Journal Pre-proof

The mechanical testing and performance analysis of polymer-fibre composites

prepared through the additive manufacturing

Vigneshwaran Shanmugam, Deepak Joel Johnson, Karthik Babu, Sundarakannan

Rajendran, Arumugaprabu Veerasimman, Uthayakumar Marimuthu, Sunpreet Singh,
Oisik Das, Rasoul Esmaeely Neisiany, Mikael S. Hedenqvist, Filippo Berto, Seeram
Ramakrishna

PII: S0142-9418(20)32154-1
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106925
Reference: POTE 106925

To appear in: Polymer Testing

Received Date: 20 July 2020

Revised Date: 9 September 2020
Accepted Date: 20 October 2020

Please cite this article as: V. Shanmugam, D.J. Johnson, K. Babu, S. Rajendran, A. Veerasimman,
U. Marimuthu, S. Singh, O. Das, R.E. Neisiany, M.S. Hedenqvist, F. Berto, S. Ramakrishna, The
mechanical testing and performance analysis of polymer-fibre composites prepared through the additive
manufacturing, Polymer Testing, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106925.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Vigneshwaran Shanmugam: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review &

Editing Deepak Joel Johnson: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Karthik

Babu: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Sundarakannan Rajendran:

Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Arumugaprabu Veerasimman: Writing -

Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Uthayakumar Marimuthu: Supervision, Writing -

of
Review & Editing Sunpreet Singh: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Oisik

ro
Das: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Rasoul Esmaeely

-p
Neisiany: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Mikael S.
re
Hedenqvist: Writing - Review & Editing Filippo Berto: Writing - Review & Editing Seeram
lP

Ramakrishna: Supervision, Writing - Review & Editing

na
ur
Jo
1 The mechanical testing and performance analysis of polymer-fibre composites prepared
2 through the additive manufacturing

3 Vigneshwaran Shanmugama,*, Deepak Joel Johnsonb, Karthik Babuc, Sundarakannan Rajendrana,

4 Arumugaprabu Veerasimmana, Uthayakumar Marimuthua,*, Sunpreet Singhd, Oisik Dase,1,
5 Rasoul Esmaeely Neisianyf,*, Mikael S. Hedenqviste, Filippo Bertog, Seeram Ramakrishnad,*
a
6 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Kalasalingam Academy of Research and Education,
7 Krishnankoil 626 126, India
b
8 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of
9 Medical and Technical Sciences, Thandalam, Chennai 602 105, India
c

of
10 Center for Polymer Composites and Natural Fibre Research, Tamil Nadu 625005, India
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117575,

ro
11
12 Singapore

13
14
e -p
Department of Fibre and Polymer Technology, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry,
Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm 100 44, Sweden
re
f
15 Department of Materials and Polymer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hakim Sabzevari
lP

16 University, Sabzevar 9617976487, Iran

g
17 Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and
na

18 Technology NTNU, S.P. Andersens Veg 3, Trondheim 7031, Norway

19
ur

20
Jo

21

22

23

24 *Corresponding Author Emails:

25 Vigneshwaran Shanmugam: [email protected]

26 Uthayakumar Marimuthu: [email protected]

27 Rasoul Esmaeely Neisiany: [email protected]

28 Seeram Ramakrishna: [email protected]

1
Present address: Department of Engineering Sciences and Mathematics, Luleå University of
Technology, Luleå, SE-97187, Sweden.
1
29 ABSTRACT

30 The development of fibre composites in recent years has been remarkably strong, owing to their

31 high performance and durability. Various advancements in fibre composites are emerging

32 because of their increased use in a myriad of applications. One of the popular processing

33 methods is additive manufacturing (AM), however, polymer-fibre composites manufactured

34 through AM have a significantly lower strength compared to the conventional manufacturing

of
35 processes, for instance, injection moulding. This article is a comprehensive review of the

ro
36 mechanical testing and performance analysis of polymer-fibre composites fabricated through

37 -p
AM, in particular fused deposition modelling (FDM). In particular, the review highlights the
re
38 effect of the various processing parameters, involved in the FDM of polymer-fibre composites,

on the observed mechanical properties. In addition, the thermal properties of FDM based fibre
lP

39

40 composites are also briefly reviewed. Overall, the review article has been structured to provide
na

41 an impetus for researchers in the concerned engineering domain to gain an insight into the
ur

42 mechanical properties of fibre-reinforced polymeric composites manufactured through AM.

Jo

43 Keywords: Additive manufacturing; 3D printing; Fused deposition modelling; Natural fibre

44 composites; Mechanical properties.

45

46

47

48

2
49

50 1. Introduction

51 Additive manufacturing (AM) is a novel manufacturing process, generally known as 3D printing,

52 which has been utilised for the processing of metals and polymers [1–3]. Products produced

53 through AM are developed by adding layer-by-layer of material, whereas, in traditional methods,

54 products are developed through subtractive manufacturing methods [4–6]. The low cost and

of
55 versatility in developing complex designs have increased the utilisation of AM in modern

ro
56 applications [7] such as product development in the automotive industry, aerospace/biomedical

57
-p
applications, the development of arts and designs, architecture, etc. [8,9]. The development of
re
58 AM has evolved vigorously after 2013 owing to their increased use in the aforementioned
lP

59 applications, and the number of publications has increased markedly over the last five years [10].

At present, AM technology is widely used in aerospace, electronics, and biomedical applications

na

60

61 [11–13]. AM is a flexible manufacturing process that develops the product directly from the
ur

62 design file, thereby reducing product lead time and material waste, and a complex design can
Jo

63 also be developed economically [14]. However, there are few drawbacks in the AM process,

64 such as slow mass production and limited material use, which restricts it in a number of

65 applications. In particular, AM has very selective material applications [15–17], since the

66 additive manufactured materials are largely found only as a prototype model [18]. In this regard,

67 the multiple printing head technique has been developed where composite material can be

68 created using controlled material combinations and properties [11]. The development of fibre

69 composites is a more challenging approach for the AM process. Several aspects need to be

70 considered for the development of fibre composites, including fibre/matrix weight percentage,

71 fibre/matrix interactions, fibre length, fibre orientation, and fibre type [19,20]. Five main AM

3
72 fabrication techniques for polymeric materials are stereolithography (SLA), laminated object

73 manufacturing (LOM), fused deposition modelling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and

74 multi-jet fusion (MJF) [21,22].

75 Polymers are the most widely used materials in many applications due to their high performance,

76 ease of production, and low cost. In AM, polymers are used in a variety of forms, such as

77 reactive, liquid, and thermoplastic melts [23]. Filled polymers have been developed in recent

of
78 years through the AM process, and commonly used fillers are carbon fibres, carbon nanotubes,

ro
79 nanoparticles, nanoparticles/nanofillers, and various synthetic fibres [24]. The addition of these

80 -p
fillers improved the mechanical properties of the composites manufactured through AM [25].
re
81 The development of fibre/filler reinforced polymers provides a synergistic effect in terms of

improved performance and polymer characteristics [26,27]. This could also benefit other AM
lP

82

83 processes in the development of fibre/filled composites. The addition of fibre to the material
na

84 could reduce the bending and warping during deposition [20]. Some changes need to be made to
ur

85 the AM process for the development of filled polymers. Short and discontinuous fibres are
Jo

86 preferred in AM due to the complexity linked to the use of long and continuous fibres. Through

87 AM, fibre composites can be produced cost-effectively. However, AM of fibre composites is still

88 at its infancy where some critical issues need to be resolved.

89 Fused deposition modelling (FDM) is one of the versatile additive manufacturing techniques

90 (AM) used for 3D printing of polymers and their composites. In this process, successive layers of

91 material are deposited using a computer-machine interface to create a 3D object. FDM-based

92 polymer research has increased in recent years due to its flexibility in the production of polymer

93 and fibre-based composites. FDM-based polymers have the potential to be used in different

94 applications, Figure 1 shows the scope of FDM based polymers in various applications.

4
 95 Relatively few review articles are available on FDM-based polymer [28–30] and the real interest

96 in 3D printing of polymers in the contemporary research is to achieve enhanced strength. The

97 available review articles advocate the need for the development of 3D printed polymers and

98 composites. However, there is a dearth of a dedicated and comprehensive review article

99 explaining the mechanical and thermal properties of FDM-based reinforced fibre composites. In

100 this light, the current article discusses the state of the art of FDM-based fibre composite

101 performance by considering various constraints and challenges. The implications of layer

of
102 bonding, fibre matrix characteristics, fibre matrix interface and FDM printing variables on the

ro
103 mechanical and thermal performance of FDM fibre composites have been critically reviewed and

104
-p
discussed to meet the research needs of developing high-strength fibre composites through FDM-
re
105 AM.
lP
na
ur
Jo

106

107 Figure 1. Scope of FDM based polymers/composites in various applications.

5
108 1.1. Steps involved in AM

109 AM involves a series of processes, from design development to final product manufacturing,

110 which varies depending on the type of manufacturing method used [31]. These primary processes

111 are common and remain the same for any type of manufacturing, whether it is a prototype or a

112 functional product. The steps involved in the AM process are shown in Figure 2.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na

113

114 Figure 2. Steps in AM – digital model to 3D model

ur

115
Jo

116 1.1.1. Production of the digital model

117 Initially, the digital model of the part is designed through CAD software in this process. Reverse

118 engineering and 3D scanning are also used to develop a digital model [32].

119 1.1.2. .STL conversion

120 Secondly, the digital model is converted into the Standard Triangle Language (.STL) or Standard

121 Tessellation Language file [33–36]. The .STL file stores information on model surface geometry

122 [37–40].

6
123 1.1.3. Slicing

124 After conversion, the .STL file is fed to the slicer program [41]. Slicing is crucial in determining

125 the quality of the printed parts [42]. The slicer is used to generate G-codes based on the

126 information in the .STL file [43–45]. The G-code produced is similar to the CNC machine codes

127 and it defines the movement of the extruder and the platform direction during printing [46–48].

128 1.1.4 Printing

of
129 After converting the .STL file to G-codes, the 3D printer is ready to print the design. The

ro
130 printing varies depending on the type of AM process involved. In FDM, the nozzle moves and

131 -p
deposits the molten filament layer by layer, based on the G-code instructions [48]. The
re
132 movement of the extruding nozzle, the amount of the material extruded, and the extrusion time

are controlled by the G-code. When the entire model printing is completed, some post-processing
lP

133

134 needs to be done to achieve a proper product finish [49]. Post-processing methods vary
na

135 according to the material and manufacturing methods used [50,51].

ur

136 2. AM of fibre-reinforced polymers

Jo

137 The strength of polymer composites can be significantly improved through fibre reinforcement.

138 Fibre-reinforced polymers manufactured using AM techniques could have a significant impact

139 on AM of polymers. Fibre matrix interactions and void formation are the two important

140 considerations to be addressed in AM of fibre composites. Various techniques such as FDM,

141 LOM, SLS, and SLA are involved in AM of fibre composites. Compared to all these techniques,

142 FDM is the most preferred method for the production of fibre composites due to its scalability,

143 material flexibility, and precision.

144 2.1. Fused deposition modelling

7
145 FDM is the preferred method for the manufacture of polymers due to the simple process, which

146 is also more economical than other techniques. FDM is part of the material extrusion

147 manufacturing process used to process thermoplastic polymers [52,53]. Some common

148 thermoplastic filaments used in FDM are acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polypropylene

149 (PP), polylactide (PLA), polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK), and polyamides (PA), like PA6, PA12

150 [54]. The properties of these matrices are shown in Table 1. In FDM, the polymers are extruded

151 and deposited in a layer by layer method for product development. Compared to other AM

of
152 methods, FDM-manufactured polymers exhibit acceptable mechanical performance, good

ro
153 surface finish, and durability at low cost. The matrix material used in the FDM process is in the

154
-p
form of long wires or filament wound on to the spool. The diameter of the filament material
re
155 varies from 1.75 - 2.85 mm depending on the nozzle used in the machine. The filament is
lP

156 initially fed into the melt head that is heated above the glass transition temperature and is
na

157 converted to a plastic melt. The plastic melt is then passed to the nozzle and extruded out. The

158 nozzle moves in XY-direction according to the design model fed to the control system. Figure 3
ur

159 shows a schematic representation of the 3D printer used in FDM. The extruded filament from the
Jo

160 nozzle is added layer by layer over the build platform until the complete design is completed.

161 After the completion of a single layer, the build platform moves in the Z-direction downward and

162 the next layer is deposited and bonded to the previous layer. The distance moved by the build

163 platform is known as the layer height, generally, the height of the layer varies from 100 - 300

164 μm. A reduction in the layer height produces fine layers. At present, it is possible to print at a

165 height as low as 25 μm.

8
 of
ro
166 -p
re
167 Figure 3. 3D printer schematic representation.
lP

168 Table 1. Properties of polymer matrices used in fibre composite fabrication in FDM [10,55]
Tensile Tensile Flexural Printing
na

3
Matrix Density (g/cm ) strength modulus modulus temperature
(MPa) (GPa) (GPa) (°C)
ur

ABS 1.04 22-37 0.998 1.9 210-250

PA 1.1 34-68 0.94 0.84 235-260
Jo

PLA 1.25 37-46 2.02 2.39 190-210

PEEK 1.3 48-265 3.5-3.9 3.7-4 360-450
PP 0.92 20-40 1.1-1.6 1.2-1.6 230-260
169

170 In FDM there are different possibilities to introduce fibre reinforcement in the thermoplastic

171 matrix [18,24,56]:

172 1. Direct reinforcement – here, two injectors are needed. One for injecting the matrix

173 filament and the other for the fibre filament. These are mixed at the part after injection.

174 2. The fibre and the matrix are mixed before the injection.

9
175 3. Fibre and matrix are mixed before injection as a pre-impregnated filament. This method

176 is preferred for fibre composite fabrication.

177 Research on printing variables in terms of mechanical properties is increasing to develop high

178 strength 3D printing models. In FDM, overhanging models are supported by structures that are

179 water-soluble or can be dissolved. Melt temperature, thermal conductivity, heat capacity,

180 cooling rate, viscosity, raster width, raster angle, printing orientation, air gap, and layer height

of
181 are some important variables in FDM-3D polymer printing [57]. The bonding of each layer is

ro
182 crucial to the development of high strength polymers through FDM. Variation in the raster angle

183
-p
changes the mechanical properties of the composite since it alters the load transfer within layers
re
184 [58]. Variation in print orientation may induce anisotropic properties in the printed part [59].
lP

185 Mohamed et al. [60] reported that the process parameters involved in the product/prototype

186 development through FDM account for the quality and mechanical performance. The control
na

187 factors to be considered during the processing of AM are shown in Figure 4(a) and the factors
ur

188 affecting the 3D printed part quality and mechanical performance are shown in Figure 4(b).
Jo

189 Anitha et al. [61] reported that the layer thickness has a significant influence on the surface

190 roughness of the fabricated part, where 50% of layer thickness contributed to affecting the

191 surface roughness of the FDM printed component. A reduction in layer thickness allows for a

192 lower surface roughness [62–64]. Since FDM based 3D printing is a relatively new technique, it

193 is essential to compare the strength of parts produced by conventional manufacturing processes

194 such as injection moulding, compression moulding and so on. In this view, Carneiro et al. [65]

195 reported that the FDM printed PP samples showed lower tensile strength and modulus compared

196 to the compression moulded samples, although adequate tensile strength and modulus of the

10
197 printed products were achieved by controlling the FDM process variables. The bonding between

198 the successive layers and voids is a major concern in the FDM parts and these factors govern the

199 mechanical strength of the parts. Bellehumeur et al. [66] quantitatively assessed the bonding

200 quality of the printed material by analysing the degree of wetting or the size of the neck formed

201 between successive filaments. The results indicated that the extrusion temperature had a

202 significant impact on the neck growth of the bonding region compared to the environment

203 temperature. Riddick et al. [67] used scanning electron microscope (SEM) images to investigate

of
204 the effects of build directions (horizontal, side, and vertical directions) and raster orientation (±

ro
205 45°, 0°, 90°, and 0°/90°) on the tensile properties and failure mechanism of FDM printed ABS

206
-p
material. It has been observed that the raster orientation and the build direction have an impact
re
207 on the tensile strength, modulus, and the elongation-at-break of the ABS material. The maximum
lP

208 tensile strength of 34 MPa was recorded for the sample printed at 0 ° raster orientation with side
na

209 build direction and the lowest was recorded on the 90 ° raster orientation with vertical build

210 direction. The maximum elongation at break was 1.5 % for the sample printed at a raster
ur

211 orientation of 45 ° with horizontal build direction. Therefore, optimisation of printing parameters
Jo

212 is necessary to improve the printing quality [68,69]. Tekinalp et al. [70] found high amounts of

213 triangle-shaped voids on the ABS/carbon fibre composite fabricated through FDM, formed

214 mainly because of the gaps between the beads deposited during printing. Kalita et al [71]

215 developed PP composite with tricalcium phosphate (TCP) ceramic reinforcement at varying

216 volume % of porosity (36 %, 48 %, and 52 %) through FDM. Porosity is the function of FDM

217 printing variables as well as the properties of the polymer and reinforcing material [72]. Air

218 pores in the FDM parts can be reduced by printing at a high nozzle temperature due to better

219 material fluidity at high nozzle temperature [73].

11
 of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

220

221 Figure 4. (a) FDM process parameters, (b) Factor affecting FDM part quality and mechanical

222 performance.

223

224

12
225 2.2. Bond formation between layers in FDM

226 In AM, bonding between the layers is a crucial factor for governing the mechanical strength of

227 the part or of the composite. During printing, the bond formation between the layers does not

228 involve any externally applied force/pressure, bonding occurs because of the high temperature in

229 the newly deposited layer [74]. Several researchers have reported the importance of inter-layer

230 bonding in FDM, which occurs through local "welding" of adjacent layers. The final 3D printed

of
231 parts' meso-structural characteristics and the degree of inter-layer bonding significantly affect the

ro
232 strength since, under loading, the weakly bonded layer fails first. The mesostructure of the 3D

233 -p
printed part describes the growth of the neck between the layer lines, as well as the formation of
re
234 bonds and voids between the layers. Variation in the bonding and formation of voids creates

inhomogeneity in the printed parts that directly affect the mechanical performance of the part
lP

235

236 [75,76]. It is important to understand the relationship between process parameters and part
na

237 performance to optimise the quality of 3D printed components [25]. However, the number of
ur

238 investigations on inter-layer bonding in FDM is rather limited. Developing models for predicting
Jo

239 and analysing layer bonding and for evaluating their impact on mechanical performance and

240 fracture resistance would improve knowledge of 3D printed part performance. In FDM, printing

241 speed and complexity of temperature variation are critical, making it difficult to achieve

242 consistency in bonding strength and molecular diffusion [77]. Aliheidari et al. [76] investigated

243 the interlayer bonding characteristics of ABS material regarding the softening temperature, bed

244 temperature, layer height, and layer width. Improvement in bonding was noted at increased layer

245 width, owing to the increase in the area of adhesion. This reduced the formation of voids since

246 the total number of layers in the crack plane decreased; correspondingly the mechanical

247 performance was also increased.

13
248 The interlayer bonding strength of FDM printed polymer is the function of FDM printing

249 parameters [78] such as temperature, viscosity, and surface energy of the thermoplastic melt

250 [79,80]. The inter-layer bond formation in the ABS polymer was analysed by Bellehumeur et al.

251 [66] through the Newtonian polymer sintering model developed by Pokluda et al. [81]. Bond

252 formation between adjacent layers begins with the growth of a neck. Sun et al. [82] reported that

253 the mechanical performance of the part is closely related to the variation in the cooling

254 temperature and critical sintering temperature. Figure 5 explains the mechanism of neck

of
255 formation between adjacent layers. The formation of the neck depends on the viscosity of the

ro
256 matrix. During the necking process, the polymer molecules in the separate layers inter-diffuse

257
-p
and form the bond. As the temperature decreases the matrix viscosity increases, which slowly
re
258 reduces the neck formation as well as the diffusion process. This process depends on the polymer
lP

259 viscosity, thermal conductivity, heat capacity, and cooling rate. The layer bond can be increased
na

260 at high temperature but at a significantly high temperature, polymer degradation may occur,

261 which produces poor surface finish and dimensional inaccuracies [80]. Longmei Li et al. [83]
ur

262 reported that the neck growth between the adjacent beads develops when the temperature is
Jo

263 above the critical sintering temperature. The deposited layer solidification time should be short to

264 achieve rapid bonding, and after solidification, the part should be free of internal stress to

265 achieve good mechanical properties [19]. Torrado et al. [84] elaborated on the importance of

266 layer bonding on 3D printed material properties. The results exemplify the relationship between

267 the complex viscosity and anisotropy. The anisotropic properties of the composite can be

268 reduced by printing at a lower viscosity and a temperature above the glass transition. This would

269 increase the layer contact area and correspondingly increase the layer bonding.

14
 of
ro
270

271 -p
Figure 5. The mechanism behind layer bonding.
re
272 Thomas and Rodriguez [85] developed a model to predict the thermal effect at the rectangular
lP

273 bead interface. The model showed that parts produced at a lower cooling rate exhibit good
na

274 strength. Costa et al. [86] proposed a transient heat transfer analysis model to quantify the

275 bonding strength of FDM parts. The model was based on the melt temperature and bonding
ur

276 between the filaments. Rodriguez et al. [87] analysed the ABS material bonding strength and
Jo

277 reported the influence of printing parameters on the bonding strength. At low raster angle and

278 high nozzle temperature, as well as high environment temperature, it is possible to produce well-

279 bonded ABS parts. Aliheidari et al. [88] reported that the interfacial bonding between the layers

280 of ABS material increases the fracture resistance of the material, and furthermore it is possible to

281 obtain good bonding at high printing temperature. Samples printed at a nozzle temperature of

282 240 °C exhibited good bonding between the layers and increased fracture resistance. Young et al.

283 [89] fabricated ABS composites with carbon fibre reinforcement through compression moulding

284 and 3D printing. The 3D printed composite exhibited poor mechanical performance owing to

15
285 inadequate layer adhesion. Compared to fibre-reinforced bio-polyethylene composite, pure bio-

286 polyethylene exhibited poor bonding between the layers. Poor bonding is the reason behind

287 increasing amounts of cracks and pores in the bio-polyethylene surface [90]. Levenhagen and

288 Dadmun [91] reported that the addition of a bimodal blend to PLA reduced the anisotropic

289 properties and also enhanced the mechanical strength of the 3D-printed PLA material.

290 Hart et al. [77] investigated the interlayer bonding of ABS thermoplastic material at four stages:

of
291 (1) Interface heating, enabling local polymer flow and molecular mobility;

ro
292 (2) Intimate contact, or close physical association of the two adherent surfaces;

293 (3) Molecular diffusion across the interface; and

-p
re
294 (4) Cooling of the interface to below the glass transition temperature.
lP

295 The finding of the Hart et al. [77] emphasised the post-treatment of polymer to achieve enhanced

inter-laminar toughness. Annealing techniques have been used to improve the inter-layer
na

296

297 bonding [77] (Figure 6). During the process of annealing, diffusion of polymer chains occurs
ur

298 through the layer interface, which shifts the material fracture behaviour from unstable to stable. It
Jo

299 is reported that the interface can be healed by annealing at the lower glass transition temperature,

300 while the higher glass transition temperature provides geometric stability in order to retain the

301 shape of the part outside the annealing fixture. Wach et al. [92] reported that annealing in FDM

302 printed PLA increased its crystallinity, leading to an increase of flexural stress from 11 to 17 %.

303 These results suggest the annealing of FDM printed parts as an effective technique to enhance

304 the layer bonding, which could lead to an increase in mechanical strength.

16
 of
ro
305 -p
re
306 Figure 6. Annealing process after printing, reproduced with permission from ref [77].
lP

307 3. Fibre Orientation influence in FDM part performance

na

308 In AM it is possible to change the fibre orientation during the fabrication of the composite by
ur

309 varying the layering pattern and raster orientation. Analysing the fibre orientation is important
Jo

310 for understanding the fibre composite characteristics, however it is challenging [93] since the

311 fibres cannot be aligned uniformly through FDM. Sporek et al. [94] studied the significance of

312 flow-induced fibre orientation on the mechanical and thermal properties of a PP/carbon fibre

313 composite. Morphological analysis showed a preferential fibre alignment along the printing

314 direction. The fibre-fibre interactions, as well as fibre-matrix interaction, were found to be better

315 in the developed composite. When the new layer was extruded over the pre-deposited layer, the

316 pre-deposited layer surface started re-melting, which developed an interconnection between fibre

317 in the two layers. This resulted in interconnected orientation of longitudinally- and orthogonally-

318 oriented fibres [95]. The melt flow field influenced by the melt flow characteristics, such as the

17
319 flow in the nozzle convergence and the extruded swell, may affect the orientation of the fibre,

320 resulting in changes in the extruded polymer strength [96]. Zhang et al [97] investigated the

321 mechanical performance of a carbon fibre composite with curved and unidirectional fibre

322 reinforcement. Finite element analysis was performed to understand the direction of the principal

323 stress. The result of the investigation showed that the curved fibre placement followed the

324 principal stress direction enhancing the mechanical properties of the carbon fibre composite

325 since the curved fibre placement reduced the stress concentration and increased the stiffness.

of
326 Safonov [98] developed an algorithm to analyse 3D printed fibre composite density and fibre

ro
327 reinforcement structure. The proposed method successfully identified the optimal distribution of

328
-p
material density and distribution of fibre orientation vectors for 2D beam, 3D cube, and 3D
re
329 cantilever beam. However, the method did not use all of the shell elements commonly utilised in
lP

330 traditional composite structures analysis. Therefore, it is not possible to find the exact material
na

331 density and fibre distribution for all 3D printed composites by this method. A modelling

332 approach was developed by Heller et al. [99] to analyse the fibre orientation in the part
ur

333 developed through FDM. The model was developed based on the converging flow in the nozzle,
Jo

334 fluid expansion caused by the extruded swell, and nozzle exit shape. Mohammadizadeh et al.

335 [100] observed variations in the tensile strength of composite samples prepared in the same way

336 and with the same content of fibres and explained it as being due to variations in the fibre

337 orientation. Additionally, the authors observed that the part with the most uniform fibre

338 orientation in the loading direction exhibited the best mechanical performance. Papon and

339 Haque [101] investigated the fracture strength of short fibre reinforced PLA composites at

340 varying orientation. From the experimental results, it was found that the composite with 5 %

341 carbon fibre printed at 45º/−45º orientation withstands the maximum fracture energy of 6.6

18
342 kJ/m2. Pertuz et al. [102] fabricated a PA composite with carbon, kevlar, and glass fibre

343 reinforcement. The composites were printed at varying orientations 0, 45, and 60º. The fibre

344 orientation was varied by changing the layering direction. Figure 7 shows the fibre layer

345 orientation. The composite with 0º fibre orientation exhibited better mechanical performance

346 than the 45º and 60º fibre oriented composites. In particular, carbon fibre composites with 0º

347 fibre orientation displayed a maximum tensile strength of 165

348 MPa.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na

349
ur

350 Figure 7. Fibre orientation 0, 45, and 60° for different test specimens, reproduced with
351 permission from ref [102].
Jo

352 4. Fibre matrix interface and its significance in FDM part performance

353 The characteristics and properties of the fibre composites in AM not only depend on the printing

354 parameters and materials used but also on the interfacial bonding developed between fibre and

355 matrix. The interaction between the fibre and the matrix is crucial for the efficient transfer of

356 load and stress. The interfacial bonding characteristics can be varied by changing the fibre

357 orientation, by varying fibre content, and by introducing fibre treatments. Parandoush et al. [103]

358 developed a laser-assisted AM method, whereby an excellent interfacial bonding was developed

359 between the glass fibre and PP. The tensile properties of the samples printed by the proposed

19
360 method were higher than those of the traditional FDM printed short fibre composites with 300 %

361 and 150 % increase in tensile strength and modulus, respectively. Liu et al. [104] studied the

362 sizing effect on a carbon fibre composite. The sizing method was done using a water-based

363 polyamide solid dispersion emulsion sizing agent PA845H. Sized carbon fibre improved the

364 interfacial bonding between the fibre and matrix, which improved the flexural strength by 82 %,

365 flexural modulus by 246 %, and interlaminate strength by 42.2 %. Figure 8 shows the

366 mechanism behind the enhanced fibre matrix interface due to the sizing treatment. In another

of
367 study, the addition of glass fibre to the PP filament increased the adhesion of the layers, which

ro
368 reduced the shrinkage and bend as compared to pure PP material [105]. Bonding between

369
-p
successive layers and voids are the major concerns in FDM prototypes and these factors are
re
370 directly integrated with the mechanical strength of the parts.
lP

371 Yao et al. [106] investigated the tensile and flexural properties of continuous carbon fibre
na

372 reinforced PLA composites. Composites were printed with 20 % infill density and varying
ur

373 carbon fibre filaments (3 K, 6 K, and 12 K filaments). Carbon fibre composites showed a higher
Jo

374 tensile and flexural strength than that of the pure PLA. However, the author found that the lack

375 of adhesion between the fibre and the matrix resulted in carbon fibre debonding from the matrix

376 leading to reduced tensile and flexural strength. This was due to the lack of chemical bonding

377 between PLA and carbon fibre. In order to improve the chemical bonding between the matrix

378 and the fibre, the author recommended surface modification of carbon fibre. Interfacial adhesion

379 is a critical factor in affecting the modulus of carbon fibre PP composite [107]. Weak bonding in

380 the carbon and wood fibre reinforced PLA composites reduced the load-carrying ability of the

381 PLA that correspondingly reduced the tensile modulus and strength [108]. To achieve enhanced

20
382 performance in the FDM printed biocomposite, it is necessary to tailor the interfacial bond

383 strength as well as the choice of fibre and matrix material [109].

of
ro
-p
re
384
lP

385 Figure 8. Interface enhancement mechanism due to sizing treatment, reproduced with permission
na

386 from ref [104].

ur

387 Through variation in the fibre direction, it is possible to increase the fibre-matrix interaction
Jo

388 [110]. Ning et al. [111] reported that bonding between the layers was reduced when increasing

389 the printing layer thickness after 0.25 mm.

390 Li et al. [112] designed a nozzle for uniform reinforcement of carbon fibre in the PLA matrix

391 during FDM printing. Pre-processed carbon fibre with a PLA sizing agent effectively increased

392 the interfacial strength between carbon fibre and PLA. It is observed that the modified carbon

393 fibre reinforced composites showed higher tensile and flexural strength, which was 14 % and

394 164 %, respectively than the unmodified carbon fibre reinforced composite. The short carbon

395 fibre reinforcement restricted the flow of the ABS matrix during FDM, consequently developing

21
396 voids and pores in the composite, which reduced the interfacial adhesion between fibre and

397 matrix [113]. Tian et al. [114] developed continuous carbon fibre/PLA composites printed

398 through the FDM process and found that the layer thickness of 0.4 - 0.6 mm and the hatch

399 spacing of 0.6 mm are capable of producing guaranteed bonding between the printed layers.

