The trends and challenges of fiber reinforced additive manufacturing

  • Ismail FidanEmail author
  • Astrit Imeri
  • Ankit Gupta
  • Seymur Hasanov
  • Aslan Nasirov
  • Amy Elliott
  • Frank Alifui-Segbaya
  • Norimichi Nanami


In the last few years, utilizing fiber reinforced additive manufacturing (FRAM)-based components in several industries has become quite popular. Compared to conventional AM technologies, FRAM offered complementary solutions to their needs. In general, fibers have been traditionally used in many manufacturing processes for various reasons. However, using conventional methods, there are obstacles in obtaining the desired complex geometries and low setup costs. AM offers possible avoidance of these limitations. Shape complexity, infill density, and manufacturing lead times are no longer barriers. Bridging AM with fiber reinforced materials offers a vast opportunity for lightweight and strong parts. Depending on the affinity, fibers with different structures can be mixed with different matrix materials and, thus, create stronger parts with improved mechanical properties. Process parameters like raster angle, infill speed, layer thickness, and nozzle temperature also strongly impact physical properties of FRAM products and are considered carefully. FRAM-based components are used in many industries such as aerospace, motorsports, and biomedicine, where the weight, strength, and complexity of parts are critical. Hence, numerous industrial companies and research facilities are investigating the implementation and adaptation of FRAM to their requirements. Studies are generally conducted on new materials, new FRAM technologies, the effect of fiber orientations and fraction on the performance of parts, improving the printing parameters, and other subjects. This study reports the current trends and challenges that FRAM is bringing to AM ecosystem.


Fiber reinforced additive manufacturing Composite Matrix Reinforcement Polymer Fiber 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The editing and source contributions made available by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s Olivia Shafer are appreciated by the project team.

Funding information

This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Advanced Manufacturing, under contract number DE-AC05-00OR22725. Dr. Fidan and Dr. Elliott would like to acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant No. ATE-1601587.


  1. 1.
    Feldman D (2008) Polymer history. Des Monomers Polym 11–1:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Szabo TL (2005) Introduction to plastics. In: Plastics, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–20Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roff WJ, Scott JR (1971) Polyvinyl formal, acetal and butyral. In: Fibres, films, plastics and rubbers. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 82–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thiry MC (2004) The customer is king!: quality, performance, and the challenge of keeping the consumer happy. AATCC Rev 4(3):35–38Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Palucka T, Bensaude-Vincent B (2002) Composites: overview. Hist. Recent Sci. Technol. жовтня. Available: Accessed 06 Jan 2019
  6. 6.
    Mallick P (2007) Fiber-reinforced composites, vol 20072757, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Donachie MJ, Zweben C (2005) Mechanical engineers’ handbook, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Conner B et al (2014) Making sense of 3-D printing: creating a map of additive manufacturing products and services. Addit. Manuf. 1:64–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kruth JP, Mercelis P, Van Vaerenbergh J, Froyen L, Rombouts M (2005) Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J 11(1):26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahn SH, Montero M, Odell D, Roundy S, Wright PK (2002) Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling ABS. Rapid Prototyp J 8(4):248–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Melchels FPW, Feijen J, Grijpma DW (2010) A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials 31(24):6121–6130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klosterman D, Chartoff R, Graves G, Osborne N, Priore B (1998) Interfacial characteristics of composites fabricated by laminated object manufacturing. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 29(9–10):1165–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Masood SH, Song WQ (2005) Thermal characteristics of a new metal/polymer material for FDM rapid prototyping process. Assem Autom 25(4):309–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brooks H, Molony S (2016) Design and evaluation of additively manufactured parts with three dimensional continuous fibre reinforcement. Mater Des 90:276–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bandyopadhyay SK, Ghose PK, Bose SK, Mukhopadhyay U (1987) The thermal resistance of jute and jute-blend fabrics. J Text Inst 78(4):255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Powell T, Panigrahi S, Ward J, Tabil LG, Crerar WJ, Sokansanj S (2002) Engineering properties of flax fiber and flax fiber-reinforced thermoplastic in rotational molding, in 2002 ASAE/CSAE North-Central Intersectional Meeting, 2002 © ASAE. J Mater:1–7.
  17. 17.
    Farah S, Anderson DG, Langer R (2016) Physical and mechanical properties of PLA, and their functions in widespread applications—a comprehensive review. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 107:367–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DuPont, “KEVLAR ® ARAMID FIBER TECHNICAL GUIDE,” 2017. [Online]. Available: Accessed 12 Oct 2018
  19. 19.
    Cichocki FR, Thomason JL (2002) Thermoelastic anisotropy of a natural fiber. Compos Sci Technol 62(5):669–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thomason J, Yang L, Gentles F (2017) Characterisation of the anisotropic thermoelastic properties of natural fibres for composite reinforcement. Fibers 5(4):36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Unterweger C, Brüggemann O, Fürst C (Feb. 2014) Synthetic fibers and thermoplastic short-fiber-reinforced polymers: properties and characterization. Polym Compos 35(2):227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Markforged, “,” (2017) [Online]. Available: Accessed 12 Oct 2018
  23. 23.
    Ivey M, Melenka GW, Carey JP, Ayranci C (2017) Characterizing short-fiber-reinforced composites produced using additive manufacturing. Adv Manuf Polym Compos Sci 0340:1–11Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ning F, Cong W, Qiu J, Wei J, Wang S (2015) Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modeling. Compos. Part B Eng. 80:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    “Mark Two | Markforged.” [Online]. Available: Accessed 29 Sep 2018
  26. 26.
    “X7 | Markforged.” [Online]. Available: Accessed 29 Sep 2018]
  27. 27.
    Gu D, Wang H, Zhang G (2014) Selective laser melting additive manufacturing of Ti-based nanocomposites: the role of nanopowder. Metall Mater Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci 45(1):464–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gu D, Wang H, Chang F, Dai D, Yuan P, Hagedorn YC, Meiners W (2014) Selective laser melting additive manufacturing of TiC/AlSi10Mg bulk-form nanocomposites with tailored microstructures and properties. Phys Procedia 56(C):108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chalmers DW (1994) The potential for the use of composite materials in marine structures. Mar Struct 7:441–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pereira TF, Oliveira MF, Maia IA, Silva JVL, Costa MF, Thiré RMSM (2012) 3D printing of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) porous structures using selective laser sintering. Macromol Symp 319(1):64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Oliveira MF, Maia IA, Noritomi PY, Nargi GC, Silva JVL, Ferreira BMP, Duek EAR (2007) Building tissue engineering scaffolds utilizing rapid prototyping. Matéria (Rio Janeiro) 12(2):373–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Campo EA (2006) The complete part design handbook: for injection molding of thermoplastics. Munich, Carl Hanser Verlag, pp 1–114Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Boparai K, Singh R, Singh H (2015) Comparison of tribological behaviour for Nylon6-Al-Al2O3 and ABS parts fabricated by fused deposition modelling: this paper reports a low cost composite material that is more wear-resistant than conventional ABS. Virtual Phys Prototyp 10(2):59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mori KI, Maeno T, Nakagawa Y (2014) Dieless forming of carbon fibre reinforced plastic parts using 3D printer. Procedia Eng 81(October):1595–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ajinjeru C, Kishore V, Liu P, Lindahl J, Hassen AA, Kunc V, Post B, Love L, Duty C (2018) Determination of melt processing conditions for high performance amorphous thermoplastics for large format additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 21:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Masood SH, Song WQ (2004) Development of new metal/polymer materials for rapid tooling using fused deposition modelling. Mater Des 25(7):587–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nugroho P, Mitomo H, Yoshii F, Kume T (2001) Degradation of poly(L-lactic acid) by γ-irradiation. Polym Degrad Stab 72(2):337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Urayama H, Kanamori T, Fukushima K, Kimura Y (2003) Controlled crystal nucleation in the melt-crystallization of poly(L-lactide) and poly(L-lactide)/poly(D-lactide) stereocomplex. Polymer (Guildf) 44(19):5635–5641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tsuji H, Ikada Y (1995) Properties and morphologies of poly(L-lactide): 1. Annealing condition effects on properties and morphologies of poly(L-lactide). Polymer (Guildf). 36(14):2709–2716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Urayama H, Ma C, Kimura Y (2003) Mechanical and thermal properties of poly(L-lactide) incorporating various inorganic fillers with particle and whisker shapes. Macromol Mater Eng 288(7):562–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Trimaille T, Pichot C, Elaïssari A, Fessi H, Briançon S, Delair T (2003) Poly(D,L-lactic acid) nanoparticle preparation and colloidal characterization. Colloid Polym Sci 281(12):1184–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hu X, Xu HS, Li ZM (2007) Morphology and properties of poly(L-lactide) (PLLA) filled with hollow glass beads. Macromol Mater Eng 292(5):646–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Di Y, Iannace S, Di Maio E, Nicolais L (2005) Reactively modified poly (lactic acid): properties and foam processing. Macromol Mater Eng 290(11):1083–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lam CXF, Olkowski R, Swieszkowski W, Tan KC, Gibson I, Hutmacher DW (2009) Composite PLDLLA/TCP scaffolds for bone engineering: mechanical and in vitro evaluations. IFMBE Proc 23(November 2014):1480–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bose S, Vahabzadeh S, Bandyopadhyay A (2013) Bone tissue engineering using 3D printing. Mater Today 16(12):496–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nelson JC, Xue S, Barlow JW, Beaman JJ, Marcus HL, Bourell DL (1993) Model of the selective laser sintering of bisphenol-A polycarbonate. Ind Eng Chem Res 32(10):2305–2317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Berzins M, Childs THC, Ryder GR (1996) The selective laser sintering of polycarbonate. CIRP Ann - Manuf Technol 45(2):187–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Heller C, Schwentenwein M, Russmueller G, Varga F, Stampfl J, Liska R (Dec. 2009) Vinyl esters: low cytotoxicity monomers for the fabrication of biocompatible 3D scaffolds by lithography based additive manufacturing. J Polym Sci Part A Polym Chem 47(24):6941–6954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Minus ML, Kumar S (2005) The processing, properties, and structure of carbon fibers. J Miner Met Mater Soc 57:52–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Chand S (2000) Carbon fibers for composites. J Mater Sci 35(6):1303–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Liao G, Li Z, Cheng Y, Xu D, Zhu D, Jiang S, Guo J, Chen X, Xu G, Zhu Y (2018) Properties of oriented carbon fiber/polyamide 12 composite parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling. Mater Des 139:283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhong W, Li F, Zhang Z, Song L, Li Z (2001) Short fiber reinforced composites for fused deposition modeling. Mater Sci Eng A301 301:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Love LJ, Kunc V, Rios O, Duty CE, Elliott AM, Post BK, Smith RJ, Blue CA (Sep. 2014) The importance of carbon fiber to polymer additive manufacturing. J Mater Res 29(17):1893–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Caminero MA, Chacón JM, García-Moreno I, Reverte JM (2018) Interlaminar bonding performance of 3D printed continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modelling. Polym Test 68:415–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Parandoush P, Tucker L, Zhou C, Lin D (2017) Laser assisted additive manufacturing of continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites. Mater Des 131:186–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chung H, Das S (2006) Processing and properties of glass bead particulate-filled functionally graded Nylon-11 composites produced by selective laser sintering. Mater Sci Eng A 437(2):226–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Invernizzi M, Natale G, Levi M, Turri S, Griffini G (2016) UV-assisted 3D printing of glass and carbon fiber-reinforced dual-cure polymer composites. Materials (Basel) 9(7):583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Goh GD, Dikshit V, Nagalingam AP, Goh GL, Agarwala S, Sing SL, Wei J, Yeong WY (2018) Characterization of mechanical properties and fracture mode of additively manufactured carbon fiber and glass fiber reinforced thermoplastics. Mater Des 137:79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Oliveira MF, Maia IA, Noritomi PY, Nargi GC, Silva JVL, Ferreira BMP, Duek EAR (2007) Construção de Scaffolds para engenharia tecidual utilizando prototipagem rápida. Matéria (Rio Janeiro) 12(2):373–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Matsuzaki R, Ueda M, Namiki M, Jeong TK, Asahara H, Horiguchi K, Nakamura T, Todoroki A, Hirano Y (Sep. 2016) Three-dimensional printing of continuous-fiber composites by in-nozzle impregnation. Sci Rep 6(1):23058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Chen X, Guo Q, Mi Y (Sep. 1998) Bamboo fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites: a study of the mechanical properties. J Appl Polym Sci 69(10):1891–1899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Singh R, Singh S, Fraternali F (2016) Development of in-house composite wire based feed stock filaments of fused deposition modelling for wear-resistant materials and structures. Compos Part B Eng 98:244–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kenzari S, Bonina D, Dubois JM, Fournée V (2012) Quasicrystal-polymer composites for selective laser sintering technology. Mater Des 35:691–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Falck R, Goushegir SM, dos Santos JF, Amancio-Filho ST (2018) AddJoining: a novel additive manufacturing approach for layered metal-polymer hybrid structures. Mater Lett 217:211–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ivanova O, Williams C, Campbell T (2013) Additive manufacturing (AM) and nanotechnology: promises and challenges. Rapid Prototyp J 19(5):353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Zheng H, Zhang J, Lu S, Wang G, Xu Z (2006) Effect of core-shell composite particles on the sintering behavior and properties of nano-Al2O3/polystyrene composite prepared by SLS. Mater Lett 60(9–10):1219–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Kim H, Fernando T, Li M, Lin Y, Tseng T-LB (Jan. 2018) Fabrication and characterization of 3D printed BaTiO 3 /PVDF nanocomposites. J Compos Mater 52(2):197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhang W, Wu AS, Sun J, Quan Z, Gu B, Sun B, Cotton C, Heider D, Chou TW (2017) Characterization of residual stress and deformation in additively manufactured ABS polymer and composite specimens. Compos Sci Technol 150:102–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Matsuzaki R, Nakamura T, Sugiyama K, Ueda M, Todoroki A, Hirano Y, Yamagata Y (2018) Effects of set curvature and fiber bundle size on the printed radius of curvature by a continuous carbon fiber composite 3D printer. Addit Manuf 24:93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ning F, Cong W, Hu Y, Wang H (2017) Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites using fused deposition modeling: effects of process parameters on tensile properties. J Compos Mater 51(4):451–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Tian X, Liu T, Yang C, Wang Q, Li D (2016) Interface and performance of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber reinforced PLA composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 88:198–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tekinalp HL, Kunc V, Velez-Garcia GM, Duty CE, Love LJ, Naskar AK, Blue CA, Ozcan S (2014) Highly oriented carbon fiber-polymer composites via additive manufacturing. Compos Sci Technol 105:144–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Yamawaki M, Kouno Y (2018) Fabrication and mechanical characterization of continuous carbon fiber-reinforced thermoplastic using a preform by three-dimensional printing and via hot-press molding. Adv Compos Mater 27(2):209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Leong KF, Phua KKS, Chua CK, Du ZH, Teo KOM (2001) Fabrication of porous polymeric matrix drug delivery devices using the selective laser sintering technique. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part H J Eng Med 215(2):191–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Shofner ML, Lozano K, Rodríguez-Macías FJ, Barrera EV (2003) Nanofiber-reinforced polymers prepared by fused deposition modeling. J Appl Polym Sci 89(11):3081–3090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Papon EA, Haque A (2018) Tensile properties, void contents, dispersion and fracture behaviour of 3D printed carbon nanofiber reinforced composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 37(6):381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Eichenhofer M, Wong JCH, Ermanni P (2017) Continuous lattice fabrication of ultra-lightweight composite structures. Addit. Manuf. 18:48–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Farina I, Fabbrocino F, Carpentieri G, Modano M, Amendola A, Goodall R, Feo L, Fraternali F (2016) On the reinforcement of cement mortars through 3D printed polymeric and metallic fibers. Compos Part B Eng 90:76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hill N, Haghi M (2014) Deposition direction-dependent failure criteria for fused deposition modeling polycarbonate. Rapid Prototyp J 20(3):221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Agarwal K, Kuchipudi SK, Girard B, Houser M (Sep. 2018) Mechanical properties of fiber reinforced polymer composites: a comparative study of conventional and additive manufacturing methods. J Compos Mater 52(23):3173–3181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Yasa E, Ersoy K (2018) Additive manufacturing of polymer matrix composites. In: Aircraft technology. InTech, Rijeka, pp 147–169Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Van Der Klift F, Koga Y, Todoroki A, Ueda M, Hirano Y, Matsuzaki R (2016) 3D printing of continuous carbon fibre reinforced thermo-plastic (CFRTP) tensile test specimens. Open J Compos Mater 06(01):18–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Sugiyama K, Matsuzaki R, Ueda M, Todoroki A, Hirano Y (2018) 3D printing of composite sandwich structures using continuous carbon fiber and fiber tension. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 113:114–121Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Justo J, Távara L, García-Guzmán L, París F (2018) Characterization of 3D printed long fibre reinforced composites. Compos Struct 185:537–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Dhariwala B, Hunt E, Boland T (Sep. 2004) Rapid prototyping of tissue-engineering constructs, using photopolymerizable hydrogels and stereolithography. Tissue Eng 10(9–10):1316–1322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Dickson AN, Barry JN, McDonnell KA, Dowling DP (2017) Fabrication of continuous carbon, glass and Kevlar fibre reinforced polymer composites using additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 16:146–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Melenka GW, Cheung BKO, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey JP (Oct. 2016) Evaluation and prediction of the tensile properties of continuous fiber-reinforced 3D printed structures. Compos Struct 153:866–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Li N, Li Y, Liu S (2016) Rapid prototyping of continuous carbon fiber reinforced polylactic acid composites by 3D printing. J Mater Process Technol 238:218–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Chen Y, Ortiz Rios C, Imeri A, Russell N, Fidan I (2019) Investigation of the tensile properties in fiber-reinforced additivemanufacturing and fused filament fabrication. Int J Rapid Manuf, no. Special Issue on 21st Century Manufacturing (in press)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Imeri A (2017) Investigation of the mechanical properties for fiber reinforced additively manufactured components, M.S. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TNGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Alwabel AS (2017) Effect of fused filament fabrication process parameters on the mechanical properties of carbon fiber reinforced polymers. Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB United StatesGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Li L, Sun Q, Bellehumeur C, Gu P (Jan. 2002) Composite modeling and analysis for fabrication of FDM prototypes with locally controlled properties. J Manuf Process 4(2):129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Stephens R, Fatemi A, Stephens R, Fuchs H (2000) Metal fatigue in engineering. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., HobokenGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kuchipudi SC (2017) The effects of fiber orientation and volume fraction of fiber on mechanical properties of additively manufactured composite material. Minnesota State University, MankatoGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Imeri A, Fidan I, Allen M, Perry G (2018) Effect of fiber orientation in fatigue properties of FRAM components. Procedia Manuf 26:892–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Imeri A, Fidan I, Allen M, Wilson DA, Canfield S (Oct. 2018) Fatigue analysis of the fiber reinforced additively manufactured objects. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98(9–12):2717–2724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Mohammadizadeh M, Fidan I, Allen M, Imeri A (Aug. 2018) Creep behavior analysis of additively manufactured fiber-reinforced components. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–10Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Papon EA, Haque A (2018) Fracture toughness of additively manufactured carbon fiber reinforced composites. Addit Manuf 26:41–52Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Young D, Wetmore N, Czabaj M (2018) Interlayer fracture toughness of additively manufactured unreinforced and carbon-fiber-reinforced acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. Addit Manuf 22(November 2017):508–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Andreassen E, Clausen A, Schevenels M, Lazarov BS, Sigmund O (Jan. 2011) Efficient topology optimization in MATLAB using 88 lines of code. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43(1):1–16zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Gao W, Zhang Y, Ramanujan D, Ramani K, Chen Y, Williams CB, Wang CCL, Shin YC, Zhang S, Zavattieri PD (Dec. 2015) The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering. Comput Des 69:65–89Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Kwok T-H, Li Y, Chen Y (Nov. 2016) A structural topology design method based on principal stress line. Comput Des 80:19–31Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Zegard T, Paulino GH (Jan. 2016) Bridging topology optimization and additive manufacturing. Struct Multidiscip Optim 53(1):175–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Wu J, Aage N, Westermann R, Sigmund O (Feb. 2018) Infill optimization for additive manufacturing—approaching bone-like porous structures. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 24(2):1127–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    L. G. Bahamonde et al. (2018) “An analysis framework for topology optimization of 3D printed reinforced composites,” in 2018 AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Hoglund R, Smith DE (2016) Continuous fiber angle topology optimization for polymer composite fused filament fabrication. In: Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, pp 1078–1090Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Michalski RS, Carbonell JG, Mitchell TM (2013) Machine learning: an artificial intelligence approach. Springer Science & Business Media, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Ryszard Michalski S, Carbonell Jamie G, Tom Mitchell M (1983) Machine learning. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Gu GX, Chen C-T, Richmond DJ, Buehler MJ (2018) Bioinspired hierarchical composite design using machine learning: simulation, additive manufacturing, and experiment. Mater Horizons 5(5):939–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    “AREVO unveils first 3D-printed carbon-fiber ebike—Arevo,” (2018) [Online]. Available: Accessed 24 Sep 2018
  111. 111.
    Rodriguez J, Lewicki J (2017) A new composite-manufacturing approach takes shape. [Online]. Available: Accessed 05 Jan 2019
  112. 112.
    “Luxury car maker PSA group puts 3D printing to use for car chassis | | The voice of 3D printing / additive manufacturing,” (2015) [Online]. Available: Accessed 27 Sep 2018
  113. 113.
    Wohlers T, Campbell I, Diegel O, Kowen J, Fidan I, Bourell DL (2018) Wohlers Report 2018. Wohlers Associates Inc, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    “3D printing applications | Markforged.” [Online]. Available: Accessed 12 Oct 2018
  115. 115.
    Soediono B (1989) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2013—the physical science basis, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–30Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Hofstätter T, Pedersen DB, Tosello G, Hansen HN (2017) State-of-the-art of fiber-reinforced polymers in additive manufacturing technologies. J Reinf Plast Compos 36(15):1061–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    “LEAP engines—CFM International Jet Engines CFM International,” 2015. [Online]. Available: Accessed 27 Sep 2018
  118. 118.
    “Additive manufacturing—the future of manufacturing—The Global Manufacturing & Industrialisation Summit.” [Online]. Available: Accessed 27 Sep 2018
  119. 119.
    Imeri A, Russell N, Rust JR, Sahin S, Fidan I, Jack H (2017) “3D printing as an alternative to fabricate the motor sports parts,” 124th ASEE Annu. Conf. ExpoGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Hofstätter T, Pedersen DB, Tosello G, Hansen HN (2017) Challenges and opportunities of fibrereinforced polymers in additive manufacturing with focus on industrial applications,” Proceedings of the Joint Special Interest Group meeting between euspen and ASPE: dimensional accuracy and surface finish in additive manufacturing. The european society for precision engineering and nanotechnology, euspen and ASPE special interest group meeting: additive Manufacturing, Leuven, Belgium,, no. October, pp. 3–6,Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Hofstätter T, Pedersen DB, Tosello G, Hansen HN (2017) Applications of fiber-reinforced polymers in additive manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 66:312–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Fidan I (2018) Academic activities and capabilities. In: Wohlers Report, pp 287–303Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Talagani MR, Dormohammadi S, Dutton R, Godines C, Baid H, Abdi F (2015) Numerical simulation of big area additive manufacturing (3D printing) of a full size car. SAMPE J 51(4):27–36Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Curran S et al. (2016) “Big area additive manufacturing and hardware-in-the-loop for rapid vehicle powertrain prototyping: a case study on the development of a 3-D-printed shelby cobra,” in SAE Technical paperGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    “3D printing takes-off” (2016) [Online]. Available: Accessed 25 Sep 2018
  126. 126.
    Mulholland T, Goris S, Boxleitner J, Osswald T, Rudolph N (2018) Process-induced fiber orientation in fused filament fabrication. J Compos Sci 2(3):45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    “Additive manufacturing industry got interested in fiber reinforced composites,” (2017) [Online]. Available: Accessed 25 Sep 2018
  128. 128.
    Eichenhofer M, Maldonado JI, Klunker F, Ermanni P (2015) “Analysis of processing conditions for a novel 3D-composite production technique,” 20th Int Conf Compos Mater, Copenhagen, pp 3401–1Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ismail Fidan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Astrit Imeri
    • 2
  • Ankit Gupta
    • 2
  • Seymur Hasanov
    • 2
  • Aslan Nasirov
    • 2
  • Amy Elliott
    • 3
  • Frank Alifui-Segbaya
    • 4
  • Norimichi Nanami
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Manufacturing & Engineering TechnologyTennessee Technological UniversityCookevilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering & Center for Manufacturing ResearchTennessee Technological UniversityCookevilleUSA
  3. 3.Manufacturing Demonstration FacilityOak Ridge National LaboratoryKnoxvilleUSA
  4. 4.School of Dentistry and Oral HealthGriffith UniversityGold CoastAustralia
  5. 5.Department of Mechanical EngineeringGifu UniversityGifuJapan

Personalised recommendations