Advertisement

Effect of printing layer thickness on water absorption and mechanical properties of 3D-printed wood/PLA composite materials

  • Nadir Ayrilmis
  • Mirko Kariz
  • Jin Heon Kwon
  • Manja Kitek KuzmanEmail author
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

Effect of printing layer thickness on technological properties of 3D-printed specimens fabricated from wood flour/PLA filaments having a diameter of 1.75 mm was investigated. For this aim, four different printing layers, 0.05 mm, 0.1 mm, 0.2 mm, and 0.3 mm, were used in the production of the 3D-printed specimens. The water absorption of the specimens (28 days immersion in water) increased with increasing printing layer thickness while the thickness swelling decreased. The tensile and bending properties of the specimens significantly improved with decreasing printing layer thickness. The increase in the layer thickness caused bigger gaps, which increased the porosity in the cross section of the specimen. Higher porosity resulted in lower mechanical properties.

Keywords

Three-dimensional printer 3D Wood flour Poly(lactic acid) Technological properties Layer thickness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Funding information

This research work was financially supported by Mevlana Exchange Program based on Project supported by Council of Higher Education of Turkey in 2017 year. Project no: 78.

References

  1. 1.
    Nassar MMA, Arunachalam R, Alzebdeh KI (2017) Machinability of natural fiber reinforced composites: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88:2985–3004.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9010-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gokhare VG, Raut DN, Shinde DK (2017) A review paper on 3D-printing aspects and various processes used in the 3D-printing. Int J Eng Res Technol 6:53–58Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wimmer R, Steyrer B, Woess J, Koddenberg T, Mundigler N (2015) 3D printing and wood. ProLigno 11:144–149Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tisserat B, Liu Z, Finkenstadt V, Lewandowski B, Ott S, Reifschneider L (2015) 3D printing biocomposites. Journal of Plastics Resarch Online, Society of Plastics Engineers, p:1–3. (SPE).  https://doi.org/10.2417/spepro.005690
  5. 5.
    Faludi G, Dora G, Renner K, Móczó J, Pukánszky B (2013) Improving interfacial adhesion in PLA/wood biocomposites. Compos Sci Technol 89:77–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.09.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sood AK, Ohdar RK, Mahapatra SS (2012) Experimental investigation and empirical modelling of FDM process for compressive strength improvement. J Adv Res 3:81–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2011.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO 291 (2008) Plastics – standard atmospheres for conditioning and testing. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO 62 (2008) Plastics - determination of water absorption. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ISO 1183-1 (2004) Plastics-methods for determining the density of non-cellular plastics -- part 1: immersion method, liquid pyknometer method and titration method. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISO 178 (2010) Plastics - determination of flexural properties. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO 527-1 (2012) Plastics - determination of tensile properties - part 1: general principles. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Christiyan KGJ, Chandrasekhar U, Venkateswarlu K (2016) A study on the influence of process parameters on the mechanical properties of 3D printed ABS composite. IOP Conference Series: Mater Sci Eng 114:012109.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/114/1/012109
  13. 13.
    Vaezi M, Chua CK (2011) Effects of layer thickness and binder saturation level parameters on 3D printing process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 53:75–84.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2821 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamilton DF, Ghert M, Simpson AHRW (2015) Interpreting regression models in clinical outcome studies. J Bone Joint Res 4:152–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Farzadi A, Solati-Hashjin M, Asadi-Eydivand M, Abu Osman NA (2014) Effect of layer thickness and printing orientation on mechanical properties and dimensional accuracy of 3D printed porous samples for bone tissue engineering. PLoS One 9:e108252.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108252 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rankouhi B, Javadpour S, Delfanian F, Letcher T (2016) Failure analysis and mechanical characterization of 3D printed abs with respect to layer thickness and orientation. J Fail Anal Prev 16:67–81.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-016-0113-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shubham P, Sikidar CT (2016) The influence of layer thickness on mechanical properties of the 3D printed ABS polymer by fused deposition modeling. Key Eng Mater 76:63–67.  https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.706.63 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadir Ayrilmis
    • 1
  • Mirko Kariz
    • 2
  • Jin Heon Kwon
    • 3
  • Manja Kitek Kuzman
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Wood Mechanics and Technology, Forestry FacultyIstanbul University-CerrahpasaIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Wood Science and Technology, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  3. 3.Department of Forest Biomaterials Engineering, College of Forest and Environmental SciencesKangwon National UniversityChuncheonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations