A Review of Melt Extrusion Additive Manufacturing Processes I. Process Design and Modeling - Brian N. Turner - 2015

Rapid Prototyping Journal
A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes: I. Process design and modeling
Brian N. Turner, Robert Strong, Scott A. Gold,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Brian N. Turner, Robert Strong, Scott A. Gold, (2014) "A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes: I. Process
design and modeling", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 20 Issue: 3, pp.192-204, https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-01-2013-0012
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-01-2013-0012
Downloaded on: 11 December 2017, At: 05:58 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 39 other documents.
Downloaded by DURBAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 05:58 11 December 2017 (PT)
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4775 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2003),"Mechanical characterization of parts fabricated using fused deposition modeling", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 9 Iss 4
pp. 252-264 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540310489631">https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540310489631</a>
(1996),"Structural quality of parts processed by fused deposition", Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 2 Iss 4 pp. 4-19 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/13552549610732034">https://doi.org/10.1108/13552549610732034</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:198529 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

A review of melt extrusion additive
manufacturing processes: I. Process
design and modeling
Brian N. Turner, Robert Strong and Scott A. Gold
Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to systematically and critically review the literature related to process design and modeling of fused
deposition modeling (FDM) and similar extrusion-based additive manufacturing (AM) or rapid prototyping processes.
Design/methodology/approach – A systematic review of the literature focusing on process design and mathematical process modeling was
carried out.
Findings – FDM and similar processes are among the most widely used rapid prototyping processes with growing application in finished part
manufacturing. Key elements of the typical processes, including the material feed mechanism, liquefier and print nozzle; the build surface and
environment; and approaches to part finishing are described. Approaches to estimating the motor torque and power required to achieve a desired
filament feed rate are presented. Models of required heat flux, shear on the melt and pressure drop in the liquefier are reviewed. On leaving the
print nozzle, die swelling and bead cooling are considered. Approaches to modeling the spread of a deposited road of material and the bonding
of polymer roads to one another are also reviewed.
Originality/value – To date, no other systematic review of process design and modeling research related to melt extrusion AM has been published.
Understanding and improving process models will be key to improving system process controls, as well as enabling the development of advanced
engineering material feedstocks for FDM processes.
Keywords FDM, Fused deposition modeling, Bead spreading, Liquefier dynamics, Melt extrusion manufacturing, Process modeling
Paper type Literature review
1. Introduction 1.1 Commercial market

Technologies first developed in the 1990s for rapid
Among the most widely used and rapidly growing rapid
prototyping have grown in sophistication and their
prototyping or additive manufacturing (AM) technologies are
applications. Most parts produced with rapid prototyping in
extrusion deposition processes such as fused deposition
modeling (FDM®), fused filament fabrication and melt the past have been for use as visual aids, presentation models
extrusion manufacturing (MEM) (Wohlers, 2011). In a and rapidly produced, but not necessarily functional
typical process, a filament of material is fed into a machine via prototypes. While these applications remain a major part of
a pinch roller mechanism. The feedstock is melted in a heated the market for parts produced by melt extrusion AM and other
liquefier with the solid portion of the filament acting as a 3D printing processes, a growing number of applications are
piston to push the melt through a print nozzle. A gantry moves for end-use parts that must meet stringent functional design
the print nozzle in the horizontal x–y plane as the material is requirements for mechanical properties and dimensional
deposited on a build surface that can be moved in the vertical tolerances. The overall market for AM products and services
z direction. This enables complex 3D objects to be produced has grown into a $1.325 billion industry (2010 estimate) and
as the melted bead leaving the nozzle solidifies. The most is projected to grow to over $5 billion by 2020 (Wohlers,
common materials used in this type of process are amorphous 2011). AM machines can be found in a number of settings
thermoplastics, with acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) worldwide such as in industrial plants, homes/offices, service
being the most common. This article provides a more detailed providers, academic institutions and government/military
overview of the typical components of extrusion-based AM settings. Investments in AM research and development from
processes and, more importantly, gives a review of the state of both government agencies and the private sector have grown
the art in process modeling and science for these processes. rapidly in recent years (Scott et al., 2012), including the recent
establishment of the National Additive Manufacturing
Innovation Institute (NAMII, 2012).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at Extrusion-based processes are among the most widely used
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2546.htm
AM technologies. The market for commercial extrusion-
based AM systems is currently dominated by fused
Rapid Prototyping Journal

20/3 (2014) 192–204 Received: 30 January 2013
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1355-2546] Revised: 12 March 2013
[DOI 10.1108/RPJ-01-2013-0012] Accepted: 13 March 2013
192
A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes Rapid Prototyping Journal
Brian N. Turner, Robert Strong and Scott A. Gold Volume 20 · Number 3 · 2014 · 192–204
deposition modeling (FDM) machines from Stratasys, Inc. 2. Overview of the design of the
According to the 2010 Wohler’s Report, Stratasys’ market extrusion-based AM systems
share of industrial AM systems is 3.5 times that of any other
Key elements of the melt extrusion AM system include a
system manufacturer at 41.5 per cent of all systems sold in
material feed mechanism, liquefier and print head, gantry,
2010 (Wohlers, 2011). As of the end of 2010, there were ⬎
build surface and build environment. Components of a
15,000 Stratasys FDM machines installed worldwide generic system are illustrated in Figure 1. The typical design
(Wohlers, 2011). Their Fortus industrial manufacturing features for each of these systems components are discussed in
line of FDM systems cost $100,000-500,000 and are this section.
marketed to manufacture parts from engineering
thermoplastic materials including Ultem® polyimide, 2.1 Material feed mechanism
polycarbonate and polyphenylsulfone, as well as ABS. Traditional extrusion manufacturing processes use a granular
Stratasys also produces widely sold, more economical or pelletized feedstock with a screw-type extruder. While such
Dimensions FDM systems that print only ABS thermoplastic a feed mechanism is theoretically feasible, to the best of our
materials, although in a variety of colors and grades. A knowledge, no such mechanism is used in a commercially
Chinese company, Beijing Yinhua, has recently emerged as a available AM system. Typical feedstocks are amorphous
competitor in this market with its MEM systems (Wohlers, thermoplastic polymer filaments with a diameter of about
2011). Their E-Print and F-Print machines sell for 1.5-3 mm. In smaller-scale systems, this feedstock is simply a
$10,000-72,000 and are currently available in the Asian loose coil, while in larger manufacturing systems, the
markets (Wohlers, 2011). feedstock is coiled inside a cartridge to supply the system. In
The rapidly growing personal fabrication market (Lipson either case, the filament is pushed through the system using a
and Kurman, 2010) is also dominated by fused filament pinch roller mechanism like that illustrated in Figure 1. A
fabrication-type systems, many of which are based on the stepper motor is connected to one of the rollers providing
open-source RepRap project (Jones et al., 2011). The growth energy to move the filament through the system. Typical roller
and popularity of these systems have been enabled by the materials are hypalon or polyurethane (Agarwala et al., 1996).
expiration of the initial Stratasys patents on the FDM process, One or both of the rollers may have a grooved or toothed
surface like a gear to create sufficient friction for the roller to
as well as the low cost and simplicity of construction of the
grab the filament and feed it to the liquefier without slippage
systems. Among the more notable competitors in the personal
(Agarwala et al., 1996). The pressure on the filament between
and office use 3D printing market are the MakerBot® systems,
the rollers is typically sufficient to slightly deform the filament,
the Bits-from-Bytes printers sold by 3D Systems, Inc. and the
usually leaving small tooth marks, but these should be
Up! Machines manufactured by Delta Micro Factory Corp. designed so as to avoid crushing the filament (Agarwala et al.,
Stratasys is also a major player in this market with its Mojo® 1996).
and uPrint® lines. Regardless of the manufacturer, these Absorption of moisture by the polymer feedstock can
small-scale machines sell for $1,500-5,000 and print parts present significant problems when printing parts in an
from ABS and/or polylactic acid (PLA) polymers. extrusion-based process. As the material is melted and pushed
through the extrusion nozzle, absorbed water vaporizes and, if
present in sufficient quantities, can lead to morphological
1.2 Process modeling needs changes in the material, blockages (Halidi and Abdullah,
Continued growth of the market for AM in general, but 2012) of the print nozzle and/or formation of bubbles and
specifically for extrusion-based processes, is dependent on bulges on the surface of the printed road of material. Stratasys,
continued improvement in the performance and cost
reduction of manufacturing systems, as well as the Figure 1 Illustration of a typical extrusion-based AM process
development of new feedstock materials. Process modeling
can enable newly advanced model-based control systems and
guide the development of new manufacturing hardware.
Materials development will also be facilitated by
improvements in our understanding of the processing science
by placing bounds on acceptable feedstock properties (e.g.
melt viscosity and filament elastic modulus) and expediting
optimization of processing conditions. Furthermore,
processing conditions play a major role in determining the
properties of finished parts. Understanding these relationships
will contribute to the development of design rules and quality
control standards. An overview of key elements of an
extrusion-based AM system will be presented. Modeling
approaches and the current understanding of the processing
science associated with each of these elements, namely, the
pinch roller feed mechanism, liquefier, bead die swelling and
cooling and road deposition and bonding, will be reviewed.
193
Inc. uses desiccant materials in both feedstock cartridges and when the print process is complete. Stratasys machines utilize
in the FDM system itself to keep the build materials dry. a disposable build sheet suitable for the build material which
Smaller systems typically do not have a mechanism to deal is placed on a vacuum-table build plate. KaptonTM films are
with this issue. among the more common build sheet surfaces used in
open-source systems, which typically print only ABS and PLA
2.2 Liquefier, print head and gantry polymers.
At the heart of an extrusion-based AM system is the liquefier Thermal gradients are necessarily present in parts, as they
in which the polymer feedstock is melted. The liquefier is are built in extrusion-based machines. Sufficiently large
generally a metal block with a channel machined for the thermal gradients can lead to warping and distortion of the
filament/melt to flow through. In Stratasys systems, the final structure (Wang et al., 2007). Advanced systems print
channel is connected to a disposable print head which is inside a temperature-controlled oven to combat this problem.
surrounded by the liquefier. Resistive heating is typically used Fans push air through the system to cool the parts as they are
with either a coiled heating element surrounding the liquefier printed and to prevent buildup of heat radiating from the print
chamber or one or more cartridge heaters embedded in the head/liquefier in the build environment. This approach is
liquefier assembly. In either case, the system is designed to necessary for high-melting polymers such as Ultem®. Smaller
maintain a uniform temperature throughout the liquefier. A

personal-scale and open-source systems use a heated build
single thermocouple is used in conjunction with the heating
plate to reduce thermal gradients and part warping. This
element and a controller to maintain constant temperature
approach is cost-effective but limits the practical size of the
(Gibson et al., 2010).
build envelope and the melt temperature that can be used
Heat flux to the feedstock material must be sufficient to
bring it to a melted state. The amount of melt in the liquefier without thermal gradients becoming excessive.
will depend on the heat flux and the material feed rate.
Feedstocks are generally amorphous polymers which do not 2.4 Part finishing
have a distinct melting point. As the temperature increases, A ridged surface is an inherent quality of parts produced from
the viscosity of the melt decreases, allowing it to flow through a melt extrusion AM process. The size of the ridges
the print nozzle more readily with a smaller pressure drop. corresponds to the dimensions of the printed polymer roads
Higher melt temperature also leads to better adhesion between extruded from the print nozzle. Two primary approaches are
successive beads or roads of printed material, and therefore used to achieve smooth surfaces on parts: chemical and
greater mechanical strength in the finished part. Higher mechanical smoothing (Gibson et al., 2010). Chemical
temperature can also lead to polymer degradation, breaking smoothing systems expose the part to solvent vapors which are
down polymer chains, weakening the finished part and leaving allowed to condense on the surface and partially melt it to
residue on the inside of the melt channel (Gibson et al., 2010). smooth small ridges. Mechanical abrasion may also be used to
The print head is closely integrated with the liquefier and smooth part surfaces, though this has limitations on parts with
may be fixed or replaceable. The latter is generally preferable
complex surface geometries due to inherent difficulties in
and is found on higher-end systems as thermal cycling and/or
abrasive materials entering small recesses, crevices or other
buildup of material residue will change the performance of the
features. Application of surface coatings is another approach
print head over time. The geometry of the print head along
to achieving a desired surface finish, in addition to adding
with the viscosity of the melt determines the pressure drop in
the system and thus the force required from the material feed strength to a finished part. Such coatings may include primers,
mechanism. The size of the print nozzle opening also places a paints or metallic electroplated coatings.
limit on the resolution that may be achieved in a final printed
product. Typical nozzle openings are about 200-500 ␮m in 3. Process modeling and science
diameter.
A major factor hindering the future growth of AM in general,
The print head/liquefier assembly is attached to a gantry that
enables motion in the x and y directions. Power to enable the and of extrusion-based processes in particular, is a limited
motion is supplied by an electric stepper motor and transduced understanding of processing science (Bourell et al., 2009).
to the print head/liquefier through a gear and timing belt. The Process models that describe the dynamics of the melt and
velocity at which the print head/liquefier can move, and extrusion process and the bonding process between successive
ultimately the speed of part fabrication, is primarily limited by layers of material are critical in developing advanced control
the stiffness of the construction of the gantry. The size of parts strategies for AM systems. Understanding the relationships
that can be printed is limited by the dimensions of the gantry. between process parameters and final part properties will be
critical in enabling design of parts for manufacturing, in
2.3 Build surface and environment developing methods of qualifying parts for industrial use and
Material is extruded from the print head/liquefier assembly in facilitating more intelligent materials development
onto a horizontal build surface which moves vertically (i.e. in strategies. Key elements of an FDM or related process include
the z direction). This motion, in conjunction with the print the pinch roller feed mechanism, liquefier dynamics, road or
head motion in the gantry, allows 3D structures to be bead spreading, bonding of adjacent roads of material to one
manufactured. The surface upon which the melt is printed is another and shape changes due to thermal gradients within the
a critical element of the system design. The melt must adhere part. The current state of the art in modeling each of these
to this surface, but not so well that the part cannot be removed aspects of a typical process will be discussed in this section.
194
3.1 Pinch roller feed mechanism Figure 2 Buckling of a filament between the feed pinch rollers and
A pinch roller mechanism is used to supply material to the the liquifier entrance due to excess compression
liquefier in FDM-like processes. The filament feedstock is in
tension above these rollers, which pull the filament from its
source (Bellini et al., 2004). Below the rollers, the filament is
in compression, being pushed against the constricted opening
of the print nozzle at the end of the liquefier (Bellini et al.,
2004). The feed rate is controlled so as to maintain a constant
volumetric flow rate of material from the print nozzle, Q. For
a desired road width (W) and slice thickness (H), the linear
feed velocity of the filament (v) can be approximated as
(Agarwala et al., 1996; Bellini et al., 2004):
Q
v⫽ (1)
WH
The feed velocity can be most simply related to pinch roller

extrusion AM processes with ceramic fillers (Venkataraman
parameters by assuming perfect adhesion between the
et al., 2000b). An approximation of the critical pressure (Pcr)
filament and rollers, i.e. no slip. In this case, the feed velocity
that can be placed on the filament can be obtained from an
can be expressed as
Euler buckling analysis,
v ⫽ ␻rRr (2)
␲2Ed2f
Pcr ⫽ (6)
16L2f
where ␻r is the angular velocity and Rr is the radius of the
rollers, respectively (Bellini et al., 2004; Agarwala et al., 1996).
A generalized Navier-slip boundary condition has also been where E is the elastic modulus of the filament, df is the filament
applied. Sources of slip between the filament and rollers diameter and Lf is the filament length from the rollers to the
include mismatch between the roller surface material and entrance of the liquefier (Yardimci et al., 1997; Venkataraman
filament surface, nonoptimal groove depth in the rollers, et al., 2000b). Due to the difference between the filament
worn-out rollers or a sufficiently high-pressure drop in the diameter and the bore of the liquefier, a correction factor has
liquefier such that the filament does not serve as an efficient been suggested for equation 6, allowing 1.1⫻ the critical
piston (Agarwala et al., 1996). Such slip leads to underflow of pressure for buckling to occur (Venkataraman et al., 1999). In
material from the liquefier nozzle and the impacts degree of addition to placing limits on the feed rate, buckling also places
bonding between adjacent roads (Agarwala et al., 1996). bounds on the properties of the feedstock that can be used in
Accounting for this slip has been found to be particularly an FDM process (Yardimci et al., 1997; Venkataraman et al.,
important to accurately control the roller motor when sudden 2000b). By relating the critical pressure predicted by the Euler
changes in the flow rate are made (Bellini et al., 2004). The buckling analysis to the pressure drop in a capillary rheometer,
force necessary to push the melt through the liquefier can be Venkataraman et al. were able to estimate and experimentally
determined if the pressure drop (⌬P) through the liquefier is validate that buckling did not occur above a critical value of
known, the ratio of the elastic modulus of the solid feedstock to its
apparent melt viscosity, E/␩, of 3 ⫻ 105 to 5 ⫻ 105 s⫺1
F ⫽ ⌬PA (3) (Venkataraman et al., 2000b). Extension of this analysis in the
future will aid in the development of composite feedstock
where A is the cross-sectional area of the filament, assumed to materials for melt extrusion AM processes.
be equal to the cross-sectional area of the liquefier (Bellini
et al., 2004). This in turn allows the required torque (⌫) 3.2 Liquefier dynamics
The liquefier and print head, where the solid polymer
F feedstock is melted and pushed through a small print nozzle,
⌫⫽ R (4)
2 r are the defining elements of extrusion-based AM processes.
The dynamics of the liquefier are quite complex and
and power (Pmot) to be calculated (Bellini et al., 2004): challenging to model, as the melt properties are a nonlinear
function of temperature and shear rate. The rate at which the
Pmot ⫽ ␻r⌫ (5) filament is fed to the liquefier and ultimately printed is limited
by the pressure drop through the nozzle. This feed rate is
It is assumed that two motors are providing power to the roller dynamically controlled, as the velocity at which the print head
mechanism in equation 5. moves in the gantry of the system changes. The amount of
The compression on the liquefier side of the feed rollers melt present in the liquefier, the temperature of the melt and,
places a limit on the feed rate. When this compression reaches consequently, the viscosity and surface energy of the melt vary
a critical limit, the feedstock filament can buckle, as shown in with the feed rate. These variables control the rate at which the
Figure 2 (Venkataraman et al., 1999, 2000a, b). This is the material flows through the liquefier and thus the size of the
most common failure mode of the filament feedstock in printed bead (i.e. resolution of the printed part). These melt
195
dynamics are critical in control algorithms for commercial constant in some models (Bellini et al., 2004; Bellini, 2002).
systems. Furthermore, understanding these melt dynamics However, cp is known to change significantly at the glass
will help put bounds on the material properties necessary for transition temperature (Tg) for amorphous polymers. As will
a feedstock to be viable for commercial use. As will be be discussed later, temperatures above Tg are necessary to
discussed later, the temperature, viscosity and surface energy achieve good bonding between successively deposited layers of
of the melt will have a major impact on the bonding of the materials. While semi-crystalline polymers have not often been
printed polymer bead to neighboring beads. used in FDM-like processes, these typically introduce a
greater change in the heat capacity on melting, as well as the
3.2.1 Melt properties
need to account for the heat of melting/fusion for the material.
The viscous behavior of the melt in the liquefier is critical in
describing the behavior of the liquefier and extrusion nozzle. 3.2.2 Liquefier/nozzle geometry
Feedstocks for extrusion AM processes are typically shear Besides the viscous behavior, the liquefier geometry has the
thinning and are commonly assumed to follow a power-law greatest impact on the melt behavior in the liquefier. Most
viscosity model (Bellini et al., 2004; Mostafa et al., 2009; current systems use a straight cylindrical tube with a truncated
Ramanath et al., 2008; Yardimci et al., 1997), conical connection to the small print nozzle opening, as
illustrated in Figure 1. Older systems used a horizontal
␩ ⫽ K共␥˙ 兲n⫺1 (7) cylindrical tube that curved 90° before connecting to a
liquefier geometry like that shown in Figure 1 (Ramanath
where ␩ is the viscosity, ␥˙ is the shear rate and K and n are
et al., 2008; Mostafa et al., 2009). To facilitate modeling, the
power-law fit parameters. The temperature dependence of
liquefier is typically divided into sections, as shown in Figure
viscosity must also be accounted for because the material will
3. Key design variables include the liquefier length (L1),
be nonisothermal as it flows through the liquefier chamber.
liquifier/filament diameter (D1), nozzle angle (␤), nozzle
This has been done by separating the viscosity into the
diameter (D2) and nozzle length (L2). Typical nozzle
product of a temperature and shear rate-dependent terms,
diameters are in the range of 200-500 ␮m, with nozzle angles
respectively (Bellini et al., 2004):
typically at 120° (Yardimci et al., 1997).
␩ ⫽ H共T兲␩T0共␥˙ 兲 (8) In either case, the diameter of the cylindrical entrance is
typically assumed to be equal to the diameter of the feed
The shear rate-dependent term is simply the power-law filament. Clearly, the bore diameter must be somewhat larger to
expression with fit parameters evaluated at some reference facilitate the insertion of the filament and to allow for a
temperature, T0. An Arrhenius model has been used for the reasonable tolerance on the filament diameter. Any gap between
temperature-dependent term, the filament and the wall of the liquefier can be expected to lead
to high thermal resistance to heat transfer from the liquefier walls
H共T兲 ⫽ exp ␣ 冋冉T1 ⫺ T1 冊册
0
(9)
to the filament. To date, this has not been accounted for in
published models of FDM or related processes. This effect
would be most significant at the top of zone I in Figure 3 and
where ␣ is the activation energy (Bellini et al., 2004; Karis would diminish as material approaches the print nozzle and the
et al., 1996). Note that H(T) is 1 at the reference temperature. compression force provided by the solid portion of the filament
To account for the material being solid at the entrance of the pushes the melt against the walls of the liquefier.
liquefier, the plug flow is assumed at the liquefier entrance.
To date, only power-law viscosity models have been used in Figure 3 Liquifier divided into three zones for modeling
published studies of FDM liquefiers. The primary advantage
of the power-law model is its mathematical simplicity. It can
be reasonably expected that some key aspects of the melt
behavior will not be captured by this model. For example, no
yield stress is included in the power-law model, which is
characteristic of many polymer melts. Bingham-type models
are widely used to describe the spreading of a printed bead of
polymer material, as will be discussed later. The power-law
model is also known to have difficulty accounting for wide
ranges in the shear rate (Osswald and Menges, 2003).
Relatively low shear is expected near the liquefier entrance,
while very high shear is expected as the melt passes through
the print nozzle. Shear rates in the nozzle are commonly in
the range of 100-200 s⫺1 (Venkataraman et al., 2000b).
Carreau-type models are commonly used to account for both
yield stress and wide ranges of shear rate in polymer melts,
although with the addition of significant mathematical
complexities (Osswald and Menges, 2003).
Modeling heat transfer in the liquefier is complicated by the
temperature and shear dependence of the melt properties. It
has been assumed that the heat capacity (cp) of melt is
196
3.2.3 Estimation of heat flux T ⫺ T0 ' r ␣z

