Tensile Properties of Processed 3D Print
Advanced Materials Research Vol. 699 (2013) pp 813-816
Online available since 2013/May/27 at www.scientific.net
© (2013) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699.813
Tensile Properties of Processed 3D Printer ZP150 Powder Material
Saleh H. Gharaie1, a, Yos Morsi2, b, S. H. Masood3, c
1,2,3
Faculty of Engineering and Industrial Sciences,
Swinburne University of Technology,
Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia
a
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
Keywords:3D printing, Tensile strength, ZP150, process parameters
Abstract.3D Printing is one of the few powder-bed type rapid prototyping (RP) technologies,
which allows fabrication of parts using powder materials. Understanding of mechanical properties
of 3D parts made by this process is essential to explore more applications of this technology. In
general, the mechanical properties of many RP produced parts depend on the process parameters
andalso on post-processing methods of that RP process. Very few studies have been made to
characterize the mechanical properties of 3D Printing processed parts. This paper presents an
experimental investigation on how tensile properties of parts fabricated by 3D Printing is affected
by 3D Printing build orientation, and by post-processing methods of infiltration process and drying
of parts. Results obtained forvarious parameters are compared to investigate the optimum
procedure to achieve the highest tensile strength using ZP150 powder material.
Introduction
3D printing is anestablished rapid prototyping technology, which was invented at Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT)[1]. The technology is commercialized by Z-Corporation to produce
different types of 3D Printers. In this process three dimension (3D) objectsare constructed directly
from computer model usinga powder bed by repetitive deposition of binder on a layer of plaster
type powder according to 2D cross section slices of the object.
The capability of fabricating complex architectures along with other competencies of this
technology attractedmany researchers in various fieldsto use this technology with different types of
powders and binders. Several studies have been made inthe field of tissue engineering to use 3D
Printing technology to construct scaffolds for tissue engineering [2-6]. In another
application,Leuker et al.[6] demonstrated suitability of 3D printed hydroxyapatite (HA) granulate
scaffold for bone tissue engineering. In addition, this technology can also be combined with other
conventional techniques such as salt leaching technique to fabricate the scaffold for tissue
engineering with pore size of (38 to 150µm) and void fraction of (75% to 90%) [7].
This paper presents an investigation to study thetensile properties of 3D printed parts made by
plaster powder and the effect of build orientation and post processing methods on the tensile
strength of the build parts in order to determine which combination of post-processing and build
direction would give the best performance of 3D printed prototypes.
The 3D Printer Parameters
3D Printing is a process of building a part through sequential binder deposition of 2D cross-section
ofthe object. In this process, a slicing algorithm (rendering software) divides the object into number
of layers, and generates detailed data of layers. Then each generated slice is printed onto the spread
powder. The mechanism is similar to inkjet printing but binder is used instead of ink. The powder
bed is lowered, and another fresh layer of powder is spread, followed by printing the next layer.
This process repeats until all layers are printed. The 3D printer starts binding layers from the bottom
section and builds up the part to the top layer which is demonstrated in Fig.1.
All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of TTP,
www.ttp.net. (ID: 136.186.19.106, Swinburne University, Hawthorn, Australia-25/02/14,00:52:32)
814
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
After the initial drying time, depending on geometry of the model, the partsare required to be
strengthened as they can be very fragile initially. They are subjected to post processing to improve
the mechanical properties. This post processing may involve infiltrating the parts with
cyanoacrylate or Epsom salt solution.
In this study, tensile test specimens are built by a plaster type ZP150 powder, using fixed layer
thickness of 0.1mm for all parts on ZPrinter150 system. The three main parameters that have been
investigated in the current experiments are thebuilding orientation,the infiltration procedure, and the
drying process to study their effects on the tensile properties of the parts.
Building Orientation:This refers to the angle of printing direction of layers with respect to
direction of tensile test. As 3D printer head only travels along X and Y axis, the only way to print
the part in diagonal direction is to impose the part in relative angle in the bed through the software.
In 3D Printing all layers are printed in the same direction, consequently the building direction
variesfrom 0° to 90° in X-Y plane. For the purpose of current experiment three directions have been
investigated,0° (axial), 90° (transverse), and 45°, which areshown in Fig.2.
Infiltration:This is one of the common post processing processes to strengthen the part. It can be
done with cyanoacrylate (Z90 super glue) or Epsom salt solution.
Dryingmethod: This refers to drying process after initial drying step in the chamber. For the
purpose of this research, effect of different drying processes were investigated on two batches, one
batch was infiltrated with Z90 super glue, and the other batch with Epsom salt solution.Two drying
methods were used: (a) at room temperature for 24 hours, and (b) in the ovenat 75° for 2 hours.
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of 3D
printing process
Figure 2 Building direction for the 3D
printed Specimens
Other 3D printing parameter such as slice thickness, bed or envelope ambient parameters were kept
constant in this study as they do not have much influence on altering the tensile properties of the
specimens.Table 1 shows the various types of selected 3D printing parameters for this study.
Table 1 3D Printing Parameters
3D Printing
parameter
Orientation
Infiltration
Drying
Method
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
0°
Z90
(super glue)
Room
Temperature
45°
Epsom Salt
solution
90°
Oven
None
None
Advanced Materials Research Vol. 699
815
Tensile Testing
The tensile testing machine used in this study is Zwick/Z010 Standard machine which has
maximum load capacity of 10kN. In-built Zwick software collects data and computes Tensile
Strength, Tensile elongation, and Tensile Modules. In the current experiment, five samples of
standard dog-bone tensile test specimens were made for each set of parameters. Specimens were 3D
printed in three directions (0 °along with X axis, 90° to X-axis, and 45 degree) and collected into
six batches as follow:
Batch NI: Not Infiltrated anddried at room temperature,
Batch NIB: Not Infiltrated and baked in the oven for 2 hours at 75°C
Batch I: Infiltrated by Z90 super glue and dried at room temperature,
Batch IB: Infiltrated by Z90 super glue and baked in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours
Batch E: Infiltrated by Epsom Salt solution and dried at room temperature,
Batch EB: Infiltrated by Epsom salt solution and baked in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours.
Results & Discussion
The tensile testswere conducted for each combination of parameters of the specimens on
theZwick/Z010 tensile testmachine. Collected results were categorised into six groups in respect to
their batch names, and bar graphs are plotted for tensile strength vs. building orientation in Fig. 3.
Tensile Strength comparison
14
Tensile Strength(MPa)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
NI batch NIB batch
I batch
IB batch
E batch
EB batch
Axial
4.27
4.3
11.4
11.7
3.69
3.62
Transverse
1.71
1.75
10.9
11.1
1.222
1.18
45 degree
4.73
4.75
12.6
12.85
3.98
3.92
Fig. 3 Tensile Strength vs. Build Orientations for sixdifferent batches of 3D Printed specimens
Effect of building orientation on tensile strength
Fig. 3 shows the tensile strength of each batch of specimens. Results obtained from not infiltrated
batch (NI) clearly showed that building orientation has a strong influence on tensile properties of
3D printed parts. Build direction 45° 3D printed specimen had the highest strength at
4.73MPawhich is 276% higher than the build direction 90° 3D printed specimen with the lowest
strength at 1.71MPa. Lee et al.[8] also demonstrated that diagonal 3D printed specimen had the
highest compressive strength among three type of building directions (axial, transverse, and
diagonal). These results confirmed that the mechanical properties of the 3D printed specimen have
anisotropic behaviour.
816
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
Effect of infiltration on tensile strength
Results from the tensile test demonstrated that infiltration process has a significant effect on the
tensile strength of 3D printed parts. Samples were infiltrated by Z90 super glue and Epsom salt
solution. While Z90 super glue improved the tensile strength substantially, and Epsom salt solution
had slightly adverse effect on the strength. Fig. 3 shows that infiltration by Z90 super glue increased
the tensile strength of 45° 3D printed specimen by 266%, 90° 3D printed by 637%, and 0° 3D
printed by 267% in respect to their relative specimen without infiltration. In addition, the percentage
of tensile strength variation in NI batch between 90° and 45° 3D printed specimen is higher
compared to the percentage variation in the same specimen in I batch, which expresses significant
role of infiltration process over building orientation.
Effect of drying method on tensile strength
Fig.3 shows that drying methods has the least effect on the tensile strength. The tensile strength
improved slightly by baking for specimen of (NI), and (I) batches in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours
whereas it decreased the strength for specimens of (E) batch.
Conclusions
In this study, the effects of 3D printing build parameters and post processing methods on the tensile
strength were investigated. The results revealed that 3D parameters have significant influence on
the tensile strength of the 3D printed parts. Further, anisotropic characteristics of the 3D printed
parts were observed. In this experiment, the highest tensile strength was 12.85MPa, which was
achieved by a combination of 45° printing build direction, Z90 super glue infiltration, and drying in
the oven for 2hours at 75°C. In addition, drying process had minimal effect on the strength of the
specimens. The tensile properties obtained in this study are fundamental to judge the mechanical
performance of parts built by the 3D Printing process for various applications.
References
[1]E. Sachs, J. Haggerty, P. Williams and M. Cima.: US patent 5,204,055. (1993)
[2]V.Mironov, T.Boland,T.Trusk, G.Forgacs and R.Markwald, in: Organ printing: computer-aided
jet-based 3D tissue engineering. Trends in Biotechnology, 2003. 21(4): p. 157-161.
[3]S.J.Hollister, Porous scaffold design for tissue engineering. Nat Mater, (2005). 4(7): p. 518-524.
[4]C.X.F.Liam,X.M.Mo, S.H.Teoh, D.W.Hutmacher: Scaffold development using 3D printing with
a starch-based polymer. Materials Science and Engineering: C, (2002). 20(1–2): p. 49-56.
[5]S.S.Kim,H.Utsunomiya, J.A,Koski, et al : Survival and function of hepatocytes on a novel threedimensional synthetic biodegradable polymer scaffold with an intrinsic network of channels.
Ann Surg, (1998). 228(1): p. 8-13.
[6]B.Leukers,H.Gulkan, S.Irsen,S.Milz, C.Tille, M.Schieker,H.Seitz: Hydroxyapatite scaffolds for
bone tissue engineering made by 3D printing. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in
Medicine, (2005). 16(12): p. 1121-1124.
[7]J.Zeltinger,S.Jill, G.Dionne A. M.Ralph, L.Griffith: Effect of Pore Size and Void Fraction on
Cellular Adhesion, Proliferation, and Matrix Deposition. Tissue Engineering, (2004). 7(5).
[8]C.S.Lee, S.G.kim, H.J.Kim, S.H.Ahn: Measurement of anisotropic compressive strength of rapid
prototyping parts. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, (2007). 187–188(0): p. 627-630.
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699
Tensile Properties of Processed 3D Printer ZP150 Powder Material
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699.813
Online available since 2013/May/27 at www.scientific.net
© (2013) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699.813
Tensile Properties of Processed 3D Printer ZP150 Powder Material
Saleh H. Gharaie1, a, Yos Morsi2, b, S. H. Masood3, c
1,2,3
Faculty of Engineering and Industrial Sciences,
Swinburne University of Technology,
Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia
a
[email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
Keywords:3D printing, Tensile strength, ZP150, process parameters
Abstract.3D Printing is one of the few powder-bed type rapid prototyping (RP) technologies,
which allows fabrication of parts using powder materials. Understanding of mechanical properties
of 3D parts made by this process is essential to explore more applications of this technology. In
general, the mechanical properties of many RP produced parts depend on the process parameters
andalso on post-processing methods of that RP process. Very few studies have been made to
characterize the mechanical properties of 3D Printing processed parts. This paper presents an
experimental investigation on how tensile properties of parts fabricated by 3D Printing is affected
by 3D Printing build orientation, and by post-processing methods of infiltration process and drying
of parts. Results obtained forvarious parameters are compared to investigate the optimum
procedure to achieve the highest tensile strength using ZP150 powder material.
Introduction
3D printing is anestablished rapid prototyping technology, which was invented at Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT)[1]. The technology is commercialized by Z-Corporation to produce
different types of 3D Printers. In this process three dimension (3D) objectsare constructed directly
from computer model usinga powder bed by repetitive deposition of binder on a layer of plaster
type powder according to 2D cross section slices of the object.
The capability of fabricating complex architectures along with other competencies of this
technology attractedmany researchers in various fieldsto use this technology with different types of
powders and binders. Several studies have been made inthe field of tissue engineering to use 3D
Printing technology to construct scaffolds for tissue engineering [2-6]. In another
application,Leuker et al.[6] demonstrated suitability of 3D printed hydroxyapatite (HA) granulate
scaffold for bone tissue engineering. In addition, this technology can also be combined with other
conventional techniques such as salt leaching technique to fabricate the scaffold for tissue
engineering with pore size of (38 to 150µm) and void fraction of (75% to 90%) [7].
This paper presents an investigation to study thetensile properties of 3D printed parts made by
plaster powder and the effect of build orientation and post processing methods on the tensile
strength of the build parts in order to determine which combination of post-processing and build
direction would give the best performance of 3D printed prototypes.
The 3D Printer Parameters
3D Printing is a process of building a part through sequential binder deposition of 2D cross-section
ofthe object. In this process, a slicing algorithm (rendering software) divides the object into number
of layers, and generates detailed data of layers. Then each generated slice is printed onto the spread
powder. The mechanism is similar to inkjet printing but binder is used instead of ink. The powder
bed is lowered, and another fresh layer of powder is spread, followed by printing the next layer.
This process repeats until all layers are printed. The 3D printer starts binding layers from the bottom
section and builds up the part to the top layer which is demonstrated in Fig.1.
All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of TTP,
www.ttp.net. (ID: 136.186.19.106, Swinburne University, Hawthorn, Australia-25/02/14,00:52:32)
814
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
After the initial drying time, depending on geometry of the model, the partsare required to be
strengthened as they can be very fragile initially. They are subjected to post processing to improve
the mechanical properties. This post processing may involve infiltrating the parts with
cyanoacrylate or Epsom salt solution.
In this study, tensile test specimens are built by a plaster type ZP150 powder, using fixed layer
thickness of 0.1mm for all parts on ZPrinter150 system. The three main parameters that have been
investigated in the current experiments are thebuilding orientation,the infiltration procedure, and the
drying process to study their effects on the tensile properties of the parts.
Building Orientation:This refers to the angle of printing direction of layers with respect to
direction of tensile test. As 3D printer head only travels along X and Y axis, the only way to print
the part in diagonal direction is to impose the part in relative angle in the bed through the software.
In 3D Printing all layers are printed in the same direction, consequently the building direction
variesfrom 0° to 90° in X-Y plane. For the purpose of current experiment three directions have been
investigated,0° (axial), 90° (transverse), and 45°, which areshown in Fig.2.
Infiltration:This is one of the common post processing processes to strengthen the part. It can be
done with cyanoacrylate (Z90 super glue) or Epsom salt solution.
Dryingmethod: This refers to drying process after initial drying step in the chamber. For the
purpose of this research, effect of different drying processes were investigated on two batches, one
batch was infiltrated with Z90 super glue, and the other batch with Epsom salt solution.Two drying
methods were used: (a) at room temperature for 24 hours, and (b) in the ovenat 75° for 2 hours.
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of 3D
printing process
Figure 2 Building direction for the 3D
printed Specimens
Other 3D printing parameter such as slice thickness, bed or envelope ambient parameters were kept
constant in this study as they do not have much influence on altering the tensile properties of the
specimens.Table 1 shows the various types of selected 3D printing parameters for this study.
Table 1 3D Printing Parameters
3D Printing
parameter
Orientation
Infiltration
Drying
Method
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
0°
Z90
(super glue)
Room
Temperature
45°
Epsom Salt
solution
90°
Oven
None
None
Advanced Materials Research Vol. 699
815
Tensile Testing
The tensile testing machine used in this study is Zwick/Z010 Standard machine which has
maximum load capacity of 10kN. In-built Zwick software collects data and computes Tensile
Strength, Tensile elongation, and Tensile Modules. In the current experiment, five samples of
standard dog-bone tensile test specimens were made for each set of parameters. Specimens were 3D
printed in three directions (0 °along with X axis, 90° to X-axis, and 45 degree) and collected into
six batches as follow:
Batch NI: Not Infiltrated anddried at room temperature,
Batch NIB: Not Infiltrated and baked in the oven for 2 hours at 75°C
Batch I: Infiltrated by Z90 super glue and dried at room temperature,
Batch IB: Infiltrated by Z90 super glue and baked in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours
Batch E: Infiltrated by Epsom Salt solution and dried at room temperature,
Batch EB: Infiltrated by Epsom salt solution and baked in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours.
Results & Discussion
The tensile testswere conducted for each combination of parameters of the specimens on
theZwick/Z010 tensile testmachine. Collected results were categorised into six groups in respect to
their batch names, and bar graphs are plotted for tensile strength vs. building orientation in Fig. 3.
Tensile Strength comparison
14
Tensile Strength(MPa)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
NI batch NIB batch
I batch
IB batch
E batch
EB batch
Axial
4.27
4.3
11.4
11.7
3.69
3.62
Transverse
1.71
1.75
10.9
11.1
1.222
1.18
45 degree
4.73
4.75
12.6
12.85
3.98
3.92
Fig. 3 Tensile Strength vs. Build Orientations for sixdifferent batches of 3D Printed specimens
Effect of building orientation on tensile strength
Fig. 3 shows the tensile strength of each batch of specimens. Results obtained from not infiltrated
batch (NI) clearly showed that building orientation has a strong influence on tensile properties of
3D printed parts. Build direction 45° 3D printed specimen had the highest strength at
4.73MPawhich is 276% higher than the build direction 90° 3D printed specimen with the lowest
strength at 1.71MPa. Lee et al.[8] also demonstrated that diagonal 3D printed specimen had the
highest compressive strength among three type of building directions (axial, transverse, and
diagonal). These results confirmed that the mechanical properties of the 3D printed specimen have
anisotropic behaviour.
816
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
Effect of infiltration on tensile strength
Results from the tensile test demonstrated that infiltration process has a significant effect on the
tensile strength of 3D printed parts. Samples were infiltrated by Z90 super glue and Epsom salt
solution. While Z90 super glue improved the tensile strength substantially, and Epsom salt solution
had slightly adverse effect on the strength. Fig. 3 shows that infiltration by Z90 super glue increased
the tensile strength of 45° 3D printed specimen by 266%, 90° 3D printed by 637%, and 0° 3D
printed by 267% in respect to their relative specimen without infiltration. In addition, the percentage
of tensile strength variation in NI batch between 90° and 45° 3D printed specimen is higher
compared to the percentage variation in the same specimen in I batch, which expresses significant
role of infiltration process over building orientation.
Effect of drying method on tensile strength
Fig.3 shows that drying methods has the least effect on the tensile strength. The tensile strength
improved slightly by baking for specimen of (NI), and (I) batches in the oven at 75°C for 2 hours
whereas it decreased the strength for specimens of (E) batch.
Conclusions
In this study, the effects of 3D printing build parameters and post processing methods on the tensile
strength were investigated. The results revealed that 3D parameters have significant influence on
the tensile strength of the 3D printed parts. Further, anisotropic characteristics of the 3D printed
parts were observed. In this experiment, the highest tensile strength was 12.85MPa, which was
achieved by a combination of 45° printing build direction, Z90 super glue infiltration, and drying in
the oven for 2hours at 75°C. In addition, drying process had minimal effect on the strength of the
specimens. The tensile properties obtained in this study are fundamental to judge the mechanical
performance of parts built by the 3D Printing process for various applications.
References
[1]E. Sachs, J. Haggerty, P. Williams and M. Cima.: US patent 5,204,055. (1993)
[2]V.Mironov, T.Boland,T.Trusk, G.Forgacs and R.Markwald, in: Organ printing: computer-aided
jet-based 3D tissue engineering. Trends in Biotechnology, 2003. 21(4): p. 157-161.
[3]S.J.Hollister, Porous scaffold design for tissue engineering. Nat Mater, (2005). 4(7): p. 518-524.
[4]C.X.F.Liam,X.M.Mo, S.H.Teoh, D.W.Hutmacher: Scaffold development using 3D printing with
a starch-based polymer. Materials Science and Engineering: C, (2002). 20(1–2): p. 49-56.
[5]S.S.Kim,H.Utsunomiya, J.A,Koski, et al : Survival and function of hepatocytes on a novel threedimensional synthetic biodegradable polymer scaffold with an intrinsic network of channels.
Ann Surg, (1998). 228(1): p. 8-13.
[6]B.Leukers,H.Gulkan, S.Irsen,S.Milz, C.Tille, M.Schieker,H.Seitz: Hydroxyapatite scaffolds for
bone tissue engineering made by 3D printing. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in
Medicine, (2005). 16(12): p. 1121-1124.
[7]J.Zeltinger,S.Jill, G.Dionne A. M.Ralph, L.Griffith: Effect of Pore Size and Void Fraction on
Cellular Adhesion, Proliferation, and Matrix Deposition. Tissue Engineering, (2004). 7(5).
[8]C.S.Lee, S.G.kim, H.J.Kim, S.H.Ahn: Measurement of anisotropic compressive strength of rapid
prototyping parts. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, (2007). 187–188(0): p. 627-630.
Materials Science and Chemical Engineering
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699
Tensile Properties of Processed 3D Printer ZP150 Powder Material
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.699.813