Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The production technology of one of the essential structural parts of rubber-textile conveyor belts, the textile carcass, has not changed much since the start of their use. Specific changes occurred only in the material used when various synthetic fibres gradually replaced cotton. However, with the development of additive technologies, the possibility of changing the production technology is coming to the fore, when industrial textiles produced by classic weaving will not be used to make the carcass but a structure built by 3D printing. Confirmation of this change would represent a revolutionary breakthrough in the technology for rubber-textile conveyor belt production. Based on these facts, the possibility of using continuous 3D printing technology was verified to print a structure that would replace the technical fabric used in the conveyor belt carcass. As part of the research, the Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), and Stereolithography (SLA) technologies were verified. Experimental specimens with the dimensions of 145 x 145 x 185 mm were produced in three different positions: at an angle (45°), horizontally, and vertically. The specimens were made of three types of filament: SLA (Elastic 50A), SLS (TPU 1301), and FDM (Flexfill 92A); for each of the three positions of the specimen, filament consumption and printing time were determined due to the use of support material. Created specimens were then assessed regarding their production possibility and achievement of the desired structure.

Keywords

Additive manufacturing rubber-textile conveyor belt thermoplastic polyurethane flexible materials carcass

Introduction

The structure of rubber-textile conveyor belts has not significantly changed in the entire period of their use. It consists of an upper covering layer, a lower covering layer, a carcass, and other additional structural elements that increase its resistance or improve the functional use of conveyor belts. The same applies to conveyor belt manufacturing technologies, where no fundamental changes have been implemented.

However, with the progress of knowledge in manufacturing technologies, more questions arise about whether it is not possible to replace the manufacturing procedures and technologies for rubber-textile conveyor belts and their structural parts with new, more progressive ones. These ideas are supported by the fact that new manufacturing technologies are gradually being promoted in various areas that were impossible until now, thus replacing formerly used ones.

Among the areas closely related to rubber-textile conveyor belts, with an enormous potential for additive technologies’ application, is the manufacturing of various textile materials. However, research on additive technologies use in textiles has lagged behind other fields until recently, mainly due to the difficulty of achieving textiles’ unique properties, such as strength, flexibility, etc., using a different manufacturing technology than the additive ones.¹ Over time, however, it became clear that additive technologies bring several advantages to textile manufacturing, significantly reducing production time and costs.² Based on these facts, it is thus possible to ask a scientific question whether additive technologies can also be used in the manufacturing of so-called technical textile materials used to create the carcass of a rubber-textile conveyor belt or to manufacture a structure that could replace traditional form of technical textiles. Currently available and used additive technologies and materials give such a possibility. The above statement can be supported by findings published on additive technologies.

Plastic prints' most common additive technology is fused deposition modeling (FDM) and fused fabrication (FFF), which produce objects with minimal cost, time, and waste. The printing process itself is described in these publications.^3,4,5,6,7 There are countless materials for printing in the form of a filament.^8,9,10,11 It always depends on the specimen’s function or material the customer wants. The size and shape are proportional to the printer’s size.

The most used material is polylactic acid (polylactic acid) – PLA. This material is not of oil origin but a fully degradable material such as corn, potato starch, and sugar cane. It can be declared a renewable source of raw materials - bio-based, compostable, thermoplastic polyester, which is being increasingly industrially used.^11,12,13 Another widely used material is acrylonitrile butadiene styrene – ABS, plus its variants ABSi (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene + impact modifier), ABS-T (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene + methyl-methacrylate), ABS-ESD7 (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene-electrostatic dissipative), ABS-M30i (It is a particular type of ABS material i.e. intended for use in medical applications and the production of medical devices and instruments). Being a petroleum product, it is highly recommended to melt it under ventilation because of its smell. The material has advantages from physical and mechanical properties, characterized by high-impact strength and rigidity. It is a non-biodegradable material.^14–18 During nozzle heating on the 3D printer, partial decomposition and emissions of solid particles and volatile gases occur, which can degrade indoor air quality. It has been proven that particle emissions during 3D printing of ABS material were higher than with PLA material. Inhalation of particles that pass through the respiratory tract can lead to adverse health effects in humans, including allergies, asthma, or lung disease.^19,20 Loads of experimental articles have been published on analyzing individual materials (the nature of thermoplastics materials, the thickness of the nozzle-applied layer, layer orientation, raster angle, and CT tomography to detect air cavities). Wu et al.¹⁷ studied the impact of the applied layer’s thickness and various angles of the orientation raster on the mechanical properties of samples printed from two types of plastics: ABS and PEEK. Monkova et al.²¹ researched the ability of ABS plastic material to absorb excessive sound noise levels. The main aspects of the analysis were changes in the filling’s internal structures (Cartesian, octagonal, diamond, and star) with different volume ratios. The expertise resulted in knowledge of the impact of noise absorption in ABS material and the FDM method.