400 Specifically, the layer thickness of 0.5 mm exhibited homogeneous bonding between the

401 deposited layers, which increased the fibre matrix interface accordingly. Fibre treatment with a

402 silane coupling agent is an efficient way to develop enhanced bonding between basalt fibre and

of
403 PLA matrix [115]. Zhu et al. [116] used random terpolymer-copolymer of styrene, acrylonitrile,

ro
404 and glycidyl methacrylate as a compatibiliser to make ABS short carbon fibre composites.

405
-p
Compatibiliser was added with varying weight percentages of 0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 wt. %. The
re
406 addition of the compatibiliser had shown a significant improvement in the interfacial
lP

407 characteristics. Due to the increased bonding of the compatibiliser added composites, the tensile
na

408 and flexural strength was observed to be higher than that of the composite without the

409 compatibiliser. The strong interface between carbon fibre and the compatibiliser was the result of
ur

410 chemical bonding between glycidyl methacrylate in the compatibiliser and hydroxyl-carboxyl
Jo

411 groups in the carbon fibre. The compatibiliser had a molecular structure similar to that of the

412 styrene-acrylonitrile copolymer in ABS, thus achieving good physical compatibility between

413 ABS and the compatibiliser. Heidari-Rarani et al. [117] observed delamination on carbon PLA

414 composite fractured surface owing to the poor permeability of the molten PLA into the carbon

415 fibre bundle. In order to increase the permeability of PLA to the carbon bundle, the author

416 recommended surface treatment of the fibre. Chacón et al. [118] found extensive carbon fibre

417 pull-out on tensile fractured carbon/PA composites due to poor interfacial bonding between PA-

418 matrix and fibre. Internal fibres were hardly infiltrated by the PA-matrix and only a limited

22
419 number of external fibres were found to be in contact with the PA-matrix, which was the main

420 reason for poor bonding. It can be understood from the available literature that the variation in

421 the fibre structure and length, fibre treatment, and addition of compatibiliser and coupling agents

422 and could improve the fibre-matrix bonding. Moreover, no modelling work was found to be

423 performed on the fibre-matrix bonding in FDM of AM. In this view, it is necessary to develop

424 models to understand the fibre-matrix bonding in FDM parts/composites, through which the

425 physical properties of the composites can be easily predicted.

of
ro
426

427 5. Mechanical testing and performance

-p
re
428 5.1 Standards for FDM polymer/composite testing
lP

429 ASTM and ISO testing methods are used to test the properties of AM polymers. Two
na

430 organisations have been involved in setting standards and testing procedures for AM polymers.
ur

431 F42 Committee and its subcommittee F42.05 in ASTM have the authority over AM materials
Jo

432 and TC261 for ISO standards [119]. These two groups are currently engaged in setting

433 mechanical testing standards for AM products and parts through comparison with existing

434 specifications. In 2014, ISO has published standard methods and test techniques for AM parts,

435 indicating the fundamental quality attributes of the parts, specifying the suitable test

436 methodology, and specifying the scope and content of the test and supply agreements [120].

437 Standards followed for conducting tensile, flexural, impact, and compression tests on FDM

438 based polymers and composites are shown in Table 2. The tensile test can be performed on both

439 the dumbbell-shaped and the flat/straight bar-shaped specimens. For the impact test, both

23
440 notched and un-notched specimens can be used, however, there is no clear indication whether the

441 notch should be made during or after printing.

442 Table 2. The testing standard followed for testing FDM based polymers. [119,120]

S.No Test Standard

ASTM D638 (P)
ISO 527-2 (P)
1 Tensile
ASTM D3039 (C)

of
ISO 527-4 (C)
ASTM D790 (P/C)

ro
2 Flexural ISO 178 (P/C)
ASTM D7264 (C)
Charpy Impact (Notched) ASTM D6110, ISO 179 (P/C)
-p
3 Impact Izod Impact (Notched) ASTM D256, ISO 180 (P/C)
Izod Impact (Unnotched) ASTM D4812, ISO 180 (P/C)
re
ASTM D695 (P)
ISO 604 (P)
lP

4 Compression
ASTM D3410 (C)
ISO 14126 (C)
P – polymer, C- composite
na

443
ur

444 5.2. Tensile properties of fibre composites fabricated through the FDM process
Jo

445 In many industries, AM process utilisation is expanding rapidly owing to its flexibility in

446 manufacturing complex designs. The recent development of fibre composites through the FDM

447 process broadens the research options in this field. Factors such as fibre reinforcement, fibre

448 content, and printing parameters significantly affect the tensile properties of the composite. The

449 tensile strength of the FDM printed composite is the function of fibre reinforcement percentage

450 and fibre orientation [121]. The FDM printed fibre composite exhibit anisotropic mechanical

451 properties due to the variation in bonding between layers. The anisotropic mechanical properties

452 of the printed fibre composites affect the final component output [122]. To increase the

24
453 application of these composites, it is necessary to understand the composites’ tensile behaviour,

454 which enables identification of optimum features in the manufacturing of fibre composites and

455 consequently develop a guideline to design 3D printed fibre composites. There are several

456 studies that conducted the tensile test on the FDM manufactured fibre composites. Zhong et al.

457 [19] suggested the reinforcement of short fibre to the ABS matrix to increase the tensile strength

458 of FDM printed composites. Ning et al. [123] studied ABS composite reinforced with carbon

459 fibre at varying weight percentages (3 %, 5 %, 7.5 %, 10 %, and 15 %). The carbon fibre was

of
460 reinforced in two different sizes of 150 and 100 µm. The addition of carbon fibre improved the

ro
461 tensile strength by 20 to 30 %. The maximum tensile strength (42 MPa at 5 wt.% carbon fibre

462
-p
content) and Young's modulus (2.5 GPa at 7.5 wt.% carbon fibre content) was noted for the
re
463 composite with 150 µm carbon fibre reinforcement. This investigation provides a clear view of
lP

464 the short fibre reinforcement effect on the tensile properties of the ABS composite, although the
na

465 fracture mechanism has not been compared between the two different fibre lengths. Liao et al.

466 [124] investigated the tensile properties of short carbon fibre (15-20 mm in length) reinforced
ur

467 PA12 composite fabricated with the different mass fraction of carbon fibre (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10
Jo

468 wt.%). Carbon fibre reinforcement at 10 wt.% showed superior tensile strength, which is over

469 100 % higher than the pure PA12. Y. Li et al. [125] fabricated PLA composite with short carbon

470 fibre (100 -150 µm) by varying layers. The composite with one layer of pure PLA and other

471 layers of carbon fibre PLA showed a maximum tensile strength of 56 MPa, which was 1.16 times

472 higher than pure PLA polymer. Overall, these investigations show the efficacy of short fibre

473 reinforcement in FDM printed composites. However, in all these investigations the length of the

474 fibre was not varied in an effective way to analyse the influence of the fibre length on tensile

25
475 properties. Thus more investigations are necessary that could lead to the finding of an optimum

476 short fibre length in order to achieve maximum tensile strength and modulus.

477 Tekinalp et al. [70] investigated ABS composite fabricated through FDM and compression

478 moulding method. The short carbon fibre of length 0.2 – 0.4 nm was used for reinforcement. The

479 tensile strength of the ABS composite was found to be low for the composite fabricated through

480 FDM. In FDM composites, the formation of voids and pores is higher than the traditional

of
481 manufacturing methods, and the reduction of such voids and pores can produce comparable

ro
482 results between FDM printed and traditional manufactured composites. In such a view, Keles et

483 -p
al. [126] manufactured the short carbon fibre reinforced ABS composite through a vibration-
re
484 assisted FDM method. Inducing vibration in the extrusion head during fabrication reduced the

formation of voids and pores, which correspondingly increased the modulus and strength.
lP

485

486 Shofner et al. [127] reported that the addition of short carbon fibre (100 µm) to ABS polymers
na

487 changed the properties of the ABS material from ductile to brittle due to non-homogeneous
ur

488 bonding between layers as well as between fibre and matrix. The tensile fracture characteristics
Jo

489 exemplify the increased stiffness of the composites developed by the reinforcement of the fibre.

490 Fibre reinforcement inhibits the mobility of the polymer chain, thus increasing the stiffness of

491 the composite. Moreover, the authors recommended the treatment of fibre to enhance the

492 mechanical properties of 3D printed composites. Zhang et al. [113] reported that matrix fracture,

493 fibre debonding, fibre pull out and weak fibre-matrix interface were found to be the dominant

494 tensile failure modes of short carbon fibre composite. Mori et al. [128] successfully fabricated

495 sandwiched ABS composite having 1.4 vol.% of long carbon fibre (70 mm) reinforcement. The

496 composite exhibited the maximum tensile strength of 43 MPa, which was 3 - 4 times higher than

497 the pure ABS material. However, the fracture mechanism involved in the failure of long fibre

26
498 composites was not disclosed in this study. Long fibre reinforced composites are expected to

499 provide increased tensile strength than short fibre composites due to a higher area of interfacial

500 attraction. In order to prove this, it is necessary to carry out a comparative study that would

501 provide insight into the aforementioned fact. Magri et al. [129] investigated the effect of FDM

502 printing parameters on the tensile properties of short fibre PLA composites. Composite printed at

503 nozzle temperature of 230 ºC and infill line orientation of 0º/15º/-15º showed a maximum tensile

504 strength of 36 MPa. This study demonstrated the influence of the nozzle temperature and the

of
505 infill line orientation on the tensile strength, however, these parameters have not yet been

ro
506 optimised for maximum tensile strength and modulus. Other parameters, such as infill density,

507
-p
raster angle, and layer thickness, are also expected to have a significant effect on tensile
re
508 properties. To prove this, Ning et al. [111] investigated the tensile characteristics of carbon fibre
lP

509 composites with respect to varying printing parameters, raster angle, infill speed, nozzle
na

510 temperature, and layer thickness. Composite printed at a raster angle of 0º/90º showed maximum

511 tensile strength whereas maximum modulus was noted at a raster angle of -45º/45º. Infill speed
ur

512 of 25 mm/s led to increased tensile strength, modulus and yield strength. Lower nozzle
Jo

513 temperature was recommended to achieve strong bonding of the layer and increased tensile

514 strength.

515 Continuous fibre is the most effective reinforcement for fabricating high strength fibre reinforced

516 thermoplastic composite through FDM [130,131]. The maximum tensile strength and modulus of

517 FDM printed continuous fibre composites reported in different literature are as follows.

518 Compared to pure PLA, PLA composite with 6.6 % of continuous carbon fibre reinforcement

519 shows 599 % and 435 % increment in the tensile modulus and strength [132]. Hao et al. [133]

520 fabricated continuous carbon fibre reinforced epoxy composite through FDM. The tensile

27
521 strength of the carbon epoxy composite was 792.8 MPa, which was higher than the thermoplastic

522 PLA carbon fibre composite. Addition of 9.5 wt.% of continuous aramid fibre in PLA polymer

523 increased the tensile strength and modulus by 499 and 186 %, respectively [110]. Yao et al.

524 [106] fabricated PLA composite with 3K, 6K, and 12K continuous carbon fibre reinforcement.

525 The tensile strength was found to be improved by 38.68 %, 58.86 %, and 70.02 % for 3K, 6K,

526 and 12K carbon fibre composite, respectively. Der Klift et al. [134] studied the effect of

527 continuous carbon fibre reinforcement in the PA matrix. The composite was fabricated with

of
528 varying fibre volume percentages. The composite with 6.9 % of fibre exhibited maximum tensile

ro
529 strength (464 MPa) and modulus (35.7 GPa). ABS composite with 10 wt.% continuous carbon

530
-p
fibre exhibited improved tensile strength of 147 MPa when compared to the pure ABS polymer
re
531 [135]. From these results, continuous fibre reinforcement of 5 wt.% to 10 wt.% in FDM
lP

532 polymers showed improved tensile strength and modulus. However, when the loading amount of
na

533 fibre increases, the brittleness of the composite filament increases too, making printing difficult.

534 In order to increase the flexibility of the filaments Sodeifian et al. [105] added maleic anhydride
ur

535 polyolefin (POE-g-MA) at varying weight percentages (10, 20, and 30 wt.%) to PP composite
Jo

536 filaments having 30 wt.% of glass fibre reinforcement and composites were printed. The tensile

537 test results of the printed PP/glass fibre/POE-g-MA composites are shown in Figure 9. The

538 addition of glass fibre to the PP filament increased the modulus of the composite as well as the

539 elongation at break. The addition of POE-g-MA to glass fibre composite reduced the tensile

540 strength. The addition of 10 wt.% and 2 wt.% of POE-g-MA increased the flexibility of the

541 composites, but POE-g-MA at 30 wt.% showed reduced flexibility, compared to the PP/GF

542 specimen without POE-g-MA. Table 3 presents the tensile strength of some FDM fabricated

543 fibre composites.

28
544

545

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

546

547 Figure 9. Tensile test results of PP/glass fibre/POE-g-MA composites, reproduced under the
548 terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license from ref [105].

29
549 Table 3. Tensile strength of FDM fabricated fibre composites

Tensile Properties Flexural Properties

Reinforceme

Reference
Max. Max. Max. flexural Max. flexural

Material
Matrix
% of Elongation
tensile tensile flexural strength flexural modulus

nt
Enhancemen at break
strength modulus strength compared modulu compared
t compared compared to
(MPa) @ (GPa) (MPa) to pure s (GPa) to pure
to pure resin pure resin
wt.% @wt.% @ wt.% resin @wt.% resin
The novel

f
Extrusion

o
nozzle and 164 %
13.8 % higher

ro
path control higher than
PLA

Modifie than original

methods were 91 --- --- 156 original --- --- [112]

-p
d-CCF CCF/PLA
designed to CCF/PLA
composites
print curved composites

re
CCF/PLA
composite.

lP
KH550-treated
basalt fibre 72 @ 20 5.55 @

na
Basalt 131 @ 5.08 @
(KBF) wt.% of 33 % 20 wt.% Increased Increased
fibre 20 wt.% 20 wt.%
reinforced PLA KBF of KBF
composite
ur
PLA

Continuously
[115]
decreased
Jo
Carbon 69 @ 10 7.18 @
CF reinforced 117 @ 5
fibre wt.% of 27 % 20 wt.% Decreased --- Increased
PLA composite wt.%
(CF) CF of CF

Increased up
SAG
to 5 wt.%
compatibilizer 18.7 % improved 3.2 % improved
Short 73.3 @ 5 15.4 % higher SAG
ABS

added short flexural strength @ 3 flexural modulus @ 3

carbon wt.% of than 0 wt.% --- addition [116]
carbon fibre wt.% of SAG addition wt.% of SAG addition
fibre SAG of SAG (23.8 %) and
(SCF)/ABS than 0 wt.% of SAG than 0 wt.% of SAG
then
composites
decreased

30
 An innovative
extruder is
designed and
PLA manufactured
109 % 368 %
CCF for FDM 3D 61.4 37 % 8.28 Reduced 152.1 13.42 [117]
increased increased
printers to
produce CCF
reinforced PLA
composites.

f
Different 11.82 % improved 16.82 % improved

o
content and 42 @ 5 2.5 @ flexural strength @ 5 flexural modulus @ 5
ABS

ro
CF length of CF wt.% of 23 % 7.5 wt.% --- wt.% of CF wt.% of CF [136]
added ABS CF of CF reinforcement than pure reinforcement than

-p
composites ABS pure ABS
Different

re
93.8 @ 10 3.58 @ 124.9 @ 5.25 @
PA12

content of CF Continuously 251.1 % 346 %

CF wt.% of 102.2 % 10 wt.% 10 wt.% 10 wt.% [124]

lP
added ABS decreased increased increased
CF of CF of CF of CF
composites
10 wt.% of

na
CCF/ABS
composites and 147 @ 10 4.18 @ 127 @ 10 7.72 @
ur
ABS

2 times 2 times 3.9 times

CCF compared with wt.% of 5 times higher 10 wt.% wt.% of 10 wt.% [135]
higher higher higher
Injection CCF of CCF CCF of CCF
Jo
molded
samples
In-melt
continuous
Glass glass fibre yarn 478 @ 50 29.4 @
PLA

fibre embedded PLA vol.% of --- 50 vol.% --- --- --- --- --- [131]
(GF) composites and GF of GF
theoretical
validation

31
 CF/PLA
composites with 54.64 @ 5
PLA
CF different wt.% of 12.4 % --- --- --- --- --- --- [101]
content and two CF
bead lay-up
Recycling and
remanufacturi
256 @ 10 20.6 @ 263 @ 10 ≈ 2.6 13.3 @
ng of 3D ≈ 3 times
PLA

CCF wt.% of 4 times higher 10 wt.% --- wt.% of times 10 wt.% [137]
printed higher
CF of CF CF higher of CF

f
CCF/PLA

o
composites

ro
Composite
filaments

-p
comprising of
pre-consumer

re
34 @ 2.16 @
hemp recycled PP
r-PP

30 wt.% of 54 % 30 wt.% Reduced --- --- --- --- [138]

fibres with varying

lP
hemp of hemp
contents of
hemp

na
fibres were
extruded
The influence
of layer ur
Jo
thickness and
PEEK and ABS

raster angle on 56.6 @ 56.2 @

15 %
the mechanical 300 µm of 108 % higher 300 µm of
--- --- --- higher 1.6 --- [139]
properties of layer than ABS layer
than ABS
3D-printed thickness thickness
PEEK and
compared with
ABS

550 Note: SAG: styrene, acrylonitrile, and glycidyl methacrylate; CCF: Continuous Carbon Fibre; Bold: the novelty of the work.

