Enhancing FDM Rapid Prototyping for Industry 4.0 Applications Through Simulation and Optimization Techniques.

Chapter 2 - 3D printing and nanotechnology

Recent developments in three-dimensional (3D) printing technology offer immense potential in fabricating scaffolds and implants for various biomedical applications, especially for bone repair and regeneration. As the availability of autologous bone sources and commercial products is limited and surgical methods do not help in complete regeneration, it is necessary to develop alternative approaches for repairing large segmental bone defects. The 3D printing technology can effectively integrate different types of living cells within a 3D construct made up of conventional micro- or nanoscale biomaterials to create an artificial bone graft capable of regenerating the damaged tissues. This article reviews the developments and applications of 3D printing in bone tissue engineering and highlights the numerous conventional biomaterials and nanomaterials that have been used in the production of 3D-printed scaffolds. A comprehensive overview of the 3D printing methods such as stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modeling (FDM), and ink-jet 3D printing, and their technical and clinical applications in bone repair and regeneration has been provided. The review is expected to be useful for readers to gain an insight into the state-of-the-art of 3D printing of bone substitutes and their translational perspectives.

Emergency and disaster medical care often face resource or equipment shortages. 3D printing technology has been proven to be effective in cases with insufficient supply chains. MAYO tubes and stethoscopes are essential components of ABCDE patient examinations; however, 3D-printed variants have not been fully tested. These 3D-printed instruments were substituted and validated in a simulated pre-hospital environment.In total, 26 participants were included in this study. Fifteen clinicians or paramedics with at least 3 years of professional experience and 10 medical students. One student was excluded because he had relevant experience with emergency care. As basic tasks, the placement of MAYO tubes and auscultation with stethoscopes were performed using medical simulators. 3D printed instruments were compared with conventional clinical devices by measuring the time required for the intervention, success rate, and user satisfaction. In the study FFF (Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), SLS (Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), and SLA (stereolithography) 3D printing were used in this study.The times required for implementation and auscultation were examined for each instrument. There was no significant difference between the MAYO tube (p = 0.798) and the stethoscope (p = 0.676). In the case of stethoscopy, the study investigated the correct diagnosis, and no significant difference was found (p = 0.239), although an interesting trend was observed. Regarding the MAYO tube, the study found no significant difference in correct position formation (p = 0.163). The experience levels of the groups did not influence these factors. However, significant differences in user satisfaction were found in both cases in favour of the conventional versions (p < 0.001).Overall, the results of this study suggest that 3D-printed devices could be suitable replacements for clinic-based devices in emergency situations. The 3D-printed devices did not perform inferiorly at any of the indicated points compared to their classical counterparts. However, the practical applicability of the devices used in this study requires further investigation.

The purpose of this paper is to make an analysis of the advanced technologies for 3D printing of pharmaceutical products for personalised medicine.A review of the basic 3D printing methods used in pharmaceutical technologies is conducted. The main types of printed solid dosage forms are examined, along with the primary advantages and disadvantages of 3D printing compared to conventional drug production. Each method is evaluated in terms of working principles, material compatibility, advantages, and limitations.Revealed that stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sintering (SLS), fused deposition modelling (FDM), ink-jet printing (IJP), and semi-solid extrusion (SSE) are the most suitable 3D printing processes for producing pharmaceutical products. The combination of two methods ensures better results, as illustrated by examples of the main types of printed solid dosage forms.The 3D printing technologies for production of pharmaceutical products present several limitations such as: uneven geometries and porous structures, necessitating the fabrication of larger and irregular dosage forms to ensure the required drug load for the patient; degradation of thermolabile drugs during FDM process; increased hardness of FDM produced tablets impairing drug release.The advanced 3D printing technologies offer the ability to produce new formulations easily through simple design modifications in software, compared to conventional manufacturing. They enable the design of flexible formulations with complex release profiles and the personalised production of dosage forms tailored to individual patients.3D printing has emerged as a transformative technology in pharmaceutical manufacturing, enabling the production of personalised dosage forms with precise drug loading, tailored release profiles, and complex geometries. The review not only summarises the main applicable techniques but also highlights the most recommended methods for personalised pharmacotherapy. The versatility and adaptability of 3D printing provide promising solutions for personalised therapy, emergency drug manufacturing, and enhanced patient compliance, marking a significant step toward decentralised, digital pharmaceutical production.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a process for creating 3D objects with various geometries using digital modeling, and it is widely used in the construction and medical industries. In the field of pharmacy, 3D printers were introduced as a suitable manufacturing method in response to the increasing need for “personalization.” Since the first 3D printed drug, Spritam®, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015, 3D printer technology has evolved through considerable research. The 3D printing methods are classified into selective laser sintering, inkjet printing, stereolithography, digital light processing, and fused deposition modeling (FDM) according to the printing method. Among them, FDM, which is a method of extruding filaments through a nozzle, is the most widely used 3D printer method in pharmaceuticals. This review paper covers the detail content of manufacturing drugs by FDM. Owing to its ease of use and relatively low price, many studies have focused on FDM 3D printers. In this review paper, we concretely investigate a series of FDM procedures and parameters and introduce many studies that used FDM 3D printers to control the release, to make novel dosage form, and to deliver the customized doses. FDM is completely different from traditional drug manufacturing methods, and it is expected to achieve personalization. Once mechanical problems and regulatory barriers are overcome and new developments are made, FDM 3D printers will become a unique and effective way to manufacture patient-customized drugs in the pharmaceutical industry.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is an emerging and enabling technology that is paving its way in different fields of research, including analytical science, for the fabrication of custom devices and portable sensing platforms based on additive manufacturing of objects from Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models. In fact, the last five years have witnessed tremendous advances in novel materials and composites with improved chemical properties (e.g., noble metals, carbon nanomaterials, and chemically resistant polymers). Printing platforms for fabrication of low-cost devices have capitalized on stereolithography (SLA) or dynamic light processing (DLP), inkjet printing, fused deposition modelling (FDM), and selective laser sintering (SLS) that enable decentralized (in situ) measurements. The main advantage of 3D printing is the capability of rapid and single-step prototyping of holders, scaffolds, and integrated complex systems with geometries that cannot easily be manufactured by conventional means, such as computer numerical controlled milling and soft-lithographic approaches. Furthermore, the outreach of this technique has been expanded by the lowering costs of the machinery, the user-friendliness of the CAD software and especially the commercial strategies addressed to the nontechnical and nonscientific collective, currently called the 'maker community'.

3D printing/Additive Manufacturing seems a pragmatic approach to realize the quest for a truly customized and personalized drug delivery. 3DP technology, with innovations in pharmaceutical development and an interdisciplinary approach to finding newer Drug Delivery Systems can usher a new era of treatments to various diseases. The true potential of this is yet to be realized, and the US-FDA is focusing on the regulatory science of 3D printed medical devices to help patients access this technology safely and effectively. The approval of the first 3D printed prescription medicine by FDA is a promising step in the translation of more research in this area. A web-search on PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Nature was performed with the keywords Customized 3D printing and Drug delivery, publications dealing with the aspects of drug delivery using 3D printing for personalized or customized delivery were further considered and analyzed and discussed. We present the advantages offered by 3DP over conventional methods of formulation development and discuss the current state of 3DP in pharmaceutics and how it can be used to develop a truly customized drug delivery system, various 3DP technologies including Stereolithography (SLA), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM), Pressure Assisted Microsyringe (PAM) that have been used to develop pharmaceutical products have been discussed along with their limitations and also the regulatory considerations to help formulation scientists envisaging research in this area with the necessary information. 3D printing has the potential to fabricate a customized drug delivery system. Presence of many drug formulation and the devices are already in the regulatory approval process indicating its success.

3D Printable Polypropylene Based Materials

Additive manufacturing (AM) or 3D printing is a digital manufacturing process and offers virtually limitless opportunities to develop structures/objects by tailoring material composition, processing conditions, and geometry technically at every point in an object. In this review, we present three different early adopted, however, widely used, polymer-based 3D printing processes; fused deposition modelling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and stereolithography (SLA) to create polymeric parts. The main aim of this review is to offer a comparative overview by correlating polymer material-process-properties for three different 3D printing techniques. Moreover, the advanced material-process requirements towards 4D printing via these print methods taking an example of magneto-active polymers is covered. Overall, this review highlights different aspects of these printing methods and serves as a guide to select a suitable print material and 3D print technique for the targeted polymeric material-based applications and also discusses the implementation practices towards 4D printing of polymer-based systems with a current state-of-the-art approach.

While NASA explores the power of 3D printing in the development of the next generation space exploration vehicle, a CubeSat Trailblazer was launched in November 2013 that integrated 3D-printed structures with embedded electronics. Space provides a harsh environment necessary to demonstrate the durability of 3D-printed devices with radiation, extreme thermal cycling, and low pressure—all assaulting the structure at the atomic to macroscales. Consequently, devices that are operational in orbit can be relied upon in many terrestrial environments—including many defense and biomedical applications. The 3D-printed CubeSat module (a subsystem occupying approximately 10 % of the total volume offered by the 10 × 10 × 10-cm CubeSat enclosure) has a substrate that fits specifically into the available volume—exploiting 3D printing to provide volumetric efficiency. Based on the best fabrication technology at the time for 3D-printed electronics, stereolithography (SL), a vat photopolymerization technology, was used to fabricate the dielectric structure, while conductive inks were dispensed in channels to provide the electrical interconnect between components. In spite of the structure passing qualification—including temperature cycling, shock and vibration, and outgas testing—the photocurable materials used in SL do not provide the level of durability required for long-term functionality. Moreover, the conductive inks with low-temperature curing capabilities as required by the SL substrate material are widely known to provide suboptimal performance in terms of conductivity. To address these challenges in future 3D-printed electronics, a next generation machine is under development and being referred to as the multi3D system, which denotes the use of multiple technologies to produce 3D, multi-material, multifunctional devices. Based on an extrusion process necessary to replace photocurable polymers with thermoplastics, a material extrusion system based on fused deposition modeling (FDM) technology has been developed that integrates other technologies to compensate for FDM’s deficiencies in surface finish, minimum dimensional feature size, and porosity. Additionally, to minimize the use of conductive inks, a novel thermal embedding technology submerges copper wires into the thermoplastic dielectric structures during FDM process interruptions—providing high performance, robust interconnect, and ground planes—and serendipitously improving the mechanical properties of the structure. This paper compares and contrasts stereolithography used for 3D-printed electronics with the FDM-based system through experimental results and demonstrates an automated FDM-based process for producing features not achievable with FDM alone. In addition to the possibility of using direct write for electronic circuitry, the novel fabrication uses thermoplastics and copper wires that offer a substantial improvement in terms of performance and durability of 3D-printed electronics.

Bone model studies for DMLS based 3D printed innovative dental implant

3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing (AM), represents a rapidly evolving technological field capable of creating distinctive products with nearly any irregular shape, often unattainable using traditional techniques. Currently, the focus in 3D printing extends beyond polymer and metal structural materials, garnering increased attention towards functional materials. This review conducts an analysis of published data concerning the 3D printing of magnetic materials. The paper provides a concise overview of key AM technologies, encompassing vat photopolymerization, selective laser sintering, binder jetting, fused deposition modeling, direct ink writing, electron beam melting, directed energy deposition and laser powder bed fusion. Additionally, it covers magnetic materials currently utilized in AM, including hard magnetic Nd–Fe–B and Sm–Co alloys, hard and soft magnetic ferrites, and soft magnetic alloys such as permalloys and elect­rical steels. Presently, materials produced through 3D printing exhibit properties that often fall short compared to their counterparts fabricated using conventional methods. However, the distinct advantages of 3D printing, such as the fabrication of intricately shaped individual parts and reduced material wastage, are noteworthy. Efforts are underway to enhance the material properties. In specific instances, such as the application of metal-polymer composites, the magnetic properties of 3D-printed products generally align with those of traditional analogs. The review further delves into the primary fields where 3D printing of magnetic products finds application. Notably, it highlights promising areas, including the production of responsive soft robots with increased freedom of movement and magnets featu­ring optimized topology for generating highly homogeneous magnetic fields. Furthermore, the paper addresses the key challenges associated with 3D printing of magnetic products, offering potential approaches to mitigate them.

This paper investigates the feasibility of manufacturing hydraulic fittings using additive manufacturing (AM) technologies, specifically Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) and Stereolithography (SLA). The study addresses the environmental challenge of material waste in conventional fitting production by exploring 3D printing as an alternative manufacturing method. Hydraulic fittings were designed using CAD software: SolidWorks 2022 and fabricated using FDM with PETG (Polyethene Terephthalate Glycol) material and SLA with UV-sensitive photopolymer resin. In present studies, on-destructive leak testing was conducted in accordance with PN-EN 1254-4 and PN-EN 1254, at pressures ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 bar. Dimensional accuracy analysis revealed shrinkage of approximately 1% for SLA-printed parts and 2% for FDM-printed parts. Microscopic examination at 50× and 80× magnification showed superior thread quality in SLA samples compared to FDM, which exhibited visible layer separation and material porosity. Leak testing demonstrated that while the brass reference fitting maintained complete seal integrity, both 3D-printed variants failed to achieve leak tightness under operational pressures, with structural failure occurring at 1.0 bar during tightening. The study showed that FDM with PETG material and SLA with UV-sensitive photopolymer resin, despite achieving acceptable dimensional tolerances (±1-2%), do not meet hydraulic leak tightness requirements at pressures exceeding 0.5 bar in their raw state after printing. The results suggest that alternative material formulations (e.g., carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK for FDM or epoxy engineering resins for SLA) warrant further investigation. Potential avenues for improvement include advanced surface treatment, optimization of printing parameters, and modifications to thread geometry to reduce interthread gaps.

Not much time has passed since the appearance of the first 3D printer. Today there are many different printers. They differ in various 3D printing technologies, namely: Stereolithography – SL, Selective Laser Sintering, Fused Deposition Modeling – FDM, Laminated Object Manufacturing – LOM, Polyjet and Ployjet Matrix. In recent years, the spread of 3D printing technology has become and continues to be used more and more today. Of course, in the future we will see a large-scale spread of additive methods, but the practical application of 3D printing today is available to everyone. Melting deposition modeling technologies have become widespread and available. The authors in this article consider possible options for upgrading the mounting of the end sensor of the Z Axis and automating the process of calibration of the zero gap of the extruder nozzle relative to the working surface of the printer. This calibration is important. This affects the accuracy and printing process of the future plastic model. During the operation of the 3D printer, it is often necessary to service the extruder, which forces the process of calibrating the zero gap of the printer nozzle. Optimally correct selected nozzle clearance affects the accuracy, geometry of the model and printing as a whole. It also allows you to get rid of peeling off the model from the desktop surface and the destruction of the model during printing.

This study addresses the challenge of designing a high-induction air diffuser with a complex geometry that effectively mixes and entrains more ambient air, raising concerns about potential noise increase. The research focuses on the acoustic performance of innovative 3D-printed air diffusers compared to the original air diffuser installed in the Dacia-Renault Duster vehicle. The four 3D-printed air diffusers, created using FDM (Fused Deposition Modelling), SLS (Selective Laser Sintering), DLP (Digital Light Processing), and SLA (Stereolithography), were tested to evaluate a single configuration due to concerns that the surface quality resulting from 3D printing could increase the noise produced by these diffusers. Using a professional sound level meter, acoustic measurements were conducted at the V2 (23.9 m3/h) and V3 (33.6 m3/h) flow rate settings. Results showed that the traditional air diffuser had the highest noise levels, measuring 38.2 dB at V2 and 39.6 dB at V3, which were 7.33% and 8.84% louder, respectively, than the innovative designs. Despite the DLP-printed diffuser being the quietest on V2 speed setting, the SLA-printed variant was preferred due to its superior dimensional tolerances and because the differences in noise were small.