Constitutive Modeling of 3D Printed FDM Parts: Part 2 (Approaches)

By: Dhruv Bhate
– January 6, 2016

In part 1 of this two-part post, I reviewed the challenges in the constitutive modeling of 3D printed parts using the Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) process. In this second part, I discuss some of the approaches that may be used to enable analyses of FDM parts even in presence of these challenges. I present them below in increasing order of the detail captured by the model.

  • Conservative Value: The simplest method is to represent the material with an isotropic material model using the most conservative value of the 3 directions specified in the material datasheet, such as the one from Stratasys shown below for ULTEM-9085 showing the lower of the two modulii selected. The conservative value can be selected based on the desired risk assessment (e.g. lower modulus if maximum deflection is the key concern). This simplification brings with it a few problems:
    • The material property reported is only good for the specific build parameters, stacking and layer thickness used in the creation of the samples used to collect the data
    • This gives no insight into build orientation or processing conditions that can be improved and as such has limited value to an anlayst seeking to use simulation to improve part design and performance
    • Finally, in terms of failure prediction, the conservative value approach disregards inter-layer effects and defects described in the previous blog post and is not recommended to be used for this reason
ULTEM-9085 datasheet from Stratasys - selecting the conservative value is the easiest way to enable preliminary analysis
ULTEM-9085 datasheet from Stratasys – selecting the conservative value is the easiest way to enable preliminary analysis
  • Orthotropic Properties: A significant improvement from an isotropic assumption is to develop a constitutive model with orthotropic properties, which has properties defined in all three directions. Solid mechanicians will recognize the equation below as the compliance matrix representation of the Hooke’s Law for an orthortropic material, with the strain matrix on the left equal to the compliance matrix by the stress matrix on the right. The large compliance matrix in the middle is composed of three elastic modulii (E), Poisson’s ratios (v) and shear modulii (G) that need to be determined experimentally.
Hooke's Law for Orthotropic Materials (Compliance Form)
Hooke’s Law for Orthotropic Materials (Compliance Form)

Good agreement between numerical and experimental results can be achieved using orthotropic properties when the structures being modeled are simple rectangular structures with uniaxial loading states. In addition to require extensive testing to collect this data set (as shown in this 2007 Master’s thesis), this approach does have a few limitations. Like the isotropic assumption, it is only valid for the specific set of build parameters that were used to manufacture the test samples from which the data was initially obtained. Additionally, since the model has no explicit sense of layers and inter-layer effects, it is unlikely to perform well at stresses leading up to failure, especially for complex loading conditions.  This was shown in a 2010 paper that demonstrated these limitations  in the analysis of a bracket that itself was built in three different orientations. The authors concluded however that there was good agreement at low loads and deflections for all build directions, and that the margin of error as load increased varied across the three build orientations.

An FDM bracket modeled with Orthotropic properties compared to experimentally observed results
An FDM bracket modeled with Orthotropic properties compared to experimentally observed results
  • Laminar Composite Theory: The FDM process results in structures that are very similar to laminar composites, with a stack of plies consisting of individual fibers/filaments laid down next to each other. The only difference is the absence of a matrix binder – in the FDM process, the filaments fuse with neighboring filaments to form a meso-structure. As shown in this 2014 project report, a laminar approach allows one to model different ply raster angles that are not possible with the orthotropic approach. This is exciting because it could expand insight into optimizing raster angles for optimum performance of a part, and in theory reduce the experimental datasets needed to develop models. At this time however, there is very limited data validating predicted values against experiments. ANSYS and other software that have been designed for composite modeling (see image below from ANSYS Composite PrepPost) can be used as starting points to explore this space.
Schematic of a laminate build-up as analyzed in ANSYS Composite PrepPost
Schematic of a laminate build-up as analyzed in ANSYS Composite PrepPost
  • Hybrid Tool-path Composite Representation: One of the limitations of the above approach is that it does not model any of the details within the layer. As we saw in part 1 of this post, each layer is composed of tool-paths that leave behind voids and curvature errors that could be significant in simulation, particularly in failure modeling. Perhaps the most promising approach to modeling FDM parts is to explicitly link tool-path information in the build software to the analysis software. Coupling this with existing composite simulation is another potential idea that would help reduce computational expense. This is an idea I have captured below in the schematic that shows one possible way this could be done, using ANSYS Composite PrepPost as an example platform.
Potential approach to blending toolpath information with composite analysis software
Potential approach to blending toolpath information with composite analysis software

Discussion: At the present moment, the orthotropic approach is perhaps the most appropriate method for modeling parts since it is allows some level of build orientation optimization, as well as for meaningful design comparisons and comparison to bulk properties one may expect from alternative technologies such as injection molding. However, as the application of FDM in end-use parts increases, the demands on simulation are also likely to increase, one of which will involve representing these materials more accurately than continuum solids.

Categories

Certified Elite Channel Partner

Get Your Ansys Products & Support from the Engineers who Contribute to this Blog.

Product Development
Platinum Partner

Technical Expertise to Enable your Addictive Manufacturing Success.

PADT’s Pulse Newsletter

Keep up to date on what is going on at PADT by subscribing to our newsletter.


By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: Phoenix Analysis and Design Technologies, 7755 S. Research Dr., Tempe, AZ, 85284, https://www.padtinc.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Share this post:

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest

Upcoming Events

10/06/2022

Fluids Updates in Ansys 2022 R2 - Webinar

10/05/2022

Experience Stratasys Truck Tour - Colorado Springs

09/29/2022

White Hat Life Science Investor Conference - 2022

09/28/2022

2022 AZBio Awards

09/28/2022

Simulation Best Practices for Rotating Machinery Design & Development

09/21/2022

ExperienceIT NM 2022

09/21/2022

Additive Updates in Ansys 2022 R2 - Webinar

09/14/2022

Rocky Mountain Life Sciences Investor & Partnering Conference

09/08/2022

Ansys Optics Simulation User Group Meeting - Virtual

09/08/2022

Ansys Optics Simulation User Group Meeting

09/07/2022

SI & PI Updates in Ansys 2022 R2 - Webinar

08/31/2022

Simulation Best Practices for Developing Medical Devices - Webinar

08/24/2022

Mechanical Updates in Ansys 2022 R2 - Webinar

08/10/2022

Tucson after5 Tech Mixer: Ruda-Cardinal

08/05/2022

Flagstaff Tech Tour, 2022

08/02/2022

2022 CEO Leadership Retreat

08/01/2022

2022 CEO Leadership Retreat

07/27/2022

Thermal Integrity Updates in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

07/20/2022

Simulation Best Practices for the Pharmaceutical Industry - Webinar

07/14/2022

NCMS Technology Showcase: Corpus Christi Army Depot

07/13/2022

NCMS Technology Showcase: Corpus Christi Army Depot

07/13/2022

Additive & Structural Optimization Updates in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

07/07/2022

Arizona AADM Conference, 2022

06/29/2022

LS-DYNA Updates & Advancements in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

06/23/2022

Simulation Best Practices for Wind Turbine Design - Webinar

06/15/2022

MAPDL Updates & Advancements in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

06/01/2022

Mechanical Updates in Ansys 2022 R1 - pt. 2 Webinar

05/26/2022

Modelling liquid cryogenic rocket engines in Flownex - Webinar

05/25/2022

SMR & Advanced Reactor 2022

05/25/2022

05/24/2022

SMR & Advanced Reactor 2022

05/19/2022

RAPID + tct 2022

05/19/2022

Venture Cafe Roundtable: AI & Healthcare

05/18/2022

Tucson after5 Tech Mixer: World View

05/18/2022

RAPID + tct 2022

More Info

05/18/2022

Signal & Power Integrity Updates in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

05/18/2022

Simulation World 2022

05/17/2022

RAPID + tct 2022

05/11/2022

Experience Stratasys Manufacturing Virtual Event

05/04/2022

Mechanical Meshing Updates in Ansys 2022 R1 - Webinar

04/27/2022

04/22/2022

12TH ANNUAL TUCSON GOLF TOURNAMENT

04/21/2022

04/20/2022

Additional Fluids Updates in Ansys 2022 R1

04/20/2022

Experience Stratasys Tour – Tempe Arizona

04/18/2022

Experience Stratasys Tour - Flagstaff Arizona

04/14/2022

D&M West | MD&M West

04/13/2022

D&M West | MD&M West

04/13/2022

Experience Stratasys Tour - Albuquerque New Mexico

04/12/2022

D&M West | MD&M West

04/12/2022

Experience Stratasys Tour - Los Alamos New Mexico

04/12/2022

Optimizing Engineering Workflows f​​​​or Propulsion System Design

04/07/2022

Experience Stratasys Tour - Austin Texas

04/07/2022

37th Space Symposium - Arizona Space Industry

04/06/2022

Transforming Digital Engineering with Ansys Discovery 2022 R1

04/06/2022

37th Space Symposium - Arizona Space Industry

04/05/2022

37th Space Symposium - Arizona Space Industry

04/04/2022

37th Space Symposium - Arizona Space Industry

03/30/2022

Simulation Best Practices for Vehicle Engineering - Webinar

03/23/2022

03/23/2022

High & Low Frequency Electromagnetics Updates in Ansys 2022 R1

02/24/2022

Arizona Technology Council After 5 Tech Mixer "Pandemic Pivot Pizza Pa

02/23/2022

SciTech Festival: Spend an Hour with 3D Printing Experts

02/11/2022

Webinar: Mechanical overview for Ansys 2022 R1

More Info

02/09/2022

Webinar: Product Development 101 (FAKE)

02/08/2022

Webinar: Navigating the Additive Landscape

01/27/2022

Arizona Technology Council 1st Quarter VIP Tech Mixer

More Info

01/26/2022

Simulation Best Practices for Gas Turbine Design & Development - Webin

More Info

01/19/2022

Arizona Photonics Days

More Info

11/04/2021

ExperienceIT, New Mexico

More Info

11/03/2021

Additive Manufacturing & Structural Optimization in Ansys 2021 R2 - We

More Info

11/03/2021

Optics Valley Technical Series: The Future of Simulation in the Optics

More Info

11/02/2021

SBIR Liftoff AZTC Virtual Breakfast Series

More Info

10/10/2021

Stratasys Mobile Truck Stop - Tucson Arizona

More Info

Search in PADT site

1h

Contact Us

Most of our customers receive their support over the phone or via email. Customers who are close by can also set up a face-to-face appointment with one of our engineers.

For most locations, simply contact us: