3D printing using powder melt extrusion
3D printing using powder melt extrusion
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.addma.2019.100811
复制
发表时间：
2019-10-01
影响因子：
11
通讯作者：
Miyake, Garret M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Boyle, Bret M.;Xiong, Panupoan T.;Miyake, Garret M.
增材制造有望彻底改变制造业。然而，新型建筑材料的3D打印目前受到打印机设计固有的限制。在这项工作中，设计和制造了一个台式粉末熔融挤出（PME） 3D打印机头，可以直接用粉末材料而不是长丝打印零件。PME打印机头的最终设计是从Rich Rap通用颗粒挤出机（RRUPE）设计演变而来的，并通过迭代方法实现。PME打印机是通过修改漏斗形状、螺旋钻对挤出物施加的压力和热端结构而成为可能的。通过将PME打印机打印的部件与市售的熔融长丝制造（FFF） 3D打印机打印的部件进行比较，该3D打印机使用普通热塑性聚乳酸（PLA）、高冲击聚苯乙烯（HIPS）和丙烯腈-丁二烯苯乙烯（ABS）粉末（直径< 1 mm），对打印机的性能进行了评估。通过动态力学分析（DMA），对于每种构建材料，PME打印对象显示出与FFF对象相当的粘弹性特性。然而，由于PME （X-Y分辨率为0.8 mm， z层高度校准为0.1 mm）和FFF （X-Y分辨率为0.4 mm， z层高度为0.18 mm）之间的打印机分辨率存在显著差异，以及PME比FFF的构建材料馈送本质上更不一致，由此产生的打印质量，由尺寸分析和表面粗糙度比较决定，从打印层均匀性和结构来看，PME打印件的打印层均匀性低于FFF打印件的打印层均匀性。此外，由于PME的打印分辨率较差和固有的不一致的构建材料，PME打印的物体的总体抗拉强度和杨氏模量比FFF打印的物体（57.7 +/- 2.31 MPa和2160 +/- 179 MPa）更低，更不一致（分别为49.2 +/- 10.7 MPa和1620 +/- 375 MPa）。尽管如此，PME打印方法有望提供一个平台，在这个平台上可以快速制作出无数用于3D打印的热塑性材料的原型。
Additive manufacturing promises to revolutionize manufacturing industries. However, 3D printing of novel build materials is currently limited by constraints inherent to printer designs. In this work, a bench-top powder melt extrusion (PME) 3D printer head was designed and fabricated to print parts directly from powder-based materials rather than filament. The final design of the PME printer head evolved from the Rich Rap Universal Pellet Extruder (RRUPE) design and was realized through an iterative approach. The PME printer was made possible by modifications to the funnel shape, pressure applied to the extrudate by the auger, and hot end structure. Through comparison of parts printed with the PME printer with those from a commercially available fused filament fabrication (FFF) 3D printer using common thermoplastics poly(lactide) (PLA), high impact poly (styrene) (HIPS), and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) powders ( < 1 mm in diameter), evaluation of the printer performance was performed. For each build material, the PME printed objects show comparable viscoelastic properties by dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) to those of the FFF objects. However, due to a significant difference in printer resolution between PME (X-Y resolution of 0.8 mm and a Z-layer height calibrated to 0.1 mm) and FFF (X-Y resolution of 0.4 mm and a Z-layer height of 0.18 mm), as well as, an inherently more inconsistent feed of build material for PME than FFF, the resulting print quality, determined by a dimensional analysis and surface roughness comparisons, of the PME printed objects was lower than that of the FFF printed parts based on the print layer uniformity and structure. Further, due to the poorer print resolution and inherent inconsistent build material feed of the PME, the bulk tensile strength and Young's moduli of the objects printed by PME were lower and more inconsistent (49.2 +/- 10.7 MPa and 1620 +/- 375 MPa, respectively) than those of FFF printed objects (57.7 +/- 2.31 MPa and 2160 +/- 179 MPa, respectively). Nevertheless, PME print methods promise an opportunity to provide a platform on which it is possible to rapidly prototype a myriad of thermoplastic materials for 3D printing.