Thermoplastic urethane - TPU is a common material for FDM method 3D printers, with a function of printed part’s flexibility in impact resistance and thermal plasticity. Prajapati et al.²² were inspired by the surrounding nature when creating individual cell’ designs based on a sea urchin morphology. The structure can be used for special functional requirements, such as light midsoles. Sousa et al.²³ analyzed and developed new optimized sports mouth and teeth protectors printed on a 3D printer. The experiment focused on impact absorption, using TPU, PLA, PMMA (Polymethyl methacrylate), and HIPS (High-impact polystyrene) as materials for comparison). Lee et al.²⁴ analyzed possibilities of personal protective equipment manufacturing, where they confirmed the absorbance of 5J for TPU materials - 3D printed personal protective equipment (e.g., knee pads).

Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) is a powder sintering technology with its printing principle: filling a chamber with given powder heated to a temperature slightly below the material’s melting point. Using the blade, a thin layer is applied to the chamber surface, on which the CO₂ laser creates a trajectory of a given layer according to the CAD model. In contrast, the laser creates sintering of powder particles.^25,26 Lopes Ana C. et al.²⁷ predicted the material properties in the SLS method when the old/new powder ratio changes. They found out that degradation impacts the weight as well as material properties. They recommended that it be best to use a 70 new/30 old ratio. They refuted the manufacturer’s recommendation of a 50/50 ratio. Many research works are based on optimizing printing parameters and their effect on the quality of geometric tolerances and shape, as well as surface integrity and material properties.^18,22,28,29

We can state that current knowledge of additive technologies, regarding methodology and materials, has enough prerequisites to research their practical use in textile materials and textile structures manufacturing for rubber-textile conveyor belts and manufacturing of their structural components.

Additive technologies’ use in textile materials production was verified by Fajardo et al.³⁰ Fajardo et al.’s study opens a vital research area on the mechanical resistance of 3D-printed textile structures. This research of his is a continuation of several research tasks from the recent past.^31,32,33

Based on the mentioned facts, a prerequisite has been created for additive technologies to make the rubber-textile conveyor belts’ carcass. As part of the research, however, individual technologies must be verified³⁴ as materials and procedures to create a structure to manufacture the rubber-textile conveyor belt carcass. At the same time, its properties need to correspond to the properties of industrial textiles produced by conventional technologies deployed in rubber-textile conveyor belt carcass manufacturing.

Without meeting the mentioned conditions,³⁵ it is impossible to produce a conveyor belt with identical properties to the conveyor belt made by the previous technological procedure.³⁶ A new approach to constructing and creating conveyor belts must fully maintain their mechanical properties to operate reliably.³⁷ However, such research needs to be in several stages. Various analyses can be performed within these stages, e.g., Metrotomography.³⁸ The study aims to reveal possible modifications in constructing conveyor belts that could be undesirable.³⁹ At the same time, it is necessary to substantiate the experimental measurements using mathematical modeling methods.⁴⁰ In the scope of the presented paper, the described research aims to check whether additive technologies can be used to create a variant that would replace standard industrial textiles for creating the rubber-textile conveyor belt carcass.

The study’s novelty is that the research focused on the possibility of replacing classic rubber-textile conveyor belt construction and modifying the production technology used so far. As part of the presented research, the options for using additive technologies in rubber-textile conveyor belts are being verified in more detail. After reviewing the literature available, we can conclude that research like this has not been carried out. However, the use of additive technologies in textile production is not new. The study extends the knowledge and application possibilities in additive technologies in the context of hardware development and printing possibilities. The created structures have the potential to replace classic fabrics. However, this requires confirmation in the following research stages, while other questions must not be neglected, such as, e.g., material and mechanical properties.

Material and methods

Manufacturing of textile structures for rubber-textile conveyor belt carcasses (Figure 1) has undergone gradual development in terms of material and technology. Initially, cotton was used to manufacture technical textiles for the conveyor belt carcass. Gradually, however, with progress in artificial fibers, several synthetic fibers began to be used. Aramid fibers and aromatic polyester fibers dominate the production of technical textiles for conveyor belts.

Figure 1.

Example of a rubber-textile conveyor belt composition with marked textile structure.⁴¹

3D printing enables a rapid change in the degree of vertical integration, describing the fluctuation of vertical integration due to innovation, where everything depends on the nature of the considered innovation. While incremental innovation is not expected to lead to significant changes, architectural innovation tends to increase integration and thus radical innovation, which leads to different hypotheses and results in research into 3D printing for manufacturing, which leads to new hypotheses for industry. There were also studies of the classification of materials used in the 3D printing process, described in their work by Ranjan et al.⁴²

The use of additive technologies to manufacture rubber-textile conveyor belt carcasses currently appears to be a logical step corresponding to the latest trends and knowledge on the possibility of applying and using additive manufacturing technology.

There are several reasons why additive technologies have not yet been used to create structural parts of rubber-textile conveyor belts. The reasons are structural and technological, all relating to limiting factors and properties that have not allowed their use for this product type.

One of the main limiting features of 3D printers is the printed object’s size, depending on the printing base size; when the object needs to be removed after printing, the base is cleaned, and the printing job starts again to continue printing. However, this is no longer the case. The problem is solved by, e.g., an FDM printer with a continuous belt (continuous 3D printing).

Thanks to a moving belt, a specimen can be printed for as long as desired, longitudinally to the Z axis. The structure of the printing head is currently limited to turning 30°, 45°, and 60° towards the moving belt, see Figure 2. The solution has two fundamental advantages, namely non-stop printing and significant reduction of support structures when printing layers at an angle of 45°. The printer with a moving belt is not a novelty; its mention dates back to 2008 when it was introduced at the RepRap forum, while MakerBot Inc. had manufactured its prototype. However, the printing community is unfamiliar with the solution, mainly due to its high purchase price.⁴³

Figure 2.

Scheme of a continuous 3D printing.

The additive technology potential in rubber-textile belts lies in the fact that they can be applied to manufacture a basic structure of the conveyor belt carcass, thus replacing the industrial textiles used so far. Thanks to knowledge development on materials used in additive manufacturing, a significant assumption exists that a structure can be manufactured that will replace industrial textiles. At the same time, such a solution can bring a significant positive change.

However, verifying the hypothesis requires research divided into several independent steps. Its course is described in the following block diagram (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

The process of finding a suitable 3D printing method.

The block diagram shows a process of scientific hypothesis verification to find a proper 3D printing method to produce a structure that would replace the industrial textile forming the conveyor belt’s carcass.

Theory

One of the essential structural components of rubber-textile conveyor belts is their textile carcass, made from a particular type of textile fabric called Segel fabrics. Segel fabric is an alternative name for technical fabric (conveyor belt fabric) used for the belts. Segel fabric serves as the rubber-textile conveyor belt’s reinforcement and supporting structure. It is made of polyester fiber (PES) and polyamide fiber (PA). Segel fabric is woven on a loom with a unique weft mechanism construction. Segel fabric is pressed into rubber during the rubber-textile conveyor belt production under high temperatures and pressure. The fibers used to produce Segel fabric must meet specific requirements, the most important of which are physical and mechanical properties. These are checked experimentally, with a focus on strength and elasticity. Properties of selected conveyor belt fabrics are given in Tab. 1.

Table 1.

Properties of selected conveyor belt fabrics (Segel fabrics).⁴⁴

Type of fabrics	Warp strength (N.mm⁻¹)	Weft strength (N.mm⁻¹)
EP (warp – PES, weft PA66)	120-900	60-120
P (warp – PA6, weft PA6)	160-915	70-120
EE (warp – PES, weft PES)	166-270	60-210
EPP (warp1 – PES, warp2- PA66, weft – PA66)	500-1300	200-400
DPP (warp1 – p-Aramid, warp2 – PA66, weft – PA66)	760-2400	120-160

In principle, it is a technical fabric made from viscose woven yarn, a high-strength polyamide or polyester yarn. Technical fabrics are generally characterized by high strength along the warp and weft. They are woven in a canvas weave, warp-reinforced canvas, and twill. In Figure 4, a simple canvas weave can be seen.

Figure 4.

Canvas weave.

Weaving takes place in special weaving machines adapted for technical fabric production. The warp threads are evenly distributed in the prescribed length and width, thanks to weaving. Longitudinal (warp) and transverse (weft) threads cross during weaving. The threads are thus woven perpendicular to each other. The point of contact where the warp and weft thread cross is called the binding point. Crossing the warp and weft threads is called the weave of the fabric.

Technical fabrics are impregnated to improve the cohesion of textile and rubber. The primary characteristic of a textile fabric is its density in the warp and weft, indicated by the number of threads per 10 cm or 1 m in the weft warp. The final textile fabric strength on warp and weft depends on the number of threads and their weight.

Canvas weave

The canvas weave has a very dense binding. Its structure is realized by alternating the binding of the weft and warp-tied point. The weft thread passes (is bound) alternately over the warp and then under the adjacent base thread. The structure ensures an extraordinarily strong binding, preventing the weft and warp from moving against each other, resulting in a strong and rigid fabric.

Twill weave

Twill is a weave of fabric characterized by a set of parallel rows running along the fabric surface from left to right or vice versa. In principle, we distinguish warp twill Figure 5(a)) and weft twill Figure 5(b)). Depending on the row’s direction, left twill or right twill can be determined.

Figure 5.

Example of the warp and weft Twill structure.

Results

Research specimen characteristic

A 3D model of an experimental specimen was created for the research using the PTC Creo software Parametric 9. The 3D specimen was modeled as a textile imitation. Horizontal fibers were woven with vertical fibers just like actual fabric. This means that in certain specimen areas, vertical fiber was omitted when designing the 3D model to follow the structure as it is in the real fabric specimen. The diameter of horizontal fibers was 2 mm, and vertical fibers was 1.5 mm. The 3D specimen model and a detailed view of the fibers' location can be seen in Figure 6.

Figure 6.

A 3D model of textile imitation.

For our research, selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modeling (FDM), and stereolithography (SLA) were used to manufacture several pieces of textile specimens. The experimental specimens were planned to be produced in three distinct positions:

• at an angle (45°),

• horizontally (XY),

• vertically (XZ).

Different material consumption and printing lengths were planned for each position due to a support structure. Figure 7 shows the method of marking three distinct positions in the experimental specimen manufacturing.

Figure 7.

Method of marking positions during experimental specimens manufacturing (a) at an angle – 45°, (b) horizontally – XY, (c) vertically – XZ.

Every production method uses a different type of material with slightly different requirements; the individual mechanical properties are listed in Table 2. The manufacturer of the input material gives the values from the technical sheets.^45,46

Table 2.

Mechanical properties of materials and technology.

Technology and material	SLA (elastic 50A)	SLS (TPU 1301)	FDM (Flexfill 92A)
Ultimate tensile strength	3.23 MPa	7 MPa	7.5 MPa
Elongation at break	160%	250%	600%
Shore hardness	50A	86 A	91A

Fused deposition modeling technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

A DeltiQ two plus printer by TRILAB Company produced experimental specimens using FDM. The printer features a working chamber with dimensions of 250 mm (X, Y) × 500 mm (Z), featuring a FlexPrint two extruder, with which flexible and rigid materials can be printed. The printer allows to produce models with a variable diameter of the print nozzle, from 0.1 to 0.4 mm. The printer’s extruder can be heated up to 250°C. A material with the commercial designation FlexFill 92A (Fillamentum, Czech Republic) was used to print experimental specimens. FlexFill materials are thermoplastic polyurethanes. TPU material is an amorphous plastic with properties like solid rubber, i.e., high elasticity and impact resistance. TPU material is resistant to oils and fuels but not acids, alkalis, and alcohol. According to the SHORE, the designation of the material as 92A indicates its hardness. When using FDM technology, the so-called support structures need to be used in places of overhanging or bridging shapes, which need to be manually removed once the printing is completed. The specimens were planned to be produced in three positions (45°, XY, and XZ), see Figure 7, when different consumption of material and different printing lengths was planned for each position due to support structures, see Table 3. Figure 8 shows the placement of 3D specimen models on the Slicer’s base.

Table 3.

Consumption of filament FDM.

Position	45°	XY
Filament consumption	110 g	30 g
Printing time	16 h	5 h

Figure 8.

Position of 3D specimen models in the Slicer (a) at an angle – 45°, (b) horizontally – XY.

With this technology, the specimen was printed in only one position (XY), as the printing at an angle of 45° would require several supports. Thus, specimen production using this technology would be unprofitable. Vertical printing by this technology was not realized due to the “fusion” of FlexFill 92A material; therefore, in Figure 9, the experimental specimen only printed horizontally can be seen. The specimen was printed under the melting temperature of 230°C, preheating the substrate to 60°C, and the filament diameter was 2.85 mm. The visual specimen quality is the lowest level compared to SLS and SLA technologies. The specimen features shrunken material at specific points (Figure 9), which cannot be removed without damaging the specimen’s structure and the thin fibers that occur when the printing head moves and the material solidifies quickly.

Figure 9.

FDM technology experimental specimen.

Selective laser sintering technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

A 3D printer, EOS P396, was used to produce specimens with this technology, with a laser with a maximum rated power of 70 W. The printer’s chamber size is 340 x 340 x 620 mm, and the scanning speed is up to 6 m.s⁻¹. The material used to produce the specimen was EOS TPU 1301 powder, mixed in a 50:50 ratio with a similar powder type already used. The ratio for integrating new and used powder is called the refresh factor, which the manufacturer recommends. This type of powder guarantees flexibility and good shock absorption. The hardness of the resulting print is, according to SHORE, 86A. A significant advantage of this technology is that no support structures need to be used when manufacturing products, mainly because no significant internal stresses during printing occur, and the powder is as light as self-supporting. During one printing job, the experimental specimens were made in three positions (45°, XY, and XZ). Due to the absence of support structures, the printing volume is the same for all specimens. With this technology, the specimen was made in all three positions. Figure 10(a)) shows the position of 3D specimen models on the base, while Figure 10(b)) shows the experimental specimens already made by SLS technology in all three positions.

Figure 10.

(a) Position of 3D specimen models on the base, (b) produced experimental specimens in all three positions.

Although the manufactured specimens shown in Figure 11 look alike, the shape or orientation of their horizontal fibers (warps) differ for each specimen. The elasticity of specimens produced in three distinct positions is remarkably similar to the touch. The most flexible is the specimen made horizontally (XY). The specimens printed vertically (XZ) and at an angle (45°) have undetectable elasticity. In Figure 11, a different orientation of the horizontal fibers (warps) can be seen in specimens produced in distinct positions, resulting in additional flexibility and tensile strength.

Figure 11.

Orientation of horizontal fibers (warps) in positions (a) 45°, (b) XY, (c) XZ.

Stereolithography technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

A printer by Formlabs Form 3 with a spot size of 85 µm produced experimental specimens using SLA technology with a laser power of 250 mW. The printing size is 145 x 145 x 185 mm. Flexible 80 A Resin (hardness 80 A according to SHORE) was used to produce experimental specimens. It is one of the most rigid and elastic resins that imitates rubber. It resists bending, pulling, and compression well. One of the disadvantages of the SLA printer is that the support structures must also be printed. That is why, in practice, the volume of support structures is larger than the specimen, and after hardening with a UV light, manual removal of support structures is challenging. With this method, the specimens could have been printed in all three positions (45°, XY, and XZ), but with various times and resin consumptions, see Table 4.

Table 4.

Consumption of resin SLA.

Position	45°	XY	XZ
Resin consumption	90 mL	78 mL	72 mL
Printing time	14 h	4 h	8 h

Figures 12–14 show the position of 3D models of experimental specimens with support structures on the Slicer’s base and real-made experimental specimens from which the support structures need to be manually removed. In the mentioned figures, the textile model is indicated in blue.

Figure 12.

(a) Experimental specimen – 45° a) positioned on the Slicer’s base, b) produced by SLA technology.

Figure 13.

(a) Experimental specimen – (XY) a) positioned on the Slicer’s base, b) produced by SLA technology.

Figure 14.

(a) Experimental specimen – (XZ) a) positioned on the Slicer’s base, b) produced by SLA technology.

After manufacturing experimental specimens, the support structures needed to manufacture them had to be removed. The easiest was the removal in the specimen printed vertically; see Figure 15(c)) since the support structure was symmetrical to the specimen’s structure. That is why the output, when printing vertically, was the best for this technology. Removing material was impossible in the specimen printed horizontally; thus, the support structure remained unremoved, see Figure 15(b)). The specimen printed at an angle of 45°, shown in Figure 15(a)), was damaged during the support structure’s removal, mainly because of its density.

Figure 15.

Experimental specimens produced by SLA technology after removal of support structures a) 45°, b) XY, c) XZ.

The parameters shown in Tab. 5 were used to produce specimens.

Table 5.

Printing parameters.

Technology	Layer Thickness (mm)	Process chamber temperature (°C)	Removal chamber Temperature (°C)	Speed of printing (mm.s⁻¹)
SLS	120	171	130	2000
FDM	200	200	-	80
SLA	30	35	-	36

Conclusions

Additive technologies, in terms of hardware and used material, are at the level that opens up new possibilities for their use in production. These areas also include structural components for rubber-textile conveyor belts’ production, specifically their carcass. This field has not been considered in additive manufacturing until now, as the size of the produced specimens has limited production. However, when continuous 3D printing began to be used, conditions were created to research and verify the possibility of manufacturing the carcass of the rubber-textile conveyor belts. The research must be gradual and systematic to confirm or refute the production possibility and feasibility hypothesis. If the result is positive, a significant change can occur and be reflected in replacing existing technology.

Within the paper we present, the research was carried out, the objective of which was:

• To confirm or refute the hypothesis that 3D printing can produce a structure replacing industrial textiles in the production of rubber textile conveyor belts. The hypothesis was confirmed because we could make the desired structure.

• To produce a flexible belt structure that is as similar as possible to the textile. The application was confirmed thanks to the SLA method, which allows the printed fabric to behave like a production textile during bending.

• Analyze the most suitable methods and materials for 3D-printed belts. This task is fulfilled by the choice of SLS technology for producing flexible structures that will replace the carcass of the rubber-textile conveyor belts.

Using additive technologies to create structures that would replace technical fabric is not new. The novelty presented in the paper is in the replacement of industrial textiles in the rubber-textile conveyor belts. Its result will be a structural change in the internal conveyor belt composition, changing the rubber-textile conveyor belt production concept. Current production technology will have to be changed, thus implying a pre-condition for mechanical properties improvement in the conveyor belts. When researching available sources, we found no information that would present research focused like this in the past. The inspiration for our study was drawn from information on the development of additive technologies used in textile materials. The mechanical properties of the created structures will be investigated in detail in the ongoing research. The production technology modification aims to produce a conveyor belt prototype in which the designed structure would replace the industrial textile.

The paper only deals with the application and technological possibilities that have been confirmed, but another part of the research on mass production and print quality is underway. Print quality can be checked by CT tomography, optical microscope, tensile tests in one rod of 3D printed textile, and load predictions. In the next phase of our research, we will study the manufactured structure’s material and strength characteristics and compare them with the industrial textiles used so far.

The presented research result is an introduction to a long-term research project: a new conveyor belt’s structural design, its production technology, and a produced conveyor belt prototype. As a result, the research will continue to measure specimens’ mechanical properties, their mutual comparison, and a comparison with classic industrial textiles. At the same time, long-term monitoring in the form of experimental measurements will be used on testing rigs to obtain a wide range of information to achieve the project objective.

The obtained results have great application potential. In the future, it is possible to implement them in the production of classic conveyor belts. With their help, production can change significantly and become more efficient and of higher quality. However, the assumption needs to be confirmed by further research. Another possibility of applying the presented results is using created structures to improve rubber-textile conveyor belt quality when the designed structure can increase resistance, e.g., against puncture damage. The other possibility of using the knowledge is to develop structures that generate internal forces necessary to unfold the rubber-textile belts in the pipe conveyors. At the same time, the research results advance the possibilities of additive technologies application to an entirely new field (industrial textiles) and help the development and use of continuous 3D printing, with its deployment potential in actual industrial production. Finally, yet importantly, the knowledge obtained from the research can be applied to conveyor belt modularity.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work is a part of projects VEGA 1/0674/24, VEGA 1/0101/22, KEGA 005TUKE-4/2022, KEGA 018TUKE-4/2022, APVV- 21-0195, SP2023/088.

ORCID iD

Gabriel Fedorko

References

Chatterjee

Ghosh

. 3D printing of textiles: potential roadmap to printing with fibers. Adv Mater 2020; 32: e1902086. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201902086.

Chakraborty

Biswas

. 3D printing technology of polymer-fiber composites in textile and fashion industry: a potential roadmap of concept to consumer. Compos Struct 2020; 248: 112562. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112562.

Maurya

Malik

Sharma

, et al. Investigation of different parameters of cube printed using PLA by FDM 3D printer. Mater Today Proc 2022; 64: 1217–1222.

. Study on optimization of 3D printing parameters. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 2018; 392: 062050. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/392/6/062050.

Manoj Prabhakar

Saravanan

Haiter Lenin

, et al. A short review on 3D printing methods, process parameters, and materials. Mater Today Proc 2021; 45: 6108–6114.

Kamble

Khoje

Lele

. Recent developments in 3D printing technologies: review. In: 2018 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS), 14-15 June 2018, Madurai, India, 2018, pp. 468–473.

Saharudin

Hajnys

Kozior

, et al. Quality of surface texture and mechanical properties of PLA and PA-based material reinforced with Carbon fibers manufactured by FDM and CFF 3D printing technologies. Polymers 2021; 13: 1671. DOI: 10.3390/polym13111671.

Ensinger . Plastic solutions, https://www.ensingerplastics.com/en-us/shapes/products#/?filter=N4XyAA$$

ABC3D . Filamenty - tiskové struny, https://www.abc3d.cz/eshop/tiskove-struny-filamenty?f196=Filamenty%2520-%2520tiskové%2520struny&gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7Mun_eXY_gIVhgCLCh061Qa0EAAYAyAAEgJf2_D_BwE

10.

3Dtisk . Materiály pro tisk technologií FDM, https://www.3dtisk-online.cz/3d-tisk-brno-prehled-materialu-pro-3d/

11.

Materialpro3D . Tiskové struny - filamenty, https://www.materialpro3d.cz/tiskove-struny-filamenty/

12.

Benwood

Anstey

Andrzejewski

, et al. Improving the impact strength and Heat resistance of 3D printed models: structure, property, and processing correlationships during fused deposition modeling (FDM) of poly(lactic acid). ACS Omega 2018; 3: 4400–4411.

13.

Fogašová

Figalla

Danišová

, et al. PLA/PHB-based materials fully biodegradable under both industrial and home-composting conditions. Polymers 2022; 14: 4113. DOI: 10.3390/polym14194113.

14.

Chiulan

Frone

Brandabur

, et al. Recent advances in 3D printing of aliphatic polyesters. Bioengineering 2017; 5: 2–18.

15.

Kamelian

Saljoughi

Shojaee Nasirabadi

, et al. Modifications and research potentials of acrylonitrile/butadiene/styrene (ABS) membranes: a review. Polym Compos 2018; 39: 2835–2846.

16.

Rodríguez-Reyna

Mata

Díaz-Aguilera

, et al. Mechanical properties optimization for PLA, ABS and Nylon + CF manufactured by 3D FDM printing. Mater Today Commun 2022; 33: 104774.

17.

Sewiko

Romdonul Hakim

Noor Firdaus

, et al. Use of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene and polylactide filaments as basic materials for marine technology prototype. Int J Eng Sci || 2019; 8: 23–42.

18.

Banjanin

Vladić

Pál

, et al. Consistency analysis of mechanical properties of elements produced by FDM additive manufacturing technology. Materia 2018; 23: 73. DOI: 10.1590/s1517-707620180004.0584.

19.

Roberts

Rohr

Mikheev

, et al. Influence of airborne particulates on respiratory tract deposition of inhaled toluene and naphthalene in the rat. Inhal Toxicol 2018; 30: 19–28.

20.

Zhang

Wong

JPS

Davis

, et al. Characterization of particle emissions from consumer fused deposition modeling 3D printers. Aerosol Sci Technol 2017; 51: 1275–1286.

21.

Monkova

Vasina

Monka

, et al. Effect of the Pore shape and size of 3D-printed Open-Porous ABS materials on sound absorption performance. Materials 2020; 13: 4474. DOI: 10.3390/ma13204474.

22.

Prajapati

Kumar

Lin

, et al. Multi-material additive manufacturing with lightweight closed-cell foam-filled lattice structures for enhanced mechanical and functional properties. Addit Manuf 2022; 54: 102766.

23.

Sousa

Pinho

Piedade

. Mechanical properties of 3D printed mouthguards: influence of layer height and device thickness. Mater Des 2021; 203: 109624.

24.

Lee

Eom

Lee

. Evaluation of the mechanical properties of Porous thermoplastic polyurethane obtained by 3D printing for protective gear. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2019; 2019: 1–10.

25.

Lichovnik

Mizera

Sadilek

, et al. Influence of tumbling bodies on surface roughness and geometric deviations by additive SLS technology. Manuf Technol J 2020; 20: 342–346.

26.

Jevtic

Mladenovic

Milosevic

, et al. Dimensional accuracy of parts obtained by SLS technology. Struct Integr life-integritet i vek Konstr 2022; 22: 288–292.

27.

Lopes

Sampaio

ÁM

Silva

, et al. Prediction of SLS parts properties using reprocessing powder. Rapid Prototyp J 2021; 27: 496–506.

28.

Rajamani

Balasubramanian

Arunkumar

, et al. Experimental investigations and parametric optimization of process parameters on shrinkage characteristics of selective inhibition sintered high density polyethylene parts. Exp Tech 2018; 42: 631–644.

29.

Vande Ryse

Edeleva

Van Stichel

, et al. Setting the optimal laser power for sustainable powder bed fusion processing of elastomeric polyesters: a combined experimental and theoretical study. Materials 2022; 15: 385. DOI: 10.3390/ma15010385.

30.

Fajardo

Farez

Paltan

. Experimental analysis of the Relationship between textile structure, tensile strength and comfort in 3D printed structured fabrics. Polymers 2022; 15: 152. DOI: 10.3390/polym15010152.

31.

Melnikova

Ehrmann

Finsterbusch

. 3D printing of textile-based structures by fused deposition modelling (FDM) with different polymer materials. In: Broitman

(ed). 2014 Global Conference On Polymer And Composite Materials (PCM 2014), 2014. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/62/1/012018.

32.

Sabantina

Kinzel

Ehrmann

et al. Combining 3D printed forms with textile structures mechanical and geometrical properties of multi-material systems. In: 2015 Global Conference On Polymer And Composite Materials (PCM 2015), 16-19 May 2015, Beijing, China, 2015. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/87/1/012005

33.

Xiao

Y-Q

Kan

C-W

. Review on development and application of 3D-printing technology in textile and fashion design. COATINGS 2022; 12: 267. DOI: 10.3390/coatings12020267.

34.

Dip

Emu

Nafiz

MNH

, et al. 3D printing technology for textiles and fashion. Text Prog 2020; 52: 167–260.

35.

Lemmi

Barburski

Kabzinski

, et al. Study of the influence of vulcanization process parameters on the adhesion strength of textile-reinforced conveyor belts. Text Res J 2023; 93: 5345–5356.

36.

Lemmi

Barburski

Kabzinski

, et al. Effect of vulcanization process parameters on the tensile strength of carcass of textile-rubber reinforced conveyor belts. Materials 2021; 14: 7552.

37.

Barburski

. Analysis of the mechanical properties of conveyor belts on the three main stages of production. J Ind Text 2014; 45: 1322–1334.

38.

Fedorko

Molnár

Dovica

, et al. Analysis of defects in carcass of rubber–textile conveyor belts using metrotomography. J Ind Text 2017; 47: 1812–1829.

39.

Barburski

Góralczyk

Snycerski

. Analysis of changes in the internal structure of PA6.6/PET fabrics of different weave patterns under heat treatment. Fibres Text East Eur 2015: 23: 46–51.

40.

Krmela

Krmelová

. The material parameters for computational modeling of long-fibre composites with textile. Matec web conf 2018; 157: 01011.

41.

Conveyorbelt . Conveyor belt structure, https://www.theconveyorbelt.in/v-elt-in-coimbatore.htmlb

42.

Ranjan

Kumar

Kundu

, et al. A critical review on classification of materials used in 3D printing process. Mater Today Proc 2022; 61: 43–49.

43.

Sarabia-Vallejos

Rodríguez-Umanzor

González-Henríquez

, et al. Innovation in additive manufacturing using polymers: a survey on the technological and material developments. Polymers 2022; 14: 1351. DOI: 10.3390/polym14071351.

44.

Production overview of conveyor belt fabrics, https://www.kordarna.cz/en/conveyor-belt-fabrics/

45.

Setter

Wudy

. Investigation of the bonding behavior between thermosets and thermoplastic elastomers in multi-material additive manufacturing. Polym Test 2024; 132: 108366.

46.

Kardos

Told

Pentek

, et al. Surface disinfection change the mechanical, structural and biological properties of flexible materials used for additive manufacturing of medical devices. Mater Des 2024; 237: 112616.

Additive technologies use to create structures for technical fabric replacement

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Material and methods

Theory

Canvas weave

Twill weave

Results

Research specimen characteristic

Fused deposition modeling technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

Selective laser sintering technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

Stereolithography technology use to create a structure for technical fabric replacement

Conclusions

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References