␪⫽ , r ⫽ , and z' ⫽ 2 (12)
Analytical models of the liquefier have assumed either constant heat T2 ⫺ T0 rf vrf
flux (Bellini et al., 2004; Bellini, 2002) or constant wall temperature
(Yardimci et al., 1997; Ramanath et al., 2008; Bellini, 2002). In the
T is the filament temperature at some point (r, z), T0 is the wall
former case, an approximation of the required heat flux to the
temperature, T2 is the temperature of the filament at the entrance of
liquefier is given by the familiar equation,
the liquefier (z ⫽ 0), rf is the filament radius, ␣ is the thermal
q ⫽ ṁcp共T ⫺ Ti兲 ⫽
冉 2␲
␳vA
D
2共兲
L 冊
cp共T ⫺ Ti兲 (10)
diffusivity of the filament, v is the filament velocity, ␭n are roots of
the zero-order Bessel function of the first kind (J0-) and J1 is the
first-order Bessel function of the first kind. This solution assumes
constant thermal properties of the filament and neglects any gap
where ṁ is the mass flow rate of the polymer through the between the filament and the liquefier wall. Solving for z= when
liquefier, cp is the heat capacity of the polymer and T and Ti r= ⫽ 0 and T ⫽ Tm, that is when the temperature of the center of
are the temperatures of the polymer at the exit and entrance
the filament is equal to the melt temperature, allows the location
of the liquefier, respectively. Typically, the feed velocity will
of the melt front to be calculated (Yardimci et al., 1997). The
be controlled rather than the mass flow rate; therefore, it is
distance from the entrance to the melt front increases linearly
convenient to approximate the mass flow rate in terms of this

with the filament velocity, which is dynamically varied in
velocity (v), the polymer density (␳) and the liquefier
dimensions (length, L; cross-sectional area, A; and diameter, commercial melt extrusion AM systems (Yardimci et al.,
D). The high thermal conductivity of the liquefier, typically 1997). The distance from the entrance to the melt front
constructed of aluminum, steel or brass, has led others to increases linearly with the filament velocity, which is
postulate a constant wall temperature in the liquefier dynamically varied in commercial melt extrusion AM systems.
(Yardimci et al., 1997; Ramanath et al., 2008). The accuracy The filament velocity and heat flux to the liquefier must thus
of either assumption rests, in part, on the design of the be set at values to maintain the melt front somewhere in the
liquefier. The most common designs use either a resistive middle of the liquefier length. The melt front distance is also
heating element coiled around the liquefier or a cartridge inversely proportional to the thermal diffusivity of the
heater embedded in the metal parallel to the liquefier material, highlighting the challenges of processing highly
chamber. The design of the latter requires some mechanism to thermally insulating materials in extrusion AM processes.
evenly distribute heat to all sides of the liquefier chamber, such
as drilling insulating holes between the heater and liquefier 3.2.6 Pressure drop estimation
chamber as in some Stratasys systems. Some degree of From a momentum balance on the liquefier, the melt velocity
nonuniformity is expected, especially in an unsteady-state profile, pressure drop and shear stress profile can be predicted.
operation. Only a single thermocouple embedded in the When solved simultaneously with an energy balance, the
liquefier is typically used to control the melt temperature. temperature profile of the melt within the liquefier can be
determined (Bellini et al., 2004; Bellini, 2002) and others,
3.2.4 Convection at the liquefier entrance and nozzle exit
building on their work (Ramanath et al., 2008) used analytical
Finite element analysis (FEA) has been used to examine
temperature gradients within the liquefier (Yardimci et al., solutions to the momentum balance equations developed for
1997). This analysis examined heat convection to the build extrusion dies (Michaeli, 2003) for cylindrical, conical and
environment at the liquefier entrance and at the nozzle exit, cylindrical shapes corresponding to regions I, II and III,
assuming a convective heat transfer coefficient (h) of respectively, in Figure 3 in conjunction with a power-law
10 W/m2K at the entrance and 100 W/m2K at the nozzle exit viscosity model with Arrhenius temperature dependence (cf.
(Yardimci et al., 1997). These values of h were not justified by equations 7 and 8) to model the liquefier. Key assumptions in
any experimental or theoretical analysis, and heat loss from this model include that the melt is incompressible, a no-slip
the liquefier is not surprisingly highly sensitive to values boundary condition applies at the walls of the liquefier and
chosen. In real systems, it is typical to include an insulating that the flow is fully developed, steady state and laminar
plate at both locations to prevent heat loss, a practice that (Michaeli, 2003). The pressure drops in each section of the
appears to be well justified based on FEA and the selected liquefier according to this model are given respectively by:
values of h (Yardimci et al., 1997).
3.2.5 Location of the melt front
Filament heating has been described by a two-dimensional
⌬P1 ⫽ 2L1 共 ␾v 兲冉共Dm /2⫹兲 3 冊
1/m
1
m⫹1
1/m
exp ␣ 冋冉T1 ⫺ T1 冊册
␣
(13)
(2D) axisymmetric steady-state advection-conduction model,

assuming a constant wall temperature and plug flow
(Yardimci et al., 1997). The nondimensional solution to this
⌬P2 ⫽ 共 3tan2m␤/2 兲冉D1 ⫺ D1 冊
共兲 3/m
2
3/m
1
⫻ 冉冉冊 m ⫹ 3 2 冊
problem is given as: D 2 1/m
1
共兲 m⫹3
⬁ 2
兺 exp共⫺␭ z 兲␭J J共␭共␭r 兲兲, J 共␭ 兲 ⫽ 0 ⫻ exp冋␣冉 ⫺
T 冊册
'
0 n
␪⫽2 2 =
(11) 1 1
n 0 n (14)
n⫽1 n 1 n T ␣
where ␪, r= and z= are the dimensionless temperature, radius

and length respectively, defined as and
197
共兲冉冊冋冉冊册
v 1/m 共m ⫹ 3兲共D1 /2兲2 1/m
1 1 2009; Ramanath et al., 2008). Laminar flow pathlines are also
⌬P3 ⫽ 2L3 exp ␣ ⫺
␾ 共D2 /2兲m⫹3 T T␣ predicted (Bellini, 2002; Bellini et al., 2004; Mostafa et al.,
(15) 2009; Ramanath et al., 2008), but no evidence of flow
instabilities and vortices due to the nozzle angle being above
the natural convergence angle has been reported.
where the dimensions L1, L3, D1 and D2 correspond to Figure 3,
␤ is the nozzle angle of the conical section of the liquefier, and
m and ␸ are power-law fit parameters (Ramanath et al., 2008; 3.3 Die swelling and bead cooling
Bellini et al., 2004; Bellini, 2002; Michaeli, 2003). The total In the nozzle, the polymer melt is under stress, with part of the
pressure drop in the liquefier is the sum of the pressure drops deformation energy being stored elastically (Michaeli, 2003).
in each section, As the polymer melt leaves the print nozzle, the now free
boundary of the polymer melt allows the polymer bead to
⌬P ⫽ ⌬P1 ⫹ ⌬P2 ⫹ ⌬P3 (16) quickly assume a plug-flow velocity profile, i.e. constant
velocity in the radial direction (Bellini, 2002). With the
3.2.7 Impact of nozzle angle
polymer melt no longer constrained by the walls of the
The nozzle angle, typically 120° in most systems (Yardimci
liquefier, stresses that were acting on the melt in the nozzle are
et al., 1997), will influence the pressure drop and flow
relaxed and the elastically stored energy is released, leading to

characteristics in a system. Ramanth et al. examined the
radial expansion of the melt referred to as die swelling, as
impact of nozzle angle on pressure drop for angles up to 60°,
illustrated in Figure 4 (Michaeli, 2003). The phenomenon is
showing that pressure drop decreases with increasing nozzle
an active area of polymer rheology research and plays a role in
angle (Ramanath et al., 2008; Bellini et al., 2004); however,
determining the resolution achieved in an extrusion-based
120° is a typical nozzle angle (Yardimci et al., 1997). Above
AM process. A quantitative measure of die swelling is the ratio
the natural convergence angle for the system, the pressure
of the maximum diameter of the extruded material to the
drop can increase due to flow instabilities and vortices that
diameter of the die opening, referred to as the swelling ratio, s.
may form in the corner of the die (Liang, 1995; Liang et al.,
The value of the swelling ratio depends on the material
2001; Liang and Ness, 1997), which may also lead to clogging
properties and the geometry of the extrusion nozzle. Reported
of the nozzle when using filled feedstocks (Yardimci et al.,
values for FDM-like processes ranged from ⬃ 1.05 to 1.3.
1997). The natural convergence angle has been suggested as
Inelastic fillers such as ceramic particles (Bellini, 2002) or
an upper bound for designs of the nozzle angle (Yardimci
carbon fibers (Shofner et al., 2003) tend to reduce die
et al., 1997). The critical pressure for buckling (cf. equations
swelling. FEA models have been used to predict die swelling
6, 13-16) places a lower limit on the nozzle angle design.
for FDM-like processes (Bellini, 2002) and other extrusion
3.2.8 Finite element analyses processes.
More rigorous analyses of the melt fluid dynamics and As the melt leaves the extrusion nozzle, it is also subject to
liquefier heat transfer have been achieved through FEA convective cooling from air moving in the build environment.
(Ramanath et al., 2008; Mostafa et al., 2009; Ji and Zhou, Bellini modeled this convective cooling assuming a heat
2010; Bellini et al., 2004). Pressure drop predictions from transfer coefficient, h ⫽ 20 W/m2K (Bellini, 2002). The
FEA analyses agree qualitatively with the analytical model convective cooling process is retarded by heat conduction
described in equations 13-16, showing an increased pressure from the melt in the liquefier still connected to the extruded
drop as the nozzle diameter decreases or as the feed velocity bead (Bellini, 2002). Somewhat counterintuitively, the greater
increases (Ramanath et al., 2008; Bellini, 2002; Bellini et al., the thermal conductivity of the melt, the slower the bead will
2004). Quantitatively, the FEA models predict significantly cool on leaving the extrusion nozzle (Bellini, 2002).
lower pressure drop (⬃5 ⫻ 105 Pa) than the analytical model
summarized in equations 13-16 (Ramanath et al., 2008). This 3.4 Road deposition, spreading and bonding
difference is most likely due to the more stringent assumptions 3.4.1 Bead deposition and stability
made in deriving the analytical model to make it After leaving the liquefier nozzle in a melt extrusion AM
mathematically tractable (Michaeli, 2003). FEA analyses process, a bead of polymer melt ultimately lands on a build
indicate that the overwhelming majority (approximately 85
per cent) of the pressure drop in the liquefier occurs in the
vicinity of the nozzle (Venkataraman et al., 2000a; Bellini, Figure 4 Illustration of die swelling in an extrusion AM process
2002), along with a strong dependence on the nozzle
diameter. In a study of poly-␧-caprolactone, increasing nozzle
size from 0.25 to 0.4 mm reduced the calculated pressure
drop from ⬃ 2.5 ⫻ 106 to ⬃ 1 ⫻ 106 Pa.
While FEA models predict rapid temperature changes at the
liquefier entrance and nozzle exit, the small size of filament
allows nearly uniform temperature in the melt to be achieved
quickly with variations from wall to centerline of often ⬍ 1 K
(Bellini, 2002; Bellini et al., 2004; Mostafa et al., 2009;
Ramanath et al., 2008). Similarly, a parabolic velocity profile
is predicted to develop rapidly after the melt front is
established (Bellini, 2002; Bellini et al., 2004; Mostafa et al.,
198
sheet or on a previously printed bead of polymer. If flow was neglected. While the influence of the tip nozzle was not
through the print nozzle, region III in Figure 3, is modeled as explicitly taken into account, two boundary conditions on the
a simple Hagen-Poiseuille flow, the volumetric flow rate, Q, is top surface of the bead were explored, a free surface where
(Crockett and Calvert, 1996):
␲ 冉冊
D2 4
⌬P
共 ⌬W
⌬t 兲 x⫽W
⫽ 共
A F共␪兲
8␩W2 l
⫺ 2␶y共t兲W 兲 (21)
2
Q⫽ (17)
8␩L2 and a constrained surface where the right side of the above
equation is multiplied by a factor of 1/4 (Crockett, 1997).
The cross-sectional area (A) of the bead will be inversely Here F(0)/l is the driving force for spreading per unit length of
proportional to the velocity of the print head (vprint). the bead, ␶Y is the yield strength of the liquid bead and W is
the bead width. Similarly, the change in contact angle was
Q described as
A⫽ (18)
vprint
If the print head velocity is sufficiently large, the bead will 共 ⌬⌬t␾ 兲
x⫽R␾
⫽
8␾R ␩
3 冉
A␥LV cos ␾ ⫺ cos共␪ ⫺ ␾兲
␾
⫺
2␶Y共t兲R
␥LV 冊
become unstable and discontinuous. As the maximum velocity (22)

for which the bead remains stable and continuous is
approached, the deposition has been described as similar to an for the free surface boundary condition with the right side of the
axisymmetric liquid bridge, allowing the maximum velocity of equation multiplied by a factor of 1/4 for the constrained surface
the print head to be estimated (Crockett, 1997; Crockett and boundary condition. Here ␸ and ␪ are the contact angles of the
Calvert, 1996; Middleman, 1995), bead as illustrated in Figure 5, assuming the bead is printed on a
surface with a circular cross-section. While the free surface
Q␲
vprint ⬍ (19) boundary condition seems more intuitive, the constrained
h2
surface boundary condition was reported to show greater
as well as the minimum cross-sectional area (Crockett, 1997; agreement with an experiment with a ceramic slurry, although
Crockett and Calvert, 1996; Middleman, 1995), still consistently a predicted bead width of approximately 25 per
cent greater than the experimental and final contact angles of
h2 approximately 35 per cent less than observed (Crockett, 1997).
Amin ⫽ (20)
␲ These reported results are somewhat misleading, as perfect
wetting was also assumed in this model. As a result, if the model
Here, h is the height of the print nozzle opening above the is evaluated for sufficiently long times, the bead will spread to
print surface. completely wet the surface it is being printed on. The complete
wetting assumption was justified in that for 3D structures,
3.4.2 Road spreading
printing of some material on a self-similar material will result in
The bead or road will spread into an oblong shape with the
complete wetting, as the bead and substrate will have the same
spreading rate and final shape dependent on the viscosity of
surface energies. Even in this case, some small differences would
the melt and the relative surface energies of the bead and the
be expected because the substrate will be a solidified material
surface on which it is printed. The interaction of the tip of the
rather than a melt. Incorporation of a term accounting for the
print head with the bead may further influence the evolution
cooling and temperature dependence of viscosity would correct
of the shape of the printed road. As it spreads, the bead is also
for this problem. While Crockett’s model has not been evaluated
cooling, and the viscosity increases until a solid state is
for a polymer melt and does have major drawbacks, it should,
reached. The final width of the road determines the resolution
however, provide a useful framework for describing the spreading
that can be achieved in the print process, as well as the contact
behavior of such materials in an FDM-like process.
area between neighboring beads. The rounded, oblong shape
of the bead inevitably leads to small voids in the part. The
strength of the bond between neighboring roads, and Figure 5 Illustration of road spreading and the force balance used in
ultimately the overall mechanical properties of the part, will the Crockett model
depend on the contact area between those beads and the size
of the voids.
While there is a wealth of literature on the spreading of
liquid droplets on a surface, only a limited number of efforts to
model the bead spreading in an AM process have been
published. Crockett et al. approximated the bead-spreading
process as a laminar axisymmetric flow (Middleman, 1995),
assuming a constant bead cross-sectional area (i.e. no
shrinkage) and a Bingham viscosity model (Crockett, 1997;
Crockett and Calvert, 1996). Only surface tension forces,
which were assumed to be constant, were accounted for in the
model (Crockett, 1997; Crockett and Calvert, 1996). The
influence of gravity and any initial velocity profile in the bead
199
Frenkel-type models based on an energy balance (Frenkel, polymer materials, road bonding occurs through a sintering
1945) have been widely used to describe spreading of liquids process which transpires through a viscous flow mechanism
(Crockett, 1997; Park, 2003; Duineveld, 2003; Mao, 1997). The (Rosenzweig and Narkis, 1981). As this sintering process is
change in the energy of the droplet due to a product of surface thermally driven, the temperature history of a road at the
energy and change in the surface area and viscous dissipation is interface with another road will be a crucial variable in
used to predict the change in the shape of the drop over time. determining the quality of the bond. A prerequisite to the
This approach should yield an equivalent result to a momentum sintering process is that the polymer be above the glass
balance approach used by Crocket, and indeed found it to be so transition temperature, Tg. On leaving the liquefier, the melt is
(Karis et al., 1996). The initial kinetic energy of the bead from well above this temperature; however, the build environment
the deposition process was, however, neglected. is held well below Tg. Heat from the material leaving the
A 2D simulation of the bead-spreading process using liquefier increases the temperature of the road it is deposited
commercial computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software on above Tg to enable bonding. Consequently, the thermal
was presented by Bellini for an FDM process (Bellini, 2002). conductivity and heat capacity of the materials play a key role
In setting up the model, a no-slip boundary condition between in determining viable process operating conditions. Heat is
the melt and the wall of the print nozzle was assumed along with lost from the roads via conduction to the material below and
a constant nozzle wall temperature. The free surface of the road convection to the surrounding air in the build environment.
was assumed to have a constant surface tension and to be losing Several models have been developed to predict the thermal
heat due to convection from the air in the build environment as history of a road. Thomas and Rodriguez presented a
well as conduction to the surface below. Simulations accounting simplified 2D thermal model that treated the roads as
for the interaction of the print nozzle with the printed road, as rectangular in shape (Thomas and Rodriguez, 2000). The
shown in Figure 6, as well as with the print nozzle above the resulting equation for the filament temperature averaged over
printed road were performed. The nozzle was shown to be the width of the road for filament height, H, and width, W, is:
冋
beneficial, resulting in more stable flow and ensuring a flat road
⬁ ⬁
兺兺共a
surface, as shown in Figure 6. It was also shown that the rate of
convective heat loss plays a large role in the evolution of the Tave共x, y, t兲 ⫽ TE 1 ⫹ mnsin共␭my兲cos共␤nx兲兲
兲册
m⫽1 n⫽1
road temperature. Distortion of the road in simulations when
the print head was above the road surface can be speculated to
共共 Ck␳ 兲共␭
2
⫻ exp ⫺ 2
m ⫹ ␤2m兲t (23)
be due to an effect similar to that seen in die swelling.
3.4.3 Road cooling and polymer bonding
The strength of a melt extrusion AM part will be limited where
fundamentally by the strength of the bond between
冉9␭2 H冊sin冉␭ 2H冊sin冉␤2W冊

ⴱ
neighboring beads of material in the part. This bond strength 4TL m m n
will be a function of the energy of adhesion/cohesion, which amn ⫽ sin (24)
E F ␭ ␤n
2
m
2
n m
will depend in part on the contact area between the beads. For
Figure 6 Interaction of the print head with an extruded road E2m ⫽

1
2冉5H ⫺
sin共10␭mH兲
2␭m 冊 (25)
F2n ⫽
1
2 冉
␻⫺
sin共␭n␤nW兲
␤n 冊 (26)
Here, t, C, k and ␳ are time, heat capacity, thermal

conductivity and density, respectively, and the eigenvalues are
the roots of the equations (Thomas and Rodriguez, 2000):
h
␭mcot共5␭mH兲 ⫽ ⫺ (27)
k
and
␤ntan 冉 ␤2W冊 ⫽ kh
n
(28)
This model neglected the effects of conduction to the build

surface and any contact resistances between filaments, the former
of which is the predominant heat transfer mechanism in the
system (Bellehumeur et al., 2004). Observing that the 2D
analysis showed temperature gradients that rapidly become
negligible along the width and height of the filament led
Belleheumer et al. to propose a lumped capacity model which
200
assumed uniform temperature distribution of cross-sectional in the axial direction of a road than in the transverse direction,
area of filament, semi-infinite filament length and constant normal to road-to-road bonds (Ahn et al., 2002). Reducing
heat transfer and convection coefficients (Bellehumeur et al., the time between the depositions of successive layers over a
2004; Sun et al., 2008). This simplified the governing given point should also increase bond strength as the
equations to a 1D transient heat transfer equation, temperature at the bonding site would stay higher for a longer
period of time. Specimens fabricated using a “level domain
␳CAv
⭸T
⫽A
共 ⭸T
⭸ k
⭸x 兲
⫺ hP共T ⫺ T 兲 ⬁ (29)
decomposition” which reduced the average road length
compared to standard unidirectional raster patterns seem to
⭸x ⭸x validate this idea (Bellini and Guceri, 2003).
The thermal history of a bead was observed to be highly
the analytical solution of which is:
dependent on convective cooling by air flowing through the build
冉共1 ⫺ 兹12␣⫹ 4␣␤兲vt冊

environment (Sun et al., 2008). Values of the convective heat
T ⫽ T⬁ ⫹ 共T0 ⫹ T⬁兲exp (30) transfer coefficient have been approximated to be around 20
W/m2K (Bellini, 2002), although no empirical measurements
validating this choice have been reported. The value of the heat
k hP
␣⫽ , and ␤ ⫽
(31) transfer coefficient is expected to vary with the location in the

␳Cv ␳CAv build environment and air flow rate, as well the size, shape,
number and distribution of parts within the build environment
This approach has the advantage of simplicity but does not
(Sun et al., 2008). Experimental validation of convective heat
allow any special resolution of the temperature within the road
transfer in an FDM® process presents a challenging problem, as
to be predicted. While the 2D model predicts a rapid initial
air flow rates and build environment temperatures are not readily
drop in temperature (for times ⬍ 1.5 seconds) when a new
controllable in typical commercial systems. Rigorous
road is deposited, the lumped capacity model predicts a steady
computational analysis of convective heat transfer is likely to be
drop in temperature over time. A commercial CFD package
of limited value due to the computational intensity of the
has also been used to model the thermal history of a road as
problem; however, establishing some extreme bounds on the
has been discussed earlier (Bellini, 2002).
process would be of great use in developing process and product
Experimental validation of models was accomplished by
design rules.
embedding a thermocouple in a material road on the build
While there have been numerous empirical studies of the
surface and monitoring the temperature as successive layers are
impact of process parameters on the strength of the final part,
deposited on top of it (Bellini, 2002; Bellehumeur et al., 2004;
little has been published examining the fundamental
Sun et al., 2008). At short times where the temperature was
relationship between the bond formation process and the final
highest, the lumped capacity model showed better agreement
mechanical strength of that bond. A figure of merit that has
with the experiment, whereas the 2D model proved to be more
been used in evaluating the bonding process between adjacent
accurate at longer times and lower temperatures. No
roads is neck formation (Bellehumeur et al., 2004; Sun et al.,
experimental comparison with predictions made by commercial
2008). This process occurs through viscous flow and
CFD software has been published, although such a model for a
molecular diffusion of polymer chains across the interface
fused deposition of ceramics process was shown to be very
between two particles of beads until they are randomized, as
accurate, except at very short times (⬍ 0.03 seconds) (Bellini,
illustrated for filaments of radius a and neck length 2y in
2002). Qualitatively, experiments showed that the temperature
Figure 7. A modified Frenkel sintering model based on
of a road increases almost instantaneously when a melt layer is
deposited on top of it followed by a rapid decay, on a time Figure 7 Illustration of polymer sintering
scale of ⬃ 2s, back below the glass transition temperature to a
few degrees above the build environment temperature (Sun
et al., 2008). The temperature in the bottom layer did not
return to the equilibrium build environment temperature even
after as many as 30 layers were deposited (Sun et al., 2008).
Given the small size of the test structure being evaluated, it is
possible that radiative heating by the print head itself left the
local environment temperature higher than that of the bulk of
the build environment, preventing further cooling. As
successive depositions can raise the material temperature
above Tg, even several layers down, the time between
successive depositions is also important in determining the
thermal history of the material. This was demonstrated for two
different part orientations with differing toolpath lengths (Sun
et al., 2008).
A consequence of these observations is that the dependence
of the mechanical properties of a given part on toolpaths and
part orientation is far more complex than it may appear at first
glance. It is well established that the mechanical properties of
an FDM® part are anisotropic with the greater tensile strength
201
Newtonian sintering has been used (Bellehumeur et al., 2004; properties and pressure drop in the liquifier. Buckling is not
Sun et al., 2008) to predict neck growth in terms of a generally a problem with amorphous polymer feedstocks most
dimensionless parameter ␪ ⫽ sin ⫺1共y/a兲 with respect to time as commonly used in FDM® and similar processes. However,
a function of the viscosity (␩), surface tension (⌫) and the this would not be expected to be the case for highly filled feed
initial particle radius, a0: filaments such as those used for fused deposition of ceramics
and metals, and chopped fiber-filled thermoplastic composite
d␪ ⌫ 2⫺5/3cos ␪ sin ␪共1 ⫺ cos ␪兲1/3 feedstocks, as these generally have a higher elastic modulus as
⫽ (32)
dt a0␩ 共1 ⫺ cos ␪兲共1 ⫹ cos ␪兲1/3 well as higher melt viscosity. The key value of this buckling
analysis is in providing qualitative guidance to material
In this analysis, surface tension was used as a fit parameter, development (e.g. when addition of a plasticizer might be
rather than from the experimental data. Below some critical needed) and determining a maximum pressure drop and
sintering temperature, no significant neck formation is hence flow rate from the print nozzle in a given system.
observed. This temperature is well above the glass transition Models of liquifier dynamics were reviewed previously.
temperature, 200°C for ABS compared to Tg of 94°C Understanding liquifier behavior is critical in melt extrusion AM
(Bellehumeur et al., 2004). A significant degree of molecular systems as a dynamic control is required to change the feed rate
diffusion is expected to occur between these temperatures that
with print head velocity to maintain a constant road width and

will not be accounted for in measurements of neck formation. ensure that the printed bead has sufficient thermal energy to form
Nonetheless, neck formation is expected to show a strong a strong bond with the material on which it is printed. One of the
correlation with bond strength. first challenges in modeling liquifier behavior is the complex
behavior of the melt, with viscosity having both temperature and
4. Summary and conclusions shear rate dependence. Generally, viscosity in the liquifier has
At least first-generation models have been developed for all been described by a power-law model for the shear dependence
major aspects of melt extrusion AM processes. There remains in combination with an Arrhenius-type temperature dependence
much room for improvement. In general, there has been a expression. While this approach to modeling polymer melt
limited degree of experimental validation of process models. viscosity is common, it presents two challenges. First, there is a
For example, simple models allow estimation of the required need for published viscosity data for commercial feedstocks. As
motor torque and power to achieve a desired filament feed rate with other polymer-processing technologies, commercial
for the commonly used pinch roller feed mechanism, as well as feedstock filaments are optimized for the process. The
the impact of variations in the feed filament diameter on the flow overwhelming majority of modeling studies on melt extrusion
rate leaving the extrusion nozzle (Bellini et al., 2004; Agarwala AM processes have focused on ABS, which is the most
et al., 1996). These models are sufficient for sizing of motors in commonly used polymer for these processes. To the authors’
the system design and for providing a good qualitative knowledge, there are no published reports of the viscosity
understanding of the process. Slip between the pinch rollers behavior of other commercially available feed materials for melt
and feed filament has been accounted for to some degree in extrusion AM processes. It is expected that this need will be even
these models; however, it has not been experimentally more acute for polymers with increasing degrees of crystallinity
measured in the published literature. The degree of slip should and thus more dramatic transitions in material properties from
be a function of the roller and feedstock material surface the solid to the melt phase. A second challenge in modeling
characteristics and the pressure exerted by the rollers. viscosity behavior occurs not in modeling the spreading of a
Minimizing slip without crushing the filament presents an printed road. An important characteristic of the printed road is its
interesting system design problem. More important is yield stress, which must be sufficient for the road to not deform
accounting for this slip in a closed-loop control algorithm. when successive roads are printed atop it. Measurements of yield
Some guidance in an approach to doing this has been provided stress are almost nonexistent for commercial feedstock materials
in terms of both an analytical model as well as when using a used in melt extrusion AM processes.
transfer function approach (Bellini et al., 2004), although the Heat transfer in the liquifier has been modeled analytically
accuracy of these models was not experimentally evaluated. with the assumption of either constant heat flux (Bellini et al.,
Buckling failure of the feed filament between the pinch rollers 2004; Bellini, 2002) or constant wall temperature (Yardimci
and liquifier places a limitation on acceptable feedstock et al., 1997; Ramanath et al., 2008; Bellini, 2002) and
properties and operating conditions. Mathematically, this failure numerically with FEA (Ramanath et al., 2008; Mostafa et al.,
mode was modeled using an Euler buckling analysis with the 2009; Ji and Zhou, 2010; Bellini et al., 2004). All these
critical pressure for buckling being a function of the filament analyses assumed perfect contact between the feed filament
diameter, its elastic modulus and the distance from the pinch and the walls of the liquifier. Understanding the impact of any
rollers to the liquifier entrance (Yardimci et al., 1997; gap between the filament and liquifier walls during heating will
Venkataraman et al., 2000b). The difference between the provide guidance to the impact of filament diameter tolerances
liquifier bore diameter and the filament diameter was not on the performance of the system. Nearly all heat transfer
accounted for theoretically, but it has been incorporated into the analyses have focused on steady-state operation with a
model through an empirical correction factor (Venkataraman constant feed rate and deposition rate. Of greater interest,
et al., 1999). While this does leave some room for improving especially for the development of advanced control
the model theoretically, the practical value of doing so would algorithms, are transients in the heat transfer rate that occur
be somewhat limited. The key value of the buckling analysis is when the feed rate is changed. These transients will have a
to place some practical bounds on acceptable feedstock major impact on road-to-road bonding and have only
202
minimally been addressed in the literature. The presence of of parts processed by fused deposition”, Rapid Prototyping
these transients also presents an opportunity for exploring the Journal, Vol. 2, pp. 4-19.
system design, particularly with regard to the heating strategy. Ahn, S.H., Montero, M., Odell, D., Roundy, S. and
Different heating strategies, such as zoned heating, might provide Wright, P.K. (2002), “Anisotropic material properties of
a means of more precisely controlling the temperature. Typically, fused deposition modeling ABS”, Rapid Prototyping Journal,
only a single thermocouple is placed in the liquifier assembly for Vol. 8, pp. 248-257.
process control. Experimental measurements at different Bellehumeur, C., Li, L., Sun, Q. and Gu, P. (2004),
locations in the liquifier could aid in modeling and process “Modeling of bond formation between polymer filaments in
control. the fused deposition modeling process”, Journal of
Models of the pressure drop in the liquefier have been Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 6, pp. 170-178.
drawn from those for extrusion dies. While there has been no Bellini, A. (2002), “Fused deposition of ceramics: a
reported experimental evaluation of these models in an AM comprehensive experimental, analytical and computational
system, they should provide a good quantitative estimate of study of material behavior, fabrication process and
the pressure drop. Of particular interest is the nature of the equipment design”, PhD dissertation, Drexel University,
flow as the liquifier chamber converges to the nozzle opening. Philadelphia, PA.
While limits on the convergence angle have been suggested for Bellini, A. and Guceri, S. (2003), “Mechanical
filled feedstocks to prevent clogging of the nozzle (Yardimci characterization of parts fabricated using fused deposition
et al., 1997), there have not been any reports of an empirical modeling”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 252-264.
evaluation of this design limit. Likewise, alignment of polymer Bellini, A., Güçeri, S. and Bertoldi, M. (2004), “Liquefier
chains as they pass through the nozzle opening can be dynamics in fused deposition”, Journal of Manufacturing
expected to have a significant impact on the mechanical Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 126,
properties of a finished part. This would reasonably be pp. 237-246.
expected to be impacted by the nozzle convergence angle, Bourell, D.L., Leu, M.C. and Rosen, D.W. (Eds) (2009),
although a study of this phenomenon in AM systems has not Roadmap for Additive Manufacturing: Identifying the Future of
been reported. Freeform Processing, The University of Texas at Austin
Bead spreading and road-to-road bonding determine the Laboratory for Freeform Fabrication Advanced
surface and mechanical properties of parts made with Manufacturing Series, Austin, TX.
extrusion AM processes. The ultimate shape of the printed Crockett, R.S. (1997), “The liquid-to-solid transition in
road depends on its surface tension, viscosity, rate of cooling stereodeposition techniques”, PhD thesis, University of
and interaction with the print head. Analytical models of bead Arizona.
spreading should be able to draw from a large body of Crockett, R.S. and Calvert, P.D. (1996), “The liquid-to-solid
literature on the spreading of individual droplets on a surface. transition in stereodeposition techniques”, in Bourell, D.L.,
One such model has been reported (Crockett, 1997; Crockett Beaman, J.J., Marcus, H.L., Crawford, R.H. and
and Calvert, 1996); however, its assumption of complete Barlow, J.W. (Eds), Solid Freeform Fabrication Proceedings,
wetting without accounting for any change in viscosity with University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, pp. 257-264.
time limits its quantitative value. This model does, however, Duineveld, P.C. (2003), “The stability of ink-jet printed
provide a useful framework for model development. The lines of liquid with zero receding contact angle on a
thermal history of the printed road is of great importance, as it homogeneous substrate”, Journal of Fluid Mechanics,
is the greatest determining factor in bonding quality between Vol. 477, p. 26.
neighboring roads of material. Simple models provide good Frenkel, J. (1945), “Viscous flow of crystalline bodies under
qualitative descriptions of the thermal history of a given road. the action of surface tension”, Journal of Physics (Moscow),
Assumptions made about convective cooling of the printed Vol. 9, pp. 385-391.
road do not seem to be justified by any experimental or Gibson, I., Rosen, D.W. and Stucker, B. (2010), Additive
theoretical basis. Ideally, predictions of thermal history could
Manufacturing Technologies: Rapid Prototyping to Direct
be related to mechanical bond strength and incorporated into
Digital Manufacturing, Springer, New York, NY.
toolpath design algorithms.
Halidi, S.N.A.M. and Abdullah, J. (2012), “Moisture effects
Fused deposition modeling® and similar processes are
on the ABS used for fused deposition modeling rapid
seeing increasing use in finished part manufacturing. Key
prototyping machine”, IEEE Symposium on Humanities,
elements of a typical extrusion-based AM process have been
Science and Engineering Research, Kuala Lumpur,
described, and approaches and challenges to modeling each
pp. 839-843.
have been reviewed. Continued growth into new markets will
Ji, L.B. and Zhou, T.R. (2010), “Finite element simulation
require improved understanding of the processing science,
of temperature field in fused deposition modeling”,
enabling development of advanced new materials,
Manufacturing Science and Engineering,, Vols. 97/101,
model-based process control algorithms and product design
pp. 2585-2588.
rules.
Jones, R., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V.,
Palmer, C. and Bowyer, A. (2011), “RepRap - the
replicating rapid prototyper”, Robotica, Vol. 29,
References
pp. 177-191.
Agarwala, M.K., Jamalabad, V.R., Langrana, N.A., Safari, A., Karis, T.E., Dawson, D.J., Davis, C.R., Kono, R.N.,
Whalen, P.J. and Danforth, S.C. (1996), “Structural quality Kim, G., Jhon, M.S. and Kim, S.J. (1996), “Rapid
203
prototyping materials rheology”, Journal of Imaging Science Solid freeform Fabrication Proceedings, University of Texas at
and Technology, Vol. 40, pp. 147-154. Austin, Austin, TX, pp. 16-23.
Liang, J.Z. (1995), “Effect of the die angle on the extrusion Venkataraman, N., Rangarajan, S., Harper, B., Matthewson,
swell of rubber compound”, Journal of Materials Processing M.J., Safari, A. and Danforth, S.C. (2000a), “Process-
Technology, Vol. 52, pp. 207-212. property-performance relationship for fused deposition of
Liang, J.Z. and Ness, J.N. (1997), “Effect of die angle on flow ceramics (FDC) feedstock materials”, in Danforth, S.C.,
behaviour for high impact polystyrene melt”, Polymer DIMOS, D. and Prinz, F.B. (Eds), Solid Freeform and
Testing, Vol. 16, pp. 403-412. Additive Fabrication, San Francisco, CA, pp. 203-210.
Liang, J.Z., Chan, J.S.F. and Wong, E.T.T. (2001), “Effects Venkataraman, N., Rangarajan, S., Matthewson, M.J.,
of operation conditions and die angles on the pressure losses Harper, B., Safari, A., Danforth, S.C., Wu, G.,
in capillary flow of polystyrene melt”, Journal of Materials Langrana, N., Guceri, S. and Yardimci, A. (2000b),
Processing Technology, Vol. 114, pp. 118-121. “Feedstock material property-process relationships in fused
Lipson, H. and Kurman, M. (2010), “Factory@Home: the deposition of ceramics (FDC)”, Rapid Prototyping Journal,
emerging economy of personal manufacturing”, occasional Vol. 6, pp. 244-252.
papers in science and technology policy, US Office of Venkataraman, N., Rangarajan, S., Matthewson, M.J.,
Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC. Safari, A., Danforth, S.C. and Yardimci, A. (1999),
Mao, T., Kuhn, D.C.S. and Tran, H. (1997), “Spread and “Mechanical and rheological properties of feedstock
rebound of liquid droplets upon impact on flat surfaces”, material for fused deposition of ceramics and metals (FDC
AIChE Journal, Vol. 43, p. 11. and FDMet) and their relationship to process
Michaeli, W. (2003), Extrusion Dies for Plastics and Rubber: performance”, in Bourell, D.L., Beaman, J.J.,
Design and Engineering Computations, Hanser Verlag, Crawford, R.H., Marcus, H.L. and Barlow, J.W. (Eds),
Munchen. Solid Freeform Fabrication Proceedings, University of Texas at
Middleman, S. (1995), Modeling Axisymmetric Flows Dynamics Austin, Austin, TX.
of Films, Jets, and Drops, Academic Press, San Diego, CA. Wang, T.M., Xi, J.T. and Jin, Y. (2007), “A model research
Mostafa, N., Syed, H.M., Igor, S. and Andrew, G. (2009), “A for prototype warp deformation in the FDM process”,
study of melt flow analysis of an ABS-iron composite in International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
fused deposition modelling process”, Tsinghua Science and Vol. 33, pp. 1087-1096.
Technology, Vol. 14, pp. 29-37. Wohlers, T.T. (2011), Wohlers Report 2011: Additive
Namii (2012), “Namii website”, available at: http://namii.org/ Manufacturing and 3D Printing State of the Industry Annual
(accessed 28 December 2012). Worldwide Progress Report, Wohlers Associates, Inc., Fort
Osswald, T.A. and Menges, G. (2003), Materials Science of Collins, CO.
Polymers for Engineers, Carl Hanser Verlag, Kempten. Yardimci, M.A., Hattori, T., Guceri, S.I. and Danforth, S.C.
Park, H., Carr, W.W., Zhu, J. and Morris, J.F. (2003), (1997), “Thermal analysis of fused deposition”, in
“Single drop impaction on a solid surface”, AIChE Journal, Bourell, D.L., Beaman, J.J., Crawford, R.H., Marcus, H.L.
Vol. 49, p. 11. and Barlow, J.W. (Eds), Solid Freeform Fabrication
Ramanath, H.S., Chua, C.K., Leong, K.F. and Shah, K.D. Proceedings, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
(2008), “Melt flow behaviour of poly-epsilon-caprolactone
in fused deposition modeling”, Journal of Materials
Science-Materials in Medicine, Vol. 19, pp. 2541-2550. About the authors
Rosenzweig, N. and Narkis, M. (1981), “Sintering rheology
of amorphous polymers”, Polymer Engineering and Science, Brian N. Turner is a Post-doctoral Research Associate at the
Vol. 21, pp. 1167-1170. University of Dayton. He received his undergraduate degree
Scott, J., Gupta, N., Weber, C., Newsome, S., Wohlers, T. from that institution in Chemistry before completing his PhD
and Caffrey, T. (2012), Additive Manufacturing: Status and in Chemistry at Vanderbilt University.
Opportunities, Institute for Defense Analysis: Science and Robert Strong will complete his BS in Chemical Engineering
Technology Policy Institute, Washington, DC. at the University of Dayton in the spring of 2013, where he
Shofner, M.L., Lozano, K., Rodríguez-Macías, F.J. and
subsequently plans to earn his MS in the same discipline.
Barrera, E.V. (2003), “Nanofiber-reinforced polymers
prepared by fused deposition modeling”, Journal of Applied Scott A. Gold has been an Associate Professor in the
Polymer Science, Vol. 89, pp. 3081-3090. Chemical and Materials Engineering Department at the
Sun, Q., Rizvi, G.M., Bellehumeur, C.T. and Gu, P. (2008), University of Dayton since 2010. Prior to that, he was on
“Effect of processing conditions on the bonding quality of the faculty at Louisiana Tech University. He served as a
FDM polymer filaments”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Post-doctoral researcher at the University of Illinois-Urbana
Vol. 14, pp. 72-80. Champaign and earned his PhD in Chemical Engineering from
Thomas, J.P. and Rodriguez, J.F. (2000), “Modeling the Arizona State University. Scott Gold is the corresponding
fracture strength between fused deposition extruded roads”, author and can be contacted at: sgold1@udayton.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
204
This article has been cited by:
1. Qingxi Hu, Yongchao Duan, Haiguang Zhang, Dali Liu, Biao Yan, Fujun Peng. 2018. Manufacturing and 3D printing of
continuous carbon fiber prepreg filament. Journal of Materials Science 53:3, 1887-1898. [Crossref]
2. Nelson Vargas-Alfredo, Helmut Reinecke, Alberto Gallardo, Adolfo del Campo, Juan Rodríguez-Hernández. 2018. Fabrication
of 3D printed objects with controlled surface chemistry and topography. European Polymer Journal 98, 21-27. [Crossref]
3. Yuan Jin, Yong He, Jianke Du. 2017. A novel path planning methodology for extrusion-based additive manufacturing of thin-
walled parts. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 30:12, 1301-1315. [Crossref]
4. Pedram Parandoush, Dong Lin. 2017. A review on additive manufacturing of polymer-fiber composites. Composite Structures
182, 36-53. [Crossref]
5. Yuan Jin, Yong He, Guoqiang Fu, Aibing Zhang, Jianke Du. 2017. A non-retraction path planning approach for extrusion-based
additive manufacturing. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 48, 132-144. [Crossref]
6. Matthew Lanaro, David P. Forrestal, Stefan Scheurer, Damien J. Slinger, Sam Liao, Sean K. Powell, Maria A. Woodruff. 2017.
3D printing complex chocolate objects: Platform design, optimization and evaluation. Journal of Food Engineering 215, 13-22.
[Crossref]
7. Felix Baumann, Dieter Roller. 2017. Additive Manufacturing, Cloud-Based 3D Printing and Associated Services—Overview.
Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing 1:2, 15. [Crossref]
8. Azizeh-Mitra Yousefi, Byran Smucker, Alex Naber, Cara Wyrick, Charles Shaw, Katelyn Bennett, Sarah Szekely, Carlie Focke,
Katherine A. Wood. 2017. Controlling the extrudate swell in melt extrusion additive manufacturing of 3D scaffolds: a designed
experiment. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition 3, 1-22. [Crossref]
9. Marco Leite, André Varanda, António Relógio Ribeiro, Arlindo Silva, Maria Fátima Vaz. Mechanical properties and water
absorption of surface modified ABS 3D printed by fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 0:ja, 00-00. [Abstract]
[PDF]
10. S. Dul, L. Fambri, C. Merlini, G.M.O. Barra, M. Bersani, L. Vanzetti, A. Pegoretti. 2017. Effect of graphene nanoplatelets
structure on the properties of acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene composites. Polymer Composites 34. . [Crossref]
11. Sarah Trabia, Zakai Olsen, Kwang J Kim. 2017. Searching for a new ionomer for 3D printable ionic polymer–metal composites:
Aquivion as a candidate. Smart Materials and Structures 26:11, 115029. [Crossref]
12. Jingran Li, Ran Jin, Hang Z. Yu. 2017. Integration of physically-based and data-driven approaches for thermal field prediction
in additive manufacturing. Materials & Design . [Crossref]
13. Laurent Chaunier, Guy Della Valle, Michèle Dalgalarrondo, Denis Lourdin, Didier Marion, Eric Leroy. 2017. Rheology and
structural changes of plasticized zeins in the molten state. Rheologica Acta 56:11, 941-953. [Crossref]
14. M. Dryzek, E. Dryzek. 2017. Positron Annihilation Lifetime Spectroscopy of ABS Objects Manufactured by Fused Deposition
Modelling. Acta Physica Polonica A 132:5, 1506-1509. [Crossref]
15. Eric L. Gilmer, Darren Miller, Camden A. Chatham, Callie Zawaski, Jacob J. Fallon, Allison Pekkanen, Timothy E. Long,
Christopher B. Williams, Michael J. Bortner. 2017. Model analysis of feedstock behavior in fused filament fabrication: Enabling
rapid materials screening. Polymer . [Crossref]
16. LiHao, Hao Li, ZhangShuai, Shuai Zhang, YiZhiran, Zhiran Yi, LiJie, Jie Li, SunAihua, Aihua Sun, GuoJianjun, Jianjun Guo,
XuGaojie, Gaojie Xu. 2017. Bonding quality and fracture analysis of polyamide 12 parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling.
Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:6, 973-982. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Josef F. Christ, Nahal Aliheidari, Amir Ameli, Petra Pötschke. 2017. 3D printed highly elastic strain sensors of multiwalled
carbon nanotube/thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites. Materials & Design 131, 394-401. [Crossref]
18. Vinzenz Nienhaus, Dieter Spiehl, Edgar Dörsam. 2017. Influence of slicer software on transformation of virtual data into porous
microstructures. Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine 1:4, 231-238. [Crossref]
19. Trevor J. Fleck, Allison K. Murray, I. Emre Gunduz, Steven F. Son, George T.-C Chiu, Jeffrey F. Rhoads. 2017. Additive
manufacturing of multifunctional reactive materials. Additive Manufacturing 17, 176-182. [Crossref]
20. Nayan G. Solanki, Md Tahsin, Ankita V. Shah, Abu T.M. Serajuddin. 2017. Formulation of 3D Printed Tablet for Rapid Drug
Release by Fused Deposition Modeling: Screening Polymers for Drug Release, Drug-Polymer Miscibility and Printability. Journal
of Pharmaceutical Sciences . [Crossref]
21. David C. Deisenroth, Ramin Moradi, Amir H. Shooshtari, Farah Singer, Avram Bar-Cohen, Michael Ohadi. 2017. Review of
Heat Exchangers Enabled by Polymer and Polymer Composite Additive Manufacturing. Heat Transfer Engineering 117, 1-17.
[Crossref]
22. Amin Jabbari, Karen Abrinia. 2017. A metal additive manufacturing method: semi-solid metal extrusion and deposition. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 67. . [Crossref]
23. M. Bodaghi, A.R. Damanpack, W.H. Liao. 2017. Adaptive metamaterials by functionally graded 4D printing. Materials & Design
. [Crossref]
24. Yuan Jin, Jianke Du, Zhiyong Ma, Anbang Liu, Yong He. 2017. An optimization approach for path planning of high-quality and
uniform additive manufacturing. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 92:1-4, 651-662. [Crossref]
25. Cho-Pei Jiang, Huang-Jan Hsu, Shyh-Yuan Lee. 2017. Technical Development of Slurry Three-Dimensional Printer. IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 235, 012010. [Crossref]
26. ZhouYing-Guo, Ying-Guo Zhou, SuBei, Bei Su, TurngLih-sheng, Lih-sheng Turng. 2017. Deposition-induced effects of
isotactic polypropylene and polycarbonate composites during fused deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:5, 869-880.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
27. Mirja Palo, Jenny Holländer, Jaakko Suominen, Jouko Yliruusi, Niklas Sandler. 2017. 3D printed drug delivery devices:
perspectives and technical challenges. Expert Review of Medical Devices 39, 1-12. [Crossref]
28. Zhiyang Zhao, Fang Peng, Kevin A. Cavicchi, Mukerrem Cakmak, R. A. Weiss, Bryan D. Vogt. 2017. Three-Dimensional
Printed Shape Memory Objects Based on an Olefin Ionomer of Zinc-Neutralized Poly(ethylene- co -methacrylic acid). ACS
Applied Materials & Interfaces 9:32, 27239-27249. [Crossref]
29. Fabio A. Cruz Sanchez, Hakim Boudaoud, Sandrine Hoppe, Mauricio Camargo. 2017. Polymer Recycling in an Open-Source
Additive Manufacturing Context: Mechanical Issues. Additive Manufacturing . [Crossref]
30. Prashanth Ravi, Panos S. Shiakolas, Tr? R. Welch. 2017. Poly- l -lactic acid: Pellets to fiber to fused filament fabricated scaffolds,
and scaffold weight loss study. Additive Manufacturing 16, 167-176. [Crossref]
31. Jamison Go, Scott N. Schiffres, Adam G. Stevens, A. John Hart. 2017. Rate limits of additive manufacturing by fused filament
fabrication and guidelines for high-throughput system design. Additive Manufacturing 16, 1-11. [Crossref]
32. Amir Zadpoor. 2017. Design for Additive Bio-Manufacturing: From Patient-Specific Medical Devices to Rationally Designed
Meta-Biomaterials. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 18:8, 1607. [Crossref]
33. C. McIlroy, P.D. Olmsted. 2017. Disentanglement effects on welding behaviour of polymer melts during the fused-filament-
fabrication method for additive manufacturing. Polymer 123, 376-391. [Crossref]
34. Niklas Sandler, Petri Ihalainen. Perspectives of Printing Technologies in Continuous Drug Manufacturing 525-549. [Crossref]
35. Huseini S. Patanwala, Danting Hong, Sahil R. Vora, Brice Bognet, Anson W. K. Ma. 2017. The microstructure and mechanical
properties of 3D printed carbon nanotube-polylactic acid composites. Polymer Composites 23. . [Crossref]
36. Xunfei Zhou, Sheng-Jen Hsieh, Yintong Sun. 2017. Experimental and numerical investigation of the thermal behaviour of
polylactic acid during the fused deposition process. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 12:3, 221-233. [Crossref]
37. B. Arey, C. Barrett, I. Arslan, Z. Kennedy, M. Warner, H. Schroeder. 2017. Investigating 3D Printing with Microscopy and
Spectroscopy Techniques. Microscopy and Microanalysis 23:S1, 312-313. [Crossref]
38. Syed A.M. Tofail, Elias P. Koumoulos, Amit Bandyopadhyay, Susmita Bose, Lisa O’Donoghue, Costas Charitidis. 2017. Additive
manufacturing: scientific and technological challenges, market uptake and opportunities. Materials Today . [Crossref]
39. Yuan Jin, Jianke Du, Yong He, Guoqiang Fu. 2017. Modeling and process planning for curved layer fused deposition. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 91:1-4, 273-285. [Crossref]
40. KhaliqMuhammad Hussam, Muhammad Hussam Khaliq, GomesRui, Rui Gomes, FernandesCélio, Célio Fernandes,
NóbregaJoão, João Nóbrega, CarneiroOlga Sousa, Olga Sousa Carneiro, FerrásLuis Lima, Luis Lima Ferrás. 2017. On the use
of high viscosity polymers in the fused filament fabrication process. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:4, 727-735. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
41. SantanaLeonardo, Leonardo Santana, AhrensCarlos Henrique, Carlos Henrique Ahrens, da Costa Sabino NettoAurélio, Aurélio
da Costa Sabino Netto, BoninCassiano, Cassiano Bonin. 2017. Evaluating the deposition quality of parts produced by an open-
source 3D printer. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:4, 796-803. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
42. Fei Ni, Guangchun Wang, Haibin Zhao. 2017. Fabrication of water-soluble poly(vinyl alcohol)-based composites with improved
thermal behavior for potential three-dimensional printing application. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 134:24. . [Crossref]
43. R. Jerez-Mesa, G. Gomez-Gras, J.A. Travieso-Rodriguez, V. Garcia-Plana. 2017. A comparative study of the thermal behavior
of three different 3D printer liquefiers. Mechatronics . [Crossref]
44. Jin Zhu, Biao Wang. 2017. Effects of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes on the Properties of Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
Nanocomposites Potentially Used for Fused Deposition Modeling. Materials Science Forum 898, 2384-2391. [Crossref]
45. Kevin R. Hart, Eric D. Wetzel. 2017. Fracture behavior of additively manufactured acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) materials.
Engineering Fracture Mechanics 177, 1-13. [Crossref]
46. Shyh-Kuang Ueng, Lu-Kang Chen, Szu-Yao Jen. A preview system for 3D printing 1508-1511. [Crossref]
47. Kevin Estelle, Dylan Blair, Kent Evans, B. Arda Gozen. 2017. Manufacturing of smart composites with hyperelastic property
gradients and shape memory using fused deposition. Journal of Manufacturing Processes . [Crossref]
48. Lu Wang, Douglas J. Gardner, Douglas W. Bousfield. 2017. Cellulose nanofibril-reinforced polypropylene composites for material
extrusion: Rheological properties. Polymer Engineering & Science 293. . [Crossref]
49. CooganTimothy J., Timothy J. Coogan, KazmerDavid O., David O. Kazmer. 2017. Healing simulation for bond strength
prediction of FDM. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:3, 551-561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
50. YuYongze, Yongze Yu, LiuFujun, Fujun Liu, LiuJing, Jing Liu. 2017. Direct 3D printing of low melting point alloy via adhesion
mechanism. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:3, 642-650. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
51. TaylorAdam C., Adam C. Taylor, BeirneStephen, Stephen Beirne, AliciGursel, Gursel Alici, WallaceGordon G., Gordon G.
Wallace. 2017. System and process development for coaxial extrusion in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyping Journal
23:3, 543-550. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. Shen Ji, Murat Guvendiren. 2017. Recent Advances in Bioink Design for 3D Bioprinting of Tissues and Organs. Frontiers in
Bioengineering and Biotechnology 5. . [Crossref]
53. Flaviana Calignano, Diego Manfredi, Elisa Paola Ambrosio, Sara Biamino, Mariangela Lombardi, Eleonora Atzeni, Alessandro
Salmi, Paolo Minetola, Luca Iuliano, Paolo Fino. 2017. Overview on Additive Manufacturing Technologies. Proceedings of the
IEEE 105:4, 593-612. [Crossref]
54. CooganTimothy J., Timothy J. Coogan, KazmerDavid Owen, David Owen Kazmer. 2017. Bond and part strength in fused
deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:2, 414-422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
55. TlegenovYedige, Yedige Tlegenov, WongYoke San, Yoke San Wong, HongGeok Soon, Geok Soon Hong. 2017. A dynamic model
for nozzle clog monitoring in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:2, 391-400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
56. Claire McIlroy, Peter D. Olmsted. 2017. Deformation of an amorphous polymer during the fused-filament-fabrication method
for additive manufacturing. Journal of Rheology 61:2, 379-397. [Crossref]
57. Changhui Song, Anming Wang, Zijun Wu, Ziyu Chen, Yongqiang Yang, Di Wang. 2017. The design and manufacturing of a
titanium alloy beak for Grus japonensis using additive manufacturing. Materials & Design 117, 410-416. [Crossref]
58. Michael E. Mackay, Zachary R. Swain, Colby R. Banbury, David D. Phan, David A. Edwards. 2017. The performance of the
hot end in a plasticating 3D printer. Journal of Rheology 61:2, 229-236. [Crossref]
59. Gianluca Alaimo, Stefania Marconi, Luca Costato, Ferdinando Auricchio. 2017. Influence of meso-structure and chemical
composition on FDM 3D-printed parts. Composites Part B: Engineering 113, 371-380. [Crossref]
60. Harry Gao, Dorcas V. Kaweesa, Jacob Moore, Nicholas A. Meisel. 2017. Investigating the Impact of Acetone Vapor Smoothing
on the Strength and Elongation of Printed ABS Parts. JOM 69:3, 580-585. [Crossref]
61. Gabriel Pieter Greeff, Meinhard Schilling. 2017. Closed loop control of slippage during filament transport in molten material
extrusion. Additive Manufacturing 14, 31-38. [Crossref]
62. Felix Baumann, Julian Eichhoff, Dieter Roller. 2017. Scanned Image Data from 3D-Printed Specimens Using Fused Deposition
Modeling. Data 2:1, 3. [Crossref]
63. Vidya Kishore, Christine Ajinjeru, Andrzej Nycz, Brian Post, John Lindahl, Vlastimil Kunc, Chad Duty. 2017. Infrared preheating
to improve interlayer strength of big area additive manufacturing (BAAM) components. Additive Manufacturing 14, 7-12.
[Crossref]
64. Yifan Jin, Yi Wan, Bing Zhang, Zhanqiang Liu. 2017. Modeling of the chemical finishing process for polylactic acid parts in fused
deposition modeling and investigation of its tensile properties. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 240, 233-239. [Crossref]
65. Abdullah Barazanchi, Kai Chun Li, Basil Al-Amleh, Karl Lyons, J. Neil Waddell. 2017. Additive Technology: Update on Current
Materials and Applications in Dentistry. Journal of Prosthodontics 26:2, 156-163. [Crossref]
66. DutyChad E., Chad E. Duty, KuncVlastimil, Vlastimil Kunc, ComptonBrett, Brett Compton, PostBrian, Brian Post,
ErdmanDonald, Donald Erdman, SmithRachel, Rachel Smith, LindRandall, Randall Lind, LloydPeter, Peter Lloyd,
LoveLonnie, Lonnie Love. 2017. Structure and mechanical behavior of Big Area Additive Manufacturing (BAAM) materials.
Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:1, 181-189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
67. PanYayue, Yayue Pan, DagliChintan, Chintan Dagli. 2017. Dynamic resolution control in a laser projection-based
stereolithography system. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23:1, 190-200. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
68. K.S. Boparai, R. Singh. Advances in Fused Deposition Modeling . [Crossref]
69. Radu I. Corcodel, Horea T. Ilies. 2017. Printability analysis in additive manufacturing. Computer-Aided Design and Applications
1. [Crossref]
70. Yifan Jin, Yi Wan, Zhanqiang Liu. 2017. Surface polish of PLA parts in FDM using dichloromethane vapour. MATEC Web
of Conferences 95, 05001. [Crossref]
71. David Kazmer. Three-Dimensional Printing of Plastics 617-634. [Crossref]
72. Emily R. Fitzharris, Narumi Watanabe, David W. Rosen, Meisha L. Shofner. 2017. Effects of material properties on warpage in
fused deposition modeling parts. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology . [Crossref]
73. Z. C. Kennedy, J. F. Christ, K. A. Evans, B. W. Arey, L. E. Sweet, M. G. Warner, R. L. Erikson, C. A. Barrett. 2017. 3D-
printed poly(vinylidene fluoride)/carbon nanotube composites as a tunable, low-cost chemical vapour sensing platform. Nanoscale
9:17, 5458-5466. [Crossref]
74. Michael Van den Eynde, Peter Van Puyvelde. 3D Printing of Polylactic Acid . [Crossref]
75. Eleni Gkartzou, Elias P. Koumoulos, Costas A. Charitidis. 2017. Production and 3D printing processing of bio-based
thermoplastic filament. Manufacturing Review 4, 1. [Crossref]
76. Rowan P. Rimington, Andrew J. Capel, Steven D. R. Christie, Mark P. Lewis. 2017. Biocompatible 3D printed polymers via
fused deposition modelling direct C 2 C 12 cellular phenotype in vitro. Lab on a Chip 17:17, 2982-2993. [Crossref]
77. A.P. Valerga, M. Batista, R. Puyana, A. Sambruno, C. Wendt, M. Marcos. 2017. Preliminary study of PLA wire colour effects
on geometric characteristics of parts manufactured by FDM. Procedia Manufacturing 13, 924-931. [Crossref]
78. J. Gilberto Siqueiros, David A. Roberson. 2017. In Situ Wire Drawing of Phosphate Glass in Polymer Matrices for Material
Extrusion 3D Printing. International Journal of Polymer Science 2017, 1-14. [Crossref]
