo
OH
43606
USA
Shohreh Vanaei
Department of Bioengineering
Northeastern University
Boston
MA
USA
Sébastien Vaudreuil
Euromed Polytechnic School
Euromed Research Center
Euromed University of Fes
Fès
Morocco
Yi Xiong
School of System Design and Intelligent Manufacturing
Southern University of Science and Technology
Shenzhen
PR China
Mengxue Yan
School of Mechanical Engineering
Changshu Institute of Technology
Changshu
Suzhou
Jiangsu
China
Nader Zirak
Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology
CNRS
CNAM
PIMM
HESAM University
75013
Paris
France
Preface
In the ever‐evolving landscape of manufacturing and innovation, 3D printing has emerged as a beacon of possibility. Its ability to turn digital designs into tangible objects has revolutionized industries from aerospace and automotive to healthcare and fashion. Yet, amid the awe‐inspiring potential of this technology, a complex tapestry of challenges has woven itself into the fabric of 3D printing's journey. As we embark on a comprehensive exploration of this remarkable realm, this book seeks to unravel the intricacies of these challenges and illuminate a solution‐driven path forward. At the heart of this narrative lies a pivotal concept: multi‐physics optimization. As the foundation upon which the future of 3D printing is built, the importance of multi‐physics optimization cannot be overstated. This book presents the world of 3D printing, dissecting its various facets and intricacies, while emphasizing the crucial role that optimization plays. Through a prism of multidisciplinary perspectives, we will explore the labyrinthine world of material properties, structural integrity, printing speed, and cost‐effectiveness.
In this book, efforts have been made to navigate the nuances of characterization and optimization, uncovering the interplay of variables that define the 3D printing process. From the composition of materials to the geometry of design, every decision reverberates through the layers of this additive manufacturing journey. The book has been conceived and written to encompass all aspects of the 3D printing process – from its applications and challenges to the importance of process optimization – and is thus divided into two separate parts. The book has been conceived and written to encompass all aspects within the scope of process optimization. It consists of fourteen chapters, each focusing on core research areas grounded in current understanding and evidence. The contributions to these chapters come from key opinion leaders and international experts in the field of 3D printing, as well as industrial researchers, making this book a truly interdisciplinary collaboration. The upcoming chapters will immerse readers in strategies and techniques that illuminate the path to excellence. The book expresses the importance of multi‐physics optimization, where the pursuit of a single ideal gives way to the quest for harmony among conflicting objectives. Through this lens, we will bridge the gap between theory and practice, translating academic insights into real‐world applications. From intricate mathematical models to practical case studies, this book serves as a roadmap for practitioners, researchers, and enthusiasts alike.
The topics have been selected based on existing research evidence, current challenges, optimization possibilities, and future needs. The first chapter serves as an overview of the entire book, emphasizing the significance of approaching the 3D printing process as a multidisciplinary field. It discusses landmark events and contributions by pioneers in the field in an engaging and readable manner. Moving forward, the second chapter highlights the potential of transitioning 3D printing from laboratory settings to industrial applications. One of the key factors is gaining a comprehensive understanding of the various applications of 3D printing and the corresponding applicable materials. Chapters 3 and 4 delve into a review of the existing literature in this context. Chapter 5 provides an in‐depth analysis of the current challenges in 3D printing. Following this, Chapter 6 elucidates the importance of multi‐objective evaluation in the 3D printing process. Notably, process variables emerge as pivotal features in 3D printing, and Chapter 7 explores their role in optimization. The succeeding chapters, namely, 8, 9, 10, and 11, focus on different aspects of 3D‐printed parts. Chapter 8 delves into the physico-chemical attributes of 3D‐printed components, while Chapter 9 underscores the significance of rheological behavior. Chapter 10 examines how the mechanical behavior of 3D-printed parts serves as an indicator of final part quality. Chapter 11 reviews thermal behavior and the importance of heat transfer within the 3D printing process. Chapter 12 addresses the criticality of in‐process temperature monitoring in assessing the quality of 3D‐printed parts during layer deposition. In alignment with the book's objectives, Chapter 13 explains the importance of optimizing control factors and properties of 3D‐printed components. The final chapter sheds light on the role of machine learning and its impact on optimizing the 3D printing process.
This book is envisioned as a primary and comprehensive reference source for material scientists, graduate engineers, postgraduates, research scholars, industrial engineers, and technicians working in the field of additive manufacturing and 3D printing. We have made sincere efforts to review and compile all relevant information based on currently available evidence. We hope that this book will be extremely useful for students, researchers, and industrialists engaged in the multidisciplinary process of 3D printing.
