This is an unedited manuscript accepted for publication and provided as an Article in Press for early access at the author’s request. The article will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and galley proof review before final publication. Please be aware that errors may be identified during production that could affect the content. All legal disclaimers of the journal apply.
Supriya R. Tambe,
Ravindra R. Navthar,
- Ph.D. Research Scholar, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dr. Vithalrao Vikhe Patil College of Engineering, Ahilyanagar, Maharashtra, India
- Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dr. Vithalrao Vikhe Patil College of Engineering, Ahilyanagar, Maharashtra, India
Abstract
This research evaluates how fused deposition modeling (FDM) fabrication process parameters affect the compressive behavior of tetra-chiral auxetic structures created from Polylactic Acid (PLA). Auxetic materials have a number of useful properties, including reversible deformation and high-energy absorbing capabilities, which are beneficial to creating ultra-lightweight structural, protective, and shock-resistance designs. Among the available auxetic topologies, the tetra-chiral configuration is particularly attractive for engineering use, because its rotation-dominated node–ligament deformation gives a negative Poisson’s ratio that remains stable over a wide strain range, its four-fold symmetry gives a nearly isotropic in-plane response suited to sandwich cores under poorly defined loading, and its long compressive plateau prior to densification favours efficient energy absorption. Three key FDM process parameters—layer thickness, raster width and printing speed—were selected to evaluate their effects on compressive strength, stiffness and specific energy absorption (SEA). The experimental design was developed using the Taguchi method with an L9 orthogonal array, enabling efficient investigation of multiple process variables while reducing the number of experimental trials. Nine tetra-chiral PLA specimens were fabricated under different combinations of processing conditions and subjected to quasi-static uniaxial compression testing in accordance with ASTM C365. The experimental results were analysed using signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios to determine the optimal parameter combinations, while analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to quantify the statistical significance and relative contribution of each process parameter. The findings reveal that layer thickness is the most influential parameter affecting all three mechanical responses, whereas raster width and printing speed demonstrate comparatively smaller but appreciable effects. Overall, reductions in layer thickness and increases in raster width improved the compressive behaviour of the fabricated structures. The minimum layer thickness of 0.15 mm consistently produced the highest compressive strength, stiffness and SEA because of enhanced interlayer bonding and reduced internal defects. These findings provide valuable practical guidance for optimizing FDM parameters and manufacturing tetra-chiral auxetic structures with improved load-bearing capacity, structural rigidity and energy-absorption performance.
Keywords: Compressive strength, fused deposition modeling, layer height, raster width, printing speed
References
1. A. Joseph, V. Mahesh, and D. Harursampath, “On the application of additive manufacturing methods for auxetic structures: A review,” Advances in Manufacturing, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 342–368, 2021.
2. S. Teraiya, S. Vyavahare, and S. Kumar, “Anti-tetrachiral auxetic structures fabricated by material extrusion: Numerical and experimental investigation on the influence of design parameters on mechanical properties under compressive loading,” International Journal of Materials Engineering Innovation, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 33–65, 2024.
3. C. C. Seepersad, R. S. Kumar, J. K. Allen, F. Mistree, and D. L. McDowell, “Multifunctional design of prismatic cellular materials,” Journal of Computer-Aided Materials Design, vol. 11, no. 2–3, pp. 163–181, 2004.
4. A. Alomarah, S. H. Masood, I. Sbarski, B. Faisal, Z. Gao, and D. Ruan, “Compressive properties of 3D printed auxetic structures: Experimental and numerical studies,” Virtual and Physical Prototyping, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 2020.
5. H. Vanaei, M. Shirinbayan, M. Deligant, K. Raissi, J. Fitoussi, S. Khelladi, and A. Tcharkhtchi, “Influence of process parameters on thermal and mechanical properties of polylactic acid fabricated by fused filament fabrication,” Polymer Engineering and Science, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 1822–1831, 2020.
6. B. H. Lee, J. Abdullah, and Z. A. Khan, “Optimization of rapid prototyping parameters for production of flexible ABS object,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 169, no. 1, pp. 54–61, 2005.
7. W. Wu, P. Geng, G. Li, D. Zhao, H. Zhang, and J. Zhao, “Influence of layer thickness and raster angle on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed PEEK and a comparative mechanical study between PEEK and ABS,” Materials, vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 5834–5846, 2015.
8. O. A. Mohamed, S. H. Masood, and J. L. Bhowmik, “Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters: A review of current research and future prospects,” Advances in Manufacturing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 42–53, 2015.
9. S. Vyavahare and S. Kumar, “Numerical and experimental investigation of FDM fabricated re-entrant auxetic structures of ABS and PLA materials under compressive loading,” Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 223–244, 2021.
10. S. Kumar, S. Vyavahare, S. Teraiya, and L. C. Dhakar, “Experimental investigation on FDM fabricated tetra chiral auxetic structures under uniaxial compressive loading,” in Fused Deposition Modeling Based 3D Printing, H. K. Dave and J. P. Davim, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2021, pp. 63–83.
11. A. Montalti, P. Ferretti, and G. M. Santi, “A cost-effective approach for quality control in PLA-based material extrusion 3D printing using 3D scanning,” Journal of Industrial Information Integration, vol. 41, art. no. 100660, 2024.
12. M. Sobih, Z. Elseddig, K. Almazy, A. Youssef, and M. Sallam, “Optimization of EBW parameters for 2219 Al-alloy using grey relation method,” Advanced Materials Research, vols. 591–593, pp. 507–514, 2012.
13. S. Vyavahare and S. Kumar, “Re-entrant auxetic structures fabricated by fused deposition modeling: An experimental study of influence of process parameters under compressive loading,” Polymer Engineering and Science, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 3183–3196, 2020.
14. X. Yu, J. Zhou, H. Liang, Z. Jiang, and L. Wu, “Mechanical metamaterials associated with stiffness, rigidity and compressibility: A brief review,” Progress in Materials Science, vol. 94, pp. 114–173, 2018.
Journal of Polymer & Composites
| Volume | 14 | |
| 05 | ||
| Received | 09/07/2026 | |
| Accepted | 22/07/2026 | |
| Published | 24/07/2026 | |
| Publication Time | 15 Days |