See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272623242

Material Property Testing of 3D-Printed Specimen in PLA on an Entry-Level 3D

Printer

Conference Paper · December 2014

DOI: 10.1115/IMECE2014-39379

CITATIONS READS
17 23,104

2 authors, including:

Todd Letcher
South Dakota State University
37 PUBLICATIONS   124 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cellular Metamaterials View project

Thermal Heat Conduction in 3d Printed Materials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Todd Letcher on 23 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Proceedings of the ASME 2014 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition
November 14-20, 2014, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
MATERIAL PROPERTY TESTING OF 3D-PRINTED SPECIMEN
IN PLA ON AN ENTRY-LEVEL 3D PRINTER
Todd Letcher
South Dakota State University
Mechanical Engineering Department
Brookings, SD, USA
ABSTRACT
An entry level consumer priced 3d-printer, the MakerBot
Replicator 2x, was used to print specimen to conduct tensile,
flexural and fatigue testing. Average priced, generic brand PLA
material was used (similar to the filament a home user may
purchase). Specimen were printed at raster orientation angles of
0°, 45° and 90° to test orientation effects on part strength. PLA
filament was also tensile tested.
Tensile testing of the 3d-printed specimens showed that the
45° raster orientation angle made the strongest specimen at an
ultimate tensile strength of 64 MPa. The 0° and 90° raster
orientation were not much less at 58 MPa and 54 MPa. A 3-point
bending fixture was used to conduct flexural testing on printed
specimen. For this type of testing, the 0° raster orientation
produced the strongest parts with an ultimate bending stress of
102 MPa. Both the 45° and 90° raster orientations had similar
results at 90 MPa and 86 MPa. For the fatigue testing, there was
no clear best option, but there was a clearly worst option, the 90°
raster orientation. This orientation clearly had lower fatigue
lives than either of the other two raster orientations. The other
two raster orientations, 0° and 45°, were very similar. PLA
filament testing using bollard style grips, showed that the PLA
filament exhibited mechanical properties similar to that of
printed specimen – when tested at high enough strain rates that
creep damage didn’t play a significant role. This may lead to
implications for recycling failed 3d-print jobs and turning it back
into reusable filament.
INTRODUCTION
3d-printers have become affordable for the dedicated home
user. In fact, there are many high quality 3d-printers for under
$3000 – complete with dual extruders and a heated build surface
[1]. Many of these consumer level 3d-printers are being sold as
printers that print using the material Polylactic Acid (PLA) as
opposed to the more traditional, but more difficult to print with,
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) material. PLA is
1 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
DRAFT
IMECE2014
IMECE2014-39379
Megan Waytashek
South Dakota State University
Mechanical Engineering Department
Brookings, SD, USA
stronger than ABS, but more brittle. PLA has a lower coefficient
of thermal expansion, which reduces the effects of warping, not
adhering to the printed surface, and large parts cracking as they
are printed. PLA also does not have the same health risks as ABS
when printing in improperly ventilated spaces [2]. The most
glaring disadvantage of PLA is the lower deflection temperature
under load (50 to 140°C), which will cause printed parts to
deform when exposed to warm environments. One kilogram
spools of either material type are about $50 (in early 2014) [1].
With all of this in mind, it is easy to understand why many 3d-
printer manufacturers are producing and supporting 3d-printers
that print exclusively using PLA.
Many people are now, and many more people will soon be
printing in PLA in their own homes with personal 3d printers.
MakerBot alone has sold more than 15,000 3d-printers in the last
5 years [3]. Material properties and characteristics of ABS have
been well studied, including many studies that test print
orientations [4-9]. Most of these studies were performed on the
“professional” model machines. Consumer machines print
quality has been largely untested for ABS, and literature
describing material property characteristics of 3d-printed PLA
could not be found. This study aims to begin to understand the
behavior of 3d-printed PLA from a consumer level 3d-printer.
Specimen were printed to study tensile strength, flexural
strength, and fatigue, along with the filament also being tensile
tested. By default, if the MakerWare software, used by the
MakerBot line of 3d-printers, is told to print a specimen/object
at 100% infill, the slicing software will print in alternating raster
orientations, layer by layer. A custom printing profile was
written to print the specimen entirely in a single raster orientation
for each specimen to examine printing orientation as it relates to
material anisotropy.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES 3d-Printed Specimen Tensile Testing

Several types of mechanical property testing were
conducted on PLA filament and specimens that were 3d-printed
using PLA. All specimen were printed on a consumer level 3d-
printer, the MakerBot Replicator 2x. Custom printing profiles
were used to control the slicing/printing software which allowed
printing in a single specified raster orientations for the entire
specimen. Each specimen was printed individually at the center
of the printing bed in order to produce all specimen as similarly
as possible. For all specimen, two “shells” were used on the
perimeter of the specimen and the inside of the specimen was
printed with 100% infill at specified raster orientations. The
PLA material was extruded at 230°C at a speed of 100mm/sec
with the heated bed surface at 65°C. All specimen were printed
with the same generic brand of PLA filament from two 1-kg
spools purchased together. Figure 1 shows the raster orientations
tested and their definitions.
Specimen were tested according to ASTM D638 Standard
Test Methods for Tensile Properties of Plastics [10]. The MTS
wedge grips were displaced at a rate of 5 mm/min with data
(force, grip displacement and strain) collected at 100 Hz. An
MTS Model 634.31F-24 extensometer (20 mm gauge length)
was used to measure strain. Figure 2 shows the testing setup for
tensile testing of the 3d-printed specimen. Figure 3 shows the
geometry of the specimen used for tensile testing. Five specimen
were tested at each of the three raster orientations tested in this
study.

Figure 1. Raster orientation directions, 0° (top), 90° middle, and

45° (bottom)
Figure 2. Tensile testing procedure
Each specimen was individually measured (thickness and
width) at several locations throughout the test section.
According to the ASTMs, the smallest cross sectional area (or
cross sectional area at the center of the beam for flexural testing)
was used to determine appropriate stress values. MTS universal
loading machines were used to conduct the tensile and fatigue
testing. Tensile testing of the 3d-printed specimen and all fatigue
testing was conducted on an MTS 858 load frame with an MTS
25kN load cell. Tensile testing of the PLA filament and flexural
testing was conducted on an MTS Insight load frame with a 5kN
load cell. On both machines, built in LVDTs were used to Figure 3. Tensile/Fatigue Specimen Dimensions [mm]
measure displacement, while an MTS extensometer (Model 3d-Printed Specimen Flexural Testing
634.31F-24) with a gauge length of 20mm was used to measure
strain for the tensile testing of the 3d-printed specimen. All tests
were conducted at room temperature (approximately 20°C).

2 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

 Specimen were tested according to ASTM D790 - Standard
test method for flexural properties of unreinforced and
reinforced plastics and electrical insulating materials [11]. An
MTS 3-point flexure test fixture was used. A support span of 5.1
cm was used. The grips were displaced at a rate of 10 mm/min
to cause the flexure. Figure 4 shows the specimen in the test
fixture. Figure 5 shows the dimensions of the test specimen.
Specimen were made longer than necessary to ensure enough
length would be available to span the supports as the specimen
deflected.
Figure 4. Bending testing procedure
Figure 5. Bending Testing Specimen Dimensions
3 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
3d-printed Specimen Uniaxial Fatigue Testing
Fatigue testing was conducted on an MTS 858 load frame
with a 25kN load cell in accordance to ASTM D7791 - Standard
test method for uniaxial fatigue properties of plastics. Specimen
were tested by constant stress using PVC compensation to ensure
that the specimen were never overloaded. According to the
ASTM, testing can be conducted at rates up to 20 Hz. Therefore,
for this experiment, specimen were fatigued using a sinusoidal
loading waveform at 2 Hz up to 1,000 cycles, then 5 Hz up to
10,000 cycles and then 20 Hz until failure. Failure was
considered to be a completely fractured specimen. The fatigue
endurance limit for this experiment was set to 1 million cycles.
If the specimen did not break by 1 million cycles, the test was
stopped. Specimen geometry is shown in Figure 3 (same as the
tensile testing specimen). All testing was conducted at a stress
ratio of 𝑅 = −1.
PLA Filament Tensile Testing
The PLA filament alone (not printed into a specimen) was
also tested. Specimen of 200mm in length were clamped using
the Bollard style grips shown in Figure 6 in the MTS Insight load
frame. Several displacement rates (500 mm/min, 200 mm/min,
50 mm/min, 5 mm/min) were used to test the filament.
Figure 6. PLA filament testing using Bollard style grips (left),
lose up of clamping method (right)
RESULTS 70
60
3d-Printed Specimen Tensile Testing
50

Stress (MPa)
Five specimen were tested at each raster orientation angle. 40
The individual results for each test are shown in Table 1. Table
2 shows a summary of all the tensile tests. 30
0 degrees
20 45 degrees
Table 1. Tensile testing of 3d-printed specimen
10 90 degrees
Modulus 0
Raster Actual Actual Ultimate Elongation
of
Orientation Width Thickness Stress at Break
Elasticity
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
(degrees) (mm) (mm) (MPa) (%)
(GPa)
Strain (mm/mm)
0 13.03 5.59 59.65 2.198% 3.256
Figure 7. Representative tensile testing data at each raster
0 12.86 5.94 58.61 2.297% 2.815
orientation
0 12.87 5.87 54.16 1.697% 3.522
0 13.14 5.88 65.49 2.271% 3.461
0 13.19 6.08 54.36 1.656% 3.599
3d-Printed Specimen Bending Testing

45 13.38 6.08 64.94 2.552% 3.677 Five flexural specimen were printed and tested at each raster
45 13.11 6.12 63.28 2.368% 3.577 orientation. For this testing, failure was considered a fully
45 13.21 6.10 62.45 2.413% 3.598 broken specimen. However, the specimen often did not fully
break. Of the specimen that did not fully break, some specimen
45 13.12 6.18 65.37 2.577% 3.585 cracked, but the outer shell held together, while the rest of the
45 13.55 6.03 64.10 2.601% 3.585 specimen were flexible enough to not break. Eventually the test
90 13.15 5.93 56.26 5.086% 3.507 was stopped because the specimen were touching the testing
fixture. Table 3 shows the results from this testing. Table 4
90 13.22 6.03 56.08 3.208% 3.536 compiles the average results for each printing orientation.
90 13.41 5.82 53.34 4.530% 3.463
90 13.05 6.00 49.10 4.553% 3.310
Table 3. Flexural Testing
90 13.36 5.92 55.26 3.334% 3.628
Raster Actual Actual Ultimate Ultimate Flexural
Orientation Width Thickness Stress Strain Modulus
Table 2. Summary of tensile testing results (degrees) (mm) (mm) (MPa) (%) (GPa)
0 12.63 3.34 99.34 6.64% 3.13
Raster Average Average Average 13.08 3.19
0 103.77 9.19% 3.17
Orientation Ultimate Elongation Modulus of
0 13.08 3.09 100.90 13.29% 3.18
(degrees) Stress at Break Elasticity
(MPa) (%) (GPa) 0 12.75 3.15 107.14 12.16% 3.48
0 58.45 2.02% 3.33 0 12.76 3.23 99.87 11.82% 2.98
45 64.03 2.50% 3.60 45 12.83 3.37 92.77 7.17% 2.98
90 54.01 4.14% 3.49 45 12.69 3.36 92.29 7.48% 3.21
45 12.76 3.44 88.23 8.15% 2.93
45 13.10 3.34 89.43 8.81% 3.02
In the case of PLA, the 45° raster orientation produced the
strongest specimen. Figure 7 shows representative stress/strain 45 12.75 3.39 90.53 7.59% 2.78
curves from each of the raster orientations. 90 12.74 3.38 85.77 4.73% 3.01
90 12.72 3.40 85.48 4.73% 2.88
90 12.77 3.33 87.32 4.75% 3.05
90 12.76 3.31 86.52 4.01% 3.00
90 12.67 3.37 85.59 4.30% 3.05

4 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

Table 4. Summary of flexural testing orientation specimen clearly have the lowest fatigue
capabilities. After adjusting the 0° specimens to account for the
Flexural “strand” breaking off during testing and not supporting any
Raster Ultimate Ultimate
Modulus of load, it can be seen in the figure that on average the 0°
Orientation Stress Strain
Elasticity specimens have better fatigue loading resistance to failure than
(degrees) (MPa) (%)
(GPa) the 45° specimens above 35 MPa. Below 35 MPa, the 45°
0 102.203 0.106 3.187 specimens have the best fatigue life capabilities. These trends
should be more closely investigated using more specimen and
45 90.649 0.078 2.985
should likely be tested at more stress levels to confirm or deny
90 86.136 0.045 3.000 these findings.

The endurance limit was considered to be 1 million cycles

For PLA printed specimen, the 0° raster orientation printed for this study. The endurance limits for the three raster
specimen had the highest ultimate stress with 102.203 MPa orientations tested in this study were, 5 MPa (0° specimens), 10
before breaking. MPa (45° specimens), and 0.5 MPa (the 90° specimens).

3d-Printed Specimen Fatigue Testing Filament Tensile Testing

Fatigue specimen were printed and then fatigued until the Tensile testing on the filament alone without having been
specimen had fully broken (or reached the fatigue limit). extruded through the printing process was also tested. Several
Eventually, for most 0° raster orientation specimen, an outer displacement rates were used to test the filament. Table 6 shows
“strand” of the specimen, in the gauge length zone, separated all of the test results, while Table 7 shows a summary of the
from the main body of the specimen. It was observed that this average results for each strain rate.
piece of the specimen provided no support as it was fatigued and
the strand would eventually break off of the specimen. After
each of these specimen failed, the strand was measured and Table 6. Filament Tensile Testing
subtracted from the area used to calculate he necessary load to Displacement Ultimate Ultimate Modulus of
be applied to cause a specified alternating stress. The load Rate Stress Strain Elasticity
applied to the specimen divided by the adjusted cross sectional (mm/min) (MPa) (%) (GPa)
area was used to calculate the “adjusted” stress value. These 500 60.86 12.3% 1.78
results are shown in Figure 8.
500 59.41 14.3% 1.72
Logarithmic curve fits (Eq 1) were calculated for each of 500 63.44 9.3% 1.77
the raster orientation angles. Table 5 shows the curve fit 500 56.89 4.6% 1.89
coefficients for each of the types of testing conducted.
500 54.17 5.5% 1.73
200 61.10 16.9% 1.93
𝜎 = 𝐴 ∗ 𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝑁) + 𝐵 Eq 1 200 59.22 14.6% 1.89
200 58.95 12.4% 1.81
200 60.26 11.0% 1.89
Table 5. Curve fit coefficients for fatigue modeling
200 58.05 11.8% 1.83
Raster 50 56.25 16.2% 1.54
Orientation A B R2
50 53.40 20.4% 1.50
(degrees)
0 -4.5949 66.4654 0.9893 50 56.08 14.5% 1.66
45 -4.3142 67.0712 0.9905 50 55.67 8.2% 2.02
90 -5.0432 67.5063 0.9912 50 52.16 28.5% 1.46
0 (adjusted) -4.9697 71.8660 0.9875 5 48.25 24.6% 1.34
5 47.01 14.4% 1.27
5 48.62 12.1% 1.16
As with all fatigue testing, the results are somewhat 5 48.67 21.4% 1.35
random, although the coefficient of determination values are
quite high. It can be seen in Figure 8 that the 90° raster 5 48.62 7.6% 1.43

5 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

 60
0 degrees
50 45 degrees
90 degrees

40 0 degree (adjusted)
Stress (MPa)

30

20

10

0
10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Number of Cycles

Figure 8. SN plot of fatigue data

Table 7. Summary of filament tensile testing

70
Displacement Average Ultimate Modulus of
Rate Ultimate Stress Strain Elasticity 60
(mm/min) (MPa) (%) (GPa)
50
500 58.951 9.2% 1.778
Stress (MPa)

200 59.518 13.3% 1.868 40

50 54.713 17.5% 1.636
5 48.233 16.0% 1.309 30
500 mm/min
20 200 mm/min
For the two fastest strain rates (500 mm/min and 200
mm/min) the ultimate stress was similar along with the modulus 10 50 mm/min
of elasticity. The two slower strain rates (50 mm/min and 5 5 mm/min
mm/min) had lower ultimate strengths, but did have longer 0
maximum elongations before failure – likely affected by creep 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
from the longer testing times. Strain (mm/mm)

The ultimate stress for the faster strain rates (not affected by
Figure 9. Representative filament stress/strain curves
creep) were similar to the results of the printed specimen, even
though the PLA plastic in the specimen has been heated and
extruded one time more than the filament alone. This finding
Microscope Evaluations
may be useful when considering whether waste PLA material
from 3d-printing can be recycled into new filament for future
printing. A Keyence VHX-600 microscope was used to perform
visual evaluation of several small features of the test specimen.
Through this evaluation, several problems with the print quality

6 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

were noted. The most notable being in the 0° raster orientation.
As shown in Figures 10 and 11, the 3d-printer left gaps near the
radius section of the specimen and along one side of the entire
test section of specimen.

Figure 10. Radius gap problem in 0° raster orientation (50x)

Figure 12. 0° raster orientation specimen exhibiting loose strand

Figure 11. Gap between the outer “shell” of the specimen and
behavior
the main body of the specimen (50x)

In contrast to the problems shown for the 0° raster

The gap between the printed shell and the main body of the
orientation angle, the 45° and the 90° orientations did not show
specimen became extremely apparent during the high stress (low
any gap problems near the radius of the specimen or anywhere.
cycle) fatigue testing. Several measurements of this gap across
See Figures 13 and 14 for these views, due to the geometry of
several specimen were made using the microscope. The average
slicing and layering the specimen, all voids could be filled much
gap thickness was 181.47μm. During these high stress fatigue
closer than the 0° specimens.
tests, it was noted that the outer shell of the specimen had
completely separated from the main body of the specimen and
was not contributing to the stiffness of the specimen leaving a
CONCLUSIONS
“loose strand” vibrating with as the load is cycled. Figures 12
shows a representative view of the “loose strand” at 0° raster
PLA filament and PLA printed specimen mechanical
orientation specimen while being fatigue tested. This loose
properties were tested. For tensile testing, it was determined that
strand looked to be buckling almost immediately after cyclic
the the 45° raster orientation specimens were the strongest. In
fatigue began and broke free very soon after the buckling began.
fatigue testing, the 90° specimens were clearly the least resistant
Because the specimen still held the full fatigue load without the
to fatigue loadings. The fatigue lives for the 45° specimens and
peak/valley machine displacement changing, it was determined
0° specimens were very similar and should be investigated
that the loose strand never contributed to supporting load on the
further. However, the 45° specimens did have the highest fatigue
specimen and therefore the loose strand failure should not
endurance limit. The filament testing (at higher strain rates
constitute a specimen failure.
where creep wasn’t a factor) showed similar results to the printed

7 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

specimen results. This may help to determine whether failed
print jobs can be recycled into new filament to be printed again.
Microscope evaluations helped to determine gap sizes left in the
specimens from the printing process.
Figure 13. 45° raster orientation 50x view of radius section (50x)
Figure 14. 90° raster orientation, 50x view of radius section
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to thank the Materials Evaluation and
Testing Lab (METLAB) and the Mechanical Engineering
Department at South Dakota State University for the use of
testing equipment.
REFERENCES
[1] 3ders.org. Price compare 3d printing materials.
http://www.3ders.org/pricecompare/. (visited 4/12/2014)
8 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
View publication stats
[2] Stephens, B., Azimi,P., El Orch, Z., Ramos, T. Ultrafine
particle emissions from desktop 3D printers, Atmospheric
Environment, Volume 79, November 2013, Pages 334-339
[3] Makerbot FAQ. http://www.makerbot.com/faq/.
[4] Rodriguez JF, Thomas JP, Renard JE. Design of fused-
deposition ABS components for stiffness and strength. Journal
of Mechanical Design 2003, Vol 125(3): Pages 545–551
[5] Li L, Sun Q, Bellehumeur C, Gu P. Composite modeling
and analysis for fabrication of FDM prototypes with locally
controlled properties. Journal of Manufacturing Processes
2002, Vol 4(2), Pages 129–141
[6] Ahn SH, Montero M, Odell D, Roundy S, Wright PK.
Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling
ABS. Rapid Prototyping Journal 2002 Vol 8(4), Pages 248–257
[7] Bellini A, Güçeri S. Mechanical characterization of parts
fabricated using fused deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyping
Journal 2003 Vol 9(4), Pages 252–264
[8] Rodriguez JF, Thomas JP, Renaud JE. Mechanical behavior
of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) fused deposition
materials. Experimental investigation. Rapid Prototyping
Journal 2001, Vol 7(3), Pages 148–158.
[9] Sood AK, Ohdar RK, Mahapatra SS. Parametric appraisal
of mechanical property of fused deposition modelling
processed parts. Material Design, 2010, Vol 31(1), P 287–295.
[10] ASTM Standard D638, 2010, "Standard test methods for
tensile properties of plastics," ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2010
[11] ASTM Standard D790, 2010, "Standard test method for
flexural properties of unreinforced and reinforced plastics and
electrical insulating materials," ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2010
[12] ASTM Standard D7791, 2012, "Standard test method for
uniaxial fatigue properties of plastics.” ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA, 2012