Cellulose and Graphene Based Polyurethane Nanocomposites for FDM 3D Printing: Filament Properties and Printability

Overview

Journal Polymers (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Date 2021 Apr 3

PMID 33803415

Citations 7

Authors

Izaskun Larraza

Julen Vadillo

Tamara Calvo-Correas

Alvaro Tejado

Sheila Olza

Cristina Pena-Rodriguez

Aitor Arbelaiz

Arantxa Eceiza

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

3D printing has exponentially grown in popularity due to the personalization of each printed part it offers, making it extremely beneficial for the very demanding biomedical industry. This technique has been extensively developed and optimized and the advances that now reside in the development of new materials suitable for 3D printing, which may open the door to new applications. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is the most commonly used 3D printing technique. However, filaments suitable for FDM must meet certain criteria for a successful printing process and thus the optimization of their properties in often necessary. The aim of this work was to prepare a flexible and printable polyurethane filament parting from a biocompatible waterborne polyurethane, which shows potential for biomedical applications. In order to improve filament properties and printability, cellulose nanofibers and graphene were employed to prepare polyurethane based nanocomposites. Prepared nanocomposite filaments showed altered properties which directly impacted their printability. Graphene containing nanocomposites presented sound enough thermal and mechanical properties for a good printing process. Moreover, these filaments were employed in FDM to obtained 3D printed parts, which showed good shape fidelity. Properties exhibited by polyurethane and graphene filaments show potential to be used in biomedical applications.

Citing Articles

Evaluating the Piezoelectric Energy Harvesting Potential of 3D-Printed Graphene Prepared Using Direct Ink Writing and Fused Deposition Modelling.

R H, Dhilipkumar T, V Shankar K, P K, Salunkhe S, Venkatesan R Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16(17).

PMID: 39274030 PMC: 11397054. DOI: 10.3390/polym16172397.

Impact of Rheology-Based Optimum Parameters on Enhancing the Mechanical Properties and Fatigue of Additively Manufactured Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene/Graphene Nanoplatelet Composites.

Hassanifard S, Behdinan K Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16(9).

PMID: 38732742 PMC: 11085430. DOI: 10.3390/polym16091273.

Nanocellulose-Based Biomaterial Ink Hydrogel for Uptake/Release of Bovine Serum Albumin.

Wan Jusoh W, Mohan D, Sajab M, Abdul P, Kaco H, Ding G Polymers (Basel). 2023; 15(4).

PMID: 36850120 PMC: 9967970. DOI: 10.3390/polym15040837.

An Overview of Various Additive Manufacturing Technologies and Materials for Electrochemical Energy Conversion Applications.

Huner B, Kisti M, Uysal S, Uzgoren I, Ozdogan E, Suzen Y ACS Omega. 2022; 7(45):40638-40658.

PMID: 36406513 PMC: 9670698. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.2c05096.

Effect of Cellulose Nanofibers' Structure and Incorporation Route in Waterborne Polyurethane-Urea Based Nanocomposite Inks.

Larraza I, Vadillo J, Calvo-Correas T, Tejado A, Martin L, Arbelaiz A Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(21).

PMID: 36365510 PMC: 9654412. DOI: 10.3390/polym14214516.

References

Harynska A, Gubanska I, Kucinska-Lipka J, Janik H . Fabrication and Characterization of Flexible Medical-Grade TPU Filament for Fused Deposition Modeling 3DP Technology. Polymers (Basel). 2019; 10(12). PMC: 6401970. DOI: 10.3390/polym10121304. View

Zhu X, Ng L, Hu G, Wu T, Um D, Macadam N . Hexagonal Boron Nitride-Enhanced Optically Transparent Polymer Dielectric Inks for Printable Electronics. Adv Funct Mater. 2020; 30(31):2002339. PMC: 7405982. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202002339. View

Chen Q, Mangadlao J, Wallat J, de Leon A, Pokorski J, Advincula R . 3D Printing Biocompatible Polyurethane/Poly(lactic acid)/Graphene Oxide Nanocomposites: Anisotropic Properties. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016; 9(4):4015-4023. DOI: 10.1021/acsami.6b11793. View

Lu Y, Larock R . Soybean-oil-based waterborne polyurethane dispersions: effects of polyol functionality and hard segment content on properties. Biomacromolecules. 2008; 9(11):3332-40. DOI: 10.1021/bm801030g. View

Wang Q, Ji C, Sun L, Sun J, Liu J . Cellulose Nanofibrils Filled Poly(Lactic Acid) Biocomposite Filament for FDM 3D Printing. Molecules. 2020; 25(10). PMC: 7287905. DOI: 10.3390/molecules25102319. View

Santamaria-Echart A, Fernandes I, Saralegi A, Costa M, Barreiro F, Corcuera M . Synthesis of waterborne polyurethane-urea dispersions with chain extension step in homogeneous and heterogeneous media. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2016; 476:184-192. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2016.05.016. View

Al-Dulimi Z, Wallis M, Tan D, Maniruzzaman M, Nokhodchi A . 3D printing technology as innovative solutions for biomedical applications. Drug Discov Today. 2020; 26(2):360-383. DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2020.11.013. View

Caffo M, Maria C, Merlo L, Lucia M, Marino D, Daniele M . Graphene in neurosurgery: the beginning of a new era. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2015; 10(4):615-25. DOI: 10.2217/nnm.14.195. View

Rastin H, Zhang B, Mazinani A, Hassan K, Bi J, Tung T . 3D bioprinting of cell-laden electroconductive MXene nanocomposite bioinks. Nanoscale. 2020; 12(30):16069-16080. DOI: 10.1039/d0nr02581j. View

10.

Tzounis L, Petousis M, Grammatikos S, Vidakis N . 3D Printed Thermoelectric Polyurethane/Multiwalled Carbon Nanotube Nanocomposites: A Novel Approach towards the Fabrication of Flexible and Stretchable Organic Thermoelectrics. Materials (Basel). 2020; 13(12). PMC: 7344427. DOI: 10.3390/ma13122879. View

11.

Soni B, Hassan E, Mahmoud B . Chemical isolation and characterization of different cellulose nanofibers from cotton stalks. Carbohydr Polym. 2015; 134:581-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.08.031. View

12.

Hojabri L, Kong X, Narine S . Fatty acid-derived diisocyanate and biobased polyurethane produced from vegetable oil: synthesis, polymerization, and characterization. Biomacromolecules. 2009; 10(4):884-91. DOI: 10.1021/bm801411w. View

13.

Hoeng F, Denneulin A, Bras J . Use of nanocellulose in printed electronics: a review. Nanoscale. 2016; 8(27):13131-54. DOI: 10.1039/c6nr03054h. View

14.

Gonzalez K, Garcia-Astrain C, Santamaria-Echart A, Ugarte L, Averous L, Eceiza A . Starch/graphene hydrogels via click chemistry with relevant electrical and antibacterial properties. Carbohydr Polym. 2018; 202:372-381. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.09.007. View

15.

Ghobadi M, Gharabaghi M, Abdollahi H, Boroumand Z, Moradian M . MnFeO-graphene oxide magnetic nanoparticles as a high-performance adsorbent for rare earth elements: Synthesis, isotherms, kinetics, thermodynamics and desorption. J Hazard Mater. 2018; 351:308-316. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.03.011. View

16.

Rastin H, Ormsby R, Atkins G, Losic D . 3D Bioprinting of Methylcellulose/Gelatin-Methacryloyl (MC/GelMA) Bioink with High Shape Integrity. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2022; 3(3):1815-1826. DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.0c00169. View

17.

Santamaria-Echart A, Ugarte L, Garcia-Astrain C, Arbelaiz A, Corcuera M, Eceiza A . Cellulose nanocrystals reinforced environmentally-friendly waterborne polyurethane nanocomposites. Carbohydr Polym. 2016; 151:1203-1209. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.06.069. View

18.

Stenvall E, Flodberg G, Pettersson H, Hellberg K, Hermansson L, Wallin M . Additive Manufacturing of Prostheses Using Forest-Based Composites. Bioengineering (Basel). 2020; 7(3). PMC: 7552696. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering7030103. View

19.

Shi K, Salvage J, Maniruzzaman M, Nokhodchi A . Role of release modifiers to modulate drug release from fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printed tablets. Int J Pharm. 2021; 597:120315. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2021.120315. View

20.

Ma T, Lv L, Ouyang C, Hu X, Liao X, Song Y . Rheological behavior and particle alignment of cellulose nanocrystal and its composite hydrogels during 3D printing. Carbohydr Polym. 2020; 253:117217. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.117217. View