This paper presents the state-of-the-art of additive manufacturing of composites for processing functional, load-bearing components. A general overview of different additive manufacturing methods is provided, and specific attention is focused on fused filament fabrication-based composites processing. Different process modeling strategies are summarized, and key aspects of these models are discussed. Significant results such as thermal and fluid flow characteristics, effects of nozzle geometry on melt flow, fiber orientation, bead spreading, and solidification, the formation of residual stresses, and deformation behavior are discussed from computational modeling perspective. The scientific advancement, model limitations, and future modeling needs are prescribed reviewing the current works. A general overview of material development in nano-micro-macro-scale reinforcement is also presented. Different length-scales of reinforcement has its own challenges and promises. The continuous fiber reinforcement has a great potential for being the next-generation composites manufacturing technology. However, the challenges in reducing the void content, better bonding between the fiber–matrix, and layer-layer adhesion, and process uncertainty are some of the key areas yet to advance. Based on the current limitations on computational modeling, materials development, and process modeling studies, future research needs and recommendations are provided.
HullCW. Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. Google Patents, 1986.
2.
SachsEMHaggertyJSCimaMJ, et al. Three-dimensional printing techniques. Google Patents, 1993.
3.
ParkJTariMJHahnHT.Characterization of the laminated object manufacturing (LOM) process. Rapid Prototyp J2000;
6: 36–50.
4.
GuDMeinersWWissenbachK, et al.
Laser additive manufacturing of metallic components: materials, processes and mechanisms. Int Mater Rev2012;
57: 133–164.
5.
CrumpSS. Apparatus and method for creating three-dimensional objects. Google Patents, 1992.
6.
ManapatJZChenQYeP, et al.
3D printing of polymer nanocomposites via stereolithography. Macromol Mater Eng2017;
302: 1600553.
7.
IvanovaOWilliamsCCampbellT.Additive manufacturing (AM) and nanotechnology: promises and challenges. Rapid Prototyp J2013;
19: 353–364.
8.
NingFCongWQiuJ, et al.
Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modeling. Compos Part B Eng2015;
80: 369–378.
9.
Wohlers Report 2018. 3D printing and additive manufacturing state of the industry: annual worldwide progressreport.
USA:
Wohlers Associates, 2018.
10.
ASTM I. ASTM52900-15 standard terminology for additive manufacturing—general principles—terminology.
West Conshohocken, PA:
ASTM International, 2015.
11.
van de WerkenNTekinalpHKhanboloukiP, et al.Additively manufactured carbon fiber-reinforced composites: state of the art and perspective.Addit Manuf2019;
31:100962.
12.
GoodridgeRDShofnerMLHagueRJ, et al.Processing of a Polyamide-12/carbon nanofibre composite by laser sintering. Polym Test2011;
30: 94–100.
13.
JanssonAPejrydLJAM.Characterisation of carbon fibre-reinforced polyamide manufactured by selective laser sintering. Addit Manuf2016;
9: 7–13.
14.
ChenBBerrettaSEvansK, et al.A primary study into graphene/polyether ether ketone (PEEK) nanocomposite for laser sintering.Appl Surf Sci2018;
428: 1018–1028.
15.
YanMTianXPengG, et al.
High temperature rheological behavior and sintering kinetics of CF/PEEK composites during selective laser sintering. Compos Sci Technol2018;
165: 140–147.
16.
ParandoushPZhouCLinD.3D printing of ultrahigh strength continuous carbon fiber composites. Adv Eng Mater2019;
21: 1800622.
WangXJiangMZhouZ, et al.
3D printing of polymer matrix composites: a review and prospective. Compos Part B Eng2017;
110: 442–458.
25.
NgoTDKashaniAImbalzanoG, et al.
Additive manufacturing (3D printing): a review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Compos Part B Eng2018;
143: 172–196.
26.
ParandoushPLinD.A review on additive manufacturing of polymer-fiber composites. Compos Struct2017;
182: 36–53.
27.
GohGDYapYLAgarwalaS, et al.
Recent progress in additive manufacturing of fiber reinforced polymer composite. Adv Mater Technol2019;
4: 1800271.
28.
HofstätterTPedersenDBToselloG, et al.
State-of-the-art of fiber-reinforced polymers in additive manufacturing technologies. J Reinforced Plast Compos2017;
36: 1061–1073.
29.
PopescuDZapciuAAmzaC, et al.
FDM process parameters influence over the mechanical properties of polymer specimens: a review. Polym Test2018;
69: 157–166.
30.
MohanNSenthilPVinodhS, et al.
A review on composite materials and process parameters optimisation for the fused deposition modelling process. Virtual Phys Prototyp2017;
12: 47–59.
31.
BrenkenBBarocioEFavaloroA, et al.
Fused filament fabrication of fiber-reinforced polymers: a review. Addit Manuf2018;
21: 1–16.
32.
TurnerBNStrongRGoldSA.A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes: I. Process design and modeling. Rapid Prototyp J2014;
20: 192–204.
33.
RamanathHChuaCLeongK, et al.
Melt flow behaviour of poly-ε-caprolactone in fused deposition modelling. J Mater Sci Mater Med2008;
19: 2541–2550.
34.
HellerBPSmithDEJackDA.Effects of extrudate swell and nozzle geometry on fiber orientation in fused filament fabrication nozzle flow. Addit Manuf2016;
12: 252–264.
35.
PipesRBHearleJBeaussartA, et al.
A constitutive relation for the viscous flow of an oriented fiber assembly. J Compos Mater1991;
25: 1204–1217.
36.
DutyCEAjinjeruCKishoreV, et al.A viscoelastic model for evaluating extrusion-based print conditions. Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL), TN, USA: Oak Ridge, 2017.
37.
FitzharrisERWatanabeNRosenDW, et al.
Effects of material properties on warpage in fused deposition modeling parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018;
95: 2059–2070.
38.
WatanabeNShofnerMTreatN, et al. A model for residual stress and part warpage prediction in material extrusion with application to polypropylene. In: 2016 annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium, Austin, 2016.
39.
AbbottATandonGBradfordR, et al.
Process-structure-property effects on ABS bond strength in fused filament fabrication. Addit Manuf2018;
19: 29–38.
40.
YunusDEShiWSohrabiS, et al.
Shear induced alignment of short nanofibers in 3D printed polymer composites. Nanotechnology2016;
27: 495302.
41.
YunusDEHeRShiW, et al.
Short fiber reinforced 3d printed ceramic composite with shear induced alignment. Ceram Int2017;
43: 11766–11772.
42.
YardmciA.Process analysis and development for fused deposition. PhD Thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, 1999.
43.
RodriguezMJ.Modeling the mechanical behavior of fused deposition acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene polymer components. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, USA, 1999.
44.
BelliniA.Fused deposition of ceramics: a comprehensive experimental, analytical and computational study of material behavior, fabrication process and equipment design. 2002.
45.
WatanableN.Computational and experimental investigation of reinforced polymers for material extrusion additive manufacturing. Masters Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology
, USA, 2016.
46.
MostafaNSyedHMIgorS, et al.
A study of melt flow analysis of an ABS-Iron composite in fused deposition modelling process. Tinshhua Sci Technol2009;
14: 29–37.
47.
StewartSRWentzJEAllisonJT. Experimental and Computational Fluid Dynamic Analysis of Melt Flow Behavior in Fused Deposition Modelling of Poly (lactic) Acid. In: ASME 2015 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2015.
48.
PaponEAHaqueASharifMAR.Effect of nozzle geometry on melt flow simulation and structural property of thermoplastic nanocomposites in fused deposition modeling. In: Proceeding of the American society for composites, Thirty-second technical conference, 2017.
49.
KimTTrangkanukulkijRKimWS.Nozzle shape guided filler orientation in 3D printed photo-curable nanocomposites. Sci Rep2018;
8: 3805.
NixonJDryerBLempertI, et al. Three parameter analysis of fiber orientation in fused deposition modeling geometries. In: Proceedings of PPS conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, 28–30 April 2014.
52.
GarciaA.Nozzle geometry effects on exit orientation of short fiber composites.Kansas:
Wichita State University, 2017.
53.
FolgarFTuckerCLIII. Orientation behavior of fibers in concentrated suspensions. J Reinforced Plast Compos1984;
3: 98–119.
54.
AdvaniSGTuckerCLIII. The use of tensors to describe and predict fiber orientation in short fiber composites. J Rheol1987;
31: 751–784.
55.
WangZSmithD.Rheology effects on predicted fiber orientation and elastic properties in large scale polymer composite additive manufacturing. J Compos Sci2018;
2: 10.
56.
WangZSmithDE.Numerical analysis of screw swirling effects on fiber orientation in large area additive manufacturing polymer composite deposition. Compos Part B Eng2019;
177: 107284.
57.
LewickiJPRodriguezJNZhuC, et al.
3D-printing of meso-structurally ordered carbon fiber/polymer composites with unprecedented orthotropic physical properties. Sci Rep2017;
7: 43401.
58.
BertevasEFérecJKhooBC, et al.
Smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) modeling of fiber orientation in a 3D printing process. Phys Fluids2018;
30: 103103.
59.
YangDWuKWanL, et al.
A particle element approach for modelling the 3D printing process of fibre reinforced polymer composites. J Manuf Mater Process2017;
1: 10.
60.
HellerBPSmithDEJackDA.Planar deposition flow modeling of fiber filled composites in large area.Addit Manuf2019;
25: 227–238.
61.
DutyCEKuncVComptonB, et al.
Structure and mechanical behavior of big area additive manufacturing (BAAM) materials. Rapid Prototyp J2017;
23: 181–189.
62.
TekinalpHLKuncVVelez-GarciaGM, et al.
Highly oriented carbon fiber–polymer composites via additive manufacturing. Compos Sci Technol2014;
105: 144–150.
63.
MulhollandTGorisSBoxleitnerJ, et al.
Process-induced fiber orientation in fused filament fabrication. J Compos Sci2018;
2: 45.
64.
RussellTHellerBJackDA, et al.Prediction of the fiber orientation state and the resulting structural and thermal properties of fiber reinforced additive manufactured composites fabricated using the big area additive manufacturing process. J Compos Sci2018;
2: 26.
65.
FurlaniEPSukhotskiyVVermaA, et al.Numerical simulation of extrusion additive manufacturing: fused deposition modeling.Inf Electron Microsysts TechConnect Brief2018; 118–121.
66.
RavooriDLoweryCPrajapatiH, et al.
Experimental and theoretical investigation of heat transfer in platform bed during polymer extrusion based additive manufacturing. Polym Test2019;
73: 439–446.
67.
XiaHLuJDabiriS, et al.
Fully resolved numerical simulations of fused deposition modeling. Part I: fluid flow. Rapid Prototyp J2018;
24: 463–476.
68.
ComminalRSerdecznyMPPedersenDB, et al.
Numerical modeling of the strand deposition flow in extrusion-based additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2018;
20: 68–76.
69.
SerdecznyMPComminalRPedersenDB, et al.
Experimental validation of a numerical model for the strand shape in material extrusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2018;
24: 145–153.
70.
SerdecznyMPComminalRPedersenDB, et al.Numerical prediction of the porosity of parts fabricated with fused deposition modeling. In: 29th annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium (SFF Symp 2018), Austin, United States, 2018.
71.
ComminalRSerdecznyMPedersenD, et al. Laboratory for freeform fabrication. In: 29th Annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium (SFF Symp 2018), Austin, Texas, USA, 13–15 August 2018.
72.
BalaniSBChabertFNassietV, et al.
Influence of printing parameters on the stability of deposited beads in fused filament fabrication of poly (lactic) acid. Addit Manuf2019;
25: 112–121.
73.
BalaniSBArthurCFranceC, et al.Influence of parameters controlling the extrusion step in fused filament fabrication (FFF) process applied to polymers using numerical simulation. AIP Conf Proc2018;
1960: 140003.
74.
LiuJAndersonKLSridharN.Direct simulation of polymer fused deposition modeling (FDM)-an implementation of the multi-phase viscoelastic solver in OpenFOAM. Int J Comput Methods2018;
17: 1844002.
75.
Atif YardimciMHattoriTGuceriSI, et al.Thermal analysis of fused deposition. Int Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium.1997.
76.
BrenkenBFavaloroABarocioE, et al. Development of a model to predict temperature history and crystallization behavior of 3D printed parts made from fiber-reinforced thermoplastic polymers. In: SAMPE conference, Long Beach, CA, 2016.
77.
ZhouYNybergTXiongG, et al. Temperature analysis in the fused deposition modeling process. In: 2016 3rd international conference on information science and control engineering (ICISCE), IEEE, 2016.
78.
PooladvandKFurlongC.Thermo-mechanical investigation of fused deposition modeling by computational and experimental methods.Mech Compos Multifunct Mater2017;
7: 45–54.
79.
XiaHLuJTryggvasonG.A numerical study of the effect of viscoelastic stresses in fused filament fabrication. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2019;
346: 242–259.
80.
LikhtmanAEGrahamRS.Simple constitutive equation for linear polymer melts derived from molecular theory: Rolie–Poly equation. J Non-Newton Fluid Mech2003;
114: 1–12.
81.
ComptonBGPostBKDutyCE, et al.
Thermal analysis of additive manufacturing of large-scale thermoplastic polymer composites. Addit Manuf2017;
17: 77–86.
82.
TalaganiMDorMohammadiSDuttonR, et al.
Numerical simulation of big area additive manufacturing (3D printing) of a full size car. SAMPE J2015;
27: 36.
83.
FavaloroAJBrenkenBBarocioE, et al. Simulation of polymeric composites additive manufacturing using Abaqus. In: Proceedings of the Dassault Systemes’ Science in the Age of Experience, Chicago, IL, 15–18 May 2017.
84.
SpinnieNK.Large scale fused deposition modeling: the effect of process parameters on bead geometry. PhD Thesis, Virginia Tech, 2016.
85.
BellehumeurCLiLSunQ, et al.
Modeling of bond formation between polymer filaments in the fused deposition modeling process. J Manuf Process2004;
6: 170–178.
86.
SunQ.Bond formation between polymer filaments in fused deposition modeling process. Calgary: University of Calgary, 2005.
87.
ShahriarBBFranceCValerieN, et al.Toward improvement of the properties of parts manufactured by FFF (fused filament fabrication) through understanding the influence of temperature and rheological behaviour on the coalescence phenomenon.AIP Conf Proc2017;
1896: 040008.
88.
SunQRizviGBellehumeurC, et al.
Effect of processing conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer filaments. Rapid Prototyp J2008;
14: 72–80.
89.
GurralaPKRegallaSP.Part strength evolution with bonding between filaments in fused deposition modeling. This paper studies how coalescence of filaments contributes to the strength of final FDM part. Virtual Phys Prototyp2014;
9: 141–149.
90.
CostaSDuarteFCovasJ.Towards modelling of free form extrusion: analytical solution of transient heat transfer. Int J Mater Form2008;
1: 703–706.
91.
CostaSDuarteFCovasJ.Estimation of filament temperature and adhesion development in fused deposition techniques. J Mater Process Technol2017;
245: 167–179.
92.
McIlroyCGrahamR.Modelling flow-enhanced crystallisation during fused filament fabrication of semi-crystalline polymer melts. Addit Manuf2018;
24: 323–340.
93.
McIlroyCOlmstedP.Disentanglement effects on welding behaviour of polymer melts during the fused-filament-fabrication method for additive manufacturing. Polymer2017;
123: 376–391.
94.
McIlroyCOlmstedPD.Deformation of an amorphous polymer during the fused-filament-fabrication method for additive manufacturing. J Rheol2017;
61: 379–397.
95.
BarocioEBrenkenBFavaloroA, et al. Fusion bonding simulations of semi-crystalline polymer composites in the extrusion deposition additive manufacturing process. In: Proceedings of the American Society for Composites—Thirty-second Technical Conference, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 23–25 October 2017.
96.
DrummerDCifuentes-CuéllarSRietzelD.Suitability of PLA/TCP for fused deposition modeling.Rapid Prototyp J. 2012;
18: 500–507.
97.
GnanasekaranKHeijmansTVan BennekomS, et al.3D printing of CNT-and graphene-based conductive polymer nanocomposites by fused deposition modeling. Appl Mater Today2017;
9: 21–28.
98.
LiHZhangSYiZ, et al.Bonding quality and fracture analysis of polyamide 12 parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling.Rapid Protype J2017;
23: 973–982.
99.
WuWGengPLiG, et al.Influence of layer thickness and raster angle on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed PEEK and a comparative mechanical study between PEEK and ABS.Materials (Basel)2015;
8: 5834–5846.
100.
WangT-MXiJ-TJinY.A model research for prototype warp deformation in the FDM process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2007;
33: 1087–1096.
101.
XinhuaLShengpengLZhouL, et al.
An investigation on distortion of PLA thin-plate part in the FDM process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2015;
79: 1117–1126.
102.
WijnenBSandersPPearceJM.Improved model and experimental validation of deformation in fused filament fabrication of polylactic acid. Prog Addit Manuf2018;
3: 193–203.
103.
ArmillottaABellottiMCavallaroM.Warpage of FDM parts: Experimental tests and analytic model. Robot Comput Int Manuf2018;
50: 140–152.
104.
ZhangYChouK.A parametric study of part distortions in fused deposition modelling using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf2008;
222: 959–968.
105.
ZhangYChouY.Three-dimensional finite element analysis simulations of the fused deposition modelling process. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf2006;
220: 1663–1671.
106.
XiaHLuJTryggvasonG.Fully resolved numerical simulations of fused deposition modeling. Part II–solidification, residual stresses and modeling of the nozzle. Rapid Prototyp J2018;
24: 973–987.
107.
XiaHLuJTryggvasonG.Simulations of fused filament fabrication using a front tracking method. Int J Heat Mass Transf2019;
138: 1310–1319.
108.
DuJWeiZWangX, et al.
An improved fused deposition modeling process for forming large-size thin-walled parts. J Mater Process Technol2016;
234: 332–341.
109.
CattenoneAMorgantiSAlaimoG, et al.
Finite element analysis of additive manufacturing based on fused deposition modeling: distortions prediction and comparison with experimental data. J Manuf Sci Eng2019;
141: 011010.
110.
ShofnerMRodrı́guez-Macı́asFVaidyanathanR, et al.
Single wall nanotube and vapor grown carbon fiber reinforced polymers processed by extrusion freeform fabrication. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2003;
34: 1207–1217.
111.
DorigatoAMorettiVDulS, et al.
Electrically conductive nanocomposites for fused deposition modelling. Synth Met2017;
226: 7–14.
112.
DulSFambriLPegorettiA.Filaments production and fused deposition modelling of ABS/carbon nanotubes composites. Nanomaterials2018;
8: 49.
113.
ZhangWCottonCSunJ, et al.
Interfacial bonding strength of short carbon fiber/acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene composites fabricated by fused deposition modeling. Compos Part B Eng2018;
137: 51–59.
114.
PatanwalaHSHongDVoraSR, et al.
The microstructure and mechanical properties of 3D printed carbon nanotube‐polylactic acid composites. Polym Compos2018;
39: E1060–E1071.
115.
LebedevSGefleOAmitovE, et al.
Mechanical properties of PLA-based composites for fused deposition modeling technology. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018;
97: 511–518.
116.
NadernezhadAUnalSKhaniN, et al.
Material extrusion-based additive manufacturing of structurally controlled poly (lactic acid)/carbon nanotube nanocomposites. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2019;
102: 1–14.
117.
GonçalvesJLimaPKrauseB, et al.
Electrically conductive polyetheretherketone nanocomposite filaments: from production to fused deposition modeling. Polymers2018;
10: 925.
118.
KaliaKAmeliA. Tensile Properties of 3D-Printed Polycarbonate/Carbon Nanotube Nanocomposites. In: ASME 2018 conference on smart materials, adaptive structures and intelligent systems, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 10–12 September 2018. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
119.
PaponEAHaqueA.Tensile properties, void contents, dispersion and fracture behaviour of 3D printed carbon nanofiber reinforced composites. J Reinforced Plast Compos2018;
37: 381–395.
120.
AumnateCPongwisuthiruchteAPattananuwatP, et al.
Fabrication of ABS/graphene oxide composite filament for fused filament fabrication (FFF) 3D printing. Adv Mater Sci Eng2018;
2018:9.
121.
DulSFambriLMerliniC, et al.
Effect of graphene nanoplatelets structure on the properties of acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene composites. Polym Compos2017;
40: E285–E300.
122.
ZhuDRenYLiaoG, et al.
Thermal and mechanical properties of polyamide 12/graphene nanoplatelets nanocomposites and parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling. J Appl Polym Sci2017;
134: 45332.
123.
CoppolaBCappettiNMaioLD, et al.
3D printing of PLA/clay nanocomposites: influence of printing temperature on printed samples properties. Materials2018;
11: 1947.
124.
Es-SaidOFoyosJNooraniR, et al.
Effect of layer orientation on mechanical properties of rapid prototyped samples. Mater Manuf Process2000;
15: 107–122.
125.
BerrettaSDaviesRShyngY, et al.
Fused deposition modelling of high temperature polymers: exploring CNT PEEK composites. Polym Test2017;
63: 251–262.
126.
XuYWuXGuoX, et al.
The boom in 3D-printed sensor technology. Sensors2017;
17: 1166.
127.
LoveLJKuncVRiosO, et al.
The importance of carbon fiber to polymer additive manufacturing. J Mater Res2014;
29: 1893–1898.
128.
JiangDSmithDE.Anisotropic mechanical properties of oriented carbon fiber filled polymer composites produced with fused filament fabrication. Addit Manuf2017;
18: 84–94.
129.
PaponEAHaqueASpearSK. Effects of fiber surface treatment and nozzle geometry in structural properties of additively manufactured two-phase composites. In: AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, San Diego, California, 7–11 January 2019.
130.
SangLHanSLiZ, et al.
Development of short basalt fiber reinforced polylactide composites and their feasible evaluation for 3D printing applications. Compos Part B Eng2019;
164: 629–639.
131.
FerreiraRTLAmatteICDutraTA, et al.
Experimental characterization and micrography of 3D printed PLA and PLA reinforced with short carbon fibers. Compos Part B Eng2017;
124: 88–100.
132.
IveyMMelenkaGWCareyJP, et al.
Characterizing short-fiber-reinforced composites produced using additive manufacturing. Adv Manuf Polym Compos Sci2017;
3: 81–91.
133.
LiYGaoSDongR, et al.
Additive Manufacturing of PLA and CF/PLA Binding Layer Specimens via Fused Deposition Modeling. J Mater Eng Perform2018;
27: 492–500.
134.
LiaoGLiZChengY, et al.
Properties of oriented carbon fiber/polyamide 12 composite parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling. Mater Des2018;
139: 283–292.
135.
YuZBaiYLiY, et al.
Fiber length distribution and thermal, mechanical and morphological properties of thermally conductive polycarbonate/chopped carbon fiber composites. Polym Int2018;
67: 1137–1144.
136.
ChuangKCGradyJEDraperRD, et al. Additive manufacturing and characterization of Ultem polymers and composites. In: CAMX conference proceedings, Dallas, TX, 26–29 October 2015.
137.
ShofnerMLozanoKRodríguezF, et al.
Nanofiber reinforced polymers prepared by fused deposition modeling. J Appl Polym Sci2003;
89: 3081–3090.
138.
PerezARTRobersonDAWickerRB.Fracture surface analysis of 3D-printed tensile specimens of novel ABS-based materials. J Fail Anal Preven2014;
14: 343–353.
139.
LiXNiZBaiS, et al.Preparation and mechanical properties of fiber reinforced PLA for 3D printing materials.IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng2018;
322.
140.
MilosevicMStoofDPickeringK.Characterizing the mechanical properties of fused deposition modelling natural fiber recycled polypropylene composites. J Compos Sci2017;
1: 7.
Van Der KliftFKogaYTodorokiA, et al.
3D printing of continuous carbon fibre reinforced thermo-plastic (CFRTP) tensile test specimens. Open J Compos Mater2016;
6: 18–27.
144.
MelenkaGWCheungBKSchofieldJS, et al.
Evaluation and prediction of the tensile properties of continuous fiber-reinforced 3D printed structures. Compos Struct2016;
153: 866–875.
145.
DicksonANBarryJNMcDonnellKA, et al.
Fabrication of continuous carbon, glass and Kevlar fibre reinforced polymer composites using additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2017;
16: 146–152.
146.
GohGDikshitVNagalingamA, et al.
Characterization of mechanical properties and fracture mode of additively manufactured carbon fiber and glass fiber reinforced thermoplastics. Mater Des2018;
137: 79–89.
147.
LozadaJNAhuett-GarzaHCastañónPO, et al.
Tensile properties and failure behavior of chopped and continuous carbon fiber composites produced by additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf2019;
26: 227–241.
148.
OztanCKarkkainenRFittipaldiM, et al.
Microstructure and mechanical properties of three dimensional-printed continuous fiber composites. J Compos Mater2019;
53: 271–280.
149.
DongGTangYLiD, et al.
Mechanical properties of continuous Kevlar fiber reinforced composites fabricated by fused deposition modeling process. Proc Manuf2018;
26: 774–781.
150.
JustoJTávaraLGarcía-GuzmánL, et al.
Characterization of 3D printed long fibre reinforced composites. Compos Struct2018;
185: 537–548.
151.
MatsuzakiRUedaMNamikiM, et al.
Three-dimensional printing of continuous-fiber composites by in-nozzle impregnation. Sci Rep2016;
6: 23058.
152.
LiNLiYLiuS.Rapid prototyping of continuous carbon fiber reinforced polylactic acid composites by 3D printing. J Mater Process Technol2016;
238: 218–225.
153.
TianXLiuTWangQ, et al.
Recycling and remanufacturing of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber reinforced PLA composites. J Clean Prod2017;
142: 1609–1618.
154.
AkhoundiBBehraveshAHBagheri SaedA.Improving mechanical properties of continuous fiber-reinforced thermoplastic composites produced by FDM 3D printer. J Reinforced Plast Compos2019;
38: 99–116.
155.
BettiniPAlittaGSalaG, et al.
Fused deposition technique for continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastic. J Mater Eng Perform2017;
26: 843–848.
156.
BaumannFScholzJFleischerJ.Investigation of a new approach for additively manufactured continuous fiber-reinforced polymers. Proc CIRP2017;
66: 323–328.
157.
YangCTianXLiuT, et al.
3D printing for continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites: mechanism and performance. Rapid Prototyp J2017;
23: 209–215.
158.
ChabaudGCastroMDenoualC, et al.
Hygromechanical properties of 3D printed continuous carbon and glass fibre reinforced polyamide composite for outdoor structural applications. Addit Manuf2019;
26: 94–105.
StarkeEAJrStaleyJT.Application of modern aluminum alloys to aircraft. Prog Aerospace Sci1996;
32: 131–172.
161.
NawaflehNCelikE.Additive manufacturing of short fiber reinforced thermoset composites with unprecedented mechanical performance. Mismatch]. Addit Manuf2020;
33: 101109.
162.
NusserKSchneiderGJPyckhout-HintzenW, et al.Viscosity decrease and reinforcement in polymer–silsesquioxane composites. Macromolecules2011;
44: 7820–7830.
163.
ChatterjeeSNafezarefiFTaiN, et al.
Size and synergy effects of nanofiller hybrids including graphene nanoplatelets and carbon nanotubes in mechanical properties of epoxy composites.Carbon2012;
50: 5380–5386.
164.
UddinMFSunC-T.Major accomplishments in composite materials and sandwich structures.
Berlin, Germany:
Springer, 2009, p.693–715.
165.
MaXZareYRheeKY.A two-step methodology to study the influence of aggregation/agglomeration of nanoparticles on Young’s modulus of polymer nanocomposites.Nanoscale Res Lett2017;
12: 621.
166.
AshrafMAPengWZareY, et al.Effects of size and aggregation/agglomeration of nanoparticles on the interfacial/interphase properties and tensile strength of polymer nanocomposites.Nanoscale Res Lett2018;
13: 214.
167.
FerdousSFSarkerMFAdnanAJP.Role of nanoparticle dispersion and filler-matrix interface on the matrix dominated failure of rigid C60-PE nanocomposites: a molecular dynamics simulation study. Polymer2013;
54: 2565–2576.
168.
DulSFambriLPegorettiA.Fused deposition modelling with ABS–graphene nanocomposites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2016;
85: 181–191.
169.
TronvollSAWeloTElverumCW.The effects of voids on structural properties of fused deposition modelled parts: a probabilistic approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018;
97: 3607–3618.
170.
TandonGWhitneyTGerzeskiR, et al.Process parameter effects on interlaminar fracture toughness of FDM printed coupons. Mech Compos Multi-functional Mater2017;
7: 63–71.
171.
LiHWangTSunJ, et al.
The effect of process parameters in fused deposition modelling on bonding degree and mechanical properties. Rapid Prototyp J2018;
24: 80–92.
172.
GebisaAWLemuHG.Investigating effects of fused-deposition modeling (FDM) processing parameters on flexural properties of ULTEM 9085 using designed experiment. Materials2018;
11: 500.
173.
MohamedOAMasoodSHBhowmikJL.Mathematical modeling and FDM process parameters optimization using response surface methodology based on Q-optimal design. Appl Math Model2016;
40: 10052–10073.
174.
TorresJColeMOwjiA, et al.
An approach for mechanical property optimization of fused deposition modeling with polylactic acid via design of experiments. Rapid Prototyp J2016;
22: 387–404.
175.
PadhiSKSahuRKMahapatraS, et al.
Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters using a fuzzy inference system coupled with Taguchi philosophy. Adv Manuf2017;
5: 231–242.
176.
DongGWijayaGTangY, et al.
Optimizing process parameters of fused deposition modeling by Taguchi method for the fabrication of lattice structures. Addit Manuf2018;
19: 62–72.
177.
NingFCongWHuY, et al.
Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites using fused deposition modeling: effects of process parameters on tensile properties. J Compos Mater2017;
51: 451–462.
178.
PaponEAMulaniSBHaqueA. Optimization and polynomial chaos-based uncertainty analysis of additively manufactured polymer composites. In: Proceedings of the American society for composites—thirty-third technical conference. Seattle, WA, USA, 2018.
179.
Domingo-EspinMPuigoriol-ForcadaJMGarcia-GranadaA-A, et al.
Mechanical property characterization and simulation of fused deposition modeling polycarbonate parts. Mater Des2015;
83: 670–677.
180.
FarbmanDMcCoyC. Materials testing of 3D printed ABS and PLA samples to guide mechanical design. In: ASME 2016 11th International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2016.
181.
MohamedOAMasoodSHBhowmikJL.Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters: a review of current research and future prospects. Adv Manuf2015;
3: 42–53.
182.
PaponEAHaqueAMulaniSB.Process optimization and stochastic modeling of void contents and mechanical properties in additively manufactured composites.Compos Part B Eng2019;
177: 107325.
183.
TangLGKardosJL.A review of methods for improving the interfacial adhesion between carbon fiber and polymer matrix. Polym Compos1997;
18: 100–113.
184.
CamineroMChacónJGarcia-MorenoI, et al.
Impact damage resistance of 3D printed continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modelling. Compos Part B Eng2018;
148: 93–103.
185.
CamineroMChacónJGarcía-MorenoI, et al.
Interlaminar bonding performance of 3D printed continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modelling. Polym Test2018;
68: 415–423.
186.
YoungDWetmoreNCzabajM.Interlayer fracture toughness of additively manufactured unreinforced and carbon-fiber-reinforced acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. Addit Manuf2018;
22: 508–515.
187.
FerrellWHTerMaathSC.Print parameter effects on the fracture properties of fiber reinforced ABS composites fabricated through fused deposition modeling.
San Diego, California:
AIAA Scitech, 2019.
188.
TofangchiAHanPIzquierdoJ, et al.
Effect of ultrasonic vibration on interlayer adhesion in fused filament fabrication 3D printed ABS. Polymers2019;
11: 315.
189.
RaviAKDeshpandeAHsuKH.An in-process laser localized pre-deposition heating approach to inter-layer bond strengthening in extrusion based polymer additive manufacturing. J Manuf Process2016;
24: 179–185.
190.
KishoreVAjinjeruCNyczA, et al.
Infrared preheating to improve interlayer strength of big area additive manufacturing (BAAM) components. Addit Manuf2017;
14: 7–12.
191.
SweeneyCBLackeyBAPospisilMJ, et al.
Welding of 3D-printed carbon nanotube–polymer composites by locally induced microwave heating. Sci Adv2017;
3: e1700262.
192.
ParandoushPTuckerLZhouC, et al.
Laser assisted additive manufacturing of continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites. Mater Des2017;
131: 186–195.
193.
DutyCFaillaJKimS, et al.
Z-pinning approach for 3D printing mechanically isotropic materials. Addit Manuf2019;
27: 175–184.
194.
KubalakJRMansfieldCDPesekTH, et al. Design and realization of a 6 degree of freedom robotic extrusion platform. In: Solid freeform fabrication symposium, Austin, Texas, USA, 2016.
195.
KubalakJRWicksALWilliamsCB.Using multi-axis material extrusion to improve mechanical properties through surface reinforcement. Virtual Phys Prototyp2018;
13: 32–38.
196.
RazviSSFengSNarayananA, et al.A Review of Machine Learning Applications in Additive Manufacturing. In: ASME 2019 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2019.
197.
GuGXChenC-TRichmondDJ, et al.Bioinspired hierarchical composite design using machine learning: simulation, additive manufacturing, and experiment. Mater Horizons2018;
5: 939–945.
