Sandwich structures are often used in the automotive, marine, aerospace, and many other industrial sectors due to their desirable performance properties, energy absorption, and ability to reduce the weight of parts. Multilayer composite materials also provide various design possibilities, making it simple for producers to fabricate intricate parts. One of the most popular additive manufacturing technologies for producing complicated objects is fused filament fabrication (FFF). In this study, sandwich samples with a dual-core of polylactic acid (PLA) and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) were fabricated by FFF technique in three different configurations, including cylindrical, honeycomb, and tetrahedral truss cells. Their properties were determined and investigated through tensile, three-point bending, Izod impact, microhardness tests, and scanning electron microscopy. The results were compared with samples manufactured with monolithic PLA. The results demonstrated that sandwich structures with TPU cores had a high-energy absorption capability. In comparison to monolithic PLA samples, these materials’ ultimate elongation and impact strength were dramatically enhanced. However, TPU cores had lower flexural and tensile strengths than samples with PLA cores. The structure's shape significantly influences both its strength and energy absorption characteristics. Firstly, tetrahedral truss core samples revealed that the samples’ elongation climbed considerably and exceeded three times with the deposition of TPU as the inner core compared to monolithic PLA. Last but not least, in flexural testing, sandwich panels with honeycomb manufactured of PLA/TPU showed the ultimate strain unit to be about 0.08, twice as much as samples made of monolithic PLA. The lowest impact resistance and the amount of energy absorbed before collapsing were demonstrated by monolithic PLA with a honeycomb inner core. Regarding energy absorption, dual sandwich panels with PLA/TPU, including cylindrical and tetrahedral truss cores, showed the best results.
LeDDoanTDoK, et al.Investigating and comparing the mechanical behavior of multicellular structures made with PLA and ABS under lateral loading. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2023, online first: 1–10.
2.
RahmatabadiDGhasemiIBaniassadiM, et al.3D printing of PLA-TPU with different component ratios: fracture toughness, mechanical properties, and morphology. J Mater Res2022; 21: 3970–3981.
3.
TofailSAKoumoulosEPBandyopadhyayA, et al.Additive manufacturing: scientific and technological challenges, market uptake and opportunities. Mater Today2018; 21: 22–37.
4.
AhmedWAhmedSAlnajjarF, et al.Mechanical performance of three-dimensional printed sandwich composite with a high-flexible core. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2021; 235: 1382–1400.
5.
TaylorGWangXMasonL, et al.Flexural behavior of additively manufactured Ultem 1010: experiment and simulation. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24: 1003–1011.
6.
MonteiroJSardinhaMAlvesF, et al.Evaluation of the effect of core lattice topology on the properties of sandwich panels produced by additive manufacturing. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2021; 235: 1312–1324.
7.
JosephAMaheshVMaheshV. Effect of loading rates on the in-plane compressive properties of additively manufactured ABS and PLA-based hexagonal honeycomb structures. J Thermoplast Compos Mater2021: 1113–1134.
8.
AraújoHLeiteMRibeiroA, et al.The effect of geometry on the flexural properties of cellular core structures. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2019; 233: 338–347.
9.
LuBLiDTianX. Development trends in additive manufacturing and 3D printing. Eng J2015; 1: 85–89.
10.
GoharSHussainGAliA, et al.Mechanical performance of honeycomb sandwich structures built by FDM printing technique. J Thermoplast Compos Mater2021: 182–200.
11.
RamakrishnaDBala MuraliG, et al.Bio-inspired 3D-printed lattice structures for energy absorption applications: a review. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2022: 503–542.
12.
JoshiSCSheikhAA. 3D printing in aerospace and its long-term sustainability. Virtual Phys Prototyp2015; 10: 175–185.
13.
WangY-CChenTYehY-L. Advanced 3D printing technologies for the aircraft industry: a fuzzy systematic approach for assessing the critical factors. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2019; 105: 4059–4069.
14.
SreehithaV. Impact of 3D printing in automotive industry. Int J Mech Eng2017; 5: 91–94.
15.
LiuZZhangMBhandariB, et al.3D printing: printing precision and application in food sector. Trends Food Sci Technol2017; 69: 83–94.
16.
VanderploegALeeS-EMampM. The application of 3D printing technology in the fashion industry. Int J Fash Des Technol Educ2017; 10: 170–179.
17.
KhalediHRostamiyanY. Compressive and bending behavior of foam-filled composite sandwich panel with novel M-shaped core reinforced by nano-silica. J Thermoplast Compos Mater2022: 2482–2504.
18.
YangYChenYWeiY, et al.3D printing of shape memory polymer for functional part fabrication. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2016; 84: 2079–2095.
19.
LiuJMaYQureshiA, et al.Light-weight shape and topology optimization with hybrid deposition path planning for FDM parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018; 97: 1123–1135.
20.
GibsonIRosenDWStuckerB. The use of multiple materials in additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf Technol2010: 436–449.
21.
Baca LopezDMAhmadR. Tensile mechanical behaviour of multi-polymer sandwich structures via fused deposition modelling. Polymers (Basel)2020; 12: 651.
22.
AkhoundiBNabipourMKordiO, et al.Calculating printing speed in order to correctly print PLA/continuous glass fiber composites via fused filament fabrication 3D printer. J Thermoplast Compos Mater2021: 162–181.
23.
CastaniéBBouvetCGinotM. Review of composite sandwich structure in aeronautic applications. Compos C Open Access2020; 1: 100004.
24.
AshbyMF. The properties of foams and lattices. Philos Trans Royal Soc2006; 364: 15–30.
25.
SarvestaniHYAkbarzadehAMirbolghasemiA, et al.3D printed meta-sandwich structures: failure mechanism, energy absorption and multi-hit capability. Mater Des2018; 160: 179–193.
26.
BruJLeiteMRibeiroA, et al.Bioinspired structures for core sandwich composites produced by fused deposition modelling. Proc Inst Mech Eng L J Mater Des Appl2020; 234: 379–393.
27.
YeGBiHChenL, et al.Compression and energy absorption performances of 3D printed polylactic acid lattice core sandwich structures. 3D Print Addit Manuf2019; 6: 333–343.
28.
BuitragoBLSantiusteCSánchez-SáezS, et al.Modelling of composite sandwich structures with honeycomb core subjected to high-velocity impact. Compos Struct2010; 92: 2090–2096.
29.
RathbunHRadfordDXueZ, et al.Performance of metallic honeycomb-core sandwich beams under shock loading. Int J Solids Struct2006; 43: 1746–1763.
30.
AkayMHannaR. A comparison of honeycomb-core and foam-core carbon-fibre/epoxy sandwich panels. Composites1990; 21: 325–331.
31.
HaldarAGuanZCantwellW, et al.The compressive properties of sandwich structures based on an egg-box core design. Compos B Eng2018; 144: 143–152.
32.
ChenYYeLEscobedo-DiazJP, et al.Quasi-static and dynamic progressive crushing of CF/EP composite sandwich panels under in-plane localised compressive loads. Compos Struct2019; 222: 110839.
33.
SaadNASabahA. An investigation of new design of light weight structure of (ABS/PLA) by using of three dimensions printing. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference “standardization, prototypes and quality: a means of Balkan countries’ collaboration”, pp.3–4.
34.
AzzouzLChenYZarrelliM, et al.Mechanical properties of 3-D printed truss-like lattice biopolymer non-stochastic structures for sandwich panels with natural fibre composite skins. Compos Struct2019; 213: 220–230.
35.
FiedlerTÖchsnerA. Experimental analysis of the flexural properties of sandwich panels with cellular core materials. Mater Sci Eng Technol2008; 39: 121–124.
36.
SinghRKumarRFarinaI, et al.Multi-material additive manufacturing of sustainable innovative materials and structures. Polymers (Basel)2019; 11: 62.
37.
KumarRSinghRFarinaI. On the 3D printing of recycled ABS, PLA and HIPS thermoplastics for structural applications. PSU Rev Res2018; 2: 115–137.
38.
DineshSRajasekaranTDhanasekaranM, et al.Experimental testing on mechanical properties of sandwich structured carbon fibers reinforced composites. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng2018; 402: 012180.
39.
SugiyamaKMatsuzakiRUedaM, et al.3D printing of composite sandwich structures using continuous carbon fiber and fiber tension. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2018; 113: 114–121.
40.
LopesLSilvaACarneiroO. Multi-material 3D printing: the relevance of materials affinity on the boundary interface performance. Addit Manuf2018; 23: 45–52.
41.
ArifviantoBSatitiBESalimUA, et al.Mechanical properties of the FFF sandwich-structured parts made of PLA/TPU multi-material. Prog Addit Manuf2022: 1213–1223.
42.
ArifviantoBWirawanYBSalimUA, et al.Effects of extruder temperatures and raster orientations on mechanical properties of the FFF-processed polylactic-acid (PLA) material. Rapid Prototyp J2021; 27: 1761–1775.
43.
LanzottiAGrassoMStaianoG, et al.The impact of process parameters on mechanical properties of parts fabricated in PLA with an open-source 3-D printer. Rapid Prototyp J2015; 21: 604–617.
44.
ZahariaSMPopMAUdroiuR. Reliability and lifetime assessment of glider wing’s composite spar through accelerated fatigue life testing. Materials (Basel)2020; 13: 2310.
45.
BrischettoSFerroCGTorreR, et al.3D FDM production and mechanical behavior of polymeric sandwich specimens embedding classical and honeycomb cores. Curved Layer Struct2018; 5: 80–94.
46.
LiYGaoSDongR, et al.Additive manufacturing of PLA and CF/PLA binding layer specimens via fused deposition modeling. J Mater Eng Perform2018; 27: 492–500.
47.
RibeiroMCarneiroOSda SilvaAF. Interface geometries in 3D multi-material prints by fused filament fabrication. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 25: 38–46.
48.
YuJWangELiJ, et al.Static and low-velocity impact behavior of sandwich beams with closed-cell aluminum-foam core in three-point bending. Int J Impact Eng2008; 35: 885–894.
49.
BirmanVVoN. Wrinkling in sandwich structures with a functionally graded core. J Appl Mech2017; 84: 021002.
50.
LiTWangL. Bending behavior of sandwich composite structures with tunable 3D-printed core materials. Compos Struct2017; 175: 46–57.
51.
UstaFTürkmenHSScarpaF. Low-velocity impact resistance of composite sandwich panels with various types of auxetic and non-auxetic core structures. Thin-Walled Struct2021; 163: 107738.
52.
HanonMMDobosJZsidaiL. The influence of 3D printing process parameters on the mechanical performance of PLA polymer and its correlation with hardness. Procedia Manuf2021; 54: 244–249.
53.
LiHKangJHeC, et al.Mechanical properties and interfacial analysis of aluminum matrix composites reinforced by carbon nanotubes with diverse structures. Mater Sci Eng A2013; 577: 120–124.
54.
AdibiHZarandiAMHatamiO. Application of a cryogenic cooling system on the grinding operation of Polyether Ether Ketone Biomaterial (PEEK). Arab J Sci Eng2022: 1–15.