13D Printing as a Multidisciplinary Field
Hamid Reza Vanaei1, 2, 3, Sofiane Khelladi3, and Abbas Tcharkhtchi4
1ESILV, Léonard de Vinci Pôle Universitaire, 92916 Paris La Défense, France
2Léonard de Vinci Pôle Universitaire Research Center, 92916 Paris La Défense, France
3Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, CNAM, LIFSE, HESAM University, 75013 Paris, France
4Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, CNRS, CNAM, PIMM, HESAM University, 75013 Paris, France
1.1 Introduction
The challenges related to effective bonding, diminished strength, and mechanical performance of 3D models created through fused filament fabrication (FFF) remain significant focal points within the realm of 3D‐printed structures. FFF, commonly known as 3D printing, is extensively utilized in crafting prototypes for various industries such as aerospace, medical, and automotive sectors. This technique involves feeding a thermoplastic polymer into a liquefier, which then extrudes a filament while traversing successive X–Y planes along the Z‐axis direction. This process results in the gradual construction of a 3D component layer by layer. As the deposition advances, the heated filament is placed upon previously deposited filaments that are in the cooling phase. This action triggers their reheating, establishing a specific period during which the interfaces of contacting filaments achieve temperatures beyond the glass transition temperature (Tg) for amorphous materials or the crystallization temperature (Tc) for semicrystalline materials. This temperature range is essential for effective bonding to occur. Consequently, each filament must attain a sufficient level of heat during deposition, while avoiding excessive heat that might lead to deformation due to the force of gravity and the weight of subsequently deposited filaments in subsequent layers.
Hence, numerous factors influence the quality of the produced component, such as the polymer's temperature profile, and, consequently, the bonding between layers. Consequently, comprehending the manner in which the process parameters impact the temperature changes in the filaments is of significant importance. Furthermore, given that rheological properties like viscosity are influenced by temperature variations, it is plausible to establish a connection between this dependency and the changing temperatures of the deposited filaments. This suggests the possibility of establishing a linked correlation between viscosity and temperature. Consequently, this concept gives rise to the notion of a time, temperature, transformation (TTT) diagram for the material, enabling the simultaneous exploration of both temperature variations and their impact on viscosity.
While 3D printing offers certain benefits, there is a need for enhancement and refinement to meet industry standards. This improvement entails enhancing mechanical attributes and the quality of bonding (with the goal of achieving superior component quality), as well as minimizing production costs and construction duration (with the aim of optimizing the overall process).
Given the abovementioned statements, the temperature evolution during 3D printing process thoroughly specified the quality and mechanical strength of fabricated structures. Experimental monitoring and analytical investigations are still challenging in 3D printing, and lack of practical knowledge corresponds to the problem of bonding in this process. Since the rheological characteristics are a function of temperature, together with the mentioned process variables, are widely affected by temperature evolution of filaments while printing. To sum up, investigation on temperature and temperature dependence viscosity of 3D printing materials while printing is still in its early stages, and it governs the bonding quality itself.
This chapter highlights the significance of 3D printing as a multidisciplinary field. It emphasizes the pivotal variables that exert control over the bonding quality of the end product. Additionally, the discussion delves into essential techniques for characterizing these factors and enhancing our perspective for the purpose of optimization through a combination of experimental and numerical methods.
1.2 Unveiling the Foundations: Grasping the Essential Features of 3D Printing
1.2.1 Historical Review
ME‐3DP emerged as one of the earliest innovations in the realm of 3D printing, with its inception traced back to the late 1980s through the appearance of its initial patent [1]. This pivotal development paved the way for the establishment of Stratasys, an entity that has since grown to attain a prominent status as one of the globe's largest and most influential enterprises in the 3D printing domain. Throughout the initial 20 years of ME‐3DP's existence, Stratasys maintained a notable presence, primarily wielding its fused deposition modeling (FDM®) apparatus. These integrated machines, recognized for their association with rapid prototyping, paralleled the functions of other contemporary 3D printing technologies during that era.
A significant transformation in both the technological and market landscapes of 3D printing emerged during the later part of the 2000s. This transformative shift was primarily instigated by two pivotal occurrences –first, the advent of the RepRap initiative, which championed open‐source principles, and second, the expiration of Stratasys' original patents. This confluence of events heralded a proliferation of participants in the market, primarily consisting of hardware startups, who embarked on the development of desktop 3D printers inspired by the RepRap model and bearing striking resemblances to Stratasys' machinery [2]. This period witnessed the rapid expansion of several of these entities, either propelling them to the forefront of the market or leading them to be acquired by established industry leaders. The consequence was the emergence of a burgeoning market characterized by an ever‐diversifying array of products. For instance, the current landscape features an extensive array of FFF (increasingly standardized as opposed to FDM) printers, spanning a price spectrum from modest hundreds of dollars to significant figures in the hundreds of thousands. Another pivotal transformation was the transition from self‐contained product architectures, emblematic of the early era of 3D printing firms, to an open ecosystem comprising specialized providers of machinery, materials, components, and software. This shift played a pivotal role in accelerating the democratization and innovation within the 3D printing field. It facilitated the technology's penetration into markets that had hitherto remained inaccessible due to various barriers. Presently, 3D printing stands as the most widely embraced 3D printing technology, quantified by both the staggering volume of machine shipments (exceeding one million annually on a global scale) and the extensive user base numbering in the millions.
