» Articles » PMID: 36772018

Influence of Process Parameters on the Characteristics of Additively Manufactured Parts Made from Advanced Biopolymers

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2023 Feb 11
PMID 36772018
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Over the past few decades, additive manufacturing (AM) has become a reliable tool for prototyping and low-volume production. In recent years, the market share of such products has increased rapidly as these manufacturing concepts allow for greater part complexity compared to conventional manufacturing technologies. Furthermore, as recyclability and biocompatibility have become more important in material selection, biopolymers have also become widely used in AM. This article provides an overview of AM with advanced biopolymers in fields from medicine to food packaging. Various AM technologies are presented, focusing on the biopolymers used, selected part fabrication strategies, and influential parameters of the technologies presented. It should be emphasized that inkjet bioprinting, stereolithography, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, extrusion-based bioprinting, and scaffold-free printing are the most commonly used AM technologies for the production of parts from advanced biopolymers. Achievable part complexity will be discussed with emphasis on manufacturable features, layer thickness, production accuracy, materials applied, and part strength in correlation with key AM technologies and their parameters crucial for producing representative examples, anatomical models, specialized medical instruments, medical implants, time-dependent prosthetic features, etc. Future trends of advanced biopolymers focused on establishing target-time-dependent part properties through 4D additive manufacturing are also discussed.

Citing Articles

The Influence of Polymer Impregnating Materials on Structural Strengthening of 3D Printed Sand Molds Produced by Binder Jetting Method.

Rybak A, Javora R, Sekula R, Kmita G Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16(21).

PMID: 39518187 PMC: 11548544. DOI: 10.3390/polym16212978.


Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of ABS-like Resin for Stereolithography Versus ABS for Fused Deposition Modeling in Three-Dimensional Printing Applications for Odontology.

Goncalves V, Vieira C, Simonassi N, Lopes F, Youssef G, Colorado H Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16(20).

PMID: 39458749 PMC: 11511427. DOI: 10.3390/polym16202921.


Alginate-Gelatin Hydrogel Scaffolds; An Optimization of Post-Printing Treatment for Enhanced Degradation and Swelling Behavior.

Kaliampakou C, Lagopati N, Pavlatou E, Charitidis C Gels. 2023; 9(11).

PMID: 37998946 PMC: 10671076. DOI: 10.3390/gels9110857.


Multi-objective numerical optimization of 3D-printed polylactic acid bio-metamaterial based on topology, filling pattern, and infill density via fatigue lifetime and mass.

Dadashi A, Azadi M PLoS One. 2023; 18(9):e0291021.

PMID: 37756325 PMC: 10529563. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291021.

References
1.
Kang J, Zhang J, Zheng J, Wang L, Li D, Liu S . 3D-printed PEEK implant for mandibular defects repair - a new method. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2021; 116:104335. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104335. View

2.
Saleh Alghamdi S, John S, Choudhury N, Dutta N . Additive Manufacturing of Polymer Materials: Progress, Promise and Challenges. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13(5). PMC: 7957542. DOI: 10.3390/polym13050753. View

3.
Wu X, Wang S . Regulating MC3T3-E1 cells on deformable poly(ε-caprolactone) honeycomb films prepared using a surfactant-free breath figure method in a water-miscible solvent. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2012; 4(9):4966-75. DOI: 10.1021/am301334s. View

4.
Sharma N, Aghlmandi S, Dalcanale F, Seiler D, Zeilhofer H, Honigmann P . Quantitative Assessment of Point-of-Care 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cranial Implants. Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22(16). PMC: 8395180. DOI: 10.3390/ijms22168521. View

5.
Zarek M, Layani M, Cooperstein I, Sachyani E, Cohn D, Magdassi S . 3D Printing of Shape Memory Polymers for Flexible Electronic Devices. Adv Mater. 2015; 28(22):4449-54. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201503132. View