MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF POLYMERIC LATTICE STRUCTURES

PRODUCED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES
OF
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

BY

ŞÜKRÜ GÜRAY KALAYCIOĞLU

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

NOVEMBER 2022
 Approval of the thesis:

MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF POLYMERIC LATTICE STRUCTURES

PRODUCED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

submitted by ŞÜKRÜ GÜRAY KALAYCIOĞLU in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering,
Middle East Technical University by,

Prof. Dr. Halil Kalıpçılar

Dean, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences

Prof. Dr. M. A. Sahir Arıkan

Head of the Department, Mechanical Engineering

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Supervisor, Mechanical Engineering, METU

Examining Committee Members:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kıvanç Azgın

Mechanical Engineering, METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Mechanical Engineering, METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ulaş Yaman

Mechanical Engineering, METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ender Yıldırım

Mechanical Engineering, METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Recep Görgülüarslan

Mechanical Engineering, TOBB ETÜ

Date: 25.11.2022
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and
presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare
that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced
all material and results that are not original to this work.

Name Last Name : Şükrü Güray Kalaycıoğlu

Signature :

iv
 ABSTRACT

MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF POLYMERIC LATTICE STRUCTURES

PRODUCED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Kalaycıoğlu, Şükrü Güray

Master of Science, Mechanical Engineering
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

November 2022, 45 pages

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a manufacturing method based on the layer-by-

layer deposition of the desired geometry. Polymer AM provides means to produce
compliant polymeric structures for impact-absorbing applications. The recent
introduction of foaming elastomeric filaments opened a new design space for
achieving optimized impact absorbance performance. This thesis investigates this
route through the mechanical testing of solid and cellular polymer foam structures
produced by additive manufacturing.

The experimental work in this thesis employs Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF),
which is a cost-effective AM technique for the rapid manufacturing of complicated
geometries in low quantities. Recent advances in filament technology have enabled
the production of foaming thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) filaments, which
makes the printing of microporous polymeric structures possible through the FFF
method.

First part of the thesis investigates the mechanical properties of the TPU foam
produced by FFF. The systematic experiments show that the nozzle temperature
directly influences the foaming behavior. With increasing temperature, the extent of
foaming increases, which results in a decrease in the elastic modulus and strength.

v
Second part of the thesis investigates the impact-absorbing performance of
honeycomb lattice structures produced by the same foaming TPU. The experiments
show that as the nozzle temperature increases, the energy absorption capacity and
the peak stress of the lattice structure increase.

Overall, the results demonstrate the great potential of foaming filaments in achieving
unique impact-absorbing behavior. Future work will focus on understanding the
behavior of different cellular structures and lattice geometries made of TPU foams
under load.

Keywords: Additive Manufacturing, Fused Filament Fabrication, 3D Printing,

Thermoplastic Polyurethane, Mechanical Properties, Foaming Polymers, Lattice
Structures, Energy Absorption

vi
 ÖZ

EKLEMELİ İMALAT İLE ÜRETİLEN POLİMER KAFES YAPILARIN

MEKANİK DAVRANIŞI

Kalaycıoğlu, Şükrü Güray

Yüksek Lisans, Makina Mühendisliği
Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Sezer Özerinç

Kasım 2022, 45 sayfa

Eklemeli imalat, istenen geometrinin katman katman biriktirilmesine dayalı bir

üretim yöntemidir. Polimer eklemeli imalatı, darbe emici uygulamalar için uyumlu
polimerik yapılar üretmek için yapılar sağlar. Son zamanlarda köpüren elastomerik
filamanların piyasaya sürülmesi, optimize edilmiş darbe emme performansı elde
etmek için yeni bir tasarım alanı açtı. Bu tez, eklemeli imalatla üretilen katı ve
hücresel polimer köpük yapılarının mekanik testi yoluyla bu yolu araştırıyor.

Bu tezdeki deneysel çalışmada, düşük miktarlarda karmaşık geometrilerin hızlı

üretimi için uygun maliyetli bir eklemeli imalat tekniği olan Eriyik Yığma
Modellemesi (FFF) kullanılmıştır. Filament teknolojisindeki son gelişmeler, FFF
yöntemiyle mikro gözenekli polimerik yapıların basılmasını mümkün kılan köpüren
termoplastik poliüretan (TPU) filamentlerin üretimini mümkün kılmıştır.

Tezin ilk bölümünde FFF tarafından üretilen TPU köpüğün mekanik özellikleri
incelenmiştir. Sistematik deneyler, nozül sıcaklığının, köpürme davranışını
doğrudan etkilediğini göstermektedir. Artan sıcaklıkla birlikte, köpürme derecesi
artar, bu da elastik modül ve mukavemette bir azalma ile sonuçlanır.

Tezin ikinci kısmı, aynı köpüren TPU'dan üretilen petek kafes yapıların darbe
sönümleme performansını araştırmaktadır. Deneyler, nozül sıcaklığı arttıkça, enerji
emme kapasitesinin ve kafes yapısının tepe geriliminin arttığını göstermektedir.

vii
Genel olarak sonuçlar, benzersiz darbe emici davranış elde etmede, filamanların
köpürmesinin büyük potansiyelini göstermektedir. Gelecekteki çalışmalar, yük
altında TPU köpüklerinden yapılmış farklı hücresel yapıların ve kafes
geometrilerinin davranışını anlamaya odaklanacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Eklemeli İmalat, Eriyik Yığma Modellemesi, Termoplastik

Poliüretan, 3 Boyutlu Baskı, Mekanik Özellikler, Köpüren Polimerler, Kafes
Yapılar, Enerji Emicilik

viii
 To My Family

ix
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Sezer Özerinç for his guidance and
priceless support to encourage me during my thesis study. I am grateful to him for
his precious recommendations and guidance that helps me to improve myself.

I want to thank Servet Şehirli for his help to able to finish my study. Also, I want to
thank Nanomechanics Labarotary members, especially Roozbeh Neshani, Amir
Fadaie, Mehmet Kepenekçi and Çağla Melis Aslan for their collaboration,
encouraging supports, sharing information and experiences, suggestions and
friendship.

I would like to thank Ali Güzel and the METU Central Laboratory staff for their
help.

I want to thank my colleagues, work team and lead engineer. They always support
and encourage me during my study.

I want to thank my friends who always support and motivate me to proceed during
my study.

Lastly, I want to thank my family for their endless support and motivation to finish
my thesis study. I cannot complete this study without their support.

x
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................v

ÖZ ........................................................................................................................... vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .........................................................................................x

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................... xi

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................. xiii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... xiv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................... xvii

CHAPTERS

1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1

1.1 Overview .................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Fused Filament Fabrication ........................................................................ 2

1.3 FFF Materials ............................................................................................. 4

1.4 Elastomers .................................................................................................. 5

1.5 Foaming Elastomers ................................................................................... 7

1.6 Foaming Filaments for FFF Applications ................................................ 10

2 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS .........................................................................11

2.1 Overview .................................................................................................. 11

2.2 Material and Manufacturing ..................................................................... 12

2.2.1 Material ............................................................................................. 12

2.2.2 Modeling and G-Code Generation .................................................... 12

2.2.3 Printing Process ................................................................................ 12

2.3 Design of Experiments ............................................................................. 13

2.3.1 Tensile and Compression Specimens ................................................ 13

xi
 2.3.2 Honeycomb Structures ...................................................................... 15

2.3.3 Printing Parameters ........................................................................... 15

2.4 Characterization and Testing .................................................................... 17

2.4.1 Mechanical Testing ........................................................................... 17

2.4.2 Scanning Electron Microscopy.......................................................... 19

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...................................................................... 21

3.1 Tensile Testing .......................................................................................... 21

3.2 Compression Testing ................................................................................ 24

3.3 Honeycomb Compression Testing ............................................................ 26

4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK ...................................................... 33

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 37

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 43

A.1 Printing Parameters ................................................................................... 43

A.2 Honeycomb compression test direction comparison ................................ 44

A.3 Honeycomb Compression Properties........................................................ 45

xii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Bulk mechanical properties of conventional thermoplastic filaments [15].

................................................................................................................................... 5
Table 2.1 A summary of experiment details of specimens. .................................... 11
Table 2.2 Printer Parameters. .................................................................................. 16
Table 3.1 Summary of Honeycomb Mechanical Properties ................................... 32

xiii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Schematic of FFF printing machine [15]. ................................................ 4

Figure 1.2 Stress-strain behavior of an elastomeric specimen under tension [22]. ... 6
Figure 2.1 Ultimaker 2+ FFF Printer. ...................................................................... 13
Figure 2.2 (a) Technical drawing of tensile test specimen. (b) A photograph of tensile
test specimen. (c) A Photograph of tensile test setup. (d) Technical drawing of
compressive test specimen. (e) A photograph of compressive test specimen. (f) A
Photograph of compressive test setup. Thicknesses are 3 mm for tensile test
specimens and 12.5 mm for compression test specimen. ........................................ 14
Figure 2.3 (a) Technical Drawing of Honeycomb Specimen. (b) A Photograph of
Honeycomb Test Specimen. (c) A Photograph of Honeycomb Compression Test
Setup. ....................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.4 (a) Honeycomb test specimen and load directions. (b) Force-Strain curve
of loading in X1 and X2 directions of 235oC. ......................................................... 19
Figure 3.1 (a) Stress-Strain behavior of Varioshore TPU at extrusion temperature
235°C. (b) UTS vs. nozzle temperature and elongation at break vs. nozzle
temperature. (c) Densities of dog bone specimens at different extrusion temperatures.
................................................................................................................................. 23
Figure 3.2 At the top: SEM images of the specimens. At the bottom: Photographs
indicating the viewing directions of the SEM images. The images on the left and the
right correspond to 190°C and 235°C extrusion temperatures, respectively........... 24
Figure 3.3 (a) Stress-Strain behavior of Varioshore TPU at extrusion temperature
190°C (b) Stress-Strain behavior comparison of Varioshore TPU at different
extrusion temperatures............................................................................................. 25
Figure 3.4 Compression stresses at 40% strain. ...................................................... 26
Figure 3.5 (a) Stress-Strain diagram of compressive test of the honeycomb structure
which is manufactured at 235°C nozzle temperature. (b) Stress-Strain curve
comparison for honeycomb structure of Varioshore TPU at different nozzle
temperatures. ........................................................................................................... 27
Figure 3.6 Average wall thickness vs. nozzle temperature. .................................... 29

xiv
Figure 3.7 Energy Absorption-Stress comparison for honeycomb structure of
Varioshore TPU at different nozzle temperatures. ................................................. 30
Figure 3.8 Efficiency comparison for honeycomb structure of Varioshore TPU at
different nozzle temperatures. ................................................................................. 30
Figure 3.9 Stress and efficiency vs. strain for honeycomb structure at 190oC nozzle
temperature. ............................................................................................................ 31
Figure A. 1 Comparison of honeycomb compression test direction (a) 190oC (b)
205oC (c) 220oC. ……..……………………………………………………………44

xv
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS

TM Traditional Manufacturing
AM Additive Manufacturing
DFM Design for Manufacturing
DFA Design for Assembly
SLA Stereolithography
SLS Selective Laser Sintering
FDM Fused Deposition Modeling
FFF Fused Filament Fabrication
LMD Laser Material Deposition
PA Polyamide
PEEk Polyetheretherketone
CAD Computer Aided Design
STL Stereolithography File
TPE Thermoplastic Elastomer
ABS Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
PLA Polylactic Acid
TPU Thermoplastic Polyurethane
3D Three Dimensional
LW Light Weight

xvii
 CHAPTER 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

Additive manufacturing (AM) is creating a three-dimensional object from a CAD

model by arranging manufacturing parameters as desired and by laying down layers
upon each other [1]. This technology was born in the 1980s due to the necessity of
creating models before the final product and prototyping [2]. AM allows to creation
desired part in a limited time. Also, before finalizing the geometry, it is possible to
see the usefulness of the part. So, it is beneficial to reduce manufacturing costs and
improve the product cycle. Besides, AM enables the creation of complex geometries
which is not possible with traditionla manufacturing (TM). This brings the design
for manufacturing and assembly (DFM/DFA). Considering the capabilities of AM,
more advanced final products are becoming easier to create such as optimized
geometries or one piece geometries without assembly needed. This situation also
reduced material and energy waste. Compared to AM, TM wastes more material and
needs a product-specific assembly line [3].

AM meets environmental and economical concerns. This approach shows that AM

has an obvious supremacy over TM. However, it is not. Both manufacturing
techniques have advantages and disadvantages. The main idea is to define a trade-
off between the AM and the TM and replace TM when it is possible [4]. Thus,
negative effects of TM on the environment and the cost can be reduced.

AM includes a wide range of techniques. Mahamood et al. [5] classified these

techniques into two main parts, first laser additive manufacturing such as
stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), laser binging, and laser
material deposition (LMD), second non-laser based additive manufacturing such as

1
ink-jet printing, fused deposition modeling (FDM) and infrared and masking
systems.

FDM is one of the most popular AM techniques, also known as fused filament
fabrication (FFF). The reason is that it is easy to achieve, easy to use, and does not
contain any chemical process compared to other AM methods. The feed material has
considerably cheap prices and it is small in size. It uses a filament that is wrapped
into a spool. This spool feeds the FDM machine that has a heated nozzle. The nozzle
melts the material and then extrudes it on a preheated plate. Material is fused layer
by layer while following a predefined path. This path is generated from a
stereolithography file (STL) [6].

Common properties of FFF materials are making strong bonding between layers at
their melting points and when the temperature of the melted material turns back to
room temperature, layers are solidified and should not have insufficient residual
stress [7]. Polylactic acid (PLA) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) are
common materials for the FFF. However, the thermoplastic material is also used as
material for the FFF. PLA and ABS are more user-friendly materials and easy to
print.

In this thesis study, foamed TPU was used in changing extrusion temperature. First
tensile and compression specimens were printed, and tests were performed to obtain
the mechanical properties of foamed TPU at different printing temperatures. Then,
honeycomb structures were printed with the same procedure and different nozzle
temperatures. Compression tests were performed to obtain energy absorption levels
of honeycomb structures.

1.2 Fused Filament Fabrication

Fused filament fabrication (FFF) is one of the most widely used AM techniques. It
is also known as fused deposition modeling (FDM). Steven Scott Crump from
Stratasys is the pioneer of this technology. He developed FFF in 1989 [8]. FFF

2
started as research purposes manufacturing device; however, it is not limited to only
research purposes. FFF is used in engineering, science, prototyping, and industrial
purposes [9]. FFF allows changing various manufacturing parameters and is
available to create custom-shaped products. These specialties make FFF
irreplaceable among other AM techniques. FFF covers %69 of all AM techniques.
Even if FFF does not have the best finalized material properties, in many
applications, FFF is preferred to apply desired parameters [10].

There are different types of FFF in the industry. However, their working principle is
the same. The working principle can be generalized as extruding the material to a
repeated layer and making one finalized geometry on a print bed [10], [13].

The printing process starts with preparing of CAD model of the necessary product.
Then, the CAD file should be converted into printer-readable form and sliced. After
slicing, printing layers are built up for FFF. The path of creating layer sequences is
introduced with G-code to a machine. G-code has information on the movement of
a nozzle in the XY plane. After creating one layer, the print bed moves in the Z
direction to create the next layer over the previous one geometry is finalized [12].

During the manufacturing process, the printing mechanism showed in Figure 1.1.
The FFF process can be divided into three main parts as extrusion, fusion and
solidification. [11]. The first material filament is loaded to FFF and then will enter
the extrusion chamber, which should be heated first to make liquid the filament. The
molten filament can extrude to print bed through a nozzle. Nozzle diameter directly
affects the print quality. The second phase is material interation between the print
bed and the layers. The material should not have residual stress to cause any
delamination. The final phase is solidification. During the solidification, the product
layers should protect the shape and size of the geometry. Gravity and surface tension,
the cooling rate, and temperature gradient affect the solidification. So, it should be
careful to prevent unwanted effects [13], [15], [16].

3
Figure 1.1 Schematic of FFF printing machine [15].

1.3 FFF Materials

Nowadays, FFF has a large variety of filament materials. As the usage of the FFF
area increases, different materials are beginning to integrate into FFF printers. The
most common printing materials are acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and
polylactic acid (PLA) for FFF [16]. Materials in FFF are required to be softened and
show low viscosity by heating up. Therefore, thermoplastics are also suitable
materials for the FFF technique. There are lots of thermoplastics available as
filament materials used in engineering applications; they are PA, TPU, PEEk, and
PEI. PLA and ABS are more user-friendly materials. They are easy to print and
reachable for any user. However, to print engineering materials, users should deal
with lots of problems. Table 1.1 shows the average mechanical properties of
commercially available filament materials [15].

4
Table 1.1 Bulk mechanical properties of conventional thermoplastic filaments [15].

Yield Tensile Elastic

Elongation at
Polymer Strength Strength Modulus
Break (%)
(MPa) (MPa) (GPa)
ABS 35–58 25–65 1.9–2.7 8–20
Nylon (PA6) 36–95 74–106 0.78–3.8 10–160
PEEK 65–95 75–100 3.5–4.4 20–50
PET 36–63 24–41 2.3 100–250
PLA 66–77 52–72 2.7–16 4–6
TPU 39–54 17–66 0.12–0.33 300–1500

1.4 Elastomers

Elastomers are distinctive materials that have elastic and viscous properties at the
same time. Therefore, it is classified as a viscoelastic material. Elastomers have low
elastic modulus and high elasticity. It allows elastomers to reach high deflection
levels; after the load application is removed, it can save the initial geometry.
Elastomers give good results under dynamic loading, they can resist environmental
effects and have low compressibility. These properties of elastomers make them a
good choice for vibration and impact isolation applications [17], [18]. However, the
prediction of the vibration response of elastomeric material is only possible with the
identification of the system accurately. The theory of viscoelasticity shows that at
least two parameters should be known to identify the mechanical properties of
elastomers. These two parameters are generally the Poisson's ratio and one of the
moduli of the elastomer [19], [20].

As mentioned before, elastomers have low compressibility which means they are
incompressible materials. They change geometric shapes while their volume stays
constant. Their Poisson’s ratio is approximately 0.5. Hooke’s law is applicable for
low strain values, and the stress-strain curve goes proportional at low strain levels
for tension or compression. However, the proportionality breaks at some point when

5
strain values become relatively high. At this state, material becomes viscoelastic and
Hooke's law is no longer valid [17], [21].

Figure 1.2 Stress-strain behavior of an elastomeric specimen under tension [22].

Figure 1.2 shows the stress-strain behavior of an elastomeric specimen under tension
loading. The stress-strain graph shows nonlinear behavior. The graph follows an
elastic path initially at small strain levels. This region is valid for Hooke's Law. The
tangent line can be drawn to obtain elastic modulus. After proportionality breaks, the
curve follows viscoelastic behavior, and there is a smooth transition from elastic
behavior to plastic behavior.

Different kinds of elastomeric material show similar mechanical behavior in various

application areas. The elastomer can be divided into two groups: first, the
conventional or thermoset elastomers, and second, the thermoplastic elastomers [23].
Thermoset elastomers can be defined as cured and shaped polymers. After curing,
polymers are crosslinked with chemical bonds. Because of chemical reactions, it is
not possible to break bonds. Through crosslinking, thermosets show elastomeric
recoverability [24]. Thermoplastic elastomers can be defined as a composition of
thermoplastics and elastomers. The structure consists of copolymer blocks which are

6
ordered as A-B-A. A represents thermoplastic and B represents elastomer [25]. A
and B’s contribution amount affects the mechanical properties of TPEs.

TPEs are new material and have recently taken place in research areas. It is a unique
material because they have a significant deflection level and processing is relatively
easy, thanks to microphase separation between copolymer blocks [26]. TPEs'
physical crosslink networks can be ripped during the thermal treatments and this
allows for physical foaming of TPEs [26].

There are various types of TPE materials which are produced by mixing of two
polymer types and produced by block copolymerization of two or more segments of
molecularly different polymers. One of the most popular TPE used in daily life and
produced by block copolymerization material is TPU [27]. It contains hard and soft
segments in the microstructure. Hard segments connected with hydrogen link to each
other, and the foaming structure highly depend on to melting of hard and soft
segments' architecture [26], [28]. This bonding helps TPU to display high flexibility,
elasticity, and shock absorbance characteristics [29]. The material properties can be
customized by controlling the ratio of soft and hard segments and structural
morphologies [30].

1.5 Foaming Elastomers

Conventional foaming method creates space inside the material and allows it to fill
with a gas such as carbon dioxide or nitrogen during the melting process in a
controlled pressure medium. Foaming may also be produced by mixing a chemical
foaming agent with melted polymer. The main idea is to create bubbles in the
polymer structure, then stabilize them to create cellular structure [28], [31], [32]. The
porous structure provides space for cell walls to bend and buckle to improve
deformability [33]. They were invented to reduce polymer consumption in processes,
improve damage tolerance, and increase product’s energy absorption and hardness.
They are widely used in the aerospace industry, automotive industry, marine and

7
civil engineering applications due to their market availability, ease of processibility,
and strength-to-weight ratio [32], [34].

Conventional methods for foam manufacturing are only partially successful for
hierarchical structure production and fine control of porosity gradient [35]. Most of
the products manufactured with conventional methods are open-cell structures that
are softer and less strong than closed-cell foams. It is not fully effective and easy to
produce complex cellular structures with conventional methods [34]. However,
recent studies show that additive manufacturing has a great potential to create
cellular structures by controlling internal porous morphology and complex final
geometry [31], [35]–[37]. Compared to the random foaming characteristics of
conventional methods, additively manufactured foams have well-defined repeated
cell structure, shape, size, and density [31]. Foaming with AM can be classified into
four groups. First, architected porous structures, second, synthetic foaming, third,
post foaming of printed parts and fourth, printing with foaming agents saturated
filaments [38].

Fused filament fabrication is one of the most common methods in AM due to

simplicity, relatively low process temperature, controllable fusion and solidification
segments and wide range of polymer filaments [34], [39]. As mentioned before, even
if FFF is the most common printer, it is still uncovered. ABS and PLA represent %80
of literature work [39]. Recently, attention for elastomer foams with FFF, a less
known area, increased.

Elastomers can be foamed by FFF with different techniques for different

applications. They can be produced by activating foaming agents [40] or by exposing
CO2 in a controlled temperature and pressure environment [41]. Also, they can be
produced by syntactic foaming [42] and architected porous structures [43]. In
literature, there are studies such as comparison of foaming at different printing
speeds at high temperatures [31], comparison of different percentages of foaming
agent and elastomer compounds [44], comparison of CO2 saturated filaments with

8
different printing speed and temperatures [45], and comparison of elastomers
contains different amounts of thermally expandable microspheres [34].

In this study, elastomers at different printing temperatures were investigated. The

main purpose was to make a comparison between the tensile properties and the
compression properties of solid specimens. Then, mechanical properties were
defined. After mechanical properties were defined, lattice structure properties under
compression of foamed elastomers which were extruded at different temperatures
would be investigated. The TPU was selected as elastomer, and Varioshore TPU
filament (Colorfabb, Netherlands) was used as filament material which has a
chemical foaming agent. The FFF printing method was used in this study since FFF
is suitable for this study to activate the foaming agent and to create controlled
porosity by changing the temperature [46]. Moreover, the distribution of hard and
soft segments of TPU can be rearranged by extruding at different temperatures [47].

The high flexibility, elasticity and shock absorbance characteristics of TPU take the
industry’s attention and soft TPU filaments for FFF are started to be produced [48].
TPU can be produced with different grades of thermally expendable microstructures
to activate foaming at different temperature levels [34], [49]. By changing the
temperature, microstructure can be arranged as desired and foaming starts. The
printed materials become anisotropic due to random orientation of particles after the
vulcanization of TPU in the three dimensional space [50]. Yet, this makes density
control more challenging. Studies showed that additively manufactured polyurethane
foams present similar resilience behaviors with bulk rubber material with four-time
lower densities [51].

Nowadays, TPU foams have a wide range of applications automotive, electronics,

footwear, aerospace, and toys. Insufficient traditional methods increase the attention
over additively manufactured TPU foams. Moreover, researchers are investigating
the recycling of TPU foams, bio-based TPU foams such as a vegetable-oil-based
polyol, personal protection equipment, electromagnetic interface shielding, sensors,
and biomedical usage of TPU [51]–[55].

9
1.6 Foaming Filaments for FFF Applications

Recently, interest in low-density materials such as porous polymeric structures in

FFF is increasing because they show improved thermal, mechanical, and physical
properties [56].

Among all foaming methods which are discussed previously, foaming agent
activation was investigated in this study. The reason is that commercial foaming
filaments are available in the market, and it is easy to process because there is no pre
or post-application addition to the printing process. Changing nozzle temperature,
infill percentage or flow rate, makes it is easy to activate foaming and obtain a
lightweight printed product. Studies show that there are few options for foaming
filament to use in FFF printers.

PLA gets attention nowadays and lightweight PLA(LW-PLA) is investigated as

foaming filament in literature [56]–[58]. LW-PLA has a chemical foaming agent
which requires a certain condition for the activation of foaming material. By
foaming, low-density, low weight, and low hardness material are obtained. LW-PLA
is used for medical applications, such as creating bone simulant structures [59] or
soft tissues [60] and small industrial applications such as creating lightweight
brushless motor components [61].

In this study, like LW-PLA, foaming TPU filament, Varioshore TPU is used and by
changing the nozzle temperature, different level of foaming was observed and
investigated. There are similar studies that investigate different types of foaming
TPU materials such as investigating the different compositions of chemical agents
and TPU material [62], cell morphology and expansion ratio [40], foaming the
printed specimen with CO2 saturation [41], compression behavior of star-shaped
scaffolds [63], [64], customized crutch grips [65]. In the following sections of this
study, the mechanical properties of foaming TPU at different levels of foaming and
the effects of mechanical properties of honeycomb structures are investigated.

10
 CHAPTER 2

2 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

2.1 Overview

In this work, parts printed using Varioshore TPU filament (Colorfabb, Netherlands)
was investigated to observe the material properties under different nozzle
temperatures. First, dog bone tensile specimens and cylinder compression specimens
were printed by an Ultimaker 2+ FFF printer. Then, standardized mechanical tests
were performed. Second, honeycomb lattice structures were designed and printed.
Lastly, compression tests were performed on these honeycombs to determine their
impact-absorbing behavior.

Three identical specimens were manufactured at five different nozzle temperatures

for both tension and compression experiments. For the honeycomb compression test,
six honeycomb structures were manufactured at five different temperatures. In total,
sixty samples are manufactured for the experiments. In Table 2.1, the summary of
the experiment details is given.

Table 2.1 A summary of experiment details of specimens.

Number of
Testing
Test Specimen Geometry Samples
Standard
Tested
Dog bone Type C
Tension ASTM D412 15
(Figure 2.2)
Compression Cylinder (Figure 2.2) ASTM D575 15
Lattice Lattice structures
ASTM D1621 30
compression (Figure 2.3)

11
Tensile specimens were also scanned in SEM to find out the microstructures and
porosity levels of specimens.

2.2 Material and Manufacturing

2.2.1 Material

For all samples, CAD models were prepared, then a toolpath was generated with a
suitable preprocess program and then samples were printed as finalized products. All
products were printed FFF method with Ultimaker 2+ (Ultimaker ltd., Netherlands).
Only extrusion nozzle temperatures were varied.

2.2.2 Modeling and G-Code Generation

At the beginning of the design process, design parameters were decided. According
to these parameters, geometries were created. These parameters were discussed in
the previous section for 3D modeling of the samples; Solidworks 2020 (Dassault
Systems, USA) is used CAD program.

After the modeling phase, able to print finalized geometries, 3D models should be
introduced to the printer via G-code. G-code contains toolpath information that the
nozzle follows during operation. CAD program gives the STL file as output. The
surface of the geometry is split into triangle meshes. STL file is the input of the
slicing software to generate the necessary G-code. Open-source software Ultimaker
CURA (Ultimaker ltd., Netherlands) was used as slicing software.

2.2.3 Printing Process

As mentioned before, Ultimaker 2+ (Ultimaker ltd., Netherlands) printer was used

for this thesis study. The printer is shown in Figure 2.1. It has a single nozzle.
Temperature can be arranged between 180°C and 260°C, which is just perfect for

12
investigated temperatures of this study. The nozzle can be heated up under 2 minutes.
Moreover, during the operation, it is observed that the nozzle temperature does not
fluctuate excessively. For these reasons, Ultimaker 2+ is reliable for this study.

Figure 2.1 Ultimaker 2+ FFF Printer.

According to the specified parameters, the printing process was performed. Tensile
and compression specimens were printed at the same time for the same temperature
level, and six honeycomb specimens were printed at the same time for the same
temperature. An attempt was made to reduce the deviation in properties to zero.

2.3 Design of Experiments

2.3.1 Tensile and Compression Specimens

The tension test specimens were made according to the D412-16 Type C standard
[66]. The compression test specimens were made according to the D575-91 [67].

13
Figure 2.2 (a) Technical drawing of tensile test specimen. (b) A photograph of tensile
test specimen. (c) A Photograph of tensile test setup. (d) Technical drawing of
compressive test specimen. (e) A photograph of compressive test specimen. (f) A
Photograph of compressive test setup. Thicknesses are 3 mm for tensile test
specimens and 12.5 mm for compression test specimen.

In Figure 2.1 (a) and Figure 2.1 (d), the specimen size for tension and compression
is given. Figure 2.1 (b) and Figure 2.1 (e) show the manufactured specimens.
Manufactured specimen dimensions were in ±0.3% as specified in standards. The
dimensions were measured with a caliper, and the room temperature was maintained
at 23±2°C during experiments.

The tension and compression tests were performed in Zwick/Roell Z250 (Germany)
universal testing machine (UTM). The tension test speed was 500mm/min. The
compression test speed was arranged as 10% of the specimen height was compressed
in a minute. In Figure 2.1 (e) and Figure 2.1 (f), the tension and compression test
setups are given. In tension, setup 0.1kN load capacity cell, and in compression test
setup 10kN load capacity cell was used.

14
All specimens were printed in the Z direction. The system axis is shown in Figure
2.2.

2.3.2 Honeycomb Structures

The lattice structure was designed as honeycomb geometry. The honeycomb

structure contains sixty-eight cells whose dimensions are given in Figure 2.3 (a). The
height of the honeycomb lattice is 29.5mm. Figure 2.3 (b) shows the printed
specimen of the honeycomb. Figure 2.3 (c) shows the test setup. The test was
performed with 10kN load capacity cell, and the test speed was arranged according
to %10 of the height of the specimen.

Honeycomb specimens printed in the Z direction are shown in Figure 2.3.

Figure 2.3 (a) Technical Drawing of Honeycomb Specimen. (b) A Photograph of

Honeycomb Test Specimen. (c) A Photograph of Honeycomb Compression Test
Setup.

2.3.3 Printing Parameters

In Table 2.2, common printer parameters are given and all experimental procedures
were carried out according to these parameters. As noticed, filament diameter, nozzle
diameter, layer thickness, printing speed, bed temperature, infill direction and
percentage were fixed for the entire experimental setup. These values were
recommended values from the technical data sheet (TDS). Only, the printing

15
temperature was changed. TDS states that the onset of foaming is around 230°C [68].
Detailed parameters for each specimen are given in Appendix A.1.

Table 2.2 Printer Parameters.

Parameters Values
Filament Diameter [mm] 2.85
Nozzle Diameter [mm] 0.4
Layer Thickness [mm] 0.2
Printing Speed [mm/s] 30
Nozzle Temperature [°C] 190, 205, 220, 235, 250
Bed Temperature 40
Infill Direction ±45°
Infill Percentage 100%

Tensile and compression test specimens with the same extrusion temperatures were
printed in the same operation. Also, honeycomb structures with the same extrusion
temperature were printed in the same operation. Printed products would have better
quality if they were printed one by one. However, by arranging toolpath and CAD
data, the same quality could be provided. Also, multiple productions at the same time
were more time efficient.

Infill direction affects the mechanical properties of structures. To obtain

homogenous stress distribution between layers, high tensile and compression
strength, the infill direction was selected as ±45° [15]. Yet, it was not valid for
honeycomb structures because their wall thickness is 0.2 mm. On the contrary, it was
important for tensile and compression test specimens. It was expected to behave
close to isotropic material since the raster angle was selected as ±45° and the infill
percentage is 100%.

16
2.4 Characterization and Testing

2.4.1 Mechanical Testing

To be able to understand the mechanical properties of the Varioshore TPU filament

(Colorfabb, Netherlands), mechanical testing was performed. Since it is novel
material, there is not enough study in literature. In this case, it was a big advantage
to perform tensile and compression tests to validate and compare the literature data
and to have a well understanding of the material characteristic.

2.4.1.1 Tensile Testing

At room temperature, uniaxial tensile tests were performed using a uniaxial material
testing apparatus (Z250, Zwick/Roell, Germany). As stated in standard D412-16
[66], the test speed was determined as 500 mm/min. 1 N preload was applied to
prevent loose of the specimen. The gauge length was specified as 25 mm.

Tensile stress was calculated using the following Equation 2.1.

𝐹𝑡
𝜎𝑡 = (Eq. 2.1)
𝐴𝑐

Where σt is tensile stress, Ft is applied axial load and Ac is the area of the cross-
section.

2.4.1.2 Compression Testing

At room temperature, uniaxial compression tests were performed using a uniaxial

material testing apparatus (Z250, Zwick/Roell, Germany). As stated D575-91 [67]
testing speed was arranged as 10% of specimen height. 10 kN load cell was used to
able to complete the experiment. A water gauge was used to ensure uniaxial loading
because of the universal joint connection of the load cell to the machine.

17
Compression stress was calculated using the following Equation 2.2.

𝐹𝑐
𝜎𝑐 = (Eq. 2.2)
𝐴𝑐

Where σc is compression stress, Fc is applied axial load and Ac is the area of cross-
section.

2.4.1.3 Honeycomb Compression Testing

Honeycomb compression test followed the same procedure in the same testing
machine with compression testing. The test speed was determined by 10% of the
specimen height. However, there were two possible directions to performing
compression tests. In this study, the X1 direction was preferred to the compression
direction, which is shown in Figure 2.4. The scanned area in Figure 2.4 shows the
cross-section area which was used in Equation 2.2 for the honeycomb compression
stress calculation.

Figure 2.4 (b) showed that the compression test was also applied in the X2 direction
for one specimen in each nozzle temperature to find out any difference in mechanical
properties. However, it was clarified that there were not any notable differences
between the compression load-strain curves. After showing that, the X1 direction
was chosen. A detailed comparison of X1 and X2 directions is given in
Appendix.A.2.

18
Figure 2.4 (a) Honeycomb test specimen and load directions. (b) Force-Strain curve
of loading in X1 and X2 directions of 235oC.

2.4.2 Scanning Electron Microscopy

Tensile test specimens after failure were prepared for the SEM process. This process
was necessary to investigate the microstructure and porosity of printed specimens at
different temperatures. QUANTA 400F Field Emission SEM was used for scanning.
It allows high-quality pictures at different levels of zoom.

Failed cross-sections of the tensile specimens were coated with gold, and then
scanning was completed for five different temperatures.

19
20
 CHAPTER 3

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section of the thesis, the experimental results were discussed. First, tensile test
results, then compression test results were evaluated. The mechanical behavior of
Varioshore TPU filament and the printing parameters’ effects tried to be figured out.
Finally, honeycomb compression test results were discussed and the energy
absorption characteristics and related phenomena were tried to understand.

3.1 Tensile Testing

The Varioshore TPU filament was applied tensile test in five different temperature
groups from 190°C to 250°C for a better understanding of the tensile characteristics
and the effect of nozzle temperature during and after the printing process.

Figure 3.1 (a) shows the repeatability of engineering stress-strain data at 235°C. It
can be easily seen that the filament material shows the same characteristic at the
same extrusion temperature. The tensile specimens stretched until the failure. All
specimens start with elastic behavior and the graph goes linear at small strain levels.
Then, linearity breaks, and the nonlinear curve continues until the yield point. After
the yield point, as noticed, strain hardening behavior starts, and large strain
deformation occurs until the breaking point without necking. Elongation varies from
nearly 250% to 450%. The chain microstructure of the Varioshore TPU filament
(Colorfabb, Netherlands) allows this large deformation. Chain structure oriented
along loading direction.

In Figure 3.1 (b), the effect of nozzle temperature on the printing process can be
easily observed. Although the mechanical properties of all specimens show
similarities, the elongation rates, strain hardening rates, fraction stresses, and yield

21
stresses are different. Temperature affects the molecular structure of the material,
and it causes gaps between the molecules at different levels at different temperatures.
In other words, the Varioshore TPU filament (Colorfabb, Netherlands) is foaming in
high temperatures. So, this affects the mechanical properties.

Figure 3.1 (c) and Figure 3.1 (d) show the effects of nozzle temperatures on the
mechanical properties and density of Varioshore TPU. Tensile strength and
elongation at break show similar characteristics, as seen in Figure 3.1 (b). There is a
decreasing path of elongation at break and tensile strength. At 190°C tensile strength
is 9.88 MPa while elongation is 439.9%. Up to 220°C, there is a nearly linear drop
line. After this drop, there is a brief rise at 235°C tensile stress increases to 5.81 MPa,
and elongation at break increases to 358.52%. Then, from 235°C to 250°C, tensile
stress decreased to 4.63 MPa and elongation at break slightly decreased to 281.45%.
The stress decreases nearly in linear path. This decrease might be the result of the
foaming effect. When foaming increases with increasing printing temperature, and
the stress decreases. The porous microstructure causes weaker specimens.

In Figure 3.1 (d), the densities of the tensile specimens are compared. The density of
the tensile specimens shows quite similar behavior with tensile strength. Density at
190°C, 0.922g/mm3 and it slightly decreased at 205°C. However, at 220°C there is
a sharp drop. At 235°C, density slightly increased and at 250°C, there is drop again.
The volume and the mass of the specimens are measured from the manufactured
tensile specimen. In other meaning, the geometrical expansion of filaments with the
foaming effect is considered during the density calculation. The reason for the sharp
drop at 220°C might be the filaments are expanded more than at lower temperatures.
Therefore, the mass decreases with foaming and at the same time, the volume
increases. In conclusion, density decreased dramatically.

22
Figure 3.1 (a) Stress-Strain behavior of Varioshore TPU at extrusion temperature
235°C. (b) UTS vs. nozzle temperature and elongation at break vs. nozzle
temperature. (c) Densities of dog bone specimens at different extrusion temperatures.

In Figure 3.2, SEM images of the tensile specimen are shown. As noticed, at 190°C
nozzle temperature, the specimen has the lowest porosity. Separate filament layers
can be easily observed. Similarly, at 205°C nozzle temperature, filament layers can
be easily distinguished. However, at 220°C, 235°C and 250°C, the layers begin to
unite and become a more porous structure. Layers could not be easily distinguished
and at 235°C layers become almost one piece. Moreover, the porosity seems the
highest at 235°C and 250°C among other temperatures. It is an expected result
because of the foaming behavior of TPU Varioshore. The difference between 190°C
and 220°C in Figure 3.2 supports the density drop in Figure 3.1 (d).

23
Figure 3.2 At the top: SEM images of the specimens. At the bottom: Photographs
indicating the viewing directions of the SEM images. The images on the left and the
right correspond to 190°C and 235°C extrusion temperatures, respectively.

3.2 Compression Testing

The Varioshore TPU filament was applied compression test in five different
temperature groups from 190°C to 250°C for a better understanding of the
compression characteristics and the effect of nozzle temperature during and after the
printing process.

The engineering stress-strain curve of Varioshore TPU foam at 190°C for the
compressive test is given in Figure 3.3 (a). The compressive test is performed for
four groups of different extrusion temperatures. It can be observed that all specimens
show similar characteristics in their temperatures as in Figure 3.3 (a); the specimen
is manufactured at 190°C shows. The experiment was performed up to %40 strain
level.

24
In Figure 3.3 (b), the levels of compressive stresses by changing printing nozzle
temperatures can be observed. The highest compressive stress at 40% strain level
belongs to 205 °C, and the lowest one belongs to 250°C.

Figure 3.3 (a) Stress-Strain behavior of Varioshore TPU at extrusion temperature

190°C (b) Stress-Strain behavior comparison of Varioshore TPU at different
extrusion temperatures.

In Figure 3.4, the compression stress levels at 40% strain are shown. The
compression stress increases at the beginning from 190°C to 205°C. Stress level is
nearly the same for 205°C and 220°C. Then, there is a critical drop at 235°C. From
235°C to 250°C, stress slightly decreased. On the contrary tensile test, the stress
initially increased at the compression test. The reason might be the fusion between

25
layers. In other words, the printed layer overlaps the previous layer, and this overlap
affects the density, eventually affecting the specimen's stress. However, after some
critical temperature points, the porosity effect overcomes the fusion effect, and the
density starts decreasing. It causes stress to drop at higher temperatures.

Figure 3.4 Compression stresses at 40% strain.

3.3 Honeycomb Compression Testing

The Varioshore TPU filament was applied honeycomb compression testing in four
different temperature groups from 190°C to 235°C for a better understanding of the
compression characteristics of honeycombs and the effect of nozzle temperature
during and after the printing process.

In Figure 3.5 (a), it can be observed that stress-strain behavior of the honeycomb
structure which is manufactured at 235°C nozzle temperature. In Figure 3.5 (a) inset,
the elastic region of the stress-strain curve is zoomed in. The compressive
characteristic is similar to elastomeric foam compressive behavior as expected [69].
In Figure 3.5 (b), the compressive behavior of the honeycomb can be observed in the
stress-strain diagram. The elastic region is zoomed in Figure 3.5 (b) inset. It can be
observed that at 235°C honeycomb structure has the highest yield, peak, and plateau

26
stresses and at 190°C, it has the lowest one. Plateau stress, 𝜎𝑃𝑙 , and yield stress, 𝜎𝑦 ,
calculations suggested by Gibson and Ashby are given in below [70].
𝜀
∫𝜀 𝑐𝑑 𝜎(𝜀) ⅆ𝜀
𝑦
𝜎𝑃𝑙 = (Eq. 3.1)
𝜀𝑐𝑑 −𝜀𝑦

𝜎𝑃𝑙 2 𝑡 2
= () (Eq. 3.2)
𝜎𝑦 3 𝑙

Where 𝜀𝑐ⅆ and 𝜀𝑦 are critical densification strain and yield strain respectively in
equation 3.1. t is thickness and l is length of cell wall in the XY plane in equation
3.2.

Figure 3.5 (a) Stress-Strain diagram of compressive test of the honeycomb structure
which is manufactured at 235°C nozzle temperature. (b) Stress-Strain curve
comparison for honeycomb structure of Varioshore TPU at different nozzle
temperatures.

27
In Table 3.1, it can be easily noticed that the lattice structures produced at 235°C
nozzle temperature have higher relative density and the average relative densities
varying in nozzle temperatures in ascending order are 220°C, 205°C, 190°C, and
235°C. Relative density is a ratio between honeycomb density and solid density.
The relative density calculation suggested by Gibson and Ashby is given in below
[70]. Where 𝜌0 and 𝜌𝑠 are honeycomb density and solid density respectively.

𝜌0 2 𝑡
= () (Eq. 3.3)
𝜌𝑠 √ 3 𝑙

The relative density affects the densification strain and plateau stress and eventually
yields stress and yield strain. Because the densification strain is a function of relative
density [71]. Densification and critical densification equations are given in Equation
3.4 and Equation 3.5 respectively. Where 𝜀ⅆ is densification strain, and 𝛼 and D are
experimental constants in Equation 3.4 and Equation 3.5.

𝜌0
𝜀ⅆ = 1 − 𝛼 (Eq. 3.4)
𝜌𝑠

1
𝜀𝑐ⅆ = 𝜀ⅆ (1 − ) (Eq. 3.5)
𝐷

The experimental studies show that with increasing relative density, the peak stress,
the yield stress, and the plateau stress increase, and the densification strain decrease
[70], [72], [73]. However, in this study, this theory is not completely applicable
because 220oC does not completely fit the theory. To explain this unusual behavior,
the given suggestion is that the mechanical properties of the lattice structures can be
affected by the porosity of the honeycomb wall. In Figure 3.2, it was discussed that
235°C has one of the most porous microstructures and 190°C has the lowest. After
220°C printing temperature in Figure 3.2, the porosity level dramatically increased,
and it affected the material behavior. It is expected that with increasing porosity, the
strength of the material decreases and the stress level increases at the same strain
level [70], [72]. However, with the increasing particle size, the strength of the lattice
structure can be deteriorated [74], [75]. The low-density foams have weak walls at

28
the microstructure level. In recent applications, these walls assumed constant width
to simplify the analysis [76]. The wall thickness of the microstructure also affects
the wall thickness of the honeycomb structure. In Figure 3.6, the variation in the wall
thickness can be observed. This variation of the wall thickness is considerably large,
and it could be affecting the buckling of the honeycomb wall.

Figure 3.6 Average wall thickness vs. nozzle temperature.

Figure 3.7 is a comparison graph of energy absorption levels against compression

stress of TPU Varioshore lattice structures at different nozzle temperatures. The
energy storage from the beginning of the loading up to densification is simply the
area under the compressive stress-strain curve of the lattice structure and it is given
in Equation 3.6 [70].

𝜀
𝑤 = ∫0 𝜎(𝜀) ⅆ𝜀 (Eq. 3.6)

Where σ and ε are stress and strain respectively in Equation 3.6. The volumetric
energy absorption efficiency of a lattice structure is energy absorption per unit
volume which is expressed as energy absorption divided by the stress level at the
instant strain of the lattice structure [70], [72]. Energy absorption equation is given
in Equation 3.7. Where 𝐸 and 𝜎(𝜀) are energy absorption and stress at related strain
respectively in equation 3.7.

29
 𝜀
∫0 𝜎(𝜀) ⅆ𝜀
𝐸(𝜀) = × 100 (Eq. 3.7)
𝜎(𝜀)

Figure 3.7 Energy Absorption-Stress comparison for honeycomb structure of

Varioshore TPU at different nozzle temperatures.

In Figure 3.8, the maximum efficiency level of lattice structures at different nozzle
temperatures is shown. Efficiencies for all nozzle temperatures are nearly %40 and
efficiency percentages are close to each other.

Figure 3.8 Efficiency comparison for honeycomb structure of Varioshore TPU at

different nozzle temperatures.

30
Figure 3.9 shows the maximum efficiency, peak stress, and critical densification
strain from stress-strain graph of the honeycomb structure. It can be noticed that
although there is no negative value in the equation of efficiency, Equation 3.7, the
efficiency decreases after a certain point. The reason is that the denominator
increases faster than numerator after it reaches maximum efficiency. Numerator is
the area under the curve and denominator is the stress value at instant strain value.
The area and stress increase are nearly linear up to a certain strain value. However,
after this strain value stress start to increase faster than energy absorption and
efficiency starts to decrease. The strain value where efficiency starts to decrease is
called the critical densification strain value and the stress at this strain is called the
peak stress.

Figure 3.9 shows stress and efficiency against strain for honeycomb structure at
190oC nozzle temperature. Emax is maximum efficiency and 𝜎p and 𝜀𝑐ⅆ are peak stress
and critical densification strain respectively. In Figure 3.9, the blue dashed line
shows the behavior of ideal energy absorber like a sponge. The stress level increase
initially at zero strain up to peak stress. Then, stress stays constant up to 100% strain
level where no longer can be compressed. For an ideal absorber, the efficiency
follows a linear path, starting from 0 to 100% efficiency at a100% strain level.

Figure 3.9 Stress and efficiency vs. strain for honeycomb structure at 190oC nozzle
temperature.

31
Table 3.1 shows the summary of the mechanical properties of honeycomb structures
that are extruded at different nozzle temperatures. These values can be determined
by the equations previously discussed; however, the experimental result can be
different than the theoretical calculations. Therefore, experimental results are used
to obtain the values in Table 3.1. Figure 3.9 shows the experimental determination
of peak stress, critical densification strain, and maximum efficiency. If there was an
ideal absorber, the curve should have followed the black dashed line up to the 100%
strain level. For each temperature level, Table 3.1 is detailed in Appendix.A.3.

Table 3.1 Summary of Honeycomb Mechanical Properties

Relative
Maximum Densification Critical Peak Yield
density Energy
Temperature Efficiency Strain Densification Stress Stress
Experimental (J/cm3)
(%) (porosity) Strain (MPa) (MPa)
(%)
40.088 17.695 0.823 0.634 0.041 0.016 0.016
190
±1.37 ±0.3 ±0 ±0.03 ±0.01 ±0 ±0

42.364 17.156 0.828 0.604 0.044 0.021 0.019

205
±0.85 ±0.42 ±0 ±0.03 ±0 ±0 ±0

47.530 17.012 0.830 0.640 0.070 0.038 0.033

220
±3.75 ±0.23 ±0 ±0.02 ±0.01 ±0 ±0

41.642 27.040 0.730 0.629 0.108 0.055 0.045

235
±1.2 ±0.46 ±0 ±0.03 ±0.01 ±0 ±0

32
 CHAPTER 4

4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

In this study, Varioshore TPU specimens that were produced by the FFF technique,
were investigated to find out the mechanical properties of novel material Varioshore
TPU at different geometries such as tensile specimens, compression specimens, and
lattice structures. During manufacturing, different nozzle temperatures were applied
to activate foaming phenomena.

In tensile testing, Varishore TPU showed the nonlinear hyperelastic curve for each
temperature level. Tensile specimens elongated over 300% before failure. The
material showed similar behavior at the same temperature. This showed the
repeatability of the FFF technique for tensile specimens. Also, relatively lower
temperatures showed similar characteristics. This was the reason that the foaming
phenomena has not been activated at low temperatures. At high temperatures,
foaming was activated and as a result of that tensile strength was downgraded.

Foaming phenomena and repeatability subjects were valid for compression also.
Compression specimens were compressed up to 40% of the initial height and
recovered their deformation during the unloading.

The difference between compression and tensile test have been explained with the
fusion effect between layers at relatively low temperatures. The fusion effect may
not be effective for tensile specimens because of the narrow printing region. For
compression specimens, there was a larger region for printing. Also, the printing
direction could be the reason for the difference because as mentioned before, all
specimens were printed in the Z direction. In tensile test, load was applied in the X
direction, yet, in compression test, load was applied in the Z direction. For this
reason, in lower temperatures, compression specimens could be stronger.

33
For lattice structure, honeycomb structure was studied which is one of the most
commonly used lattice structures in literature. Again, repeatability was shown for
honeycomb compression test. The energy absorption level of honeycomb varied with
the foaming level. This was a result of the different nozzle temperatures as discussed.
At higher relative density higher energy absorption was observed. In other words,
when the porosity increased the absorber characteristic of honeycomb became better.
Therefore, it was possible to achieve high energy absorption levels with the
manipulation of the FFF printing parameter. FFF offered arrangeable parameters
during manufacturing operations. Although foamed materials showed higher
absorption levels, it could not be said that the most foamed material with 235oC
nozzle temperature was the most efficient. Efficiency was related to absorbed energy
and stress level.

In this thesis study, five printing temperature levels were validated. The foaming
phenomena of TPU and its effect on mechanical properties were studied. Foaming
had a remarkable effect on the mechanical properties of TPU, and the energy
absorption level of lattice structures. The temperature was used to activation of the
foaming.

In the future, other parameters than the temperature of the printing process can be
changed to observe differences. FFF gives a chance to interfere with the production
process parameter. The printing speed can be investigated, and the study can be
expanded by arranging printing speed.

As lattice structure geometry, honeycomb geometry was chosen. In the future,

another lattice structure model can be used to compare energy absorption and nozzle
temperature effect. For example, cubic lattice, diamond lattice, triangular lattice or
lattice structures with tailored cell geometries can be manufactured to obtain
optimized geometry for energy absorption.

In future work, closer temperatures can be considered as nozzle temperatures to

obtain the beginning temperature of the foaming and observe the temperature effect
in more detail. Moreover, other parameters such as feed rate, nozzle moving speed,

34
printing table temperature, or infill density can be investigated to find out any effects
of the foaming activation.

FEM analysis was not performed during the study. For a better understanding of
structures FEM analysis and material modeling can be performed. This study can
also provide an effective route for designing impact-absorbing structures for helmets
and similar protective equipment.

35
36
 REFERENCES

[1] BETTINA WARBURG, “Additive Manufacturing vs. Traditional

Manufacturing,” Polymer 207, Aug. 06, 2020.
[2] K. V. Wong and A. Hernandez, “A Review of Additive Manufacturing,” ISRN
Mechanical Engineering, vol. 2012, pp. 1–10, Aug. 2012, doi:
10.5402/2012/208760.
[3] S. H. Huang, P. Liu, A. Mokasdar, and L. Hou, “Additive manufacturing and
its societal impact: a literature review,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol, vol. 67, no.
5–8, pp. 1191–1203, Jul. 2013, doi: 10.1007/s00170-012-4558-5.
[4] H. Paris, H. Mokhtarian, E. Coatanéa, M. Museau, and I. F. Ituarte,
“Comparative environmental impacts of additive and subtractive
manufacturing technologies,” CIRP Annals, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 29–32, 2016,
doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.036.
[5] R. M. Mahamood’, E. T. Akinlabi’, M. Shukla, and S. Pityana, “Revolutionary
Additive Manufacturing: An Overview,” p. 19.
[6] V. Mazzanti, L. Malagutti, and F. Mollica, “FDM 3D Printing of Polymers
Containing Natural Fillers: A Review of their Mechanical Properties,”
Polymers, vol. 11, no. 7, p. 1094, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.3390/polym11071094.
[7] W. R. Priedeman and P. W. Turley, “FDM® TECHNOLOGY PROCESS
IMPROVEMENTS,” p. 8.
[8] Crump S. S. (1992). Apparatus and method for creating three-dimensional
objects (US5121329A). U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
[9] B. Shaqour et al., “Gaining a better understanding of the extrusion process in
fused filament fabrication 3D printing: a review,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol,
vol. 114, no. 5–6, pp. 1279–1291, May 2021, doi: 10.1007/s00170-021-06918-
6.
[10] S. Singh, G. Singh, C. Prakash, and S. Ramakrishna, “Current status and future
directions of fused filament fabrication,” Journal of Manufacturing Processes,
vol. 55, pp. 288–306, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.04.049.
[11] A. A. Rashid and M. Koç, “Fused Filament Fabrication Process: A Review of
Numerical Simulation Techniques,” Polymers, vol. 13, no. 20, p. 3534, Oct.
2021, doi: 10.3390/polym13203534.
[12] A. Dey, I. N. Roan Eagle, and N. Yodo, “A Review on Filament Materials for
Fused Filament Fabrication,” JMMP, vol. 5, no. 3, p. 69, Jun. 2021, doi:
10.3390/jmmp5030069.
[13] I. Gibson, D. Rosen, and B. Stucker, Additive Manufacturing Technologies.
New York, NY: Springer New York, 2015. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3.
[14] K. S. Boparai, R. Singh, and H. Singh, “Development of rapid tooling using
fused deposition modeling: a review,” Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 22, no.
2, p. 19, 2016.
[15] A. A. Bakır, R. Atik, and S. Özerinç, “Mechanical properties of thermoplastic
parts produced by fused deposition modeling:a review,” RPJ, vol. 27, no. 3, pp.
537–561, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1108/RPJ-03-2020-0061.

37
[16] S. C. Daminabo, S. Goel, S. A. Grammatikos, H. Y. Nezhad, and V. K. Thakur,
“Fused deposition modeling-based additive manufacturing (3D printing):
techniques for polymer material systems,” Materials Today Chemistry, vol. 16,
p. 100248, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100248.
[17] R. J. Schaefer, “MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF RUBBER,” p. 18.
[18] V. Gonca and Y. Shvabs, “DEFINITION OF POISSON’S RATIO OF
ELASTOMERS,” ENGINEERING FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT, p. 6.
[19] D. Koblar and M. Boltežar, “Evaluation of the Frequency-Dependent Young’s
Modulus and Damping Factor of Rubber from Experiment and Their
Implementation in a Finite-Element Analysis,” Exp Tech, vol. 40, no. 1, pp.
235–244, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s40799-016-0027-7.
[20] Physicochemical Behavior and Supramolecular Organization of Polymers.
Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2009. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9372-2.
[21] H. F. Brinson and L. C. Brinson, Polymer Engineering Science and
Viscoelasticity. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2015. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-
7485-3.
[22] A. A. Bakır, R. Neshani, and S. Özerinç, “Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed
Elastomers Produced by Fused Deposition Modeling,” in Fused Deposition
Modeling Based 3D Printing, H. K. Dave and J. P. Davim, Eds. Cham: Springer
International Publishing, 2021, pp. 107–130. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-68024-
4_6.
[23] “Printability of elastomer latex for additive manufacturing or3D printing.pdf.”
[24] J. E. Mark, “6 - Thermoset Elastomers,” Applied Plastics Engineering
Handbook, p. 17.
[25] “Journal of Polymer Science Part C Polymer Symposia - 1969 - Holden -
Thermoplastic elastomers.pdf.”
[26] W. Zhai, J. Jiang, and C. B. Park, “A review on physical foaming of
thermoplastic and vulcanized elastomers,” Polymer Reviews, vol. 62, no. 1, pp.
95–141, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1080/15583724.2021.1897996.
[27] D. Whelan, “Thermoplastic Elastomers,” in Brydson’s Plastics Materials,
Elsevier, 2017, pp. 653–703. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-35824-8.00024-4.
[28] P. P. Järvelä, “JOHANNA PAUKKUNEN FOAMING OF
THERMOPLASTIC ELASTOMERS,” p. 78.
[29] H. Lee, R. Eom, and Y. Lee, “Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties of
Porous Thermoplastic Polyurethane Obtained by 3D Printing for Protective
Gear,” Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 2019, pp. 1–10,
Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1155/2019/5838361.
[30] J. Wang et al., “Research of TPU Materials for 3D Printing Aiming at Non-
Pneumatic Tires by FDM Method,” Polymers, vol. 12, no. 11, p. 2492, Oct.
2020, doi: 10.3390/polym12112492.
[31] C. Ge, L. Priyadarshini, D. Cormier, L. Pan, and J. Tuber, “A preliminary study
of cushion properties of a 3D printed thermoplastic polyurethane Kelvin foam,”
Packag. Technol. Sci., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 361–368, May 2018, doi:
10.1002/pts.2330.

38
[32] H. B. Gunasekaran, S. Ponnan, N. Thirunavukkarasu, A. Laroui, L. Wu, and J.
Wang, “Rapid Carbon Dioxide Foaming of 3D Printed Thermoplastic
Polyurethane Elastomers,” ACS Appl. Polym. Mater., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1497–
1511, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.1021/acsapm.1c01846.
[33] Q. Chen, P. Cao, and R. C. Advincula, “Mechanically Robust, Ultraelastic
Hierarchical Foam with Tunable Properties via 3D Printing,” Adv. Funct.
Mater., vol. 28, no. 21, p. 1800631, May 2018, doi: 10.1002/adfm.201800631.
[34] A. Pawar, G. Ausias, Y.-M. Corre, Y. Grohens, and J. Férec, “Mastering the
density of 3D printed thermoplastic elastomer foam structures with controlled
temperature,” Additive Manufacturing, vol. 58, p. 103066, Oct. 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.addma.2022.103066.
[35] M. G. M. Marascio, J. Antons, D. P. Pioletti, and P.-E. Bourban, “3D Printing
of Polymers with Hierarchical Continuous Porosity,” Adv. Mater. Technol., vol.
2, no. 11, p. 1700145, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1002/admt.201700145.
[36] D. Valiulis and E. Jurkonis, “ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING BY 3D AND
4D PRINTING METHODS: A REVIEW OF MATERIALS, METHODS AND
APPLICATIONS,” p. 11, 2020.
[37] A. Gleadall, D. Visscher, J. Yang, D. Thomas, and J. Segal, “Review of additive
manufactured tissue engineering scaffolds: relationship between geometry and
performance,” Burns & Trauma, vol. 6, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1186/s41038-018-
0121-4.
[38] M. Nofar, J. Utz, N. Geis, V. Altstädt, and H. Ruckdäschel, “Foam 3D Printing
of Thermoplastics: A Symbiosis of Additive Manufacturing and Foaming
Technology,” Advanced Science, vol. 9, no. 11, p. 2105701, Apr. 2022, doi:
10.1002/advs.202105701.
[39] S. Guessasma, S. Belhabib, and H. Nouri, “Effect of printing temperature on
microstructure, thermal behavior and tensile properties of 3D printed nylon
using fused deposition modeling,” J Appl Polym Sci, vol. 138, no. 14, p. 50162,
Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1002/app.50162.
[40] S.-K. Yeh, R. Rangappa, T.-H. Hsu, and S. Utomo, “Effect of extrusion on the
foaming behavior of thermoplastic polyurethane with different hard segments,”
J Polym Res, vol. 28, no. 7, p. 244, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10965-021-02604-
z.
[41] B. Hu, M. Li, J. Jiang, and W. Zhai, “Development of microcellular
thermoplastic polyurethane honeycombs with tailored elasticity and energy
absorption via CO2 foaming,” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,
vol. 197, p. 106324, May 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106324.
[42] A. K. Singh, B. Patil, N. Hoffmann, B. Saltonstall, M. Doddamani, and N.
Gupta, “Additive Manufacturing of Syntactic Foams: Part 1: Development,
Properties, and Recycling Potential of Filaments,” JOM, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 303–
309, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11837-017-2734-7.
[43] N. Ben Ali, M. Khlif, D. Hammami, and C. Bradai, “Mechanical and
morphological characterization of spherical cell porous structures
manufactured using FDM process,” Engineering Fracture Mechanics, vol. 216,
p. 106527, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2019.106527.

39
[44] N. Gama, A. Ferreira, and A. Barros-Timmons, “3D Printed Thermoplastic
Polyurethane Filled with Polyurethane Foams Residues,” J Polym Environ, vol.
28, no. 5, pp. 1560–1570, May 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10924-020-01705-y.
[45] “Adv Eng Mater - 2022 - Zhang - 3D‐Printed Polyurethane Tissue‐Engineering
Scaffold with Hierarchical Microcellular Foam.pdf.”
[46] Q. Sun, G. M. Rizvi, C. T. Bellehumeur, and P. Gu, “Effect of processing
conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer filaments,” Rapid
Prototyping Journal, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 72–80, Mar. 2008, doi:
10.1108/13552540810862028.
[47] C. Hohimer, J. Christ, N. Aliheidari, C. Mo, and A. Ameli, “3D printed
thermoplastic polyurethane with isotropic material properties,” presented at the
SPIE Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health
Monitoring, Portland, Oregon, United States, Apr. 2017, p. 1016511. doi:
10.1117/12.2259810.
[48] E. Heiml, A. Hössinger-Kalteis, and Z. Major, “Experimental characterization
of 3D printed cellular structures,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 62, pp.
2528–2532, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.03.124.
[49] J. Yao, M. R. Barzegari, and D. Rodrigue, “Polyethylene Foams Produced
under a Temperature Gradient with Expancel and Blends Thereof,” Cellular
Polymers, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 259–282, Sep. 2010, doi:
10.1177/026248931002900501.
[50] A. Bezazi and F. Scarpa, “Mechanical behaviour of conventional and negative
Poisson’s ratio thermoplastic polyurethane foams under compressive cyclic
loading,” International Journal of Fatigue, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 922–930, May
2007, doi: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2006.07.015.
[51] N. Gama, A. Ferreira, and A. Barros-Timmons, “Polyurethane Foams: Past,
Present, and Future,” Materials, vol. 11, no. 10, p. 1841, Sep. 2018, doi:
10.3390/ma11101841.
[52] C. Ge, S. Wang, W. Zheng, and W. Zhai, “Preparation of microcellular
thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) foam and its tensile property,” Polym Eng
Sci, vol. 58, no. S1, pp. E158–E166, May 2018, doi: 10.1002/pen.24813.
[53] S. R. G. Bates, I. R. Farrow, and R. S. Trask, “3D printed polyurethane
honeycombs for repeated tailored energy absorption,” Materials & Design, vol.
112, pp. 172–183, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.08.062.
[54] E. O. Bachtiar et al., “3D printing and characterization of a soft and biostable
elastomer with high flexibility and strength for biomedical applications,”
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, vol. 104, p.
103649, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103649.
[55] C. Zhang and M. R. Kessler, “Bio-based Polyurethane Foam Made from
Compatible Blends of Vegetable-Oil-based Polyol and Petroleum-based
Polyol,” ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 743–749, Apr. 2015,
doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00049.
[56] A. R. Damanpack, A. Sousa, and M. Bodaghi, “Porous PLAs with Controllable
Density by FDM 3D Printing and Chemical Foaming Agent,” Micromachines,
vol. 12, no. 8, p. 866, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.3390/mi12080866.

40
[57] Á. Kmetty, K. Litauszki, and D. Réti, “Characterization of Different Chemical
Blowing Agents and Their Applicability to Produce Poly(Lactic Acid) Foams
by Extrusion,” Applied Sciences, vol. 8, no. 10, p. 1960, Oct. 2018, doi:
10.3390/app8101960.
[58] W. J. Choi et al., “Rapid development of dual porous poly(lactic acid) foam
using fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing for medical scaffold
application,” Materials Science and Engineering: C, vol. 110, p. 110693, May
2020, doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2020.110693.
[59] E. Williams, S. Long, M. Tatum, D. D. Anderson, and G. Thomas, “Designing
a 3D Printed Bone Simulant for Wire Navigation Training,” in 2021 Design of
Medical Devices Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA, Apr. 2021, p.
V001T01A002. doi: 10.1115/DMD2021-1034.
[60] İ. Özsoykal, R. B. Husemoglu, and A. Yurt, “Radiological Evaluation of the
Effects of Printing Parameters on 3D Printed Cylindrical LW-PLA Samples:
Preliminary Results,” Journal of Medical Innovation and Technology, Jan.
2022, doi: 10.51934/jomit.1037540.
[61] C. Lancea et al., “Design and additive manufacturing of brushless electric
motor components,” MATEC Web Conf., vol. 343, p. 01007, 2021, doi:
10.1051/matecconf/202134301007.
[62] O. Faruk and M. Sain, “Continuous Extrusion Foaming of Lignin Enhanced
Thermoplastic Polyurethane (TPU),” j biobased mat bioenergy, vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 309–314, Jul. 2013, doi: 10.1166/jbmb.2013.1365.
[63] X. Chen and S. Lee, “Physical Property of 3D-Printed N-Pointed Star-Shaped
Outsole Prepared by FDM 3D Printer Using the Lightweight TPU,” Polymers,
vol. 14, no. 15, p. 3189, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.3390/polym14153189.
[64] X. Chen and S. Lee, “Morphology and Compressive Property of 3D-printed 3-
pointed Star Shape Prepared Using Lightweight Thermoplastic Polyurethane,”
Fibers Polym, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 1779–1788, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s12221-
022-4833-5.
[65] E. J. Parry, J. M. Best, and C. E. Banks, “Three-dimensional (3D) scanning and
additive manufacturing (AM) allows the fabrication of customised crutch
grips,” Materials Today Communications, vol. 25, p. 101225, Dec. 2020, doi:
10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101225.
[66] D11 Committee, “Test Methods for Vulcanized Rubber and Thermoplastic
ElastomersTension,” ASTM International. doi: 10.1520/D0412-16R21.
[67] D11 Committee, “Test Methods for Rubber Properties in Compression,”
ASTM International. doi: 10.1520/D0575-91R18.
[68] “TDS_E_ColorFabb_varioShore_TPU.pdf.”
[69] “Cellular Solids Structure and Properties (Cambridge Solid State Science
Series) (Lorna J. Gibson, Michael F. Ashby) (z-lib.org).pdf.”
[70] L. J. Gibson and M. F. Ashby, Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties, 2nd
ed. Cambridge University Press, 1997. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139878326.
[71] Q. M. Li, I. Magkiriadis, and J. J. Harrigan, “Compressive Strain at the Onset
of Densification of Cellular Solids,” Journal of Cellular Plastics, vol. 42, no.
5, pp. 371–392, Sep. 2006, doi: 10.1177/0021955X06063519.

41
[72] F. N. Habib, P. Iovenitti, S. H. Masood, and M. Nikzad, “In-plane energy
absorption evaluation of 3D printed polymeric honeycombs,” Virtual and
Physical Prototyping, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 117–131, Apr. 2017, doi:
10.1080/17452759.2017.1291354.
[73] I. Ivañez, L. M. Fernandez-Cañadas, and S. Sanchez-Saez, “Compressive
deformation and energy-absorption capability of aluminium honeycomb core,”
Composite Structures, vol. 174, pp. 123–133, Aug. 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.04.056.
[74] D. Ghosh, N. Dhavale, M. Banda, and H. Kang, “A comparison of
microstructure and uniaxial compressive response of ice-templated alumina
scaffolds fabricated from two different particle sizes,” Ceramics International,
vol. 42, no. 14, pp. 16138–16147, Nov. 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.07.131.
[75] M. Banda and D. Ghosh, “Effects of porosity and strain rate on the uniaxial
compressive response of ice-templated sintered macroporous alumina,” Acta
Materialia, vol. 149, pp. 179–192, May 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.actamat.2018.02.027.
[76] N. Mills, Polymer foams handbook: engineering and biomechanics
applications and design guide. Elsevier, 2007.

42
 Sample ID T190 T205 T220 T235 C190 C205 C220 C235 190HC 205HC 220HC 235HC
Infill
Percentage 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Infill
Direction ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45° ±45°
Wall
Thickness 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0 0 0 0
Number of
APPENDICES

Table A. 1 Detailed Table of Printing Parameters.

Wall 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Bed

43
Temperature 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Nozzle
Temperature 190 205 220 235 190 205 220 235 190 205 220 235
Printing
Printing Parameters

Speed 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Layer
Thickness 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Nozzle
Diameter 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Filament 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85

A.1
Diameter
A.2 Honeycomb compression test direction comparison

Figure A. 2 Comparison of honeycomb compression test direction (a) 190oC (b)

205oC (c) 220oC.

44
A.3 Honeycomb Compression Properties

Table A. 2 Detailed honeycomb compression properties.

Relative Yield
Maximum Densification Critical Peak
Sample density Stress Energy
Efficiency Strain Densification Stress
Name Experimental of HC (J/cm3)
(%) (porosity) Strain (MPa)
(%) (MPa)
HC190#1 39.825 17.939 0.821 0.642 0.043 0.016 0.017
HC190#2 38.884 17.998 0.820 0.620 0.039 0.015 0.015
HC190#3 39.396 17.853 0.821 0.688 0.051 0.016 0.020
HC190#4 40.170 17.351 0.826 0.628 0.038 0.015 0.015
HC190#5 43.013 17.217 0.828 0.635 0.036 0.015 0.015
HC190#6 39.241 17.809 0.822 0.591 0.037 0.016 0.014
HC205#1 41.252 17.546 0.825 0.555 0.042 0.021 0.018
HC205#2 42.033 17.763 0.822 0.598 0.046 0.021 0.019
HC205#3 42.643 17.125 0.829 0.616 0.048 0.022 0.020
HC205#4 42.812 16.715 0.833 0.653 0.047 0.019 0.020
HC205#5 41.623 17.203 0.828 0.581 0.041 0.020 0.017
HC205#6 43.819 16.582 0.834 0.623 0.042 0.021 0.018
HC220#1 53.457 17.230 0.828 0.659 0.063 0.036 0.034
HC220#2 41.821 17.195 0.828 0.661 0.086 0.039 0.036
HC220#3 49.461 16.888 0.831 0.628 0.064 0.038 0.031
HC220#4 46.936 16.648 0.834 0.650 0.068 0.036 0.032
HC220#5 44.390 16.837 0.832 0.618 0.069 0.037 0.031
HC220#6 49.118 17.277 0.827 0.624 0.068 0.040 0.033
HC235#1 42.317 27.267 0.727 0.625 0.109 0.057 0.046
HC235#2 40.783 27.228 0.728 0.649 0.116 0.056 0.047
HC235#3 39.923 27.614 0.724 0.633 0.121 0.057 0.048
HC235#4 42.302 26.213 0.738 0.568 0.087 0.053 0.037
HC235#5 43.541 26.685 0.733 0.644 0.102 0.054 0.044
HC235#6 40.983 27.233 0.728 0.654 0.115 0.053 0.047

45