For the 3D printers, a considerable proportion is comprised of FFF printers that, for the most part, retain operational similarities to the original Stratasys machines. Nevertheless, there have been successive innovations within the process over time, resulting in a significant broadening and enhancement of the technological landscape governing 3D printing methodologies (as indicated in Figure 1.1). Among the most prominent instances is the utilization of 3D printing for generating continuous fiber‐reinforced composite structures, a groundbreaking concept initially pioneered by the US‐based firm Markforged. Subsequently, this innovation garnered widespread attention both within industrial circles and scholarly discourse. This advancement empowers the creation of structures characterized by extraordinary stiffness and resilience, thereby enabling 3D printing to venture into novel domains of material attributes that had hitherto remained inaccessible.
Figure 1.1 Process variations in 3D printing.
1.2.2 Potential of 3D Printing from Lab to Industry
The evolution of 3D printing technology, from its origins in laboratories to its widespread adoption in various industries, has been nothing short of transformative. Initially developed as a rapid prototyping tool in the 1980s, 3D printing has now emerged as a powerful force that holds immense potential across a wide spectrum of applications. Its journey from lab experimentation to industrial integration highlights its capacity to revolutionize traditional manufacturing processes and redefine the boundaries of creativity and innovation.
In the early stages, 3D printing was primarily confined to research laboratories, where it was used for creating prototypes and conceptual models with relative ease and speed. This capability drastically cuts down development times and costs compared to traditional subtractive manufacturing methods. As the technology advanced, its potential began to extend beyond prototyping, leading to the production of intricate and customized components that were previously deemed unfeasible. As 3D printing techniques evolved, industries such as aerospace, automotive, healthcare, and consumer goods took notice of the technology's promise. In aerospace, for instance, the ability to create lightweight, complex geometries with high precision has enabled the production of fuel‐efficient components and reduced overall aircraft weight. In healthcare, 3D printing has enabled the creation of patient‐specific implants, prosthetics, and medical models for surgical planning. This personalized approach has improved patient outcomes and streamlined medical procedures.
One of the most significant advantages of 3D printing is its potential to revolutionize supply chains and manufacturing processes. Traditional manufacturing often involves producing parts in large quantities and shipping them globally, which can be time‐consuming and costly. With 3D printing, companies can transition to localized manufacturing, producing items on demand and reducing the need for large inventories and long shipping distances. This not only reduces waste but also allows for rapid response to market demands and customization. Furthermore, 3D printing opens doors to intricate and innovative designs that were previously constrained by the limitations of traditional manufacturing methods. Complex structures, lattice designs, and organic shapes that were once impossible or economically unviable to create can now be realized with 3D printing. This encourages designers to push the boundaries of creativity, resulting in products that are not only functional but also aesthetically captivating. However, while the potential of 3D printing is vast, challenges still exist. Material limitations, production speed, and post‐processing requirements are areas that researchers and industries are actively addressing to unlock even greater potential. As materials improve and new techniques emerge, 3D printing's role is likely to expand, influencing industries beyond manufacturing, such as architecture, fashion, and even food. The journey of 3D printing from laboratory experimentation to industrial integration showcases its potential to disrupt traditional manufacturing, accelerate innovation, and offer new levels of customization. Its ability to produce complex, personalized, and functional objects has paved the way for advancements across diverse sectors. As research and development continue, the full extent of 3D printing's impact on industries and society at large is only beginning to unfold.
1.2.3 Challenges and Potential Roadmap Toward Solving them in 3D Printing
The rapid advancement of 3D printing technology has undeniably brought about transformative changes across various industries. However, this progress has not been without its share of challenges, many of which have become focal points for researchers, engineers, and industry professionals aiming to further harness the potential of additive manufacturing.
Material Limitations:
The range of materials available for 3D printing is expanding, but it remains limited compared to traditional manufacturing processes. While some materials like plastics and metals are well established, there is a demand for more diverse and specialized materials that can meet the requirements of specific applications, such as high‐temperature environments, biocompatibility, or electrical conductivity.
Print Speed and Scale:
3D printing is often criticized for its relatively slow production speeds, particularly when compared to traditional manufacturing methods. The layer‐by‐layer additive process inherently takes longer, making it less suitable for high‐volume, time‐sensitive production. Scaling up 3D printing while maintaining quality and efficiency remains a challenge.
Surface Finish and Post‐Processing:
Parts produced by 3D printing may exhibit rough surfaces and layer lines. Achieving a smooth and high‐quality surface finish without extensive post‐processing is a challenge. Additional steps like sanding, polishing, or chemical treatments are often required, increasing the overall production time and complexity.
Structural Integrity and Quality Control:
Ensuring the structural integrity and consistency of 3D‐printed parts is essential, especially for critical applications in industries like aerospace and healthcare. Variations in layer adhesion, porosity, and material properties can impact the mechanical performance of the final product. Developing reliable quality control measures to identify defects and inconsistencies is an ongoing concern.
Design Complexity and Optimization:
While 3D printing enables intricate designs and geometries, not all designs are inherently suited for additive manufacturing. Designing for 3D printing requires a different approach, taking into account factors like overhangs, support structures, and material properties. Optimizing designs for both functionality and printability is a challenge that demands specialized skills and software tools.
Regulatory Hurdles:
Industries like healthcare and aerospace are subject to strict regulatory standards. Introducing 3D‐printed components into these sectors requires demonstrating their reliability, safety, and compliance with regulatory requirements. Developing standardized testing and certification procedures for 3D‐printed products is an ongoing endeavor.
Cost Considerations:
While 3D printing can be cost‐effective for low‐volume production and customized items, it might not always be the most economical option for mass production. The costs associated with materials, equipment, and post‐processing can be significant, requiring a thorough analysis of cost‐effectiveness for each application.
Sustainability and Material Recycling:
The environmental impact of 3D printing, particularly in terms of material waste and energy consumption, is a concern. Many 3D printing processes generate excess material that cannot be reused, leading to material waste. Developing more sustainable materials and recycling methods is crucial to mitigate this challenge.
The journey toward confronting the fundamental challenges intrinsic to the 3D printing process has catalyzed the formulation of potential pathways, each charting a direction to unleash the technology's complete potential. To surmount the obstacles associated with sluggish construction rates and properties displaying anisotropy, a strategic trajectory involves delving into the realm of advanced materials engineering. The exploration of innovative materials characterized by heightened ease of printing and optimized thermal attributes holds the potential to accelerate deposition rates while alleviating anisotropy concerns. In parallel, the enhancement of extrusion mechanisms, capitalizing on multi‐nozzle systems or continuous extrusion methodologies, has the potential to overhaul the speed of material deposition and lead to the creation of components possessing greater isotropy. Running in tandem with advancements in materials, the course to address inconsistencies in mechanical properties entails the cultivation of robust interlayer bonding techniques. Research endeavors are honing in on the comprehension of molecular diffusion at interfaces, the optimization of thermal conditions, and the design of sophisticated extruders engineered to foster more robust adhesion between layers. These collective endeavors, coupled with the integration of predictive modeling and simulation, seek to cultivate a deeper understanding of the intricate interplay linking process parameters and mechanical attributes. Ultimately, these pursuits aspire to engender heightened reliability and predictability, culminating in more assured and foreseeable outcomes.
To overcome the obstacle of uncertainty surrounding part characteristics, a strategic approach directs attention toward innovation driven by data. Leveraging the capabilities of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI), scientists are engaged in efforts to establish connections among process factors, material attributes, and eventual part behavior. By assimilating extensive datasets, these techniques hold the potential to unveil patterns and revelations, facilitating the development of resilient models capable of predicting part attributes based on distinct printing parameters.
As the landscape of 3D printing undergoes transformation, another strategic direction envisions a convergence involving hardware, software, and process regulation. Progressions in real‐time monitoring systems, adaptable control algorithms, and closed‐loop feedback mechanisms stand ready to augment the precision and uniformity of printing. These advancements possess the potential to effectively counterbalance discrepancies stemming from factors such as fluctuations in temperature or inconsistencies in materials, thereby fostering the production of components marked by heightened accuracy and dependability. Essentially, these potential pathways embody collaborative endeavors to navigate the intricate realm of 3D printing challenges. Through the harmonization of inventive materials, sophisticated interlayer bonding techniques, insights derived from data analysis, and refined process management, the envisioned path ahead anticipates a future in which 3D printing not only surmounts its hurdles but also catalyzes industries with unparalleled swiftness, precision, and adaptability.
1.2.3.1 High Building Rate 3D Printing Process
The building rate in 3D printing, a crucial factor determining the speed of the additive manufacturing process, is inherently constrained by the capabilities of the printing system's module. In this context, enhancing the performance of individual modules within the system holds the potential to yield substantial improvements in the overall building rate of 3D printing [3, 4]. This acknowledgment underscores the significance of focusing on module‐level advancements to expedite the additive manufacturing process.
Presently, two promising avenues emerge as potential technologies capable of realizing higher building rates within the 3D printing process. These avenues represent distinct approaches that could potentially revolutionize the speed and efficiency of the technology. By addressing the challenges inherent to low building rates, these technologies aim to enhance the competitiveness of 3D printing as a viable manufacturing method across various industries. As the pursuit of faster additive manufacturing continues, these innovative pathways promise to reshape the landscape of 3D printing, potentially catapulting the technology into new realms of application and significance.
1.2.3.2 Big Area Additive Manufacturing (BAAM) System
Big Area Additive Manufacturing (BAAM) stands out as a notable advancement in the realm of large‐format printing systems, pioneered by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Designed to produce structures on a scale of several meters, this technology introduces the capability to swiftly print sizable components while maintaining high extrusion rates [5]. The unique approach of utilizing feedstock in the form of thermoplastic or reinforced thermoplastic pellets brings about a substantial reduction in material deposition costs, presenting a cost‐efficient alternative that slashes expenses by a factor of 20 times. At the core of this system lies a single‐screw extruder, responsible for both melting the plastic pellets and subsequently extruding the molten material onto a heated print bed. This single‐screw extruder further distinguishes itself by its remarkable deposition speed, surpassing conventional polymer additive manufacturing systems by over 200 times and boasting rates of up to 50 kg/h.
An additional feature contributing to BAAM's prowess is its expansive build platform, capable of accommodating structures of impressive dimensions. With the potential to construct objects as substantial as 6 m in length, 2.4 m in width, and 1.8 m in height, BAAM's build capacity surpasses most commercial systems by a factor of approximately 10. This expanded envelope of production capability positions BAAM as a technology with promising implications across diverse sectors, including automotive, aerospace, and energy industries. The exceptional attributes of BAAM, from its rapid extrusion rates and economical material usage to its capacity for fabricating sizable structures, underscore its potential to revolutionize manufacturing methodologies, making substantial contributions to the realms of transportation, aeronautics, and power generation.
1.2.3.3 Faster FFF 3D Printing System
To surmount the constraints imposed by performance‐limiting mechanisms, the development of a swift FFF system hinges on several key enhancements. These enhancements encompass an improved material feed mechanism, augmented heat transfer rates from the liquefier wall to the filament core, and the optimization of gantry positioning systems guided by open‐loop stepper motors. Researchers' estimations suggest that a remarkable 10‐fold increase in building rate compared to typical commercial desktop systems could be attainable through the enhancement of printer module performance and the implementation of refined toolpath planning algorithms [5]. In parallel, innovative hardware components have emerged to bolster the potential of swift FFF systems. Extruders featuring multipoint contact with the filament have been introduced to the market, ensuring a firm grip on the filament, and preventing slippage during the printing process. Furthermore, the liquefier, now equipped with dual heat zones and meticulous temperature control mechanisms, maintains the polymer at a consistent temperature throughout the extrusion process. The incorporation of Step‐Motor Driving Systems aids in achieving elevated velocity and acceleration for the stepper motor, ultimately allowing for printing speeds reaching up to 250 mm/s.
Recently, a rapid FFF system boasting a building rate of approximately 720 cm3/h has become available on the market. Looking ahead, it is foreseeable that further advancements in module functionality will pave the way for even swifter FFF systems. The integration of AI‐driven assistance systems, such as Camera Recognition, in conjunction with refined path planning algorithms, holds promise for significantly elevating building rates. As these technological advancements continue to converge, it is reasonable to anticipate the emergence of fast FFF systems with progressively higher building rates, propelling the field of additive manufacturing into a new era of enhanced speed and efficiency.
1.2.3.4 Improvement of Interfacial Bonding and Strength in Z‐Direction
Examining the underlying factors influencing the weakened bond interface in the context of ME‐3DP underscores the need for a dual‐pronged approach encompassing both process control and judicious material selection. To effectively bolster the interfacial bonding strength and concurrently diminish the pronounced anisotropy characteristic of printed components, these two key aspects must be thoughtfully addressed. Process control plays a pivotal role in sculpting the final quality of ME‐3D printed parts. Fine‐tuning various printing parameters, such as extrusion temperature, layer height, and print speed, can exert a significant influence on the formation of robust interlayer bonds. By meticulously optimizing these parameters, the thermal conditions during printing can be adjusted to facilitate enhanced molecular chain diffusion at the interface, leading to stronger and more dependable bonds between successive layers. Process control also extends to real‐time monitoring and feedback mechanisms, allowing for dynamic adjustments during printing to counteract potential deviations and ensure consistent interfacial bonding throughout the entire production process.
Simultaneously, the choice of materials assumes paramount importance in augmenting interfacial bonding strength. The selection of polymers with compatible melt viscosities and thermal properties can foster more cohesive bonding between layers. Additionally, the incorporation of additives, such as coupling agents or compatibilizers, can promote molecular adhesion and alignment, further enhancing the overall interlayer adhesion. Furthermore, materials with balanced mechanical properties and thermal behaviors across multiple directions can contribute to reducing anisotropy, resulting in more uniform and predictable mechanical performance across all orientations.
Harmonizing process control and material selection leverages a comprehensive strategy to surmount the challenge of weak bond interfaces and the ensuing anisotropy in ME‐3D printed parts. This combined effort, founded on precise control over the printing process parameters and the strategic utilization of materials with optimal properties, offers a pathway toward producing components with heightened strength, reliability, and uniformity across diverse orientations.
The inadequate adhesion between layers stems from the limited diffusion of large and sluggish polymer chains across the interface between filaments. Enhancing diffusion and interlayer adhesion in FDM‐fabricated parts can be facilitated by employing filament materials that contain lower molecular weight components. This choice is driven by the fact that polymers with lower molecular weights exhibit quicker diffusion across the inter‐filament interface, thereby fostering improved interlayer adhesion [6]. A promising solution to address the weakness in the z‐direction involves utilizing filaments with a core‐shell structure, a concept realized through polymer coextrusion [7–10]. Typically, the filament's core possesses a notably higher glass transition temperature than its sheath, imparting favorable attributes such as enhanced printability, stiffness, and dimensional stability. The interplay between these dual materials benefits from well‐established chemical compatibility, often resulting in a phase‐separated blend characterized by excellent adhesion between phases. Predominantly, the most prevalent combination involves a dual‐material filament comprising ABS with a PC core. This combination is frequently subjected to annealing post‐printing, a treatment that reinforces bonding between printed layers while upholding dimensional stability.
Compared to conventionally printed single‐material filaments, components produced using the dual‐material filament exhibit remarkable enhancements. For instance, post‐printing annealing culminates in a fivefold amplification in z‐direction impact toughness and a fourfold increase in z‐direction tensile strength. Impressively, these benefits are achieved without compromising part dimensional accuracy or surface quality. Notably, even when elevated printer nozzle temperatures are employed, the inherent stability of the core material exerts a stabilizing effect, ensuring excellent dimensional precision and surface finish.
1.2.4 Role of Controlling Factors in 3D Printing
In the domain of 3D printing, the influence of controlling factors takes on paramount significance, exerting a profound and undeniable impact on the very essence of the additive manufacturing process. This influence spans across an intricate web of parameters, encompassing the diverse domains of material properties, design intricacies, printing configurations, and post‐processing methodologies. This intricate interplay among these varied factors is the architect of the final outcomes, ultimately shaping the characteristics, quality, functionality, and efficiency of the fabricated objects. In the relentless pursuit of crafting components that not only meet but surpass performance expectations, the optimization of these controlling factors emerges as a central tenet. Material properties stand as a foundational cornerstone, wherein the careful selection of materials becomes the maestro that dictates the mechanical traits, thermal dynamics, and the flow behavior of materials during the deposition process. Concurrently, design parameters weave a narrative of both aesthetics and functionality, wielding the power to define internal structures, intricate infill patterns, and overarching geometrical configurations.
The strategic manipulation of printing parameters constitutes another layer of finesse. The orchestration of variables such as layer thickness, print speed, and temperature acts as a symphony conductor, fine‐tuning the deposition process to orchestrate factors like layer adhesion, surface finish, and the mechanical robustness of the final product. However, the journey does not conclude there; it extends into the post‐processing realm. Post‐processing techniques provide a canvas for further enhancing properties and refining aesthetics, emphasizing the holistic nature of the optimization endeavor.
As these controlling factors converge and collaborate, a harmonious symphony emerges. This orchestration encapsulates the essence of additive manufacturing, empowering the creation of parts that bear meticulously tailored attributes. This harmonious synthesis resonates perfectly with the overarching ambition of 3D printing itself – the art of meticulously crafting components endowed with impeccable precision, bespoke designs, and elevated performance characteristics. In the continued evolution of this field, the comprehension and mastery of these controlling factors will persist as a central fulcrum, opening pathways for innovation across a wide spectrum of industries. In doing so, it ushers in a new era, where the realm of advanced manufacturing thrives with limitless possibilities.
1.3 Multiphysics Behavior in 3D Printing Process
1.3.1 Physicochemical and Mechanical Phenomena of 3D‐printed Parts
Physicochemical and mechanical phenomena of 3D‐printed parts are pivotal factors that define the overall quality and functionality of the additive manufacturing process. These phenomena encompass a multidimensional spectrum of material behavior and structural attributes, fundamentally shaping the performance and application potential of the final components. Physicochemical attributes delve into the intricate properties of the materials used in 3D printing. Factors such as material composition, thermal properties, and molecular structure play a vital role in dictating how the material responds during the printing process. Understanding these phenomena is essential for achieving optimal print quality, as they influence aspects like material flow, adhesion to previous layers, and susceptibility to heat‐related issues like warping. Mechanical characteristics, on the other hand, are the mechanical properties that the printed parts exhibit once they are completed. This encompasses a diverse range of attributes including tensile strength, hardness, flexibility, and resilience. These mechanical traits are closely tied to the material properties and how they interact with the printing process itself. Achieving the desired mechanical properties often involves striking a delicate balance between factors like print temperature, layer adhesion, infill density, and post‐processing techniques.
In the quest for robust and reliable 3D‐printed parts, a comprehensive understanding of both the physicochemical and mechanical phenomena is paramount. Engineers and researchers work meticulously to optimize these attributes to meet specific performance requirements for various applications. Tailoring material choices, design considerations, and printing parameters to align with the intended function of the part is an ongoing pursuit to ensure that the 3D‐printed components not only achieve the desired mechanical robustness but also exhibit the necessary physicochemical attributes to withstand real‐world conditions and demands. As 3D printing technology continues to advance, the ability to control and manipulate these physicochemical and mechanical phenomena becomes increasingly refined. This progress opens doors to a myriad of applications across industries, ranging from aerospace to healthcare and beyond, where the tailored properties of 3D‐printed parts enable innovations that were previously unattainable through traditional manufacturing methods.
1.3.2 Thermal Features of 3D‐printed Parts
3D printing process involves the utilization of a thermoplastic polymer system, often in the form of circular filaments, pellets, or powder. These polymer materials undergo a sequence of transformation steps – they are compressed, heated until molten, and then extruded as a filament thread through a nozzle. Concurrently, a build platform, known as the latter, is directed along a predetermined printing trajectory. This orchestrated movement forms the foundation upon which three‐dimensional structures come into existence. These structures are constructed as a sequence of vertical layers, each layer comprising horizontally arranged cross sections composed of the deposited threads. This method permits the fabrication of geometrically intricate components, showcasing the power of this manufacturing technique.
Central to the integrity of the resulting parts is the bonding that takes place between the adjacent threads. This inter‐thread bonding is essential for the physical coherence of the printed part. The mechanical properties, surface texture, dimensional precision, and residual stresses inherent in a 3D‐printed object are notably impacted by the quality of bonding achieved and the specific morphology that evolves during the cooling phase. To establish effective bonding, an extensive process of diffusion and entanglement of polymer macromolecules transpires across the interfaces of neighboring filament threads. This intricate process relies on a combination of factors, including the rheological characteristics of the polymer material, the local temperatures experienced, and the associated timeframes. In essence, for a given part geometry to be printed within the confines of specific processing conditions, 3D printing encapsulates a series of interconnected stages. This involves the sequential phases of material heating and melting, the application of melt pressure as it flows through a nozzle, the deposition of the extruded thread onto a build platform, and the subsequent layering upon previously deposited threads. Cooling and solidification mark the culmination of this multifaceted journey.
The focus for thermal characterization requires to be on the comprehensive modeling of the thermal dynamics encompassing the deposition and cooling stages within the 3D printing process. The overarching goal is to unravel the intricate correlations interwoven among printing parameters, the resultant temperature profiles, and the extent of bonding achieved. Such thermal modeling holds the potential to significantly enhance our comprehension of the 3D printing process, enabling better‐informed decisions regarding part design, the selection of corresponding printing parameters, and optimizing the manufacturing process itself. By unraveling the thermal intricacies, this approach opens pathways to more precisely tailored parts and more efficient manufacturing processes within the domain of material extrusion additive manufacturing.
1.3.3 Rheological Evaluations in 3D Printing
Rheological characteristics form the cornerstone of successful 3D printing, governing how materials flow, deform, and interact during the additive manufacturing process. In the realm of 3D printing, where intricate structures are built layer by layer, understanding the rheological behavior of the materials used is paramount. This page delves into the significance of rheological properties in 3D printing, exploring key concepts such as viscosity, shear thinning, and thixotropy.
1.3.3.1 Mastering the Flow: Essential Fundamentals of Rheology
Viscosity is considered a foundational rheological property and dictates a material's resistance to flow. In the context of 3D printing, viscosity directly influences the extrusion process. The optimal viscosity range is crucial for ensuring smooth material flow through the printing nozzle. A material that is too viscous might lead to inconsistent extrusion, clogs, or insufficient layer bonding. Conversely, a material with low viscosity might result in excessive spreading and poor adhesion between layers. Achieving the right viscosity balance is vital for maintaining the dimensional accuracy and surface finish of printed parts. Besides, shear thinning is a prevalent rheological behavior in 3D printing materials and offers a unique advantage. It refers to the phenomenon where a material's viscosity decreases as the shear rate increases. This property facilitates seamless extrusion during high‐speed nozzle movements, allowing for precise deposition of material. When the extrusion halts, the material's viscosity rebounds, preventing unwanted material flow. Shear thinning contributes to the accurate reproduction of intricate details, resulting in parts with enhanced geometric fidelity, structural integrity, and surface finish.
1.3.3.2 Optimizing with Rheological Insights
It is crucial to consider a deep understanding of rheological characteristics as it empowers manufacturers to optimize their 3D printing processes and achieve superior results. Thixotropy, an intriguing rheological attribute, refers to a material's ability to exhibit decreased viscosity over time under constant shear stress. In the context of 3D printing, thixotropy plays a role in material recovery after extrusion pauses. This property prevents drooping or sagging of material when the extruder is stationary, preserving the structural integrity of the printed layers. Thixotropic materials ensure stability during printing pauses and contribute to the overall success of intricate designs.
To harness the full potential of rheological characteristics, manufacturers rely on rheological testing methods. These techniques quantify how materials respond to temperature changes, shear rates, and stress. By generating comprehensive rheological profiles, manufacturers can make informed decisions about printing parameters, nozzle sizes, and even material formulations. Additionally, advanced modeling and simulation tools predict how materials will behave during the printing process, allowing for virtual experimentation and optimization of printing strategies.
In the dynamic domain of 3D printing, a profound comprehension of rheological characteristics is indispensable. Viscosity, shear thinning, and thixotropy collectively shape the material's behavior, directly influencing print quality, precision, and mechanical properties. By leveraging these insights, manufacturers can tailor their printing strategies to suit a material's rheological behavior, achieving exceptional print outcomes across diverse applications. Rheological mastery represents a bridge between scientific understanding and the art of additive manufacturing, paving the way for groundbreaking innovations in the world of 3D printing.
1.3.4 In‐process Temperature Monitoring in 3D Printing
In‐process temperature monitoring is a crucial aspect of enhancing the precision, quality, and reliability of 3D printing processes. 3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, involves the layer‐by‐layer deposition of materials to create intricate three‐dimensional objects. The temperature at various stages of the printing process significantly impacts the structural integrity, dimensional accuracy, and material properties of the final printed object. As a result, real‐time temperature monitoring and control have emerged as fundamental techniques to ensure consistent and optimal printing outcomes. During 3D printing, the temperature of the print bed, the extruder or nozzle, and the ambient environment all play pivotal roles in determining the final product's characteristics. In‐process temperature monitoring involves the use of sensors, such as thermocouples or infrared cameras, to capture and analyze temperature data at critical locations. These sensors provide real‐time feedback to the printer's control system, enabling it to make necessary adjustments to temperature settings on the fly. This continuous monitoring helps prevent issues like warping, layer misalignment, or insufficient material bonding, which can arise due to temperature fluctuations.
One of the primary advantages of in‐process temperature monitoring is its ability to ensure consistent material properties throughout the printed object. Different materials used in 3D printing, such as plastics, metals, and composites, exhibit specific thermal behaviors that influence their flow characteristics and solidification rates. By closely monitoring and controlling temperatures, operators can mitigate material‐specific challenges, such as nozzle clogging or uneven cooling, leading to more predictable and repeatable printing outcomes. Furthermore, in‐process temperature monitoring enables the identification of anomalies or deviations from desired temperature profiles. If a temperature excursion occurs, the monitoring system can trigger alerts or pause the printing process, preventing the production of defective parts. This capability is especially important in industrial applications where quality control is paramount and production efficiency is closely tied to minimized waste and downtime.
Presumably, in‐process temperature monitoring is a critical advancement in 3D printing technology. By maintaining precise temperature conditions throughout the printing process, manufacturers can achieve higher‐quality prints, reduce waste, and enhance the overall efficiency of additive manufacturing. As 3D printing continues to evolve and find applications in various industries, the role of in‐process temperature monitoring is set to become even more integral in ensuring the reliability and consistency of printed products.
1.4 3D Printing Perfection: Unveiling the Power of Optimization
1.4.1 Importance of Multiphysics Evaluation in 3D Printing
In 3D printing, multiphysics evaluation emerges as a crucial cornerstone for informed decision‐making and optimized outcomes. Unlike traditional manufacturing processes, 3D printing offers a spectrum of possibilities across various dimensions, ranging from material choices and part geometries to production speeds and cost considerations. Embracing a multiphysics approach acknowledges the intricate interplay between these diverse factors and strives to strike a delicate balance that meets a multitude of criteria. One of the most significant advantages of multiphysics evaluation lies in its ability to navigate the complex web of trade‐offs. Inherent in 3D printing are numerous competing physics, such as achieving high material strength while minimizing weight or enhancing production speed while maintaining impeccable surface finish. By adopting a multiphysics lens, manufacturers and designers can gain a comprehensive understanding of how adjustments in one area affect others, leading to more informed compromises that align with overall goals.
This approach also allows for a holistic examination of the 3D printing process, from design to post‐processing. For instance, in aerospace applications, a multiphysics evaluation can consider factors like weight reduction, thermal resistance, and material compatibility. By assessing these multiple dimensions simultaneously, stakeholders can refine designs that not only meet stringent performance requirements but also optimize manufacturing efficiency and economic viability. Moreover, in industries focused on sustainable practices, multiphysics evaluation becomes a vital tool. Environmental impact, material recyclability, and energy efficiency can all be weighed alongside traditional performance metrics. This enables the creation of 3D‐printed products that are not only high‐performing but also aligned with eco‐friendly principles, a crucial aspect in a world increasingly concerned with minimizing its carbon footprint. Furthermore, multiphysics evaluation fosters collaboration and communication among interdisciplinary teams. Engineers, designers, material scientists, and business strategists can collectively analyze various aspects of 3D printing projects, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of potential challenges and opportunities. This collaborative effort enhances creativity, reduces blind spots, and often leads to innovative solutions that may have otherwise been overlooked.
