Optimization of 3D Printing Parameters of Biodegradable Polylactic Acid/Hydroxyapatite Composite Bone Plates
The building parameters of three-dimensional (3D) printed polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite (HA) composite bone plates were optimized by an orthogonal experiment, and the effects of the layer thickness, printing speed, filament feeding speed, and HA content on the bending strengths of the specimens were analyzed. The deformation characteristics of the specimens were studied by 3D full-field strain analysis, and the internal defects of the specimens were analyzed. The effects of different combinations of the process parameters on the cross-sectional shape of the single deposited line, printing temperature, and pressure of the molten material were further analyzed. The results showed that the factors affecting the bending properties were the layer thickness, printing speed, filament feeding speed, and HA content, successively. The optimized process parameters were an HA content of 10%, a layer thickness of 0.1 mm, a printing speed of 30 mm/s, and a filament feeding speed of 0.8 mm/s, and the optimized specimen bending strength was 103.1 ± 5.24 MPa. The deposited line with a flat section shape and width greater than the print spacing helped to reduce the porosity of the specimens. The process parameters that resulted in large high-temperature areas and a high extrusion pressure could better promote material fusion.
1. Ngo TD, Kashani A, Imbalzano G, et al., 2018, Additive Manufacturing (3D Printing): A Review of Materials, Methods, Applications and Challenges. Compos B Eng, 143:172–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012
2. Bozkurt Y, Karayel E, 2021, 3D Printing Technology; Methods, Biomedical Applications, Future Opportunities and Trends. J Mater Res Technol, 14:1430–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.07.050
3. Kumar R, Kumar M, Chohan JS, 2021, The Role of Additive Manufacturing for Biomedical Applications: A Critical Review. J Manuf Processes, 64:828–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.02.022
4. Dos Santos T, Merlini C, Aragones A, et al., 2019, Manufacturing and Characterization of Plates for Fracture Fixation of Bone with Biocomposites of Poly (Lactic Acid-Co-Glycolic Acid) (PLGA) with Calcium Phosphates Bioceramics. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 103:109728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.05.013
5. Dhandapani R, Krishnan PD, Zennifer A, et al., 2020, Additive Manufacturing of Biodegradable Porous Orthopaedic Screw. Bioact Mater, 5:458–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.03.009
6. Tong Y, Kaplan DJ, Spivak JM, et al., 2020, Three-Dimensional Printing in Spine Surgery: A Review of Current Applications. Spine J, 20:833–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.11.004
7. Xia RZ, Zhai ZJ, Chang YY, et al., 2019, Clinical Applications of 3‐Dimensional Printing Technology in Hip Joint. Orthop Surg, 11:533–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12468
8. Wang F, Chen H, Yang P, et al., 2019, Three-Dimensional Printed Porous Tantalum Prosthesis for Treating Inflammation after Total Knee Arthroplasty in One-Stage Surgery-a Case Report. J Int Med Res, 48:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060519891280
9. Xiao R, Feng X, Fan R, et al., 2020, 3D Printing of Titanium-Coated Gradient Composite Lattices for Lightweight Mandibular Prosthesis. Compos B Eng, 193:108057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108057
10. Liu D, Fu J, Fan H, et al., 2018, Application of 3D-Printed PEEK Scapula Prosthesis in the Treatment of Scapular Benign Fibrous Histiocytoma: A Case Report. J Bone Oncol, 12:78–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbo.2018.07.012
11. Zhang C, Wang L, Kang J, et al., 2020, Bionic Design and Verification of 3D Printed PEEK Costal Cartilage Prosthesis. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 103:103561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103561
12. Hedayati SK, Behravesh AH, Hasannia S, et al., 2020, 3D Printed PCL Scaffold Reinforced with Continuous Biodegradable Fiber Yarn: A Study on Mechanical and Cell Viability properties. Polym Test, 83:106347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106347
13. Wang W, Zhang B, Li M, et al., 2021, 3D Printing of PLA/n-HA Composite Scaffolds with Customized Mechanical Properties and Biological Functions for Bone Tissue Engineering. Compos B Eng, 224:109192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109192
14. Yang Y, Wang G, Liang H, et al., 2019, Additive Manufacturing of Bone Scaffolds. Int J Bioprint, 5:148. https://doi.org/10.18063/IJB.v5i1.148
15. Rony L, Lancigu R, Hubert L, 2018, Intraosseous Metal Implants in Orthopedics: A Review. Morphologie, 102:231–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.morpho.2018.09.003
16. Gupta SK, Shahidsha N, Bahl S, et al., 2021, Enhanced Biomechanical Performance of Additively Manufactured Ti-6Al-4V Bone Plates. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 119:104552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104552
17. Jung GS, Kwon JH, Lee JW, et al., 2017, A New Approach to Nasomaxillary Complex Type of Nasal Bone Fracture: Clip Operation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 45:954–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.03.020
18. Ueki K, Moroi A, Yoshizawa K, et al., 2017, Comparison of Skeletal Stability after Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy among Mono-Cortical Plate Fixation, Bi-Cortical Plate Fixation, and Hybrid Fixation using Absorbable Plates and Screws. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 45:178–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2016.11.007
19. Gong M, Zhao Q, Dai L, et al., 2018, Fabrication of Polylactic Acid/Hydroxyapatite/Graphene Oxide Composite and their Thermal Stability, Hydrophobic and Mechanical Properties. J Asian Ceram Soc, 5:160–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jascer.2017.04.001
20. Nikzad M, Masood SH, Sbarski I, 2011, Thermo-Mechanical Properties of a Highly Filled Polymeric Composites for Fused Deposition Modeling. Mater Des, 32:3448–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2011.01.056
21. Huang G, Du Z, Yuan Z, et al., 2018, Poly(L-Lactide) Nanocomposites Containing Poly (D-Lactide) Grafted Nanohydroxyapatite with Improved Interfacial Adhesion Via Stereo complexation. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 78:10–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.10.036
22. Shikinami Y, Matsusue Y, Nakamura T, 2005, The Complete Process of Bioresorption and Bone Replacement Using Devices Made of Forged Composites of Raw Hydroxyapatite Particles/Poly L-Lactide (F-u-HA/PLLA). Biomaterials, 26:5542–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.016
23. Takayama T, Todo M, Takano A, 2009, The Effect of Bimodal Distribution on the Mechanical Properties of Hydroxyapatite Particle Filled Poly (L-Lactide) Composites. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2:105–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2008.06.001
24. Nejati E, Firouzdor V, Eslaminejad MB, et al., 2009, Needle-Like Nano Hydroxyapatite/Poly(L-Lactide Acid) Composite Scaffold for Bone Tissue Engineering Application. Mater Sci Eng C, 29:942–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2008.07.038
25. Gao X, Qi S, Kuang X, et al., 2021, Fused Filament Fabrication of Polymer Materials: A Review of Interlayer Bond. Addit Manuf, 37:101658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101658
26. Mohan N, Senthil P, Vinodh S, et al., 2017, A Review on Composite Materials and Process Parameters Optimisation for the Fused Deposition Modelling Process. Virtual Phys Prototyp, 12:47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2016.1274490
27. Bardiya S, Jerald J, Satheeshkumar V, 2021, The Impact of Process Parameters on the Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength and the Manufacturing Time of Fused Filament Fabricated (FFF) Parts. Mater Today Proc, 39:1362–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.691
28. Lepoivre A, Levy A, Boyard N, et al., 2021, Coalescence in Fused Filament Fabrication Process: Thermo-Dependent Characterization of High-Performance Polymer Properties. Polym Test, 98:107096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2021.107096
29. Rao Y, Wei N, Yao S, et al., 2021, A Process-Structure-Performance Modeling for Thermoplastic Polymers Via Material Extrusion Additive Manufacturing. Addit Manuf, 39:101857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.101857
30. Pei N, Hao Z, Wang S, et al., 2021, 3D Printing of Layered Gradient Pore Structure of Brain-like Tissue. Int J Bioprint, 7:359–9. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v7i3.359
31. Porter JH, Cain TM, Fox SL, et al., 2018, Influence of Infill Properties on Flexural Rigidity of 3D-Printed Structural Members. Virtual Phys Prototyp, 14:148–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2018.1537064
32. Kerekes TW, Lim H, Joe WY, et al., 2019, Characterization of Process-Deformation/Damage Property Relationship of Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) 3D-Printed Specimens. Addit Manuf, 25:532–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.11.008
33. Yao T, Zhang K, Deng Z, et al., 2020, A Novel Generalized Stress Invariant-Based Strength Model for Inter-Layer Failure of FFF 3D Printing PLA Material. Mater Des, 193:108799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108799
34. Popescu D, Zapciu A, Amza C, et al., 2018, FDM Process Parameters Influence Over the Mechanical Properties of Polymer Specimens: A Review. Polym Test, 69:157–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.05.020
35. Sharafi S, Santare MH, Gerdes J, et al., 2021, A Review of Factors that Influence the Fracture Toughness of Extrusion-Based Additively Manufactured Polymer and Polymer Composites. Addit Manuf, 38:101830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101830
36. Costa SF, Duarte FM, Covas JA, 2017, Estimation of Filament Temperature and Adhesion Development in Fused Deposition Techniques. J Mater Process Technol, 245:167–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.02.026