32
551 To understand the stress concentration effect on the FDM printed continuous fibre composites,

552 Pyl et al. [140] conducted an open-hole tensile test on the carbon PA composite printed in

553 rectangular as well as dumbbell shape. Four specimens were studied such as dumbbell and

554 rectangular specimens with printed hole and dumbbell and rectangular specimens with drilled

555 hole. High-stress concentrations were observed in all specimens near the ‘hole’ area during

556 tensile loading. Under increasing load, cracks and fibre damage from the stress-concentrated

of
557 points propagated leading to failure. FDM printed parts have sharp edges and corners, which

ro
558 may increase stress concentration. Thus, necessary modelling tools need to be developed to

559 -p
predict stress concentration that could reduce the chances of failure due to stress concentration.
re
560 Figure 10 compares the tensile strength of FDM printed composites tested at different strain

rates.
lP

561
na
ur
Jo

562

563 Figure 10. Tensile strength of FDM printed composites tested at different strain rates.

33
564 Dong et al. [141] studied the kevlar fibre reinforcement effect in the PA matrix. The fibre was

565 reinforced at different layering patterns and infill angles. The investigation reported a maximum

566 elastic modulus of 27 GPa and strength of 333Mpa for the composite fabricated at 0o infill angle

567 and 18 layers of fibre. The variation in the infill angle did not show any significant effect on the

568 modulus.

569 Various researchers have also studied the tensile properties of natural fibre reinforced FDM

of
570 composites. Milosevic et al. [138] investigated a 30 wt.% hemp fibre reinforcement effect in the

ro
571 PP matrix. The composite exhibited 50 % and 143 % improvement in the tensile strength and

572 -p
modulus, respectively when compared to the pure PP. In another work, Stoof et al. [142]
re
573 investigated harakeke fibre reinforced PLA composite’s tensile strength. Composites were

printed at different fibre weight percentages. The composite with 20 wt.% harakeke fibre
lP

574

575 reinforcement showed maximum tensile strength, which was 5.4 % higher than the pure PLA
na

576 polymer. Matsuzak et al. [132] made a comparison on the tensile characteristics of PLA
ur

577 composite reinforced with jute fibre and carbon fibre. Compared to PLA, carbon fibre composite
Jo

578 exhibited 425 % and 599 % increase in the tensile strength and modulus, respectively whereas

579 the jute fibre composite showed 157 % and 134 % increment for the same properties. Duigou et

580 al [143] investigated flax fibre-reinforced PLA composite with 30 % fibre volume content and

581 suggested that continuous reinforcement of natural fibre for enhancing mechanical performance.

582 The tensile properties exhibited by FDM printed natural fibre composites are satisfactory and

583 enhanced research in this area could increase the application of natural fibres in 3D printing

584 technology. A few researches have also been conducted on the area of hybridised composites

585 manufactured by FDM. Oztan et al. [144] investigated kevlar and carbon fibre reinforced PA

586 composite's tensile property. The composites exhibited linear-elastic behaviour under the tensile

34
587 loading. During loading, the failure of the composite occurred within 1.4 – 2.5 % of strain. Sang

588 et al. [115] compared the tensile strength of the carbon fibre/PLA composite and silane treated

589 basalt fibre/PLA composite. Both carbon fibre and basalt fibre were loaded in three varying

590 weight percentages of 5, 10, and 20 %. Silane-treated basalt fibre composite showed a tensile

591 strength comparable to that of carbon fibre composite. 20 % basalt fibre composite had a

592 maximum tensile strength of 72 MPa, which is approximately 33 % higher than the pure PLA

593 (54.2 MPa). These results demonstrate the possibility of developing high-strength hybrid

of
594 composites through FDM.

ro
595 -p
5.3. Flexural properties of fibre composites fabricated through the FDM process
re
596 In FDM manufactured fibre composites, the interlaminar shear strength is compromised, which
lP

597 directly affects the flexural strength of the composites. The anisotropic properties of the FDM

fabricated fibre composite under bending cause variation in the strain rate, which increases the
na

598

599 shear stress between the layers leading to the separation of the layers and eventual failure.
ur

600 Interlaminar shear strength is a critical component to be focused on improving the flexural
Jo

601 character of FDM fibre composite. Flexural properties of FDM printed fibre composites are

602 shown in Table 3. Li et al. [125] explored the impact of short-carbon fibre reinforcement on the

603 PLA composite. The length of the fibre was maintained between 100 and 150 μm and the volume

604 of reinforcement was 15 vol.%. The maximum flexural strength and modulus of the PLA carbon

605 fibre composite was 74 MPa and 21 GPa, respectively. A uniform distribution of flexural load

606 from PLA to carbon fibre was observed, which is the key explanation for increased flexural

607 strength. However, the influence of varying fibre percentages was not disclosed by the authors,

608 which could aid in finding the optimum level of fibre percentage for maximum bending strength.

609 In this regard, Gavali et al. [145] found an increment in the flexural strength of the chopped

35
610 carbon fibre PLA composite owing to the increment in carbon fibre reinforcement. The PLA

611 exhibited flexural strength of 66 MPa and on reinforcing 10 wt.% of carbon fibre, the strength

612 increased to 67 MPa. When the weight percentage increased to 15 %, the flexural strength was

613 ca. about 78 MPa.

614 Goh et al. [146] investigated PA composite reinforced with continuous glass and carbon fibre.

615 Compared to the glass fibre composite, carbon fibre composite exhibited maximum flexural

of
616 strength (430 MPa) and flexural modulus (38.1 GPa). The maximum flexural strength and

ro
617 flexural modulus reported for glass fibre composite were 149 MPa and 14.7 GPa, respectively,

618 -p
approximately 40% of the strength and modulus of carbon fibre composite. Yao et al. [106]
re
619 analysed the flexural strenght of the carbon fibre PLA composites having carbon fibre with

varying tow (3K, 6K, and 12K). The increase in the carbon fibre tow increases the flexural
lP

620

621 strength and modulus of the PLA and carbon fibre composites. Maximum flexural strength of 68
na

622 MPa was noted on the 12K carbon fibre/PLA composite, for 3k and 6k it was 60 and 66 MPa
ur

623 respectively.
Jo

624 Tian et al. [114] studied the flexural characteristics of the continuous carbon fibre reinforced

625 PLA composite. Composites were printed with varying FDM-printing parameters of layer

626 thickness, liquefier temperature, filament feed rate, hatch spacing, and printing speed.

627 Interestingly, flexural strength and modulus increased steadily when the liquefier temperature

628 increased from 180 to 240 °C. When the liquefier temperature was 240 °C, the maximum

629 flexural strength (335 MPa) and the modulus (30 GPa) were recorded. However, the increasing

630 trend in layer thickness and hatch spacing reduced the flexural modulus and strength. There is no

631 significant variation in flexural strength and modulus at varying printing speeds. This

632 investigation demonstrated the influence of printing parameters on the flexural properties of

36
633 FDM composites, however, the orientation of the fibre was not considered in the investigation.

634 Variation in fibre orientation affects the bending nature of FDM composites. In this view, Araya-

635 Calvo et al. [158] investigated continuous carbon fibre PA composite and found significant

636 variation in the flexural properties of the composites on varying print orientation and

637 reinforcement type. In another work, Chacón et al. [118] investigated the influence of build

638 orientation on the flexural strength of FDM composites. Figure 11 shows the flexural stress-

639 strain curves of the PA composites having glass, kevlar, and carbon fibre reinforcement

of
640 fabricated with different build orientations. These results showed that flat build orientation

ro
641 maximised the flexural property of all the composites. Compared to Kevlar and glass fibre

642
-p
reinforcement, carbon fibre composite showed maximum flexural strength. The maximum
re
643 flexural strength of 424 MPa and the flexural modulus of 39 GPa was reported for carbon fibre
lP

644 composites with a flat orientation. Figure 12 compares the flexural strength of FDM printed
na

645 composites tested at different strain rates. Hu et al. [147] examined the variation in flexural

646 property of the PLA carbon fibre composite at varying layer thickness, printing speed, and
ur

647 printing temperature. The results reveal the influence of layer thickness on the flexural modulus
Jo

648 and strength. The maximum strength of 610 MPa and modulus of 40 GPa was obtained at a

649 combination of high printing temperature, low layer thickness, and low printing speed. Overall,

650 these studies highlight the importance of optimising the FDM variables for the bending

651 properties of fibre composites. However, FDM involves a number of variables, along with fibre

652 and polymer properties, making optimisation challenging. In the case of short fibre composites,

653 Spoerk et al. [94] observed variations in flexural properties of 250 μm-short carbon fibre

654 composite with respect to variation in the fibre orientation. Variation in fibre orientation

655 significantly improved the flexural strength and modulus of PP and short carbon fibre

37
656 composites by 150 % and 400 %, respectively. Maximum flexural strength of 51 MPa was noted

657 on the composite printed at 0°/90° orientation and the corresponding flexural modulus was 3385

658 MPa. In addition, the authors recommended the addition of compatibilisers for PP-based

659 composites in order to achieve uniform dispersion of the fibre as well as enhanced fibre matrix

660 bonding that would increase the bending strength. Surface modification of fibre could also

661 increase the fibre matrix interfacial bonding. Sang et al. [115] reported that the silane treated

662 basalt PLA composite exhibited enhanced flexural properties compared to the carbon fibre

of
663 composite. The carbon fibre reinforcement increased the matrix viscosity, which reduced the

ro
664 printing flow-ability and bonding between the adjacent layers, consequently reducing the flexural

665
-p
strength of the composite. The silane-treated 20 wt.% basalt fibre composite exhibited the
re
666 highest flexural strength of 131 MPa and modulus of 5.08 GPa, respectively.
lP
na
ur
Jo

38
 of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur

667
Jo

668 Figure 11. Flexural test stress-strain curves of fibre-reinforced PA-composite (a) kevlar fibre (b)
669 glass and (c) carbon fibre, reproduced with permission from ref [118]

670

39
 of
ro
671

672
-p
Figure 12. Flexural strength of FDM printed composites tested at different strain rates.
re
lP

673
na

674 5.4. Impact properties of fibre composites fabricated through the FDM process
ur

675 Fibre composite impact strength is critical to address the stiffness and strength of composites
Jo

676 against impact loads in applications such as automobiles. A sudden impact on the fibre

677 composite could produce fibre-matrix debonding, fibre delamination, and fibre breakage, which

678 could lead to failure in load transmission. In 3D printed fibre composites, the impact strength

679 depends on the interfacial bonding as well as the fibre content. Most of the literature in the 3D

680 fibre composites investigated the composite’s tensile and flexural properties but the impact

681 behaviour of the 3D printed fibre composites remains to be investigated systematically. Only

682 limited studies have reported the impact characteristics of the fibre composites fabricated

683 through the FDM process. Knowledge of the impact strength of 3D printed composites would

684 expand their application in the automobile sector.

40
685 Chacón et al. [118] investigated the tensile and flexural properties of the 3D printed PA

686 composites with continuous carbon, glass, and Kevlar reinforcement and stated that investigating

687 the impact performance of the 3D printed fibre composite would bring possibilities for their

688 usage in various applications. Caminero et al. [148] investigated the impact strength behaviour of

689 PA composites with continuous glass, kevlar, and carbon fibre. Composites were printed at flat

690 and on-edge orientations. The carbon fibre composite exhibited poor impact strength owing to

691 the increased brittleness of carbon fibre whereas the glass fibre composite exhibited maximum

of
692 impact strength. However, when increasing the carbon fibre content, the composite impact

ro
693 strength was increased considerably. The maximum impact strength was noted for on-edge

694
-p
printed composites with 34 vol.% of fibre, i.e. compared to flat orientation printed composites,
re
695 on-edge printed PA composites with carbon fibre showed a 43 % increase in impact strength, 47
lP

696 % for Kevlar fibre and only 4 % for glass fibre reinforcement. Tian et al. [137] investigated the
na

697 impact strength of the PLA composite with 10 wt.% of continuous carbon fibre. The pure PLA

698 and carbon fibre reinforced PLA exhibited impact strengths of 20 kJ/m2 and 35 kJ/m2,
ur

699 respectively. The author claimed the variation in the impact strength was not a multifold
Jo

700 improvement. The limited increase in the strength was attributed due to the lower strain of the

701 carbon fibre. On impact, the carbon fibre was found to be fractured and pulled out of the matrix.

702 Liao et al. [124] analysed PA12/ long carbon fibre (15 - 20 mm) composite impact strength

703 behaviour at the varying fibre contents (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 wt.%). From 2 to 8 wt.% carbon fibre

704 reinforcement, the impact strength was lower than the pure PA material owing to the penetration

705 of stress concentration at the end of the fibre, which leads to crack initiation during impact. At 8

706 and 10 % carbon fibre reinforcement, the composite developed crack resistance ability. The

707 maximum impact strength was noted for the 10 wt.% carbon fibre composite, which was 10%

41
708 higher than the pure PA12 material. Except for the 10 wt.% carbon fibre reinforced composites,

709 the other composites displayed lower impact strength than the pure PA12. These results indicate

710 that the type and amount of reinforcement is important for enhancing impact strength and carbon

711 fibre composites have a low impact strength due to the brittle nature of the carbon fibre.

712 Similarly, in another study, short carbon fibre reinforcement increased the brittleness of the PP

713 matrix, which led to brittle fracture under impact load. 10 % carbon fibre reinforced composite

714 exhibit two to four times lower impact strength than the PP material [94]. However, Ashori et al.

of
715 [107] have achieved improved impact strength in short carbon fibre/PP composites by coating

ro
716 carbon fibre with exfoliated graphene nanoplatelets (xGnP). Carbon fibre was reinforced at 15

717
-p
wt.% and coating was made at three different percentages (0.5, 1, and 3 wt.%). The maximum
re
718 impact strength was noted for the 1 wt.% xGnP coated composite, which was 7 % higher than
lP

719 the uncoated composite. During impact, the xGnP coating minimised the chances of crack
na

720 initiation and propagation. The impact strength of the cork granules reinforced PLA composite

721 was investigated by Daver et al. [149]. Composite was fabricated with varying percentages of
ur

722 cork granules reinforcement. The addition of cork granules in PLA material reduced the impact
Jo

723 strength of the composite. The impact strength was found to be low at all weight percentages, but

724 the addition of the plasticiser in the form of tributyl citrate to the cork PLA composite

725 significantly increased the impact strength compared to the pure PLA material. Overall, it is

726 understood that the impact strength of FDM printed fibre composites is low, and this

727 shortcoming can limit the application of FDM printed parts in automotive sectors. In order to

728 address this, research in this field should be expanded in a different approach to optimise the

729 FDM parameters and base material as well as the reinforcement properties. The impact strength

730 of FDM printed fibre composites is shown in Table 4.

42
731 Table 4. Impact strength of FDM fabricated fibre composites

Max.
% of Notch
Matrix Impact Remarks Ref.
reinforcement condition
Strength

GF composites displayed the best

34.3 vol.% of 280.95 impact performance compared to
Nylon Notched [148]
GF kJ/m2 CF, leading to more brittle
behaviour.

of
When the CF content increased to

ro
some extent such as 8 wt%, the
effect of preventing crack
PA-12 10 wt.% of CF Unnotched 24.8 kJ/m2
-p propagation dominated the impact [124]
process, which contributed to the
enhancement of the impact
re
strength.
lP

No fibre pull-out was observed

and only fibre breakage occurred
PLA 8.9 wt.% of CF Unnotched 38.7 kJ/m2 [137]
na

on the sample after the impact

test.
ur

Increase in the impact strength

Jo

15 wt.% of was a result of the composites

SCF coated requiring more impact energy to
PP Notched 38.1 J/m [107]
with 1 wt.% of pull out the xGnP–SCFs from the
xGnPs matrix owing to the rough surface
of SCFs in the presence of xGnP.

Pure PP displayed plastic

deformation on the fracture
surface visible as elongated fibrils
in large magnifications. The
PP 10 wt.% of CF Notched 40 kJ/m2 [94]
matrix of PP/CF10 appeared
smooth and showed no plastic
deformation due to brittle
fracture.

43
 Strong interfacial bonding among
GF and PEEK compared to CF
PEEK 5 wt.% of GF Unnotched 30.2 kJ/m2 and PEEK was observed and this [150]
made it difficult to pull-out GF
from PEEK.

Experimental results were

2 wt.% aramid 0.637
Nylon --- interpreted with the Taguchi [151]
short fibres MJ/m2
Technique

of
The impact test resulted in a
significant reduction of the
18 kJ/m2

ro
ASA 20 wt.% of CF Unnotched absorbed energy (87%) by the 20 [152]
wt% CF composite as compared
-p to the pure ASA.
re
Increment of impact strength was
observed when the CF content
PLA 20 wt.% of CF Notched 6.11 kJ/m2 [153]
lP

increased from 15 wt.% to 20

wt.%.
na

732 xGnPs: exfoliated graphene nanoplatelets, SCFs: Short Carbon Fibres; ASA: Acrylonitrile

733 styrene acrylate

ur

734
Jo

735

736 5.5. Compression properties of FDM fibre composites fabricated through the FDM process

737 FDM manufactured fibre composites exhibit poor compressive strength due to their anisotropic

738 and brittle nature making it is necessary to study resistance to compressive load behaviour. The

739 layer of the FDM printed material debonds and undergoes plastic deformation under

740 compression load. The compressive loading of the FDM parts may cause layer separation and

741 increased buckling [18]. Justo et al. [56] observed the failure mechanism for PA composites with

44
742 glass and carbon fibre reinforcement. Carbon fibre failed before the buckling of the composite,

743 however, the failure of the glass fibre was noted after the buckling of the composite. Material

744 buckling is categorised as the main failure mode of 3D printed fibre composites under the

745 compression load [154]. Hou et al. [155] investigated continuous kevlar fibre reinforced PLA

746 composite at varying fibre percentages and reported that 11.5 % of fibre reinforcement produced

747 an increased compressive strength of 17 MPa in the PLA matrix. The authors observed that

748 during compression loading, the composite experienced elastic buckling and plastic deformation.

of
749 Using FDM 3D printing techniques, two different sandwich composites were manufactured with

ro
750 vertical pillar corrugated sine wave (VPSC) structure and vertical pillar corrugated trapezoidal

751
-p
(VPTC) structure, made of PA/glass fibre and photopolymers (80 percent rigid-ABS, 20 %
re
752 Flexible-Rubber) [154]. Composite with the VPSC structure showed good compressive strength
lP

753 compared to the VPTC structure. It is understood that, due to their anisotropic nature, fibre
na

754 composite materials are more likely to buckle under compression loading and eventually lead to

755 greater deformation or even crippling of the material. However, reinforcement of continuous
ur

756 fibre in FDM polymers is observed to significantly reduce buckling during compression loading
Jo

757 conditions. The SEM morphology of the sample tested for compression showed buckling and

758 separation of layers as major failure modes during loading (Figure 13). De-bonding of layers

759 under compressive load is another failure mode. De-bonding affects the general stress-strain

760 behaviour of the composite resulting in poor compressive strength. Proper amendment of process

761 parameters (optimised process parameters) during the manufacturing of fibre reinforced

762 composites significantly influences the layer bonding, which correspondingly improves the

763 compressive strength of the composites.

45
764

of
ro
765 Figure 13. SEM image of compression failed ABS composite (a) failure due to buckling and (b)
766 de-bonding between layers, reproduced under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
767 (CC-BY) license from ref [157].

768
-p
re
lP

769 Kaur et al. [156] investigated the compressive strength of 3D truss structure made of polymeric

770 materials PA618, PLA, and carbon fibre reinforced PLA by the FDM 3D printing process. In the
na

771 uniaxial compression test, the stress-stress curve showed significant stretch dominance behaviour
ur

772 for polymeric materials at different strain rates. Carbon fibre PLA composite showed promising
Jo

773 mechanical stability compared to pure PA618 and PLA. In another work, compressive properties

774 of aramid fibre reinforced PLA were compared to pure PLA by Bettini et al. [110]. The results

775 showed an 87 % increase in compressive strength when reinforcing PLA with aramid fibre.

776 Improper feeding of fibre in accordance with the speed of extrusion during the FDM process

777 breaks the fibre and results in homogeneous extrusion and clogging. In the case of continuous

778 fibre reinforcement FDM, variable extrusion speed plays a vital role in the printed composite

779 compression performance under loading conditions.

46
780 In order to achieve maximum compressive strength in ABS-P400 [157], FDM process

781 parameters of layer thickness, raster angle, raster width, orientation, and air gap were analysed.

782 The Quantum-behaved particle swarm optimisation (QPSO) technique was used to optimise the

783 process parameters. The maximum compressive stress of 17.48 MPa was achieved under printing

784 conditions of 0.254 mm layer thickness, 0.036 ° orientation, 59.44 ° raster angle, 0.422 mm

785 raster width, and 0.00026 mm air gap. Araya-Calvo et al. [158] investigated the compression

786 strength of the PA6 composite made of continuous carbon fibre reinforcement. The compression

of
787 strength was analysed at different fibre percentages, which varied according to the type of

ro
788 reinforcement (isotropic and concentric), reinforcement orientation, and print orientation

789
-p
(parallel and perpendicular to the direction of force). A significant influence of the reinforcement
re
790 distribution and the reinforcement type on the compression response was noted from the
lP

791 investigation. The maximum compressive response was observed at 0.25 carbon fibre volume
na

792 ratio, resulting in a compressive modulus of 2.102 GPa and compressive stress at a proportional

793 limit of 53.3 MPa. The distribution of reinforcement material has a significant role to play in
ur

794 achieving a decent compressive strength for reinforced fibre composites. Usually, three
Jo

795 distributions of fibre reinforcement are followed during the manufacturing of continuous fibre

796 reinforced composites, i.e. borders only, borders & centre and equidistant. Enhanced

797 compressive resistance can be achieved for composites manufactured using the FDM method

798 when the reinforcement distribution is equidistant. When continuous fibre is used as a

799 reinforcement material, the reinforcement type and the reinforcement orientation play a

800 significant role in the compressive strength of the composite manufactured using the FDM

801 process.

47
802 Han et al. [159] manufactured a PEEK biocompatible carbon fibre reinforced composite suitable

803 for orthopedic and dental applications. Both the compressive strength and the compressive

804 modulus were analysed for the samples produced. It was also noted that PEEK reinforced carbon

805 fibre composite (137 MPa) exhibited similar compressive strength compared to the pure PEEK

806 material (138 MPa), although the modulus for pure PEEK was 2.7 GPa and for composite, it was

807 3.5 GPa. This investigation suggested FDM printed PEEK and its composites for achieving

808 better compressive properties. Kain et al. [160] investigated the effect of the infill orientation (0°,

of
809 15° crossed, 30° crossed, 45° crossed, 60° crossed, 75° crossed and 90° crossed) and the fibre

ro
810 content (15 and 25 wt. %) on the compressive strength of the wood fibre-reinforced PLA

811
-p
composite. The infill orientation had a direct effect on the compression strength of the PLA
re
812 composite. The increase in the fibre content increased the compression strength of the composite.
lP

813 The maximum compression strength of 70 N/mm2 was noted for 25 wt.% of wood fibre
na

814 composite printed with 15 ° infill orientation. In another study, Yang et al. [161] investigated the

815 effect of the extrusion temperature on the compression strength of the FDM 3D unidirectional
ur

816 wood fibre-reinforced PLA composite. When the extrusion temperature was increased from 200
Jo

817 to 230 °C, the compressive strength of the composite was increased by 15 %, while the other

818 mechanical properties, i.e. the tensile and flexural properties, decreased. This was due to a

819 decrease in the viscosity of the polymer at higher extrusion temperature, which tightly packed

820 the fibre between the layers leading to an increase in the composite density that improved the

821 compression strength.

822 Short carbon fibre reinforced PA6 composite was manufactured using FDM and polymer

823 injection moulding (PIM) methods and the compression strength of the composite was

824 investigated [162]. FDM printed composite showed a 4 % reduction in compression strength

48
825 compared to the injection moulded composite. However, 3D printed specimens exhibited higher

826 rigidity than the injection moulded specimens. The compression modulus of the FDM printed

827 fibre composite and injection moulded composite was 3931 MPa and 1950 MPa, respectively

828 [162]. There is a dearth of studies reporting the compression modulus of FDM printed fibre

829 composites is rare. It is surprising to observe a high variation in the FDM printed composite

830 modulus when compared to the injection moulded composite, although the FDM printed

831 composite compression strength was 4 % lower than the injection moulded composite. However,

of
832 the rationale behind this phenomenon has not been properly addressed and further investigations

ro
833 into the compression modulus of FDM printed parts are warranted.
-p
re
834 6. Thermal properties of FDM fibre composites fabricated through the FDM process
lP

835 In addition to mechanical properties, FDM manufactured fibre composites were also investigated

their thermal behaviour, albeit the number of studies is few in number. Additive manufacturing
na

836

837 involves repeated heating and cooling process, which could produce residual stress in the
ur

838 manufactured parts. The presence of residual stress may affect mechanical performance and also
Jo

839 results in the bending of part and dimensional inaccuracies [163]. The thermal diffusivity and the

840 thermal conductivity of carbon fibre reinforced PEEK composite fabricated from the FDM

841 technique was compared with the composite fabricated by traditional casting [164]. Compared to

842 composite fabricated with traditional casting, the composite fabricated with FDM 3D print

843 technique showed a 25 % to 30 % decrease in the thermal diffusivity and conductivity. The

844 thermal diffusivity of the fibre composite was influenced by the fibre alignment formed during

845 the melt flow. The PEEK carbon fibre composite thermal diffusivity increased significantly with

846 carbon fibre reinforcement. 30 wt.% carbon fibre reinforcement exhibited high thermal

847 diffusivity of 0.5 mm2 and for 20 wt.% reinforced composite it was 0.22 mm2. Kaur et al. [156]

49
848 studied the thermal properties of the FDM fabricated polymeric materials of PA618, PLA, and

849 carbon fibre reinforced PLA. The thermal behaviour of these polymeric materials was analysed

850 using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) with the test temperature ranging from 25 to 270

851 °C at a heating rate of about 10 °C/min in a nitrogen atmosphere. 3D printed carbon-based PLA

852 exhibited better thermal behaviour compared to the other polymeric materials under

853 investigation. It is because the presence of carbon fibre accelerated the nucleation of PLA.

854 Thermal variation in the printed PLA and carbon fibre reinforced PLA analysed in DSC at a

of
855 heating rate of 10 °C/min is shown in Figure 14. The printed PLA has a glass transition

ro
856 temperature of 57.07 °C, however, for the carbon fibre reinforced PLA, the glass transition

857 temperature increased to 59.23 °C.

-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

858

859 Figure 14. Thermal variation in the printed PLA and carbon fibre reinforced PLA, reproduced

860 with permission from ref [156]. (Tg= glass transition temperature; Tcc= recrystallisation

861 temperature; Tm= melting temperature)

50
862 Composite printed at different build plate temperatures exhibited similar crystallisation peaks on

863 the DSC test. These results concluded that the thermal variation in the printing environment does

864 not influence the properties of the printed part and composite [162]. Yang et al. [161] reported

865 that the increase in the extrusion temperature has a significant effect on the mechanical

866 properties of wood-PLA composite. Composite fabricated at high extrusion temperature

867 exhibited maximum tensile and flexural properties. The internal bonding strength was increased

868 by up to 24 % at 200 ºC of extrusion temperature. Kain et al [160] found similar thermal

of
869 properties between wood fibre PLA composite and PLA material. It is because the thermal

ro
870 stability of the natural fibre composite largely depends on the thermoplastic polymers.

871
-p
Elsewhere, in a different study, the addition of carbon fibre to PA12 composite reduced the
re
872 thermal degradation of the composite [124]. When increasing the fibre content, the onset of
lP

873 degradation temperature was also increased, fostering thermal stability in the composite. Carbon
na

874 fibre reinforcement acted as a thermal stabiliser that protected the matrix through a shielding

875 effect. The thermal conductivity along the print direction increased drastically to 278 %
ur

876 compared to the pure PA12. In another study, De Toro et al. [165] investigated the thermal
Jo

877 properties of 20 wt.% carbon fibre reinforced PA composite, through DSC and

878 thermogravimetry-differential thermal analysis. The composites showed a glass transition

879 temperature of 50 °C, a melting point of 220 °C, and maximum degradation was observed at 450

880 °C.

881 Wang et al. [150] investigated the thermal stability of PEEK composites reinforced with short

882 carbon fibre (average length of 205 μm) and glass fibre (average length of 96 μm). Composites

883 were manufactured with varying fibre reinforcements of 5, 10, and 15 wt.%. Glass fibre

884 composites exhibited better thermal stability than the carbon fibre composites due to enhanced

51
885 interfacial bonding. A minimum weight loss of 43 % was noted for 10 wt.% glass fibre

886 composite, while for 10 wt.% carbon fibre composite the same was 47 %. An increase in the

887 melting point, thermal decomposition temperature, and crystallisation temperature was noted on

888 the composites when increasing the fibre content. Similar results were reported by Vinyas et al.

889 [166] for 30 wt.% glass fibre reinforced PLA composite. The degradation temperature of the

890 glass fibre PLA composite was 442 °C, which is 25 % higher than that of the pure PLA. From

891 these results, it is identified that fibre reinforcement in FDM-printed polymer could provide

of
892 enhanced thermal stability. The fibre reinforcement limits the movement of the polymer

ro
893 molecular chains leading to higher thermal stability than the pure polymer.
-p
re
894 Li et al. [112] investigated the dynamic mechanical properties of FDM printed continuous carbon

fibre PLA composites. The composites were made with carbon fibre and with fibre having a
lP

895

896 modified surface. Surface modification was performed using aqueous solution containing
na

897 methylene dichloride and PLA particles. The glass transition temperature and the storage
ur

898 modulus of modified carbon fibre composite were higher than the pure and original carbon fibre
Jo

899 composite. The storage module of the modified carbon fibre reinforced PLA composites was

900 3.25 GPa, which is 166 % and 351 % higher than the pure PLA and the original carbon fibre

901 reinforced composites, respectively. In another study, Zhang et al. [58] examined the influence

902 of the raster angle on the dynamic mechanical properties of FDM-printed aluminium fibre

903 composites. Composites were printed at varying raster orientations of 0°, 90°, 45°, 0°/90 ° and ±

904 45° with PLA/aluminium fibre composite filament having 6.95 wt.% of aluminium fibre. The

905 increased stiffness due to the addition of aluminium fibre increased the storage modulus of the

906 composites. A maximum storage modulus of 3.87 GPa was observed for the composite printed at

907 0° raster angle, however, a maximum glass transition temperature of 72.34 °C was noted for the

52
908 composite printed at 90° raster angle. Nevertheless, it was found that literature reporting the

909 influence of the FDM parameter on the thermal properties of printed composites is limited.

910 Investigating the influence of FDM parameters on the thermal properties of FDM-based fibre

911 composites could lead to interesting new findings.

912 7. Summary and future research scopes

913 The present review article summarises the performance of the fibre-reinforced composites

of
914 manufactured through AM, in particular the FDM method. In recent years, the FDM process has

ro
915 achieved significant improvement in developing fibre composites. The review investigated both

916
-p
the short and continuous fibre-reinforced composites. Most of the literature is concentrated on
re
917 the effect of carbon fibre reinforcement in FDM fabricated composites and future research
lP

918 should be focused on different synthetic and natural fibre reinforcement. In FDM, the effect of

natural fibre is studied by only a few researches, which provides an impetus for the development
na

919

920 of natural fibre composites through FDM. The fibre and matrix interaction could be increased
ur

921 through fibre treatment and other processing methods that can also aid in avoiding the formation
Jo

922 of voids. The void formation was found to be a more common printing defect in FDM of fibre

923 composites. Variation in fibre content, fibre orientation, and fibre-matrix bonding was found to

924 be the crucial parameters deciding the part performance. The increase in fibre reinforcement

925 content and fibre length contributed to increased strength. Regarding mechanical performance,

926 although a number of literatures reported the tensile characteristics, only a limited study

927 examined the flexural behaviour of the composite while there are even fewer studies relating to

928 the compression strength and impact strength. To understand the AM fibre composites' strength,

929 the mechanical properties should be investigated in more detail concerning fracture mechanics.

930 Understanding of FDM process parameters is important to enhance the part performance. It is

53
931 therefore essential to optimise the FDM process parameters. Modelling should be developed to

932 understand the significance of the parameters on part performance. Moreover, to establish FDM

933 as a viable process for developing fibre composites, research on the development of a modelling

934 tool to predict the process and its consequences are important. Further, the rheological properties

935 of polymer matrix/filament and morphology should be studied when reinforced with fibres. Only

936 a few thermoset based 3D printed fibre composites performance were reported and development

937 in this area can enable high-performance composites. In AM, composites' defect, formation

of
938 chances are high leading to reduced strength. Hence, investigating the defect formation

ro
939 mechanism could reduce the possibility of the defect and consequently increase the performance

940
-p
properties. More detailed and fundamental research on FDM-based fibre composites’
re
941 performance is required to warrant their foray into modern applications. The FDM method is
lP

942 found to be the most potential and promising method for the development of fibre composites,
na

943 which can reduce the composite processing time and cost.
ur

944
Jo

945 CRediT authorship contribution statement

946 Vigneshwaran Shanmugam: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review &

947 Editing Deepak Joel Johnson: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Karthik

948 Babu: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Sundarakannan Rajendran:

949 Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Arumugaprabu Veerasimman: Writing -

950 Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Uthayakumar Marimuthu: Supervision, Writing -

951 Review & Editing Sunpreet Singh: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Oisik

952 Das: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Rasoul Esmaeely

54
953 Neisiany: Conceptualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing Mikael S.

954 Hedenqvist: Writing - Review & Editing Filippo Berto: Writing - Review & Editing Seeram

955 Ramakrishna: Supervision, Writing - Review & Editing

956

957 Declaration of Competing Interest

958 The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal

of
959 relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

ro
960 -p
re
961 References
lP

962 [1] Snyder TJ, Andrews M, Weislogel M, Moeck P, Stone-Sundberg J, Birkes D, et al. 3D
963 systems’ technology overview and new applications in manufacturing, engineering,
na

964 science, and education. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing 2014;1:169–76.

965 https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2014.1502.
ur

966 [2] Goh GD, Yap YL, Tan HKJ, Sing SL, Goh GL, Yeong WY. Process–Structure–Properties
967 in Polymer Additive Manufacturing via Material Extrusion: A Review. Critical Reviews
Jo

968 in Solid State and Materials Sciences 2019:1–21.

969 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408436.2018.1549977.

970 [3] Vigneshwaran Shanmugam, Oisik Das, Rasoul Esmaeely Neisiany, Karthik Babu,
971 Sunpreet Singh, Mikael S. Hedenqvist, Filippo Berto, S. Ramakrishna, Polymer recycling
972 in additive manufacturing: An opportunity for the circular economy, Mater Circ Econ,
973 (2020)..

974 [4] Gardan J. Additive manufacturing technologies: State of the art and trends. International
975 Journal of Production Research 2016;54:3118–32.
976 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1115909.

977 [5] Wendel B, Rietzel D, Kühnlein F, Feulner R, Hülder G, Schmachtenberg E. Additive

978 processing of polymers. Macromolecular Materials and Engineering 2008;293:799–809.
979 https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.200800121.

980 [6] Vaezi M, Chianrabutra S, Mellor B, Yang S. Multiple material additive manufacturing -
981 Part 1: A review. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 2013;8:19–50.

55
 982 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2013.778175.

983 [7] Khoo ZX, Teoh JEM, Liu Y, Chua CK, Yang S, An J, et al. 3D printing of smart
984 materials: A review on recent progresses in 4D printing. Virtual and Physical Prototyping
985 2015;10:103–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2015.1097054.

986 [8] Horn TJ, Harrysson OLA. Overview of current additive manufacturing technologies and
987 selected applications. Science Progress 2012;95:255–82.
988 https://doi.org/10.3184/003685012X13420984463047.

989 [9] R.E. Neisiany, S.N. Khorasani, M. Naeimirad, J.K.Y. Lee, S. Ramakrishna, Improving
990 Mechanical Properties of Carbon/Epoxy Composite by Incorporating Functionalized
991 Electrospun Polyacrylonitrile Nanofibers, Macromolecular Materials and Engineering,

of
992 302 (2017) 1600551. https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.201600551.

ro
993 [10] Kabir SMF, Mathur K, Seyam AFM. A critical review on 3D printed continuous fibre-
994 reinforced composites: History, mechanism, materials and properties. Composite
995 Structures 2020;232:111476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111476.
-p
996 [11] Rahim TNAT, Abdullah AM, Md Akil H. Recent Developments in Fused Deposition
re
997 Modeling-Based 3D Printing of Polymers and Their Composites. Polymer Reviews
998 2019;59:589–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583724.2019.1597883.
lP

999 [12] Mangat AS, Singh S, Gupta M, Sharma R. Experimental investigations on natural fibre
1000 embedded additive manufacturing-based biodegradable structures for biomedical
na

1001 applications. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2018;24:1221–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-

1002 08-2017-0162.
ur

1003 [13] Ngo TD, Kashani A, Imbalzano G, Nguyen KTQ, Hui D. Additive manufacturing (3D
1004 printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Composites Part
Jo

1005 B: Engineering 2018;143:172–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012.

1006 [14] Nasirov A, Fidan I. Prediction of mechanical properties of fused filament fabricated
1007 structures via asymptotic homogenization. Mechanics of Materials 2020;145.
1008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2020.103372.

1009 [15] Wendt C, Valerga AP, Droste O, Batista M, Marcos M. FEM based evaluation of Fused
1010 Layer Modelling monolayers in tensile testing. Procedia Manufacturing 2017;13:916–23.
1011 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.160.

1012 [16] Cuan-Urquizo E, Espinoza-Camacho JI, Álvarez-Trejo A, Uribe E, Treviño-Quintanilla

1013 CD, Crespo-Sánchez SE, et al. Elastic response of lattice arc structures fabricated using
1014 curved-layered fused deposition modeling. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and
1015 Structures 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2019.1682728.

1016 [17] Ahn SH, Montero M, Odell D, Roundy S, Wright PK. Anisotropic material properties of
1017 fused deposition modeling ABS. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2002;8:248–57.
1018 https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540210441166.

56
1019 [18] Mohan N, Senthil P, Vinodh S, Jayanth N. A review on composite materials and process
1020 parameters optimisation for the fused deposition modelling process. Virtual and Physical
1021 Prototyping 2017;12:47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2016.1274490.

1022 [19] Zhong W, Li F, Zhang Z, Song L, Li Z. Short fibre reinforced composites for fused
1023 deposition modeling. Materials Science and Engineering A 2001;301:125–30.
1024 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(00)01810-4.

1025 [20] Love LJ, Kunc V, Rios O, Duty CE, Elliott AM, Post BK, et al. The importance of carbon
1026 fibre to polymer additive manufacturing. Journal of Materials Research 2014;29:1893–8.
1027 https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2014.212.

1028 [21] Hofstätter T, Pedersen DB, Tosello G, Hansen HN. State-of-the-art of fibre-reinforced

of
1029 polymers in additive manufacturing technologies. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and
1030 Composites 2017;36:1061–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684417695648.

ro
1031 [22] Nakagawa Y, Mori K ichiro, Maeno T. 3D printing of carbon fibre-reinforced plastic
1032 parts. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2017;91:2811–7.
-p
1033 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9891-7.
re
1034 [23] Garzon-Hernandez S, Garcia-Gonzalez D, Jérusalem A, Arias A. Design of FDM 3D
1035 printed polymers: An experimental-modelling methodology for the prediction of
lP

1036 mechanical properties. Materials and Design 2020;188.

1037 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108414.
na

1038 [24] Prüß H, Vietor T. Design for Fibre-Reinforced Additive Manufacturing. Journal of
1039 Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME 2015;137:111409-1-111409–7.
1040 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030993.
ur

1041 [25] Wang J, Xie H, Weng Z, Senthil T, Wu L. A novel approach to improve mechanical
Jo

1042 properties of parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling. Materials and Design
1043 2016;105:152–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.078.

1044 [26] S.M.J. Razavi, R.E. Neisiany, S.N. Khorasani, S. Ramakrishna, F. Berto, Effect of neat
1045 and reinforced polyacrylonitrile nanofibers incorporation on interlaminar fracture
1046 toughness of carbon/epoxy composite, Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Letters, 8
1047 (2018) 126-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taml.2018.02.008.

1048 [27] R.E. Neisiany, S.N. Khorasani, J.K.Y. Lee, M. Naeimirad, S. Ramakrishna, Interfacial
1049 toughening of carbon/epoxy composite by incorporating styrene acrylonitrile nanofibers,
1050 Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 95 (2018) 242-247.
1051 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2018.03.006.

1052 [28] Wickramasinghe S, Do T, Tran P. FDM-Based 3D Printing of Polymer and Associated

1053 Composite: A Review on Mechanical Properties, Defects and Treatments. Polymers
1054 2020;12:1529. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12071529.

1055 [29] Goh GD, Yap YL, Agarwala S, Yeong WY. Recent Progress in Additive Manufacturing

57
1056 of Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composite. Advanced Materials Technologies
1057 2019;4:1800271. https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.201800271.

1058 [30] van de Werken N, Tekinalp H, Khanbolouki P, Ozcan S, Williams A, Tehrani M.

1059 Additively manufactured carbon fibre-reinforced composites: State of the art and
1060 perspective. Additive Manufacturing 2020;31:100962.
1061 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.100962.

1062 [31] V Wong, Aldo Hernandez. A Review of Additive Manufacturing. International Scholarly
1063 Research Notices 2012;Article ID 208760. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/208760.

1064 [32] Yang L, Hsu K, Baughman B, Godfrey D, Medina F, Menon M, et al. Additive
1065 Manufacturing of Metals: The Technology, Materials, Design and Production. Springer

of
1066 International Publishing; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55128-9.

ro
1067 [33] Zha W, Anand S. Geometric approaches to input file modification for part quality
1068 improvement in additive manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Processes
1069 2015;20:465–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2015.06.021.
-p
1070 [34] Gebhardt A. Understanding Additive Manufacturing Rapid Prototyping - Rapid Tooling -
re
1071 Rapid Manufacturing. Carl Hanser, München 2012:591.
1072 https://doi.org/10.3139/9783446431621.
lP

1073 [35] Hällgren S, Pejryd L, Ekengren J. 3D Data Export for Additive Manufacturing-Improving
1074 Geometric Accuracy. Procedia CIRP, vol. 50, Elsevier B.V.; 2016, p. 518–23.
na

1075 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.046.

1076 [36] Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B, Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B. Software Issues for Additive
ur

1077 Manufacturing. Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Springer New York; 2015, p. 351–
1078 74. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3_15.
Jo

1079 [37] Jin Y an, He Y, Fu J zhong. Support generation for additive manufacturing based on sliced
1080 data. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2015;80:2041–52.
1081 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7190-3.

1082 [38] Vaidya R, Anand S. Image Processing Assisted Tools for Pre- and Post-processing
1083 Operations in Additive Manufacturing. Procedia Manufacturing 2016;5:958–73.
1084 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2016.08.084.

1085 [39] Chua CK, Leong KF. 3D printing and additive manufacturing: Principles and applications:
1086 The 5th edition of rapid prototyping: Principles and applications. World Scientific
1087 Publishing Co.; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1142/10200.

1088 [40] Revilla-León M, Ceballos L, Martínez-Klemm I, Özcan M. Discrepancy of complete-arch

1089 titanium frameworks manufactured using selective laser melting and electron beam
1090 melting additive manufacturing technologies. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
1091 2018;120:942–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.02.010.

58
1092 [41] Chung S, Song SE, Cho YT. Effective software solutions for 4D printing: A review and
1093 proposal. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing - Green
1094 Technology 2017;4:359–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-017-0041-y.

1095 [42] Rebaioli L, Magnoni P, Fassi I, Pedrocchi N, Molinari Tosatti L. Process parameters
1096 tuning and online re-slicing for robotized additive manufacturing of big plastic objects.
1097 Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 2019;55:55–64.
1098 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2018.07.012.

1099 [43] Sikder S, Barari A, Kishawy HA. Effect of Adaptive Slicing on Surface Integrity in
1100 Additive Manufacturing, ASME International; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2014-
1101 35559.

of
1102 [44] Steuben JC, Iliopoulos AP, Michopoulos JG. Implicit slicing for functionally tailored
1103 additive manufacturing. CAD Computer Aided Design 2016;77:107–19.

ro
1104 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.04.003.

1105 [45] Kruth JP, Leu MC, Nakagawa T. Progress in additive manufacturing and rapid
-p
1106 prototyping. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 1998;47:525–40.
1107 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)63240-5.
re
1108 [46] Lim S, Buswell RA, Le TT, Austin SA, Gibb AGF, Thorpe T. Developments in
lP

1109 construction-scale additive manufacturing processes. Automation in Construction

1110 2012;21:262–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2011.06.010.
na

1111 [47] Brown AC, De Beer D. Development of a stereolithography (STL) slicing and G-code
1112 generation algorithm for an entry level 3-D printer. IEEE AFRICON Conference, Institute
1113 of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.; 2013.
ur

1114 https://doi.org/10.1109/AFRCON.2013.6757836.
Jo

1115 [48] Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B. Additive manufacturing technologies: 3D printing, rapid
1116 prototyping, and direct digital manufacturing, second edition. Springer New York; 2015.
1117 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3.

1118 [49] Kumbhar NN, Mulay A V. Post Processing Methods used to Improve Surface Finish of
1119 Products which are Manufactured by Additive Manufacturing Technologies: A Review.
1120 Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C 2018;99:481–7.
1121 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-016-0340-z.

1122 [50] Cheruvathur S, Lass EA, Campbell CE. Additive Manufacturing of 17-4 PH Stainless
1123 Steel: Post-processing Heat Treatment to Achieve Uniform Reproducible Microstructure.
1124 JOM 2016;68:930–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-015-1754-4.

1125 [51] Levy A, Miriyev A, Sridharan N, Han T, Tuval E, Babu SS, et al. Ultrasonic additive
1126 manufacturing of steel: Method, post-processing treatments and properties. Journal of
1127 Materials Processing Technology 2018;256:183–9.
1128 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.02.001.

59
1129 [52] Domingo-Espin M, Puigoriol-Forcada JM, Garcia-Granada AA, Llumà J, Borros S, Reyes
1130 G. Mechanical property characterization and simulation of fused deposition modeling
1131 Polycarbonate parts. Materials and Design 2015;83:670–7.
1132 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.074.

1133 [53] Martínez J, Diéguez JL, Ares E, Pereira A, Hernández P, Pérez JA. Comparative between
1134 FEM models for FDM parts and their approach to a real mechanical behaviour. Procedia
1135 Engineering, vol. 63, Elsevier Ltd; 2013, p. 878–84.
1136 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.08.230.

1137 [54] Nováková-Marcinčinová Ľ, Kurić I. Basic and Advanced Materials for Fused Deposition
1138 Modeling Rapid Prototyping Technology 2012.

of
1139 [55] Wu H, Fahy WP, Kim S, Kim H, Zhao N, Pilato L, et al. Recent developments in
1140 polymers/polymer nanocomposites for additive manufacturing. Progress in Materials

ro
1141 Science 2020;111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100638.

1142 [56] Justo J, Távara L, García-Guzmán L, París F. Characterization of 3D printed long fibre
-p
1143 reinforced composites. Composite Structures 2018;185:537–48.
1144 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.052.
re
1145 [57] Valerga AP, Batista M, Puyana R, Sambruno A, Wendt C, Marcos M. Preliminary study
lP

1146 of PLA wire colour effects on geometric characteristics of parts manufactured by FDM.
1147 Procedia Manufacturing 2017;13:924–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.161.
na

1148 [58] Zhang X, Chen L, Mulholland T, Osswald TA. Effects of raster angle on the mechanical
1149 properties of PLA and Al/PLA composite part produced by fused deposition modeling.
1150 Polymers for Advanced Technologies 2019;30:2122–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.4645.
ur

1151 [59] Jiang D, Smith DE. Anisotropic mechanical properties of oriented carbon fibre filled
Jo

1152 polymer composites produced with fused filament fabrication. Additive Manufacturing
1153 2017;18:84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.08.006.

1154 [60] Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL. Optimization of fused deposition modeling
1155 process parameters: a review of current research and future prospects. Advances in
1156 Manufacturing 2015;3:42–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-014-0097-7.

1157 [61] Anitha R, Arunachalam S, Radhakrishnan P. Critical parameters influencing the quality of
1158 prototypes in fused deposition modelling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
1159 vol. 118, Elsevier; 2001, p. 385–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(01)00980-3.

1160 [62] Nancharaiah T RDRV. An experimental investigation on surface quality and dimensional
1161 accuracy of FDM components. Int J Emerg Technol 2010;1:106–11.

1162 [63] Daniel Horvath RNMM. Improvement of Surface Roughness on ABS 400 Polymer Using
1163 Design of Experiments (DOE) | Scientific.Net. Materials Science Forum 2007;561:2389–
1164 92.

60
1165 [64] Wang CC, Lin TW, Hu SS. Optimizing the rapid prototyping process by integrating the
1166 Taguchi method with the Gray relational analysis. Rapid Prototyping Journal
1167 2007;13:304–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540710824814.

1168 [65] Carneiro OS, Silva AF, Gomes R. Fused deposition modeling with polypropylene.
1169 Materials and Design 2015;83:768–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.053.

1170 [66] Bellehumeur C, Li L, Sun Q, Gu P. Modeling of bond formation between polymer

1171 filaments in the fused deposition modeling process. Journal of Manufacturing Processes
1172 2004;6:170–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1526-6125(04)70071-7.

1173 [67] Riddick JC, Haile MA, Wahlde R Von, Cole DP, Bamiduro O, Johnson TE. Fractographic
1174 analysis of tensile failure of acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene fabricated by fused deposition

of
1175 modeling. Additive Manufacturing 2016;11:49–59.
1176 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.03.007.

ro
1177 [68] García-Domínguez A, Claver J, Sebastián MA. Methodology for the optimization of work
1178 pieces for additive manufacturing by 3D printing. Procedia Manufacturing 2017;13:910–
-p
1179 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.158.
re
1180 [69] Gnanasekaran K, Heijmans T, van Bennekom S, Woldhuis H, Wijnia S, de With G, et al.
1181 3D printing of CNT- and graphene-based conductive polymer nanocomposites by fused
lP

1182 deposition modeling. Applied Materials Today 2017;9:21–8.

1183 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.04.003.
na

1184 [70] Tekinalp HL, Kunc V, Velez-Garcia GM, Duty CE, Love LJ, Naskar AK, et al. Highly
1185 oriented carbon fibre-polymer composites via additive manufacturing. Composites
1186 Science and Technology 2014;105:144–50.
ur

1187 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2014.10.009.
Jo

1188 [71] Kalita SJ, Bose S, Hosick HL, Bandyopadhyay A. Development of controlled porosity
1189 polymer-ceramic composite scaffolds via fused deposition modeling. Materials Science
1190 and Engineering C 2003;23:611–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-4931(03)00052-3.

1191 [72] Berretta S, Davies R, Shyng YT, Wang Y, Ghita O. Fused Deposition Modelling of high
1192 temperature polymers: Exploring CNT PEEK composites. Polymer Testing 2017;63:251–
1193 62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.08.024.

1194 [73] Ding S, Zou B, Wang P, Ding H. Effects of nozzle temperature and building orientation
1195 on mechanical properties and microstructure of PEEK and PEI printed by 3D-FDM.
1196 Polymer Testing 2019;78:105948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.105948.

1197 [74] Brenken B, Barocio E, Favaloro A, Kunc V, Pipes RB. Fused filament fabrication of
1198 fibre-reinforced polymers: A review. Additive Manufacturing 2018;21:1–16.
1199 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.01.002.

1200 [75] Alaimo G, Marconi S, Costato L, Auricchio F. Influence of meso-structure and chemical
1201 composition on FDM 3D-printed parts. Composites Part B: Engineering 2017;113:371–

61
1202 80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.01.019.

1203 [76] Aliheidari N, Christ J, Tripuraneni R, Nadimpalli S, Ameli A. Interlayer adhesion and
1204 fracture resistance of polymers printed through melt extrusion additive manufacturing
1205 process. Materials and Design 2018;156:351–61.
1206 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.07.001.

1207 [77] Hart KR, Dunn RM, Sietins JM, Hofmeister Mock CM, Mackay ME, Wetzel ED.
1208 Increased fracture toughness of additively manufactured amorphous thermoplastics via
1209 thermal annealing. Polymer 2018;144:192–204.
1210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2018.04.024.

1211 [78] Jin M, Giesa R, Neuber C, Schmidt H. Filament Materials Screening for FDM 3D Printing

of
1212 by Means of Injection‐Molded Short Rods. Macromolecular Materials and Engineering
1213 2018;303:1800507. https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.201800507.

ro
1214 [79] Turner BN, Gold SA. A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes: II.
1215 Materials, dimensional accuracy, and surface roughness. Rapid Prototyping Journal
-p
1216 2015;21:250–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-02-2013-0017.
re
1217 [80] Turner BN, Strong R, Gold SA. A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing
1218 processes: I. Process design and modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2014;20:192–204.
lP

1219 https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-01-2013-0012.

1220 [81] Pokluda O, Bellehumeur CT, Vlachopoulos J. Modification of Frenkel’s model for
na

1221 sintering. AIChE Journal 1997;43:3253–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690431213.

1222 [82] Sun Q, Rizvi GM, Bellehumeur CT, Gu P. Effect of processing conditions on the bonding
ur

1223 quality of FDM polymer filaments. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2008;14:72–80.

1224 https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540810862028.
Jo

1225 [83] Li L, Sun Q, Bellehumeur C, Gu P. Investigation of Bond Formation in FDM Process 400.
1226 In 2002 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium., 2002.
1227 https://doi.org/10.26153/TSW/4500.

1228 [84] Torrado AR, Shemelya CM, English JD, Lin Y, Wicker RB, Roberson DA. Characterizing
1229 the effect of additives to ABS on the mechanical property anisotropy of specimens
1230 fabricated by material extrusion 3D printing. Additive Manufacturing 2015;6:16–29.
1231 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2015.02.001.

1232 [85] Thomas JP, Rodríguez JF, editors. Modeling the Fracture Strength between Fused-
1233 Deposition Extruded Roads 16. International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium,
1234 2000, p. 17–23.

1235 [86] Costa S, Duarte F, A. J. Using MATLAB to Compute Heat Transfer in Free Form
1236 Extrusion. MATLAB - A Ubiquitous Tool for the Practical Engineer, InTech; 2011.
1237 https://doi.org/10.5772/23512.

62
1238 [87] Rodriguez J, Thomas J, Renaud J. Maximizing the Strength of Fused-Deposition ABS
1239 Plastic Parts. In 1999 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 1999.

1240 [88] Aliheidari N, Tripuraneni R, Ameli A, Nadimpalli S. Fracture resistance measurement of

1241 fused deposition modeling 3D printed polymers. Polymer Testing 2017;60:94–101.
1242 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.03.016.

1243 [89] Young D, Wetmore N, Czabaj M. Interlayer fracture toughness of additively

1244 manufactured unreinforced and carbon-fibre-reinforced acrylonitrile butadiene styrene.
1245 Additive Manufacturing 2018;22:508–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.02.023.

1246 [90] Tarrés Q, Melbø JK, Delgado-Aguilar M, Espinach FX, Mutjé P, Chinga-Carrasco G. Bio-
1247 polyethylene reinforced with thermomechanical pulp fibres: Mechanical and

of
1248 micromechanical characterization and its application in 3D-printing by fused deposition
1249 modelling. Composites Part B: Engineering 2018;153:70–7.

ro
1250 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.07.009.

1251 [91] Levenhagen NP, Dadmun MD. Interlayer diffusion of surface segregating additives to
-p
1252 improve the isotropy of fused deposition modeling products. Polymer 2018;152:35–41.
1253 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2018.01.031.
re
1254 [92] Wach RA, Wolszczak P, Adamus-Wlodarczyk A. Enhancement of Mechanical Properties
lP

1255 of FDM-PLA Parts via Thermal Annealing. Macromolecular Materials and Engineering
1256 2018;303:1800169. https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.201800169.
na

1257 [93] Mulholland T, Goris S, Boxleitner J, Osswald T, Rudolph N. Process-Induced Fibre

1258 Orientation in Fused Filament Fabrication. Journal of Composites Science 2018;2:45.
1259 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs2030045.
ur

1260 [94] Spoerk M, Savandaiah C, Arbeiter F, Traxler G, Cardon L, Holzer C, et al. Anisotropic
Jo

1261 properties of oriented short carbon fibre filled polypropylene parts fabricated by
1262 extrusion-based additive manufacturing. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
1263 Manufacturing 2018;113:95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.06.018.

1264 [95] Hofstätter T, Gutmann IW, Koch T, Pedersen DB, Tosello G, Heinz G, et al. Distribution
1265 and orientation of carbon fibres in polylactic acid parts produced by fused deposition
1266 modeling. In ASPE Summer Topical Meeting 2016, The American Society for Precision
1267 Engineering.; 2016.

1268 [96] Heller BP, Smith DE, Jack DA. Effects of extrudate swell and nozzle geometry on fibre
1269 orientation in Fused Filament Fabrication nozzle flow. Additive Manufacturing
1270 2016;12:252–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.06.005.

1271 [97] Zhang H, Yang D, Sheng Y. Performance-driven 3D printing of continuous curved carbon
1272 fibre reinforced polymer composites: A preliminary numerical study. Composites Part B:
1273 Engineering 2018;151:256–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.06.017.

1274 [98] Safonov AA. 3D topology optimization of continuous fibre-reinforced structures via

63
1275 natural evolution method. Composite Structures 2019;215:289–97.
1276 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.02.063.

1277 [99] Heller BP, Smith DE, Jack DA. Effect of Extrudate Swell, Nozzle Shape, and
1278 Convergence Zone on Fibre Orientation in Fused Deposition Modeling Nozzle Flow.
1279 Proceedings of the Solid Freeform Fabrication, Austin, TX, USA: 2015, p. 1220–36.

1280 [100] Mohammadizadeh M, Imeri A, Fidan I, Elkelany M. 3D printed fibre reinforced polymer
1281 composites - Structural analysis. Composites Part B: Engineering 2019;175:107112.
1282 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107112.

1283 [101] Papon EA, Haque A. Fracture toughness of additively manufactured carbon fibre
1284 reinforced composites. Additive Manufacturing 2019;26:41–52.

of
1285 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.12.010.

ro
1286 [102] Pertuz AD, Díaz-Cardona S, González-Estrada OA. Static and fatigue behaviour of
1287 continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites manufactured by fused deposition
1288 modelling technique. International Journal of Fatigue 2020;130:105275.
-p
1289 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.105275.
re
1290 [103] Parandoush P, Tucker L, Zhou C, Lin D. Laser assisted additive manufacturing of
1291 continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites. Materials and Design
lP

1292 2017;131:186–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.06.013.

1293 [104] Liu T, Tian X, Zhang M, Abliz D, Li D, Ziegmann G. Interfacial performance and fracture
na

1294 patterns of 3D printed continuous carbon fibre with sizing reinforced PA6 composites.
1295 Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 2018;114:368–76.
1296 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.09.001.
ur

1297 [105] Sodeifian G, Ghaseminejad S, Yousefi AA. Preparation of polypropylene/short glass fibre
Jo

1298 composite as Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) filament. Results in Physics

1299 2019;12:205–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2018.11.065.

1300 [106] Yao X, Luan C, Zhang D, Lan L, Fu J. Evaluation of carbon fibre-embedded 3D printed
1301 structures for strengthening and structural-health monitoring. Materials and Design
1302 2017;114:424–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.10.078.

1303 [107] Ashori A, Menbari S, Bahrami R. Mechanical and thermo-mechanical properties of short
1304 carbon fibre reinforced polypropylene composites using exfoliated graphene nanoplatelets
1305 coating. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 2016;38:37–42.
1306 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2016.04.003.

1307 [108] Liu Z, Lei Q, Xing S. Mechanical characteristics of wood, ceramic, metal and carbon
1308 fibre-based PLA composites fabricated by FDM. Journal of Materials Research and
1309 Technology 2019;8:3743–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.06.034.

1310 [109] Le Duigou A, Castro M, Bevan R, Martin N. 3D printing of wood fibre biocomposites:
1311 From mechanical to actuation functionality. Materials and Design 2016;96:106–14.

64
1312 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.02.018.

1313 [110] Bettini P, Alitta G, Sala G, Di Landro L. Fused Deposition Technique for Continuous
1314 Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastic. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
1315 2017;26:843–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-016-2459-8.

1316 [111] Ning F, Cong W, Hu Y, Wang H. Additive manufacturing of carbon fibre-reinforced

1317 plastic composites using fused deposition modeling: Effects of process parameters on
1318 tensile properties. Journal of Composite Materials 2017;51:451–62.
1319 https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998316646169.

1320 [112] Li N, Li Y, Liu S. Rapid prototyping of continuous carbon fibre reinforced polylactic acid
1321 composites by 3D printing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2016;238:218–

of
1322 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2016.07.025.

ro
1323 [113] Zhang W, Cotton C, Sun J, Heider D, Gu B, Sun B, et al. Interfacial bonding strength of
1324 short carbon fibre/acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene composites fabricated by fused
1325 deposition modeling. Composites -p Part B: Engineering 2018;137:51–9.
1326 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.11.018.
re
1327 [114] Tian X, Liu T, Yang C, Wang Q, Li D. Interface and performance of 3D printed
1328 continuous carbon fibre reinforced PLA composites. Composites Part A: Applied Science
lP

1329 and Manufacturing 2016;88:198–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.05.032.

1330 [115] Sang L, Han S, Li Z, Yang X, Hou W. Development of short basalt fibre reinforced
na

1331 polylactide composites and their feasible evaluation for 3D printing applications.
1332 Composites Part B: Engineering 2019;164:629–39.
1333 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.01.085.
ur

1334 [116] Zhu J, Zhang J, Wang J, Wang B. Compatibilizer Assistant SCF/ABS Composites with
Jo

1335 Improved Mechanical Properties Prepared by Fused Deposition Modeling. Polymer -

1336 Plastics Technology and Engineering 2018;57:1576–84.
1337 https://doi.org/10.1080/03602559.2017.1410843.

1338 [117] Heidari-Rarani M, Rafiee-Afarani M, Zahedi AM. Mechanical characterization of FDM

1339 3D printing of continuous carbon fibre reinforced PLA composites. Composites Part B:
1340 Engineering 2019;175:107147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107147.

1341 [118] Chacón JM, Caminero MA, Núñez PJ, García-Plaza E, García-Moreno I, Reverte JM.
1342 Additive manufacturing of continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using
1343 fused deposition modelling: Effect of process parameters on mechanical properties.
1344 Composites Science and Technology 2019;181:107688.
1345 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107688.

1346 [119] Forster AM. Materials testing standards for additive manufacturing of polymer materials:
1347 State of the art and standards applicability. vol. 8059. 2015.
1348 https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8059.

65
1349 [120] ISO - ISO 17296-3:2014 - Additive manufacturing — General principles — Part 3: Main
1350 characteristics and corresponding test methods n.d.
1351 https://www.iso.org/standard/61627.html (accessed July 5, 2020).

1352 [121] Al Abadi H, Thai HT, Paton-Cole V, Patel VI. Elastic properties of 3D printed fibre-
1353 reinforced structures. Composite Structures 2018;193:8–18.
1354 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.03.051.

1355 [122] Gray IV RW, Baird DG, Bøhn JH. Effects of processing conditions on short TLCP fibre
1356 reinforced FDM parts. Rapid Prototyping Journal 1998;4:14–25.
1357 https://doi.org/10.1108/13552549810197514.

1358 [123] Ning F, Cong W, Qiu J, Wei J, Wang S. Additive manufacturing of carbon fibre

of
1359 reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modeling. Composites Part B:
1360 Engineering 2015;80:369–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.06.013.

ro
1361 [124] Liao G, Li Z, Cheng Y, Xu D, Zhu D, Jiang S, et al. Properties of oriented carbon
1362 fibre/polyamide 12 composite parts fabricated by fused deposition modeling. Materials
-p
1363 and Design 2018;139:283–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.027.
re
1364 [125] Li Y, Gao S, Dong R, Ding X, Duan X. Additive Manufacturing of PLA and CF/PLA
1365 Binding Layer Specimens via Fused Deposition Modeling. Journal of Materials
lP

1366 Engineering and Performance 2018;27:492–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-017-

1367 3065-0.
na

1368 [126] Keleş Ö, Anderson EH, Huynh J. Mechanical reliability of short carbon fibre reinforced
1369 ABS produced via vibration assisted fused deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyping
1370 Journal 2018;24:1572–8. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-12-2017-0247.
ur

1371 [127] Shofner ML, Lozano K, Rodríguez-Macías FJ, Barrera E V. Nanofibre-reinforced

Jo

1372 polymers prepared by fused deposition modeling. Journal of Applied Polymer Science
1373 2003;89:3081–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.12496.

1374 [128] Mori KI, Maeno T, Nakagawa Y. Dieless forming of carbon fibre reinforced plastic parts
1375 using 3D printer. Procedia Engineering, vol. 81, Elsevier Ltd; 2014, p. 1595–600.
1376 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.196.

1377 [129] El Magri A, El Mabrouk K, Vaudreuil S, Ebn Touhami M. Mechanical properties of CF-
1378 reinforced PLA parts manufactured by fused deposition modeling. Journal of
1379 Thermoplastic Composite Materials 2019:089270571984724.
1380 https://doi.org/10.1177/0892705719847244.

1381 [130] Gray Iv RW, Baird DG, Bøhn JH. Thermoplastic composites reinforced with long fibre
1382 thermotropic liquid crystalline polymers for fused deposition modeling. Polymer
1383 Composites 1998;19:383–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.10112.

1384 [131] Akhoundi B, Behravesh AH, Bagheri Saed A. Improving mechanical properties of
1385 continuous fibre-reinforced thermoplastic composites produced by FDM 3D printer.

66
1386 Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 2019;38:99–116.
1387 https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684418807300.

1388 [132] Matsuzaki R, Ueda M, Namiki M, Jeong TK, Asahara H, Horiguchi K, et al. Three-
1389 dimensional printing of continuous-fibre composites by in-nozzle impregnation. Scientific
1390 Reports 2016;6:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23058.

1391 [133] Hao W, Liu Y, Zhou H, Chen H, Fang D. Preparation and characterization of 3D printed
1392 continuous carbon fibre reinforced thermosetting composites. Polymer Testing
1393 2018;65:29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.11.004.

1394 [134] Der Klift F Van, Koga Y, Todoroki A, Ueda M, Hirano Y, Matsuzaki R. 3D Printing of
1395 Continuous Carbon Fibre Reinforced Thermo-Plastic (CFRTP) Tensile Test Specimens.

of
1396 Open Journal of Composite Materials 2016;06:18–27.
1397 https://doi.org/10.4236/ojcm.2016.61003.

ro
1398 [135] Yang C, Tian X, Liu T, Cao Y, Li D. 3D printing for continuous fibre reinforced
1399 thermoplastic composites: Mechanism and performance. Rapid Prototyping Journal
-p
1400 2017;23:209–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-08-2015-0098.
re
1401 [136] Ning F, Cong W, Wei J, Wang S, Zhang M. Additive Manufacturing of CFRP Composites
1402 Using Fused Deposition Modeling: Effects of Carbon Fibre Content and Length, ASME
lP

1403 International; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1115/msec2015-9436.

1404 [137] Tian X, Liu T, Wang Q, Dilmurat A, Li D, Ziegmann G. Recycling and remanufacturing
na

1405 of 3D printed continuous carbon fibre reinforced PLA composites. Journal of Cleaner
1406 Production 2017;142:1609–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.139.
ur

1407 [138] Milosevi, Stoof D, K.L.Pickering. Characterizing the Mechanical Properties of Fused
1408 Deposition Modelling Natural Fibre Recycled Polypropylene Composites. Journal of
Jo

1409 Composites Science 2017;1:7. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs1010007.

1410 [139] Wu W, Geng P, Li G, Zhao D, Zhang H, Zhao J. Influence of Layer Thickness and Raster
1411 Angle on the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PEEK and a Comparative Mechanical
1412 Study between PEEK and ABS. Materials 2015;8:5834–46.
1413 https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8095271.

1414 [140] Pyl L, Kalteremidou KA, Van Hemelrijck D. Exploration of the design freedom of 3D
1415 printed continuous fibre-reinforced polymers in open-hole tensile strength tests.
1416 Composites Science and Technology 2019;171:135–51.
1417 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.12.021.

1418 [141] Dong G, Tang Y, Li D, Zhao YF. Mechanical Properties of Continuous Kevlar Fibre
1419 Reinforced Composites Fabricated by Fused Deposition Modeling Process. Procedia
1420 Manufacturing, vol. 26, Elsevier B.V.; 2018, p. 774–81.
1421 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.090.

1422 [142] Stoof D, Pickering K, Zhang Y. Fused Deposition Modelling of Natural Fibre/Polylactic

67
1423 Acid Composites. Journal of Composites Science 2017;1:8.
1424 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs1010008.

1425 [143] Le Duigou A, Barbé A, Guillou E, Castro M. 3D printing of continuous flax fibre
1426 reinforced biocomposites for structural applications. Materials and Design
1427 2019;180:107884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107884.

1428 [144] Oztan C, Karkkainen R, Fittipaldi M, Nygren G, Roberson L, Lane M, et al.

1429 Microstructure and mechanical properties of three dimensional-printed continuous fibre
1430 composites. Journal of Composite Materials 2019;53:271–80.
1431 https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998318781938.

1432 [145] Gavali VC, Kubade PR, Kulkarni HB. Property Enhancement of Carbon Fibre Reinforced

of
1433 Polymer Composites Prepared by Fused Deposition Modeling. Materials Today:
1434 Proceedings 2020;23:221–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.020.

ro
1435 [146] Goh GD, Dikshit V, Nagalingam AP, Goh GL, Agarwala S, Sing SL, et al.
1436 Characterization of mechanical properties and fracture mode of additively manufactured
-p
1437 carbon fibre and glass fibre reinforced thermoplastics. Materials and Design 2018;137:79–
1438 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.021.
re
1439 [147] Hu Q, Duan Y, Zhang H, Liu D, Yan B, Peng F. Manufacturing and 3D printing of
lP

1440 continuous carbon fibre prepreg filament. Journal of Materials Science 2018;53:1887–98.
1441 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-1624-2.
na

1442 [148] Caminero MA, Chacón JM, García-Moreno I, Rodríguez GP. Impact damage resistance of
1443 3D printed continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition
1444 modelling. Composites Part B: Engineering 2018;148:93–103.
ur

1445 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.04.054.
Jo

1446 [149] Daver F, Lee KPM, Brandt M, Shanks R. Cork–PLA composite filaments for fused
1447 deposition modelling. Composites Science and Technology 2018;168:230–7.
1448 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.10.008.

1449 [150] Wang P, Zou B, Ding S, Huang C, Shi Z, Ma Y, et al. Preparation of short CF/GF
1450 reinforced PEEK composite filaments and their comprehensive properties evaluation for
1451 FDM-3D printing. Composites Part B: Engineering 2020;198:108175.
1452 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108175.

1453 [151] Nagendra J, Prasad MSG. FDM Process Parameter Optimization by Taguchi Technique
1454 for Augmenting the Mechanical Properties of Nylon–Aramid Composite Used as Filament
1455 Material. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C 2020;101:313–22.
1456 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-019-00538-6.

1457 [152] Guo R, Ren Z, Bi H, Song Y, Xu M. Effect of toughening agents on the properties of
1458 poplar wood flour/poly (lactic acid) composites fabricated with Fused Deposition
1459 Modeling. European Polymer Journal 2018;107:34–45.
1460 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2018.07.035.

68
1461 [153] Gavali VC, Kubade PR, Kulkarni HB. Mechanical and Thermo-mechanical Properties of
1462 Carbon fibre Reinforced Thermoplastic Composite Fabricated Using Fused Deposition
1463 Modeling Method. Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 22, Elsevier Ltd; 2019, p. 1786–95.
1464 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.012.

1465 [154] Dikshit V, Yap YL, Goh GD, Yang H, Lim JC, Qi X, et al. Investigation of out of plane
1466 compressive strength of 3D printed sandwich composites. IOP Conf Series: Materials
1467 Science and Engineering 2013;139:012017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-
1468 899X/139/1/012017.

1469 [155] Hou Z, Tian X, Zhang J, Li D. 3D printed continuous fibre reinforced composite
1470 corrugated structure. Composite Structures 2018;184:1005–10.
1471 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.10.080.

of
1472 [156] Kaur M, Yun TG, Han SM, Thomas EL, Kim WS. 3D printed stretching-dominated

ro
1473 micro-trusses. Materials and Design 2017;134:272–80.
1474 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.08.061.

1475
1476
-p
[157] Sood AK, Ohdar RK, Mahapatra SS. Experimental investigation and empirical modelling
of FDM process for compressive strength improvement. Journal of Advanced Research
re
1477 2012;3:81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2011.05.001.
lP

1478 [158] Araya-Calvo M, López-Gómez I, Chamberlain-Simon N, León-Salazar JL, Guillén-Girón

1479 T, Corrales-Cordero JS, et al. Evaluation of compressive and flexural properties of
1480 continuous fibre fabrication additive manufacturing technology. Additive Manufacturing
na

1481 2018;22:157–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.05.007.

1482 [159] Han X, Yang D, Yang C, Spintzyk S, Scheideler L, Li P, et al. Carbon Fibre Reinforced
ur

1483 PEEK Composites Based on 3D-Printing Technology for Orthopedic and Dental
1484 Applications. Journal of Clinical Medicine 2019;8:240.
Jo

1485 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8020240.

1486 [160] Kain S, Ecker J V., Haider A, Musso M, Petutschnigg A. Effects of the infill pattern on
1487 mechanical properties of fused layer modeling (FLM) 3D printed wood/polylactic acid
1488 (PLA) composites. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products 2020;78:65–74.
1489 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-019-01473-0.

1490 [161] Yang T-C. Effect of Extrusion Temperature on the Physico-Mechanical Properties of
1491 Unidirectional Wood Fibre-Reinforced Polylactic Acid Composite (WFRPC) Components
1492 Using Fused Deposition Modeling. Polymers 2018;10:976.
1493 https://doi.org/10.3390/polym10090976.

1494 [162] Verdejo de Toro E, Coello Sobrino J, Martínez Martínez A, Miguel Eguía V, Ayllón Pérez
1495 J. Investigation of a Short Carbon Fibre-Reinforced Polyamide and Comparison of Two
1496 Manufacturing Processes: Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) and Polymer Injection
1497 Moulding (PIM). Materials 2020;13:672. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13030672.

1498 [163] Zhang W, Wu AS, Sun J, Quan Z, Gu B, Sun B, et al. Characterization of residual stress

69
1499 and deformation in additively manufactured ABS polymer and composite specimens.
1500 Composites Science and Technology 2017;150:102–10.
1501 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.07.017.

1502 [164] Stepashkin, Chukov DI, Senatov FS, Salimon AI, Korsunsky AM, Kaloshkin SD. 3D-
1503 printed PEEK-carbon fibre (CF) composites: Structure and thermal properties. Composites
1504 Science and Technology 2018;164:319–26.
1505 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.05.032.

1506 [165] De Toro EV, Sobrino JC, Martínez AM, Eguía VM. Analysis of the influence of the
1507 variables of the fused deposition modeling (FDM) process on the mechanical properties of
1508 a carbon fibre-reinforced polyamide. Procedia Manufacturing, vol. 41, Elsevier B.V.;
1509 2019, p. 731–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.09.064.

of
1510 [166] Vinyas M, Athul SJ, Harursampath D, Nguyen Thoi T. Experimental evaluation of the

ro
1511 mechanical and thermal properties of 3D printed PLA and its composites. Materials
1512 Research Express 2019;6:115301. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab43ab.
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

70
Highlights

• The studies refer to the performance of FDM fiber composites are reviewed.
• The mechanical and thermal characteristics of the FDM fiber composites are discussed.
• The importance of FDM parameters in composite performance is explained.
• Future scope of FDM fiber composites is presented.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo
Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered
as potential competing interests:

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo