Effect of processing conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer filaments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the mechanisms controlling the bond formation among extruded polymer filaments in the fused deposition modeling (FDM) process. The bonding phenomenon is thermally driven and ultimately determines the integrity and mechanical properties of the resultant prototypes. Design/methodology/approach The bond quality was assessed through measuring and analyzing changes in the mesostructure and the degree of healing achieved at the interfaces between the adjoining polymer filaments. Experimental measurements of the temperature profiles were carried out for specimens produced under different processing conditions, and the effects on mesostructures and mechanical properties were observed. Parallel to the experimental work, predictions of the degree of bonding achieved during the filament deposition process were made based on the thermal analysis of extruded polymer filaments. Findings Experimental results showed that the fabrication strategy, the envelope temperature and variations in the convection coefficient had strong effects on the cooling temperature profile, as well as on the mesostructure and overall quality of the bond strength between filaments. The sintering phenomenon was found to have a significant effect on bond formation, but only for the very short duration when the filament's temperature was above the critical sintering temperature. Otherwise, creep deformation was found to dominate changes in the mesostructure. Originality/value This study provides valuable information about the effect of deposition strategies and processing conditions on the mesostructure and local mechanical properties within FDM prototypes. It also brings a better understanding of phenomena controlling the integrity of FDM products. Such knowledge is essential for manufacturing functional parts and diversifying the range of application of this process. The findings are particularly relevant to work conducted on modeling of the process and for the formulation of materials new to the FDM process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".