Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-94d59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T11:46:18.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Process-Property-Performance Relationship for Fused Deposition of Ceramics (FDC) Feedstock Materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

N. Venkataraman
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
S. Rangarajan
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
B. Harper
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
M.J. Matthewson
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
A. Safari
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
S.C. Danforth
Affiliation:
Department of Ceramic and Materials Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8065.
Get access

Abstract

Fused deposition of ceramics (FDC) is an extrusion based layered manufacturing process. It uses a high solids loaded (>50 vol. % ceramic or metal powder) thermoplastic binder in filament form as the feedstock material. The filament acts as both the piston driving the extrusion process and the feedstock material being deposited in the X-Y direction onto a Z-stage platform. The primary mode of failure of the filament during the FDC process is via buckling. Earlier work has shown that the filament compressive modulus and the feedstock viscosity control the buckling behavior of the filament material in FDC. A study was conducted to investigate the effect of particle/polymer interface on the viscosity and compressive modulus of the PZT filled ECG9 system. The relative viscosity of the untreated and the surface treated particle filled systems increases with solids loading. It is found that both of the surface treated materials (stearic acid and titanate coupling agent) exhibit a lower relative viscosity than the untreated material. A rheological model (Krieger-Dougherty model) was used to investigate the possible reasons for the decrease in relative viscosity due to the surface treatment of particles. The investigaton showed that the coupling agent acted as a dispersant (increasing value of ϕm) and thereby decreased the viscosity. The stearic acid may act as a dispersant (increasing value of ϕm) and as a lubricant (decreasing value of KE). The compressive modulus of all the different systems studied showed an increase with solids loading. A generalized Nielsen model was used to describe the relative modulus vs. solids loading behavior for all the different systems studied. Also, the measured compressive modulus of the filled system was found to be insensitive to the modifications in the particle surface treatment.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cima, M., Sachs, E., Fan, T., Bredt, J.F., Michaels, S.P., Khanuja, S., Lauder, A., Lee, S.J., Brancazio, D., Curodeau, A. and Tureck, H., U.S. Patent No. 5,387,380 (1995).Google Scholar
2 Danforth, S.C., Agarwala, M., Bandyopadhyay, A., Langrana, N., Jamalabad, V., Safari, A., and Weeren, R. van, U.S. Patent No. 5,738,817 (1998).Google Scholar
3 Sanders, R.C., Forsyth, J.L., Philbrook, K.F., U.S. Patent No. 5,506,607 (1996).Google Scholar
4 Griffith, M.L. and Halloran, J.W., J. Amer. Cer. Soc. 79 (11), 2601 (1996).Google Scholar
5 Bourell, D.L., Marcus, H.L., Barlow, J.W., and Beamen, J.J., Int. J. Powder Metall. Technol. 28 (4), 369 (1992).Google Scholar
6 Agarwala, M.K., Bandyopadhyay, A., Weeren, R. van, Safari, A., and Danforth, S.C., American Ceramic Society Bulletin 75 (11), 60 (1996).Google Scholar
7 Bandyopadhyay, A., Panda, R.K., Janas, V.F., Danforth, S.C., Safari, A., J. Amer. Cer. Soc. 80 (6), 1366 (1997).Google Scholar
8 Safari, A., Janas, V.F., Bandhyopadhyay, A., Panda, R.K., Agarwala, M., Danforth, S.C., U.S. Patent No. 5, 818, 149 (1998).Google Scholar
9 Venkataraman, N., Rangarajan, S., Harper, B., Matthewson, M.J., Safari, A., Wu, G., Langrana, N., Yardimci, A.. Guceri, S. and Danforth, S.C., Accepted for Publication in Rapid Prototyping Journal, April 2000.Google Scholar
10 Khan, S.A. and Prud'Homme, R.K., Reviews in Chemical Engineering 4 (3), 205 (1987).Google Scholar
11 Nielsen, L.E. and Landel, R.F., Mechanical Properties of Polymers and Composites, 2nd ed., (Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1994).Google Scholar
12 Han, C.D., Weghe, T. Van Den, Shete, P. and Haw, J.R., Polym. Engg. and Sci. 21 (4), 196.Google Scholar
13 Luo, H.L., Han, C.D. and Mijovic, J., J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 28, 3387 (1983).Google Scholar
14 Monte, S.J. and Sugerman, G., Polym. Engg. and Sci. 24 (18), 1369 (1984).Google Scholar
15 Han, C.D., Sandford, C. and Yoo, H.J., Polym. Engg. and Sci. 18 (11), 849 (1978).Google Scholar
16 McNulty, T., Mohammadi, F., Bandyopadhyay, A., Shanefield, D.J., Danforth, S.C., and Safari, A., Rapid Prototyping Journal 4 (4), 144 (1998).Google Scholar
17 Tsao, I., PhD Thesis, Rutgers University, May 1990.Google Scholar
18 Hunt, K.N., Evans, J.R.G. and Woodthorpe, J., Polym. Engg. and Sci. 28 (23), 1572 (1988).Google Scholar
19 Hunter, R.J., Foundations of Colloid Science, Vol.2, (Oxford Science, Oxford, UK, 1987).Google Scholar
20 Rangarajan, S., Qi, G., Venkataraman, N., Safari, A., and Danforth, S.C., Accepted for Publication in the Journal of American Ceramic Society, January 2000.Google Scholar