79. Felip Esteve, Djamila Olivier, Qin Hu, Martin Baumers. Micro-additive Manufacturing Technology 67-95. [Crossref]
80. Fabian Schuster, Fabrice Ngako Ngamgoue, Tobias Goetz, Thomas Hirth, Achim Weber, Monika Bach. 2017. Investigations of
a catalyst system regarding the foamability of polyurethanes for reactive inkjet printing. Journal of Materials Chemistry C 5:27,
6738-6744. [Crossref]
81. Mamadou Diagne, Nikolaos Bekiaris-Liberis, Miroslav Krstic. 2017. Time- and State-Dependent Input Delay-Compensated
Bang-Bang Control of a Screw Extruder for 3D Printing. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control . [Crossref]
82. R. Jerez-Mesa, J.A. Travieso-Rodriguez, J. Llumà-Fuentes, G. Gomez-Gras, D. Puig. 2017. Fatigue lifespan study of PLA parts
obtained by additive manufacturing. Procedia Manufacturing 13, 872-879. [Crossref]
83. Jung Hyun Park, Min-Young Lyu, Soon Yong Kwon, Hyung Jin Roh, Myung Sool Koo, Sung Hwan Cho. 2016. Temperature
Analysis of Nozzle in a FDM Type 3D Printer Through Computer Simulation and Experiment. Elastomers and Composites 51:4,
301-307. [Crossref]
84. Murat Guvendiren, Joseph Molde, Rosane M.D. Soares, Joachim Kohn. 2016. Designing Biomaterials for 3D Printing. ACS
Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2:10, 1679-1693. [Crossref]
85. Quhao Li, Wenjiong Chen, Shutian Liu, Liyong Tong. 2016. Structural topology optimization considering connectivity
constraint. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 54:4, 971-984. [Crossref]
86. Xiaoyong Tian, Tengfei Liu, Chuncheng Yang, Qingrui Wang, Dichen Li. 2016. Interface and performance of 3D printed
continuous carbon fiber reinforced PLA composites. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 88, 198-205. [Crossref]
87. Sebastian Hertle, Maximilian Drexler, Dietmar Drummer. 2016. Additive Manufacturing of Poly(propylene) by Means of Melt
Extrusion. Macromolecular Materials and Engineering . [Crossref]
88. Jenny Holländer, Natalja Genina, Harri Jukarainen, Mohammad Khajeheian, Ari Rosling, Ermei Mäkilä, Niklas Sandler. 2016.
Three-Dimensional Printed PCL-Based Implantable Prototypes of Medical Devices for Controlled Drug Delivery. Journal of
Pharmaceutical Sciences 105:9, 2665-2676. [Crossref]
89. Jae-Gwang Lim, Seung-Ho Jang, Jeong-Mo Hong. 2016. A Pre-Visualization Method for FDM 3D Printing Based on Perlin
Noise. Korean Journal of Computational Design and Engineering 21:3, 224-233. [Crossref]
90. Daniel P. Cole, Jaret C. Riddick, H. M. Iftekhar Jaim, Kenneth E. Strawhecker, Nicole E. Zander. 2016. Interfacial mechanical
behavior of 3D printed ABS. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 133:30. . [Crossref]
91. Hedi Nouri, Sofiane Guessasma, Sofiane Belhabib. 2016. Structural imperfections in additive manufacturing perceived from the
X-ray micro-tomography perspective. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 234, 113-124. [Crossref]
92. Xiaoqiang Luo, Qingzhi Yan, Zhengyang Li. 2016. Effect of the pouring temperature by novel synchronous rolling-casting for
metal on microstructure and properties of ZLl04 alloy. Journal of Materials Research 31:16, 2524-2530. [Crossref]
93. Z. Ortega, M.E. Alemán, A.N. Benítez, M.D. Monzón. 2016. Theoretical–experimental evaluation of different biomaterials for
parts obtaining by fused deposition modeling. Measurement 89, 137-144. [Crossref]
94. Natalja Genina, Jenny Holländer, Harri Jukarainen, Ermei Mäkilä, Jarno Salonen, Niklas Sandler. 2016. Ethylene vinyl acetate
(EVA) as a new drug carrier for 3D printed medical drug delivery devices. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 90, 53-63.
[Crossref]
95. BoparaiKamaljit Singh, Kamaljit Singh Boparai, SinghRupinder, Rupinder Singh, SinghHarwinder, Harwinder Singh. 2016.
Process optimization of single screw extruder for development of Nylon 6-Al-Al2O3 alternative FDM filament. Rapid Prototyping
Journal 22:4, 766-776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
96. Thomas Köpplmayr, Michael Mühlberger. 2016. Inkjet printing of polylactic acid on substrates prepared by fused deposition
modeling and its potential for selective surface finishing. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 133:23. . [Crossref]
97. R. Jerez-Mesa, J.A. Travieso-Rodriguez, X. Corbella, R. Busqué, G. Gomez-Gras. 2016. Finite element analysis of the thermal
behavior of a RepRap 3D printer liquefier. Mechatronics 36, 119-126. [Crossref]
98. Sheng Qi, Duncan Craig. 2016. Recent developments in micro- and nanofabrication techniques for the preparation of amorphous
pharmaceutical dosage forms. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 100, 67-84. [Crossref]
99. Charoula Kousiatza, Dimitris Karalekas. 2016. In-situ monitoring of strain and temperature distributions during fused deposition
modeling process. Materials & Design 97, 400-406. [Crossref]
100. Hanshin Choi, Jong Min Byun, Wonsik Lee, Su-Ryong Bang, Young Do Kim. 2016. Research Trend of Additive Manufacturing
Technology − A=B+C+D+E, add Innovative Concept to Current Additive Manufacturing Technology: Four Conceptual Factors
for Building Additive Manufacturing Technology −. Journal of Korean Powder Metallurgy Institute 23:2, 149-169. [Crossref]
101. Anna Tycova, Jan Prikryl, Frantisek Foret. 2016. Reproducible preparation of nanospray tips for capillary electrophoresis coupled
to mass spectrometry using 3D printed grinding device. ELECTROPHORESIS 37:7-8, 924-930. [Crossref]
102. Stefan F. Busch, Marcel Weidenbach, Jan C. Balzer, Martin Koch. 2016. THz Optics 3D Printed with TOPAS. Journal of
Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves 37:4, 303-307. [Crossref]
103. A. Le Duigou, M. Castro, R. Bevan, N. Martin. 2016. 3D printing of wood fibre biocomposites: From mechanical to actuation
functionality. Materials & Design 96, 106-114. [Crossref]
104. F.S. Senatov, K.V. Niaza, M.Yu. Zadorozhnyy, A.V. Maksimkin, S.D. Kaloshkin, Y.Z. Estrin. 2016. Mechanical properties and
shape memory effect of 3D-printed PLA-based porous scaffolds. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 57,
139-148. [Crossref]
105. Sarah K. Everton, Matthias Hirsch, Petros Stravroulakis, Richard K. Leach, Adam T. Clare. 2016. Review of in-situ process
monitoring and in-situ metrology for metal additive manufacturing. Materials & Design 95, 431-445. [Crossref]
106. Singh Boparai Kamaljit, Kamaljit Singh Boparai, Singh Rupinder, Rupinder Singh, Singh Harwinder, Harwinder Singh. 2016.
Experimental investigations for development of Nylon6-Al-Al2O3 alternative FDM filament. Rapid Prototyping Journal 22:2,
217-224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
107. Boparai Kamaljit Singh, Kamaljit Singh Boparai, Singh Rupinder, Rupinder Singh, Singh Harwinder, Harwinder Singh. 2016.
Development of rapid tooling using fused deposition modeling: a review. Rapid Prototyping Journal 22:2, 281-299. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
108. Nicolò Dossi, Fabio Terzi, Evandro Piccin, Rosanna Toniolo, Gino Bontempelli. 2016. Rapid Prototyping of Sensors and
Conductive Elements by Day-to-Day Writing Tools and Emerging Manufacturing Technologies. Electroanalysis 28:2, 250-264.
[Crossref]
109. Massimiliano Annoni, Hermes Giberti, Matteo Strano. 2016. Feasibility Study of an Extrusion-based Direct Metal Additive
Manufacturing Technique. Procedia Manufacturing 5, 916-927. [Crossref]
110. Kamaljit Singh Boparai, Rupinder Singh, Harwinder Singh. 2016. Modeling and optimization of extrusion process parameters
for the development of Nylon6–Al–Al2O3 alternative FDM filament. Progress in Additive Manufacturing 1:1-2, 115. [Crossref]
111. Hermes Giberti, Enrico Fiore, Luca Sbaglia. 2016. Kinematic synthesis of a new 3D printing solution. MATEC Web of Conferences
45, 04013. [Crossref]
112. R. Singh, S. Singh. Development of Functionally Graded Material Through the Fused Deposition Modeling-Assisted Investment
Casting Process: A Case Study . [Crossref]
113. Hermes Giberti, Matteo Strano, Massimiliano Annoni. 2016. An innovative machine for Fused Deposition Modeling of metals
and advanced ceramics. MATEC Web of Conferences 43, 03003. [Crossref]
114. Azizeh-Mitra Yousefi, Paul F. James, Rosa Akbarzadeh, Aswati Subramanian, Conor Flavin, Hassane Oudadesse. 2016. Prospect
of Stem Cells in Bone Tissue Engineering: A Review. Stem Cells International 2016, 1-13. [Crossref]
115. Ana Tojeira, Sara S. Biscaia, Tânia Q. Viana, Inês S. Sousa, Geoffrey R. Mitchell. Controlling Morphology in 3D Printing
181-207. [Crossref]
116. Jeffrey W. Stansbury, Mike J. Idacavage. 2016. 3D printing with polymers: Challenges among expanding options and
opportunities. Dental Materials 32:1, 54-64. [Crossref]
117. Enrico Fiore, Hermes Giberti, Luca Sbaglia. Dimensional synthesis of a 5-DOF parallel kinematic manipulator for a 3d printer
41-48. [Crossref]
118. Jonathan Raasch, Marcus Ivey, Daniel Aldrich, David S. Nobes, Cagri Ayranci. 2015. Characterization of polyurethane shape
memory polymer processed by material extrusion additive manufacturing. Additive Manufacturing 8, 132-141. [Crossref]
119. Maren Preis, Joerg Breitkreutz, Niklas Sandler. 2015. Perspective: Concepts of printing technologies for oral film formulations.
International Journal of Pharmaceutics 494:2, 578-584. [Crossref]
120. Haixi Wu, Yan Wang, Zhonghua Yu. 2015. In situ monitoring of FDM machine condition via acoustic emission. The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology . [Crossref]
121. Alberto Boschetto, Luana Bottini. 2015. Triangular mesh offset aiming to enhance Fused Deposition Modeling accuracy. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 80:1-4, 99-111. [Crossref]
122. Shutian Liu, Quhao Li, Wenjiong Chen, Liyong Tong, Gengdong Cheng. 2015. An identification method for enclosed voids
restriction in manufacturability design for additive manufacturing structures. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering 10:2, 126-137.
[Crossref]
123. Ian Gibson, David Rosen, Brent Stucker. Extrusion-Based Systems 147-173. [Crossref]
124. Steven Shaffer, Kejia Yang, Juan Vargas, Matthew A. Di Prima, Walter Voit. 2014. On reducing anisotropy in 3D printed polymers
via ionizing radiation. Polymer 55:23, 5969-5979. [Crossref]

A Review of Melt Extrusion Additive Manufacturing Processes I. Process Design and Modeling - Brian N. Turner - 2015

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Review of Melt Extrusion Additive Manufacturing Processes I. Process Design and Modeling - Brian N. Turner - 2015

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Rapid Prototyping Journal

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

1. Introduction 1.1 Commercial market

Rapid Prototyping Journal

maintain a uniform temperature throughout the liquefier. A

The feed velocity can be most simply related to pinch roller

3.2.3 Estimation of heat flux T ⫺ T0 ' r ␣z

convenient to approximate the mass flow rate in terms of this

(2D) axisymmetric steady-state advection-conduction model,

where ␪, r= and z= are the dimensionless temperature, radius

relaxed and the elastically stored energy is released, leading to

become unstable and discontinuous. As the maximum velocity (22)

冉9␭2 H冊sin冉␭ 2H冊sin冉␤2W冊

Figure 6 Interaction of the print head with an extruded road E2m ⫽

Here, t, C, k and ␳ are time, heat capacity, thermal

This model neglected the effects of conduction to the build

冉共1 ⫺ 兹12␣⫹ 4␣␤兲vt冊

(31) transfer coefficient is expected to vary with the location in the

with print head velocity to maintain a constant road width and

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi