Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No.

# (202#) ##–##
MYU Tokyo

S & M ****

Mechanical properties of resin castable wax material V1 printed by

Stereolithography
Tran Minh Truong1, Tran Khanh Tuyen1, Pham Thanh Tam1, Do Thi Le Mai1,
Pham Thi Hong Nga1*, Nguyen Thanh Tan1, Nguyen Van Thuc1
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology and Education,
No. 1 Vo Van Ngan Street, Linh Chieu Ward, Thu Duc District, Ho Chi Minh City, 71307, Vietnam

(Received Month Day, Year; accepted Month Day, Year; online published Month Day, Year)

Keywords: Additive Manufacturing, SLA, printing angle, tensile strength, compressive strength

Material additive technology, or 3D printing technology, has been recognized as one of the
future manufacturing techniques of most industries. The mechanical properties of products
manufactured using 3D printing technology depend on many factors, one of the most important
being the printing angle. Currently, there is no standard for 3D printing angles. Therefore, the
influence of printing angle on the mechanical properties of printed materials in 3D printing
technology is still a mystery. The present study explores the effect of printing angles on the
mechanical properties of the printed material, precisely the Castable Wax Resin V1 material, by 3D
SLA printing method on the Formlabs Form 3+ machine. This paper analyzes the mechanical
properties of Castable Wax Resin V1 printing material by testing printed specimens at three
different printing angles (0°, 45°, and 90°). Tensile and compressive strength are carried out on
printed samples by corresponding tests according to standards. From the analysis data, the pattern
printed at an angle of 90º has the highest tensile and compressive strength, and vice versa for
samples printed at 0º.

1. Introduction

These days, the increasing demand for highly accurate and complex printed products has
made 3D printing technology increasingly popular, with its versatility, ability to
manufacture difficult parts, and ability to design and produce with fewer tools than
traditional manufacturing processes. (1) An overview of 3D printing technology typically
begins with Standard Tessellation Language (STL), which is constructed using computer-
aided design (CAD) software to contain the 2D slice building data sent to the 3D printer. To
create complexly shaped components, various techniques have been developed, such as
Digital Light Processing (DLP), Continuous Liquid Interface Production (CLIP), Selective
Laser Sintering (SLS), Fused Filament Fabrication (FDM), and Stereolithography (SLA).
Each of these techniques has its own set of drawbacks, benefits, and applications. (2) Among

*Corresponding author: e-mail: [email protected]

https://doi.org/10.18494/SAM.2022.####
ISSN 0914-4935 © MYU K.K.
2 Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No. # (201#)

these, the SLA technique is widely used and most popular, invented in 1980 by Kodama. (3)
This method uses a special photopolymer resin. When the SLA resin is subjected to a
specific wavelength of light, short chains of molecules bond with each other, polymerizing
monomers and oligomers into hard or resinous objects. (4,5) The SLA technique can be
applied to the various polymer materials produced for different applications. Most notably,
in the medical field, specifically in medical modeling. 3D space models help in diagnosis,
presurgical planning, designing, and manufacturing implants. Additionally, SLA 3D
printing is used to produce accurate part prototypes, even those with complicated shapes,
relatively inexpensively. Engineers can use the models to test their product designs or
promote the finished products.
The main advantage of SLA printing technology is the ability to print parts with high
resolution and fast printing speed. Material manufacturers have developed innovative SLA
resin formulas with optical, mechanical, and thermal properties. (2) Notably, the mechanical
properties of 3D-printed polymer materials are an essential factor. Many factors can affect
the mechanical properties of the constructed components. For example, adding other
materials to the polymer structure, (6) , such as nanoparticles and fibers, to alter the material
structure, (7) , changing the printing direction, or adding post-printing processes such as
photopolymerization and thermal treatment. Specifically, the construction orientation of the
component plays a significant role. (6-8) A standard for 3D printing angles has yet to be
established. (9,10) Therefore, it is still necessary to determine how the printing angle affects
the mechanical properties of 3D printed materials. (11-13) In this study, the Castable Wax
Resin V1 material on a 3D printer is tested to see how the printing angle affects the
mechanical properties of the printed material. The article evaluates the tensile strength and
compressive strength of the Castable Wax Resin V1 material by testing samples printed at 0°,
45°, and 90°. The mechanical properties of the models are evaluated through these tests. (14-
16)

2. Materials and Methods

(a) (b) (a) (b)

Fig. 1. Different print orientations for testing Fig. 2. Sample with printing angle of 45°
(a) Compressive sample and (b) Tensile sample. (a) Compressive sample and (b) Tensile sample.

The Castable Wax Resin V1 (Table 1) used in this search is a high-performance plastic with a
20% waxy composition ideal for direct printing and printed at 0°, 45°, and 90° (Figure 1 and Figure
2). It is specifically intended to produce precious and non-precious metal jewelry casting cores.
Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No. # (201#) 3

Tensile and compressive tests were performed on samples with different print orientations to
evaluate the effect of print orientation on mechanical properties. Models after printing were washed
in IPA solution and dried with UV rays with a temperature gradually increasing to the threshold of
60 °C for 30 min. The following steps after printing are washing, removing parts, removing
supports, and curing.
Table 1. Properties of Castable Wax V1
Ultimate Tensile Strength 12 MPa
Tensile Modulus 220 MPa
Elongation at Break 13%
Temp @ 5% Mass Loss 249 °C
Ash Content (TGA) 0.0 - 0.1%

The thickness of each printed layer is 50 μm. This study uses transparent photopolymer resin
with a print layer thickness of 0.05 mm, print time of 78 min, layers 195, and volume 1.2 ml. In the
present work, five samples were used for each printing direction. Then, samples are transferred to
the Shimadzu AGS-X 10 kN machine to measure tensile strength in the same room.
Compressive test samples were prepared according to ASTM D695. The samples were
fabricated as solid cylinders with 12.7 mm × 25.4 mm dimensions. In the present work, five
samples were used for each printing orientation. The test uses a Shimadzu testing machine with a
load capacity of 100 kN and runs the test at a constant speed of 1.3 mm/min.

3. Results and discussions

3.1 Tensile strength

Fig. 3. Stress-displacement curve of the samples.

The curve showing the relationship between tensile stress and tensile strain at three different
printing angles (0°, 45°, and 90°) is shown in Figure 3. From Figure 3 it has been shown that
tensile stress are 19.04, 20.72, and 23.13 MPa, with printing angles of 0°, 45°, and 90°,
respectively. This chart shows maximum tensile stress and tensile strain gradually increasing from
4 Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No. # (201#)

0° printing angle to 90° printing angle. When the print layers are constructed in a direction parallel
to the direction of the tensile load, the maximum tensile stress and tensile strain of the angle at 0° is
the lowest. Ultimate tensile stress and tensile strain of the 90° printing angle are the largest because
the print layers are constructed in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the dynamic tensile
load.

Fig. 4. The maximum tensile load of printing angles. Fig. 5. Tensile modulus of printing angles.

Figure 4 describes the maximum tensile load at three different printing angles. The ultimate
tensile load increases gradually as the angle changes from 0° to 90°. The measured value increased
from 456.9 N to 555.2 N, and the total increase was 98.3 N. The highest value measured in sample
90° reached 555.2 N, a rise of 21.51% compared to the result calculated in sample 0° got 456.9 N.
The tensile modulus of three different printing angles is described in Figure 5. The tensile
modulus (MPa) increases gradually as the angle changes from 0° to 90°. The total increase was
4.09 MPa, from 19.04 MPa to 23.13 MPa. Compared to the lowest result measured in sample 0°
with 19.04 MPa, the highest value obtained in model 90° at 23.13 MPa increased by 21.48%.

3.2 Compressive strength

The study used a machine with a high load capacity. The sample fails under pressure loading.
The stress-strain curves during compressive testing for all the printed part orientations are indicated
in Figure 6. It can be seen that compressive stress are 97.89, 103.89, and 124.97 MPa, with
printing angles of 0°, 45°, and 90°, respectively. Thus, from Figure 6, it has been shown that the
material has high compressive strength, with compressive strain at about 45%.
 Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No. # (201#) 5

Fig. 6. Stress-strain curves during compressive testing for all the Fig. 7. Maximum compressive load with respect to print
print orientations. orientation.

Figure 7 demonstrates the relationship between the maximum compressive load and printing
angle in the chart above. From the graph, it can be seen that when the printing angle is increased
from 0° to 45° to 90°, the maximum compressive load also increases, namely at the printing angle
of 0º the full compressive load is approximately 15788 N to 16756 N at the printing angle of 45°
and 20156 N at the printing angle of 90°. The lowest maximum compressive load is at a printing
angle of 0° because the material is accreted in a direction parallel to the direction of the impact
compressive load. When the compressive load increases to a certain level, specifically 15788 N, the
print layers will break, damaging the printed pattern. With an increase in the direction of printing,
the material is accreted in the order of gradual inclination towards the direction of the impact
compressive load. Therefore, printed patterns tend to resist more compressive loads. The printed
sample withstands the highest compressive load when the material is accreted perpendicular to the
compressive load's direction. As the compressive load increases, the print pattern will slowly bulge
horizontally until the compressive load reaches its highest value, resulting in the print pattern
matching its tolerance limit and being damaged. This result explains why at a printing angle of 90°,
the maximum compressive load is the most significant value for the other two printing angles.(2)

4. Conclusions

After studying the mechanical properties of Resin castable wax V1 material by stereolithography
method (SLA), this research has obtained specific results and concluded that: The tilt angle of 90°
is the most optimized and proper angle to choose and use when conducting 3D printing (SLA) of
V1 stable wax materials. Because when the angle of inclination is increased from 0° to 90°, the
mechanics of the material will gradually change. More obviously, at the angle of 90°, compressive
strength, and pull parameters all achieve the best perfection: maximum compressive load reaches
20155 N, and ultimate tensile load reaches 555.17 N, tensile modulus (23.13 MPa). After that, the
data obtained when measured at a printing angle of 90° has a higher difference than the data from
the other measuring angles. Moreover, when applying mechanical measurement of 5 test samples at
a certain angle, the results obtained also have a small but insignificant gap because of the external
conditions affecting the material, and that is all evidence for the thesis at an angle of 90°, the data is
still the best.
6 Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3#, No. # (201#)

References

1 N. V. Ngo, K. K. Nguyen, V. T. Ngo, X. T. Vo, T. T. Nguyen, N. T. Tran, M. T. U. Tran, Q. T. Truong, and T. H.N.
Pham: AMAS 2021, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99666-6_95
2 J. S. Saini, L. Dowling, J. Kennedy, and D. Trimble: Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part C, 234(11), 2279-2293 (2020.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0954406220904106
3 P M Dickens: J. Eng. Manuf. 209(4), 261–266 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1243/PIME_PROC_1995_209_082_02
4 T. T. Nguyen, V. T. Tran, T. H.N. Pham, V. T. Nguyen, N. C. Thanh; T. H. M. Nguyen; V. A. D. Nguyen. T. D.
Nguyen, and V. T. T. Nguyen: Micromachines (Basel), 14 (2), 395 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14020395
5 H. H. Hamzah, S. A. Shafiee, A. Abdalla, and B. A. Patel,: Electrochem. commun., 96, 27-31 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2018.09.006
6 C. S. Lee, S. G. Kim, H. J. Kim, and S. H. Ahn: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 187-188, 627-630 (2007).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.11.095
7 V. Vega, J. Clements, T. Lam, A. Abad, B. Fritz, N. Ula, and O. S. Es-Said: J. of Materi Eng and Perform
(JMEPEG), 20, 978–988 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-010-9740-z
8 J. R. C. Dizon, A. Espera, Q. Chen, and R. C. Advincula: Addit. Manuf. (AM), 20 (2017).
https://10.1016/j.addma.2017.12.002
9 A. R. Torrado, and D. A. Roberson: J Fail. Anal. and Preven (JFAP), 16(1), 154–164 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-016-0067-4
10 J. M. Montal, J. P. Sánchez, and D. Varas: Polymers, 13(7), 1147 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13071147
11 D. Le, C. H. Nguyen, T. H. N. Pham, V. T. Nguyen, S. M. Pham, M. T. Le, and T. T. Nguyen: J. of Materi Eng and
Perfom (JMEP), 137(37), 49087(2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-023-07892-8
12 A. D. Leon, Q. Chen, N. B. Palaganas, P. Jerome, M. Jill, and R. C. Advincula: React. Funct. Polym, 103, 141–155
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2016.04.010
13 K. K. Yang, J. H. Zhu, C. Wang, D. S. Jia, L. L. Song, and W. H. Zhang: Comput. Mech. 61, 581–598 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-018-1537-1
14 J. Mueller, K. Shea, and C. Daraio: Mater. Des. 86, 902-912(2015), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.129
15 C. K. Dorota, G. Krzysztof, P. Paweł, B. Mateusz, G. Katarzyna, and P. Mikołaj: Mater, 13(10), 2255 (2020),
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13102255
16 E. Wang, F. Yang, X. Shen, L. Zhizhong, X. Yang, X. Zhang, and W. Peng: Mater, 15(19), (2022).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196743

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge HCMC University of Technology and Material Testing Laboratory. They

gave me an opportunity to join their team, accessed the laboratory and research machines.