International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-022-01667-7

REVIEW

Interfacial behaviors of continuous carbon fiber reinforced polymers

manufactured by fused filament fabrication: A review and prospect
Yiyun Wu1 · Kui Wang2   · Victor Neto1 · Yong Peng2 · Robertt Valente1 · Said Ahzi3

Received: 7 June 2021 / Accepted: 5 November 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2022

Abstract
Continuous fiber reinforced polymers composites have significant potential due to their high specific strength and high specific
modulus. But there are some limitations on manufacturing and maintenance for the composites using existing manufactur-
ing technologies. Meanwhile, the increasingly advanced 3D printing technology, with advantages on complex components
building, no need for assembling operations and precise entity replication, has brought new hope for the manufacture and
application of continuous fiber reinforced composites. However, compared to traditionally manufactured composites, poor
interfacial adhesion is the main weakness of 3D printed composites. In the present work, a comprehensive review study on
the identification, categories, characterization and measuring methods for interfaces in 3D printed composites is presented.
Particularly, the effects of materials, processing and design parameters on the interfacial properties and mechanical behaviors
of 3D printed composites are systematically discussed. Based on these investigation and discussion, compilation of effec-
tive methods and technologies is presented to improve the interfacial adhesion and reduce the generation of voids. Also,
modeling and simulation approaches are also presented for the special case of 3D printed composites. This work therefore
intends to provide a reference source regarding interfacial properties, processing control, processing scalability and product
performance of 3D printed composites, that could help researchers proceed and make contributions to this research field.

Keywords  3D printing · Continuous fiber reinforced polymer · Interfacial properties · Mechanical behaviors · Voids ·
Modeling

Introduction automobiles, with the development of manufacturing tech-

nologies [1–3]. However, traditional manufacturing methods
Carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) have shown for CFRP have limitations on free-form shape design and
great potential on guarantee for both high strength and one-piece molding. On the contrary, 3D printing technolo-
light-weighting, and have been gradually used as structural gies have advantages on complex components building, no
components in various applications such as aerospace and need for assembling operations and precise entity replication
[4, 5]. Thus, 3D printed CFRP becomes a good alternative
choice for structural components covering the shortages of
* Kui Wang traditionally manufactured CFRP [6, 7]. 3D printing tech-
kui.wang@csu.edu.cn nologies encompass numerous methods, including fused
* Victor Neto filament fabrication (FFF), powder bed and inkjet head 3D
vneto@ua.pt printing (3DP), stereolithography (SLA), selective laser sin-
1
Centre for Mechanical Technology and Automation, tering (SLS) [8]. Among these, FFF technique allows for
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University the manufacturing of parts by depositing thin lines side by
of Aveiro, 3810‑193 Aveiro, Portugal side, and layer by layer, which is very suitable for printing
2
Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety On Track of Ministry continuous fiber filaments [9].
of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation In order to better understand and enlarge application
Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, potential, it is essential to study the factors affecting mechan-
China
ical behaviors of CFRP fabricated by FFF, and come up
3
ICUBE Laboratory – CNRS, University of Strasbourg, with different feasible improvement methods for weakness.
67000 Strasbourg, France

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 18   Page 2 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

Generally, the whole properties of composites depend on some analytic, finite element method (FEM) and smoothed
matrix, reinforcements as well as inner microstructure. Some particle hydrodynamics (SPH) methods are summarized for
of these factors are easy to adjust and control, such as the modeling and simulation of 3D printed composites. The
type of fibers and polymer matrix, the geometry of fibers present paper intends to provide a clear frame of knowledge
[10], fiber content [11], fiber orientation [12], and building regarding interfacial properties, processing control, process-
direction [13]. However, the internal defects that may result ing scalability and product performance of 3D printed com-
from the poor adhesion between fibers and matrix, between posites, which could help researchers make contributions to
deposited lines and between layers, as well as the pores the current research direction.
induced by gas diffusion, are difficult to control [14]. The
adhesions between deposited lines and between layers in 3D
printed components are recognized to be weaker than those Characterization and methods
manufactured by traditional methods, due to the lack of com-
paction during printing processes along building direction In this section, different FFF techniques for continuous fiber
[15, 16]. The number of pores induced by gas diffusion in reinforced composites are presented. Based on FFF technol-
filaments is more than that of traditionally manufactured ogy, forming processes and mechanisms of three kinds of
composites attributing to the uneven extrusion during raw interfaces in 3D printed composites are presented. Then,
filaments passage through printing head and nozzles [14]. several characterization and experimental testing methods
Therefore, imperfect interfacial adhesion is recognized for interfacial properties are introduced.
as the main weakness of 3D printing technologies inducing
premature failure of samples. Moreover, the introduction of Fused filament fabrication (FFF)
reinforcement may further increase the porosity due to the
poor interfacial bonding with matrix. Thus, it is necessary FFF is the most common 3D printing technology for fab-
to further research how to eliminate the formation of void ricating polymer composites, allowing for the manufactur-
during printing and ensure good interfacial bonding, in order ing of parts by depositing thin lines side by side, and layer
to improve the whole mechanical properties and engineer by layer [8, 9]. Generally, according to the difference of
application potential of 3D printed composites. feeding filaments and mechanism, there are three kinds of
In the present work, the mechanism of interfacial forming, FFF printers for CFRP shown in Fig. 1 [17, 18]: towpreg
identification, categories, and characterization of interfaces extrusion (single feeding in – single extruding out), in-situ
in composites fabricated by FFF are presented. The factors impregnation (dual feeding in – single extruding out), and
that could affect the interfacial properties and mechanical co-extrusion with towpreg (dual feeding in – dual extruding
behaviors of 3D printed composites, including materials, out). Feeding filaments for towpreg extrusion printers are
processing, and design parameters, and their specifical prepreg continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastic filaments,
effects, were systematically summarized and discussed. while for in-situ impregnation and co-extrusion with tow-
Then, various methods and technologies for improving the preg printer are thermoplastic matrix and continuous fiber
interfacial properties of 3D printed composites were also (or continuous fiber reinforced filaments).
summarized, including impregnation and surface modifica- Due to the different printing mechanism and feeding fila-
tion for filaments before printing, multiple parameters opti- ments, these three kinds of printers have different applica-
mization, post treatment and other novel methods. Finally, tion targets. Towpreg extrusion technique is similar to the

Fig. 1  Different FFF technolo-

gies for continuous fiber rein-
forced composites: (a) towpreg
extrusion, (b) in-situ impregna-
tion, and (c) co-extrusion with
towpreg [12]

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 3 of 18  18

common FFF technique used for polymers, which could only Among them, interfaces between layers and between
print prepared filaments and is helpless for additional pro- deposited beads are generated during the printing pro-
cess. In-situ impregnation technique allows continuous fibers cesses and could be observed under macro scale. In addi-
and polymer matrix to mix and glue together inside printing tion, interfaces between continuous fibers and matrix are
head during printing process, and is needless advanced prep- generated during the preparation process for filaments and
aration for filaments. The special mechanism leads to both could just be found in micro scale.
freedom of printing investigation and unstable interfacial Compared to traditionally manufactured composites,
properties of 3D printed components. As for co-extrusion there are no cohesive layers (generally consist of glues
with towpreg technique, it is popularly adopted by com- and adhesives) between fiber reinforced layers in 3D
mercial printer. There are two nozzles in co-extrusion with printed composites. The adhesion between beads and lay-
towpreg printer, one for matrix and another for continuous ers in FFF parts is driven by thermal energy of extruded
fibers. The summary of published studies regarding to 3D materials. The temperature history of interfaces plays
printed continuous carbon fiber reinforced composites using an important role in determining bonding quality, and
the three types of FFF techniques are listed in Tables 1, 2, 3, further affects mechanical properties of final parts [39].
in which, IFSS refers to interfacial shear strength that will Specifically, bonding quality depends on the growths of
be explained in detail in Sect. 2.3. necks formed between adjacent beads and on the molecu-
lar diffusion and randomization of polymer chains across
Forming of interfaces in 3D printed composites interfaces, as showed in Fig. 3 [40, 41]. The heat interac-
tion process is helpful for adhesion between beads and
Generally, three types of interfaces in 3D printed CFRP between layers, but meantime induces residual stresses
could be found under multi scale, including interfaces within deposited parts [42]. Although the randomization
between layers, interfaces between beads, and interfaces and adhesion would be achieved between beads, voids
between fiber and matrix, as shown in Fig. 2 [29, 35–37]. would finally remain. Thus, diamond-like holes always

Table 1  Summary of reported Source Materials Flexural strength Flexural IFSS Other properties
mechanical data for CFRP (MPa) modulus (MPa)
manufactured by Towpreg (GPa)
extrusion FFF technologies
Hao et al. [19] CCF/epoxy 202 143.9 – Tensile strength = 792.8 MPa
Tensile modulus = 161.4 GPa
Ming et al. [20] CCF/epoxy 952.9 74.1 –  –
Vf = 58%
Hu et al. [21] CCF/PLA 541.6 40.1 –  –
Vf = 58%
Ming et al. [22] CCF/epoxy 858.05 71.95 48.75 Tensile strength = 
Vf = 48.33% 1476.11 MPa
Tensile modulus = 100 GPa

Table 2  Summary of reported Source Materials Flexural Flexural IFSS Other properties

mechanical data for CFRP strength modulus (MPa)
manufactured by in-situ (MPa) (GPa)
impregnation FFF technologies
Tian et al. [23] CCF/PLA 335 30 –  –
Vf = 27%
Hou et al. [24] CCF/PLA  –  –  – Compressive strength = 11.17 MPa
Vf = 11.5%
Luo et al. [25] CCF/PEEK 480 37 35.7 Impact strength = 56 kJ/m2
Vf = 38.27%
Li et al. [26] CCF/PLA 156  –  – Tensile strength = 91 MPa
Vf = 34% Dynamic storage modulus = 3.25 GPa
Tian et al. [27] CCF/PLA 263 13.3 22.67 Impact strength = 38.7 kJ/m2
Vf = 8.9%
Luo et al. [28] CCF/PEEK  –  – 39.05  –

13
 18   Page 4 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

Table 3  Summary of reported mechanical data for CFRP manufactured by co-extrusion with towpreg FFF technologies
Source Materials Flexural strength Flexural IFSS Other properties
(MPa) modulus (MPa)
(GPa)

Blok et al. [10] CCF/PA 485 41.6  – Tensile strength = 986 MPa

Vf = 27% Tensile modulus = 62.5 GPa
Shear strength = 36.16 MPa
Shear modulus = 2.26 GPa
Justo et al. [15] CCF/PA  –  –  – Tensile strength = 701.41 MPa
Vf = 40% Tensile modulus = 68.08 GPa
Compressive strength = 223.06 MPa
Compressive modulus = 52.99 GPa
Yu et al. [29] CCF/PA 270.63 14.5  –  –
Vf = 48.72%
Camineroa et al. [30] CCF/PA  –  – -  –
Vf = 22.19% 22
Vf = 31.94% 32
Van der Klift et al. [31] CCF/PA  –  –  – Tensile strength = 464.4 MPa
Vf = 34.5% Tensile modulus = 35.7 GPa
Peng et al. [32] CCF/PA  –  –  – Tensile strength = 515.67 MPa
Vf = 25.69% Tensile modulus = 39.2 GPa
Vf = 36.48%  –  –  – Tensile strength = 592.0 MPa
Tensile modulus = 57.6 GPa
Dickson et al. [33] CCF/PA 250.23 13.02  – Tensile strength = 216 MPa
Vf = 11% Tensile modulus = 7.73 GPa
Peng et al. [34] CCF/PA 261.7 16  –  –
Vf = 19.1%

Fig. 2  Various interfaces and

voids in 3D printed CFRP in
multiscale [38]

appear in the center of every four beads (inter-bead void whole materials. The same applies to 3D printed composites.
in Fig. 2). Due to the lack of compressive force along building direc-
For most of materials and components, interfacial region tion during printing processes, interfaces between layers and
is one of the most noteworthy places, not only due to the beads may be unperfect, which leads to gaps at these inter-
discontinuous stress transferring, but also because of the facial regions. In addition, during the preparation processes
potential defects that could induce premature failure of the for printing filaments, voids between fibers and matrix

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 5 of 18  18

Fig. 3  Illustrations for adhesion process (heat interaction process) of Fig. 4  Setups for interfacial investigations including (a) short beam
two adjacent beads [41] shear test and (b) floating roller peel test [45, 47]

(intra-bead void in Fig. 2) are formed mainly due to the

imperfect impregnation between continuous fibers and poly- by parallel fibers as shown in Fig. 4 (a). The determination
mers [43, 44]. Firstly, the inertness, low surface energy and of the IFSS is shown below:
lack of chemically active functional groups of carbon fiber
Pm
surfaces themselves would have induced relatively weak 𝜏ILSS = 0.75 × (1)
adhesion of interfaces between fiber and matrix. Besides, b×h
the relatively high content of continuous fibers could also where 𝜏IFSS is the interlaminar shear strength, Pm is the maxi-
induce gaps in filaments. Too much continuous fibers might mum load observed during testing, b is the width of speci-
block the mobility of matrix during preparation processes for mens and h the thickness of specimens.
filaments, resulting in incomplete impregnation of materials. In addition, f loating roller peeling testing could
Meantime, there are pores induced by gas diffusion existing investigate the specific peel strength of interfaces
(intra-bead void in Fig. 2) in filament as well. between two adjacent layers by measuring the peeling
The imperfect adhesions between layers, between beads force of a T-shaped bonded assembly of two flexible
and inside filaments become the main weakness of 3D adherends, as shown in Fig. 4 (b) [47, 48]. Specifically,
printed composites. And in most cases, they induce the pre- force is applied to the unbonded ends of specimen for
mature failure and weaken the reinforcement effect of con- a flexible-to-flexible assembly. The experimental pro-
tinuous fibers, resulting in lower mechanical performances cedure was based on the ASTM standard D3167 [49].
of composites. Based on the knowledge of printing mechanism of FFF
technique, forming processes of interfaces in multi scale,
Investigation methods and morphological and quantitative analysis methods for
interfacial properties, the effect of factors during the whole
Interfacial properties of 3D printed composites could be manufacturing processes on mechanical behaviors as well
investigated by morphological analysis and quantitative as interfacial properties of 3D printed CFRP could be sys-
analysis. The morphological characterization for interfaces tematically investigated.
could be done though several devices, including scanning
electron microscope (SEM), optical microscope, high-
resolution digital camera and computed tomography (CT),
according to different requirements of accuracy and obser- Effects on mechanical and interfacial
vation objects. behaviors
As for the quantitative analysis, the interfacial proper-
ties could be investigated through short-beam strength test In order to better understand and use 3D printed CFRP, it is
method for polymer matrix composites (ATSM D 2344/D essential to study the effects of various parameters including
2344 M) [45] and floating roller peeling test for flexible- materials and process parameters, intra-ply design and inter-
to-flexible bonded assemblies (ISO 11339:2005) [46]. ply design parameters, on mechanical behaviors as well as
Short beam shear testing is used to determine interlaminar interfacial properties of 3D printed CFRP.
shear strength (IFSS) of laminated composites reinforced

13
 18   Page 6 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

Materials parameters Then, as for the type of matrix, the most common used
matrix for FFF technique are thermoplastic polymers, since
Mechanical properties and interfacial behaviors of 3D they could be heated and cured several times but only lose
printed CFRP are decided and balanced by matrix and rein- limited material and chemical properties. Generally, thermo-
forcement materials, including the type of fiber and matrix, setting composites are hard to be applied into FFF technique
content of fiber and length of fiber in filaments. The effect because they cannot melt again after curing, though they
of materials parameters on the physical properties of 3D have higher rigidity compared to thermoplastic composites.
printed CFRP are summarized on Table 4. If the difficulty of extrusion of thermosetting filaments could
To start with, the effect of fiber types on interfacial prop- be overcome, thermosetting-based composites could show
erties of 3D printed continuous fiber reinforced composites higher elastic strength and modulus than thermoplastic-
was studied by several researchers. Camineroa et al. [30] based composites due to the chemical reaction occurring at
quantitatively measured interlaminar bonding performance the interfaces of the fibers and matrix [19, 54, 55]. A com-
of 3D printed composites reinforced by different continuous parison between tensile properties of 3D printed continu-
fibers through short beam shear testing. It was found the ous carbon fiber reinforced epoxy (EP) [19], reinforced PLA
ranking of the reinforcement effects for interfacial strength (with similar fiber content) [31] and SiC/C reinforced EP is
is: carbon fiber > glass fiber > Kevlar fiber, as shown in summarized [56] in Fig. 5 (a). And IFSS of 3D printed pure
Fig. 5 (b). Similar results were also found by Mei et al. [50]. polyamide (PA), PA reinforced by different reinforcements
Except single reinforcement effect, interfacial behaviors [30] and pre-preg M21/IMA thermosetting-based composite
of 3D printed composites reinforced by hybrid fiber were [57] is summarized in Fig. 5 (b).
also investigated [37-. Wang et al. [53] studied the hybrid And as for the effect of fiber content on interfacial prop-
effect of continuous carbon and Kevlar fibers on 3D printed erties of the whole structure, 3D printed composites with
composites using quasi‐static indentation (QSI) testing and higher continuous fiber content tend to show higher rigidity.
interfacial analysis. It was found that the introduction of both But the interfacial adhesion may be weakened if the fiber
carbon and Kevlar fibers provided simultaneously tailored content is higher than critical value due to the imperfect
rigidity and ductility. impregnation between matrix and fiber [58, 59].

Table 4  Effects of different materials parameters on interfacial behaviors and mechanical properties of 3D printed continuous fiber reinforced
composites
Materials parameters Interfacial behaviors Mechanical properties Ref

Type of fiber Carbon fiber IFSS: Carbon fiber > glass fibers > Kevlar Rigidity: carbon fiber > Kevlar fiber + carbon [30, 50–53]
Glass fiber fibers fiber > Kevlar fiber > glass fiber
Kevlar fiber
Hybrid fiber
Type of matrix Thermoplastic IFSS: Thermoplastic > Thermoset Rigidity: thermosetting-based compos- [19, 31, 54–57]
Thermoset ites > thermoplastic-based composites
Content of fiber Higher content of fiber, lower adhesion Higher content of fiber, higher mechanical [58, 59]
quality properties before 40 vol%
Length of fiber Higher length of fiber, lower adhesion quality Higher length of fiber, higher mechanical [10, 14, 32, 60]
properties

Fig. 5  (a) Tensile properties of

3D printed CCF/EP, CCF/PLA
and SiC/C/EP, and (b) interfa-
cial shear strength (IFSS) of 3D
printed pure PA, composites
reinforced by different continu-
ous fiber and prepreg M21/IMA
(data from ref [19, 30, 31, 56,
57])

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 7 of 18  18

In addition, the effect of fiber length on interfacial prop-

erties were also investigated [10, 14]. The results showed
that longer carbon fibers could provide higher reinforcement
effects in terms of strength and stiffness for composites. In
addition, Peng et al. investigated the effect of synergistic
reinforcement by both continuous carbon fiber and short car-
bon fiber on mechanical properties of 3D printed composites
[32]. There were three kinds of interfaces between layers in
the composites. It can be found that adhesion strengths of
interfaces between short and continuous fibers layers (inter-
face S-C) and interfaces between short fiber layers (interface
S–S) were higher than that of interfaces between continuous
fiber layers (interface C–C) as shown in Fig. 6. This phe-
nomenon was probably due to the presence of short fibers Fig. 7  Schematic of process parameters for 3D printing of CFRP [23]
which could improve the interfacial strength between layers
[60].
affect mechanical behaviors and interfacial properties of 3D
printed composites (Table 5 and Table 6).
Process and design parameters Some researchers have studied the effects of process-
ing and design parameters on the interfacial behaviors of
Temperature and pressure are the two key indexes affecting 3D printed CFRP [20, 23, 63]. It was found that with an
the properties of composites during manufacturing process. increasing temperature of liquefier, flexural and interfacial
During 3D printing processes, heating process takes place strength of samples increased due to the increasing melting
in the printing head and pressure is generated between noz- flow index, which leads better interfacial adhesion between
zles and printing bed (or deposited layers). Temperature of beads. In addition, with thinner layer thickness, 3D printed
printing head and printing bed could be controlled directly composites would have higher fiber content (if the whole
by the 3D printer or the matching software. But pressure thickness of sample is fixed), and further have higher rigid-
could not be simply set manually. Only relative printing ity [24]. And in other hand, thinner layer thickness also
parameters, such as layer thickness and hatch spacing could means higher contact pressure between nozzle and bead,
be set by software [61]. A schematic of process parameters which could also help to strengthen interfacial properties
for 3D printing is presented in Fig. 7. All these parameters between layers. Then, hatch spacing is the distance between
will be discussed in this section. Besides parameters men- the centers of two adjacent beads. Lower spacing could help
tioned above, feed rate of filament and printing speed could two adjacent beads stick together, avoid gaps and improve
affect the quality of 3D printed components [62]. In addi- interfacial adhesion. Feeding rate controls the unit volume
tion, except printing parameters, researchers also need to of filament fed into printing head, determining the inner
consider some design parameters such as the fill pattern, pressure and extrusion speed of melt materials. And as for
stacking sequence, and fiber orientation. All these printing feeding rate, higher rate leads to higher mechanical proper-
and design parameters have significant effects on micro and ties of printed composites within the volume capacity of
macro structures of printed composites, and consequently printing head, while out of the limited capacity, feeding rate

Fig. 6  SEM images for tensile

fracture surfaces of 3D printed
(a) short and continuous carbon
fiber reinforced PA and (b) short
carbon fiber reinforced PA [32]

13
 18   Page 8 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

Table 5  Effects of different process parameters on interfacial behaviors and mechanical properties of 3D printed continuous fiber reinforced
composites
Process parameters Mechanical properties Interfacial behaviors and mechanisms Ref

Temperature of printing head Higher temperature, higher rigidity Higher temperature, higher melting flow index, better inter- [20, 23, 63]
facial adhesion
Layer thickness Higher layer thickness, lower rigidity Thinner layer thickness with fixed dimensions of samples, [20, 23, 24]
higher fiber content
Hatch spacing Higher hatch spacing, lower rigidity Lower hatch spacing, less gaps between adjacent lines, [20, 23]
higher interfacial adhesion
Printing speed Limited effect Higher printing speed, less impregnation time, lower contact [20, 23]
pressure, however higher fiber content (contradictory
effect)

Table 6  Effects of different design parameters on interfacial behaviors and mechanical properties of 3D printed continuous fiber reinforced com-
posites

Design parameters Mechanical properties Interfacial behaviors and mechanisms Ref

Fill pattern Rigidity: Isotropic > concentric filling pattern Isotropic filling pattern, higher fiber content [24]
Stacking sequence Rigidity: Separated > concentrated distribution Separated distribution, more interfaces S-C and S–S, [40, 60]
Ductility: Separated > concentrated distribution less interfaces C–C, higher interfacial strength of
whole composites, higher rigidity and ductility
Fiber orientation Rigidity: 0° (length/loading direction) >  ± 45° > 90° The more the fibers arranged along short side, more [16, 33, 40, 64]
Anisotropy: 0° > 90° >  ± 45° and bigger teardrop-shaped voids, weaker interfa-
cial quality

could only show limited effect. Besides, printing speed is place in the corner areas where continuous fibers change
the moving speed of nozzles. High printing speed decreases their orientation and turn back, which could really affect the
the impregnation time of fiber and polymer, but increases interfacial adhesion between beads and become a significant
the overall fiber content of the composites. These two con- weakness for 3D printed composites with 90° continuous
tradictory factors cause limited effect of printing speed on fiber angle [34].
mechanical properties of printed composites.
In addition, design parameters such as the fill pattern,
stacking sequence, fiber orientation would also affect the
Methods and technologies to improve
interfacial behaviors of composites. Generally, continuous
interfacial properties
fiber could be deposited follow isotropic filling patterns or
concentric filling pattern as shown in Fig. 8 (a). Dickson
In the above section, the effects of materials, processing, and
et al. [33] found that printed composites with isotropic fill-
design parameters on the interfacial behaviors and mechani-
ing pattern showed better tensile performances compared to
cal properties of 3D printed CFRP were systematically
composites with concentric filling pattern, since the former
investigated and discussed. Then, it is necessary and essen-
could have higher fiber content in the actual printing process.
tial to think about the ways that could improve the interfacial
In addition, Peng et al. [32] investigated the effect of
properties of 3D printed composites.
stacking sequence on the interfacial behaviors of 3D printed
composites with synergistic reinforcement by both continu-
ous and short carbon fibers (Fig. 8 (c)). The results showed Impregnation and surface modification
that tensile properties of composites were higher when the
stacked continuous fiber layers were separated, which was The adhesion of interfaces between continuous fiber with
attributed to the better interfaces between short and con- matrix are relatively weak, due to the inertness, low surface
tinuous fiber layers (interface S-C) and between short fiber energy and lack of chemically active functional groups of
layers (interface S–S) rather than interfaces between con- fiber’s surfaces [65]. Thus, extra physical or chemical meas-
tinuous fiber layers (interface C–C). Regarding fiber orienta- ures are supposed to use to improve the adhesive quality of
tion, several researchers have studied its effect on 3D printed filaments aiming to improve the whole interfacial properties
composites [12, 40, 64]. Teardrop-shaped voids usually take of 3D printed composites.

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 9 of 18  18

Isotropic filling pattern

Concentric filling pattern

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 8  Schematic presentation of 3D printed CFRP with different design parameters including (a) filling pattern (b) orientation and (c) staking
sequence [32]

Effective surface modification is usually used to improve such as – OH,—COOH,—COO—and—NH2 on the surfaces
the infiltration and adhesion of continuous fiber and matrix of fibers, as shown in Fig. 9. In addition, carbon black (CB)
[66]. Generally, there are four kinds of ways for surface mod- [67] and graphene oxide could [68] also be introduced as
ification, including surface cleaning, oxidation treatment, auxiliary reinforcements onto the surface of CFs by chemical
plasma treatment and chemical grafting. The mechanism of vapor deposition (CVD) to improve the mechanical proper-
above surface modification methods could be summarized ties of fibers/polymer composites without sacrificing tensile
in three aspects. Firstly, the interfacial adhesion would be strength of fibers.
improved by increasing the surface roughness, which is Feeding filaments used for 3D printing could be impreg-
helpful for mechanical interlocking between continuous nated and modified before printing. Thus, it is recommended
fiber and polymer matrix. Secondly, reducing the size of to use prepreg fiber reinforced filaments as feeding materi-
graphite crystallite could increase the number of activated als for all types of FFF technologies [25]. Several attempts
carbon atom and further be beneficial to the adhesion of have been made to improve the interfacial properties of 3D
fiber and polymer. Thirdly, it is useful to improve interfacial printed composites by surficial treatment. For instance,
adhesion by coating more diverse surficial functional groups Hu et al. [21] utilized single screw extruder and coaxial

Fig. 9  Schematic of interfacial
interaction in carbon fiber (CF)
reinforced polypropylene (PP)
coated with ethylene–methyl
acrylate–glycidyl meth-
acrylate (E–MA–GMA) during
surface modification progress
[65]

13
 18   Page 10 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

extrusion molds to manufacture CCF prepreg filament. Ming in Fig. 10. The results confirmed that this research provided
et al. [22] proposed a novel fabrication method for continu- an effective tool to solve the materials selection problem and
ous carbon fiber reinforced thermosetting polymer by care- some reference for designers.
fully impregnating continuous fiber and epoxy resin con-
sidering the viscosity–temperature curve of resin matrix. Li Post treatment
et al. [26] compared the interfacial behaviors and mechanical
properties of printed samples with or without preprocessed After printing process, postprocessing could further improve
carbon fiber bundle. It was found that both tensile strength interfacial properties and the whole mechanical behaviors of
and storage modulus were substantially improved by modi- 3D printed composites. Chemical treatment, heat treatment,
fying fiber surfaces. All these researches got their successes and additive treatment are the most common postprocessing
aiming to improve the adhesive quality between continuous technologies. Among them, heat treatment is more suitable
carbon fibers and polymer matrix. for 3D printed CFRP than chemical treatment and additive
treatment, due to its advantages on releasing residual stress,
Multiple parameters selection perfecting crystallization, and improving mechanical prop-
erties [73, 74]. However, although heat treatment has been
The single effects of several critical printing parameters widely used for composites prepared via traditional tech-
on interfacial properties and mechanical behaviors of 3D niques, study regarding heat-treatment effect on mechanical
printed composites were discussed in Sect. 3.2. However, the properties of 3D printed composites is still needed to be
whole mechanical properties of composites are the balanced further investigated.
results influenced by all the parameters. Thus, during 3D Wang et al. [75] investigated the heat-treatment effects on
printing processes, the combinations of printing parameters the flexural properties of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber
are supposed to be careful considered and designed for 3D reinforced PA with different design parameters and heat-
printed CFRP under different loading conditions and appli- treatment conditions. It was found that heat-treatment could
cation requirements. help improve mechanical properties of 3D printed compos-
For example, the combined effects of different param- ites by decreasing porosity and strengthening interface qual-
eters combination, including continuous fiber raster angle, ity. The results also showed that heat-treatment could delay
stacking sequence, and loading direction, on rigidity and the crack initiation through the change of failure mode of
energy absorption capability of 3D printed short and con- matrix layers and the improved adhesion between fiber-
tinuous carbon fiber reinforced PA were evaluated by Peng bundles/matrix. Besides, Bhandari et al. [76] studied the
et al. [34]. It was found that, in some cases, several param- positive effect of annealing on the mechanical properties of
eters may have conflicting effects on some properties of 3D 3D printed short carbon fiber (SCF) reinforced composites,
printed composites. It means that, these parameters could and found the interlayer tensile strength of 3D printed SCF/
present negative effect on certain properties, but may have PETG and SCF/PLA were improved.
positive effect on other properties. In addition, it is probably Based on these previous works, it was confirmed that heat
that one of these parameters could become the dominating treatment could effectively enhance mechanical properties
factor affecting physical properties of composites, thus com- and reduce porosity of 3D printed composites by affecting
posites tend to present sensitive behaviors regarding to the the pores, porosity, matrix crystallinity, interlaminar and
changing of specific parameter. intralaminar adhesion.
Thus, in order to flexibly design the most suitable and
optimal combination of process parameters for 3D printed Other methods
composites under different loading conditions and applica-
tion requirements, it is necessary to understand the combined Besides methods and technologies mentioned above, there
effect of various parameters. Multiple criteria is a good are some scattered researches aiming to improve interfacial
choice to optimize the combination of various parameters properties of 3D printed composites using novel ways.
for different application aims [69, 70]. Besides mechanical Firstly, it is worth mentioning the value of recycling and
properties of 3D printed composites, environmental, eco- remanufacturing for 3D printed composites. A clean produc-
nomic, social, and physical impacts could also be considered tion pattern for high-performance CFRP has been proposed
into the systematic hierarchical structure of multiple crite- by Tian et al. based on recycling and remanufacturing of
ria [71]. Zhang et al. [72] established an integrated multi- 3D printed filaments [27]. It was found that the mechani-
criteria decision-making approach that contained fuzzy cal properties of recycled CFRP was 25% higher than that
best–worst method and fuzzy G-VIKOR method to solve of original CFRP, due to the better adhesion of interfaces
the materials selection problem. The flowchart of multiple between beads and between layers deposited by recycled fil-
criteria models for manufacturing process selection is shown aments. Secondary melting process is helpful to reduce gaps

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 11 of 18  18

Fig. 10  Flowchart of materials selection considering multiple criteria [72]

and voids in filaments and improve the quality of interfacial process. Besides, Ming et al. [77] proposed an ultravio-
adhesion between fibers and polymers. It is recommended let-assisted FFF technique with a dual-curing process for
to recycle and remanufacture 3D printed composites, which fabricating continuous fiber reinforced thermosetting com-
could not only save energy and materials and be environ- posites (Fig. 11 (b)), which helps strengthen interfacial
ment-friendly, but also improve interfacial properties of 3D adhesion of composites.
printed composites. Besides, blending thermosetting and thermoplastic pol-
In addition, some auxiliary technologies and devices, ymers together as the “effective matrix” can also improve
for example, laser and ultraviolet irradiation, can be uti- interfacial quality and mechanical properties of 3D printed
lized to help improve interfacial quality of 3D printed composites [78, 79]. It was found that mixed polymer
composites. Luo et al. [25] used a fiber laser to preheat matrix could facilitate better interfacial bonding between
previously printed layers to increase their surface tem- deposited beads compared to single polymer matrix.
perature. Further on, the research team proposed a plasma- With the help of preparation modification, optimiza-
laser cooperatively assisted 3D printing process to improve tion of multiple parameter selection, post treatment, and
bi-scale interfaces of CFRP (shown in Fig. 11 (a)) [28]. It other useful methods, it is believed that mechanical prop-
was found that IFSS was improved around 700% compared erties and interfacial qualities of 3D printed CFRP could
to that of composites manufactured by general printing be effectively improved.

13
 18   Page 12 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

Fig. 11  (a) Setup of FFF printer

assembled with laser device
and (b) schematic illustration of
ultraviolet -assisted FFF process
[28, 77]

Modeling and simulation E11 = pEi + (1 − p)Em (2)

Due to the forming mechanism of FFF, printed compos- ( )

1 + p𝜂𝜁
ites are born with voids and defective interfaces, which are E22 = Em (3)
prone to be damaged and become fracture initiations. And 1 − p𝜂
it is problematic to predict failure by means of experimental
measurements on inner surfaces of 3D printed composites. Ei
−1
Em
Thus, numerical simulation is a prospective alternative way 𝜂= (4)
Ei
for monitoring and predicting behaviors of materials. This Em
−𝜁
section intends to provide potential modeling and simulation
methods to estimate and predict physical behaviors of 3D ( )
1 + p𝜂𝜁
printed composites. G12 = Gm (5)
1 − p𝜂

where, E11 , E22 , G12 are longitudinal modulus, transverse

Analytic methods modulus and shear modulus, respectively. 𝜁 is a shape
parameter depend on geometry of fibers. And η is given by
Currently, there are few analytic methods established specifi- Eq. (4).
cally to predict the mechanical and interfacial properties of In addition, MESOTEX model proposed by Scidaet et al.
3D printed composites. Several simple and general analytic [84], is also an analytical model for predicting 3D elastic
formulas could be used to simulate elastic properties of 3D properties of laminate composites. Using this model, the
printed composites. periodicity of woven composites could isolate a repeating
Volume Average Stiffness Method (VAS) could be used unit-cell, in which each strand is described by a sinusoidal
to predict the effective elastic constants of 3D printed fiber path for an undulating portion. Then, mechanical proper-
reinforced composites involving three main steps [100–102]. ties of composites could be determined by discretizing each
Specifically, the first step is to develop micromechanical strand. Based on the classical laminate theory, MESOTEX
models determining the effective properties of 3D printed could be used to analyze plain-weave, twill-weave, satin-
components. Then, a coordinate system transformation is weave composites and their hybrid equivalents. And it could
built for each infilled layer. And the third step is to per- be also adopted for predicting mechanical properties of 3D
form volume averaging of stiffness matrices of each of the printed composites [85].
cross-sectional regions. It was found that simulation results Except below methodologies, some researchers recently
of elastic properties presented good agreement with experi- proposed several novel modeling methods for 3D printed
mental data, in particular for 3D printed configurations with composites considering the significant effects of micro-voids
higher fiber volume fractions. generated during manufacturing process. Vajari et al. [86]
In addition, Halpin and Tsai [83] developed a well-known studied the effects of porosity, inter-fiber voids and matrix
mathematical theory as shown below equations. The theory voids on transverse mechanical properties of unidirectional
has advantages on predicting elasticity of composites rein- composites by computational micromechanics. Rao et al.
forced by nano particles or unidirectional fibers, based on [87] established a model estimating the structure and elastic
the geometry and orientation of fillers, and elastic properties properties of unidirectionally extruded thermoplastic poly-
of fillers and matrix. The model is based on the self-consist- mers just by setting printing conditions and intrinsic material
ent field method although often consider to be empirical.

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 13 of 18  18

properties as primary variables. Wang et al. [88] proposed model of 3D printed composites. Representative volume
a novel insight about analyzing synergistic influence of element (RVE) could be a good solution for this problem
voids and interphase characteristics on effective properties and suitable to be implemented for modeling 3D printed
of unidirectional composites using a hierarchical modeling. composites considering voids and contact (interfacial adhe-
In the proposed modeling, fiber content, interphase content, sion) between beads [93]. Generally, RVE depends on the
interphase properties, and the trait of the interphase pores microstructure of the whole sample, and is designed as a
were considered. cubic unit cell with single or multiple particles embedded
randomly or uniformly in matrix, with a certain volume frac-
Finite element method (FEM) tion similar to those of the whole composites [94]. In RVE,
each fiber separately considers authentic physical properties
Nowadays, finite element method (FEM) is the most com- and precise position in matrix. Figure 12 shows the common
mon computer method for modeling and simulation on engi- RVEs that can be used for 3D printed composites. Dong
neering problems. FEM provides solutions for various multi- et al. [95] established finite element models based on RVE
physical problems, such as nonlinear behaviors of materials with voids randomly distributed in matrix, and investigated
induced by interaction with different environmental con- the effects of voids on modulus and strength of fiber rein-
ditions. FEM is also a good choice to model and analyze forced composites.
mechanical behaviors of 3D printed composites due to its Besides, Drach et al. [97] used the principal component
advantages on analyzing objects with complex geometries analysis approach to approximate pore geometry and calcu-
in multi scale. late the effect of pore on properties of composites by FEM.
Before using FEM to predict physical properties of 3D It was concluded that approximation by spheroidal shape
printed parts, it is essential to define constitutive models produced better overall prediction of effective elastic moduli
governing mechanical behaviors of orthotropic composites. than by long cylinders. Recently, Hyde et al. [98] developed
Based on stiffness matrix in orthotropic constitutive model, a micromechanics-based FEM to study failure mechanism
linear elastic behaviors of composites could be investigated of 3D printed composites in the presence of inter-fiber voids
by correlating a finite element analysis with physical test- and matrix voids.
ing [89]. In addition, orientation and path of CFRP is sup- In addition, multi-scale structure finite element model-
posed to be optimized in each element during finite element ling scheme is another appealing approach for balancing the
analysis processes, especially analysis for composites with efficiency of macroscopic models and the accuracy of micro-
holes [90–92]. scopic models [99]. Meso-scale modelling and failure analy-
But if more accurate mechanical responses of 3D printed sis of kenaf fiber reinforced composites under high strain
composites in meso-scale or micro scale are required, the rate compression loading were presented by Seman et al.
details of modeling should take into more careful considera- [100]. The proposed modelling framework included a micro-
tion. Specifically, the main distinction between 3D printed scale structure model with periodic boundary conditions for
composites and traditionally manufactured composites is homogenizing the heterogeneous fiber/polymer system into
the significant porosity and poor interfacial adhesion, which a unit cell. And the framework also contained a meso-scale
needs to be incorporated into the respective finite element model with established constitutive relationship for the

Fig. 12  RVEs of 3D printed CFRP: (a) meso-structure, (b) carbon fibers and (c) FEM model [96]

13
 18   Page 14 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

constituents integrated with failure criterion to account for the coupling of SPH and Discrete Element Method
the stiffness degradation and subsequent element removal (DEM) to better model and optimize 3D printing
(Fig. 13). process. The predicted transient f low patterns were
shown in Fig. 14. It was found that the method has
Smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) the capability for simulating both short and continu-
ous fiber reinforced polymer with promising results
The smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) is a achieved for the rheological f low and fiber orienta-
meshless Lagrangian method used for simulating the tion and deformation.
mechanics of continuum media, such as solid mechan- In summary, the comparison of different modeling
ics and fluid flows. In SPH method, governing equations methods regarding to their advantages and disadvantages
are discretized by a moving set of particles representing are summarized in Table 7. According to different simula-
interpolation points and corresponding fluid volumes. tion requirement and focus, it could freely choose differ-
SPH presents high conservative properties, also allows ent analytic, FEA and SPH methods to model and predict
for an exact description of advection. Considering the mechanical behaviors of 3D printed composites with mul-
advantages of SPH, it is a good choice for simulating the tiple combination of manufacturing parameters and load-
3D printing process of deposited beads. ing condition in different scale.
Bertevas et al. implemented a microstructure-based con-
stitutive fiber suspension model for FFF process by SPH
method [101]. The microstructure was described through
an evolution equation by orientation tensors, and an expres-
sion for the extra stress induced by the presence of fibers.
The impact of fiber stress for various aspect ratios, concen-
trations, nozzle geometries and processing conditions were
systematically investigated.
During the 3D printing process for fiber reinforced
composites, fibers and polymers mix in the cham-
ber of printing head. It is much more difficult to
model the printing process of composites than single
materials. In addition, interfaces between fibers and
matrix are supposed to be considered to understand
the spatial distribution of fibers. Yang et  al. [102] Fig. 14  The predicted transient flow patterns of 3D printed continu-
proposed a particle method-based approach based on ous fiber reinforced composites [102]

(a) (b)

Fig. 13  Stress history for the meso-scale whole structure FEA model under compressive impact loading: (a) 3D unidirectional fiber reinforce-
ment and (b) matrix [100]

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 15 of 18  18

Table 7  comparison of different modeling methods for simulating mechanical properties of composites

Modeling methods Advantages Disadvantages Ref

Analytic VAS Relatively accurate prediction for elasticity of Limited predictive ability for other mechanical [80–82]
meth- composites with complex structure and differ- properties except elasticity
ods ent component
Halpin—Tsai model Simplicity; [83]
Accuracy for calculating elasticity of randomly/
unidirectional oriented composites
MESOTEX model Modeling composites with periodicity (woven [84, 85]
composites and 3D printed composites)
Re-innovation model Accuracy results for simulation with special Limited applicability with several assumptions [86–88]
requirement and attention
FEM Simple and clear physical concepts; Fluctuating accuracy of results according to the [89–100]
Widely adopted in various areas; authenticity of boundary and loading condi-
Complex engineering problem with various tion
materials, boundary and complex geometry
of model
SPH Meshless; imprecise boundary [101, 102]
Flow problems with large deformations

Conclusion and prospect Novel printing head or auxiliary devices to increase the

compression force for deposited layers along building
Interfacial quality is the key factor affecting mechanical direction.
properties and application potential of 3D printed CFRP. Precise modeling and simulation for 3D printed compos-
However, due to the lack of compressive force along build- ites considering the interfacial structures between depos-
ing direction and adhesive agent between layers, interfaces ited beads as well as between fibers and matrix.
as well as the appearance of voids become the main weak-
ness of 3D printed composites. It is essential to further Though there are limitations existing now, 3D printing
research how to avoid the formation of voids and improve continuous carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites still
adhesion quality of interfaces in composites. have their special advantages. Researchers are working hard
Based on the discussion and summarization of the pre- to explore physical properties and possibility of adjusting
sent work, the interfacial properties of 3D printed compos- and improving properties of 3D printed composites. This
ites are affected by various materials, process, and design paper could guide researchers to go ahead and make con-
parameters. And several methods could improve the inter- tributions in terms of materials, processing control, pro-
facial quality during filament preparation process, printing cessing scalability and product performance of 3D printed
process and after printing process. To be brief, several composites.
valuable works regarding the improvement for interfacial
adhesion of 3D printed composites waiting to be further Acknowledgements  This work was supported by the projects
UIDB/00481/2020 and UIDP/00481/2020—FCT—Fundação para a
researched are listed below: Ciencia e a Tecnologia; and CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-022083—
Centro Portugal Regional Operational Programme (Centro2020), under
More accurate quantitative measuring methods for the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European
interfacial properties and voids content of 3D printed Regional Development Fund. The author Y. Wu acknowledged Chi-
nese Scholarship Council 2020. And the author K. Wang would like
composites. to acknowledge the National Natural Science Foundation of China
Surface modification for the prepreg filaments. (No. 51905555), the Hu-Xiang Youth Talent Program (2020RC3009),
Tailorable design for the most suitable and optimal the Innovation-Driven Project of Central South University (No.
combination of process parameters under different load- 2019CX017).
ing conditions and application requirements.
Postprocessing. Effective postprocessing methods could Declarations 
enhance interfacial properties of 3D printed compos-
Conflict of interest  On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author
ites by affecting porosity, matrix crystallinity, inter- and states that there is no conflict of interest.
intra-laminar adhesion.

13
 18   Page 16 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

References 20. Ming Y, Zhang S, Han W, Wang B, Duan Y, Xiao H (2020)

Investigation on process  parameters  of  3D printed continu-
ous carbon fiber-reinforced thermosetting epoxy composites.
1. Prashanth S, Subbaya KM, Nithin K, Sachhidananda S (2017)
Addit Manuf 33:101184
Fiber Reinforced Composites - A Review. J Mater Sci Eng
21. Hu Q, Duan Y, Zhang H, Liu D, Yan B, Peng F (2018) Manu-
6(3):1000341
facturing and 3D printing of continuous carbon fiber prepreg
2. Chen Q, Boisse P, Park C, Saouab A, Bréard J (2011) Intra/
filament. J Mater Sci 53(3):1887–1898
inter-ply shear behaviors of continuous fiber reinforced ther-
22. Ming Y, Duan Y, Wang B, Xiao H, Zhang X (2019) A novel
moplastic composites in thermoforming processes. Compos
route to fabricate high-performance 3D printed continuous fiber-
Struct 93:1692–1703
reinforced thermosetting polymer composites. Mater 12(9):1369
3. Park KY, Choi JH, Lee DG (1995) Delamination-free and
23. Tian X, Liu T, Yang C, Wang Q, Li D (2016) Interface and per-
high-efficiency drilling of carbon-fiber-reinforced plastics. J
formance of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber reinforced PLA
Compos Mater 29(15):1988–2002
composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 88:198–205
4. Swolf Y, Pinhob ST (2019) 3D printed continuous fibre-rein-
24. Hou Z, Tian X, Zhang J, Li D (2018) 3D printed continuous
forced composites: Bio-inspired microstructures for improv-
fibre reinforced composite corrugated structure. Compos Struct
ing the translaminar fracture toughness. Compos Sci Technol
184:1005–1010
182:107731
25. Luo M, Tian X, Shang J, Zhu W, Li D, Qin Y (2019) Impregna-
5. Wang X, Jiang M, Zhou ZW, Gou JH, Hui D (2016) 3D print-
tion and interlayer bonding behaviours of 3D-printed continu-
ing of polymer matrix composites: A review and prospective.
ous carbon-fiber-reinforced poly-ether-ether-ketone composites.
Compos B Eng 110:442–458
Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 121:130–138
6. Economidou SN, Lamprou DA, Douroumis D (2018) 3D print-
26. Li N, Li Y, Liu S (2016) Rapid prototyping of continuous car-
ing applications for transdermal drug delivery. Int J Pharm
bon fiber reinforced polylactic acid composites by 3D printing.
544:415–424
J Mater Process Technol 238:218–225
7. Tilford T, Stoyanov S, Braun J, Janhsen JC, Burgard M, Birch
27. Tian X, Liu T, Wang Q, Dilmurat A, Li D, Ziegmann G (2017)
R (2018) Design, manufacture and test for reliable 3D printed
Recycling and remanufacturing of 3D printed continuous carbon
electronics packaging. Microelectron Reliab 85:109–117
fiber reinforced PLA composites. J Clean Prod 142:1609–1618
8. Chua CK, Leong KF (2017) 3D printing and additive manufac-
28. Luo M, Tian X, Shang J, Yun J, Zhu W, Li D, Qin Y (2020) Bi-
turing: principles and applications, 5th edn. World Scientific
scale interfacial bond behaviors of CCF/PEEK composites by
Publishing Company, Singapore
plasma-laser cooperatively assisted 3D printing process. Compos
9. Koch C, Hulle LV, Rudolph N (2017) Investigation of mechani-
A Appl Sci Manuf 131:105812
cal anisotropy of the fused filament fabrication process via
29. Yu T, Zhang Z, Song S, Bai Y, Wu D (2019) Tensile and flexural
customized tool path generation. Addit Manuf 16:138–145
behaviors of additively manufactured continuous carbon fiber-
10. Blok LG, Longana ML, Yu H, Woods BKS (2018) An investi-
reinforced polymer composites. Compos Struct 225:111147
gation into 3D printing of fibre reinforced thermoplastic com-
30. Camineroa MA, Chacónb JM, García-Morenoa I, Reverteb JM
posites. Addit Manuf 22:176–186
(2018) Interlaminar bonding performance of 3D printed con-
11. Kelly J, Mohammadi M (2018) Uniaxial tensile behavior of
tinuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused
sheet molded composite car hoods with different fibre contents
deposition modelling. Polym Test 68:415–423
under quasi-static strain rates. Mech Res Commun 87:42–52
31. Van der Klift F, Koga Y, Todoroki A, Ueda M, Hirano Y, Matsu-
12. Casavola C, Cazzato A, Moramarco V, Pappalettere C (2016)
zaki R (2016) 3D printing of continuous carbon fibre reinforced
Orthotropic mechanical properties of fused deposition model-
thermo-plastic (CFRTP) tensile test specimens Open. J Compos
ling parts described by classical laminate theory. Mater Des
Mater 6(1):18–27
90:453–458
32. Peng Y, Wu Y, Wang K, Gao G, Ahzi S (2019) Synergistic rein-
13. Chacon JM, Caminero MA, García-Plaza E, Núnez PJ (2017)
forcement of polyamide-based composites by combination of
Additive manufacturing of PLA structures using fused depo-
short and continuous carbon fibers via fused filament fabrica-
sition modelling: effect of process parameters on mechanical
tion. Compos Struct 201:232–239
properties and their optimal selection. Mater Des 124:143–157
33. Dickson AN, Barry JN, McDonnell KA, Dowling DP (2018) Fab-
14. Ning F, Cong W, Qiu J, Wei J, Wang S (2015) Additive manu-
rication of continuous carbon, glass and Kevlar fibre reinforced
facturing of carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites
polymer composites using additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf
using fused deposition modeling. Compos B Eng 80:369–378
16:146–152
15. Justo J, Távara L, García-Guzmán L, París F (2018) Characteri-
34. Peng Y, Wu Y, Li S, Wang K, Yao S, Liu Z, Garmestani H
zation of 3D printed long fibre reinforced composites. Compos
(2020) Tailorable rigidity and energy-absorption capability of
Struct 185:537–548
3D printed continuous carbon fiber reinforced polyamide com-
16. Chohan JS, Singh R, Boparai KS, Penna R, Fraternali F (2017)
posites. Compos Sci Technol 199:108337
Dimensional accuracy analysis of coupled fused deposition
35. Kishore V, Ajinjeru C, Nycz A, Post B, Lindahl J, Kunc V, Duty
modeling and vapour smoothing operations for biomedical
C (2017) Infrared preheating to improve interlayer strength of big
applications. Compos B Eng 117:138–149
area additive manufacturing (BAAM) components. Addit Manuf
17. Adumitroaie A, Antonov F, Khaziev A, Azarov A, Golubev M,
14:7–12
Vasiliev VV (2019) Novel Continuous Fiber Bi-Matrix Com-
36. Van de Werken N, Hurley J, Khanbolouki P, Sarvestani AN, Tam-
posite 3D Printing Technology. Mater 12:3011
ijani AY, Tehrani M (2019) Design considerations and modeling
18. Wickramasinghe S, Do T, Tran P (2020) FDM-Based 3D
of fiber reinforced 3D printed parts. Compos B Eng 160:684–692
Printing of Polymer and Associated Composite: A Review
37. Sarvestani AN, Van de Werken N, Khanbolouki P, Tehrani M
on Mechanical Properties, Defects and Treatments. Polymers
(2017) 3D printed composites with continuous carbon fiber
12(7):1529
reinforcements. Proceedings of the ASME 2017 International
19. Hao W, Liu Y, Zhou H, Chen H, Fang D (2018) Preparation
Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. November
and characterization of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber
3-9, Tampa, Florida, USA
reinforced thermosetting composites. PolymTest 65:29–34

13
International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18 Page 17 of 18  18

38. Van de Werken N, Tekinalp H, Khanbolouki P, Ozcan S, Wil- continuous fiber reinforced composite structures with variable
liams A, Tehrani M (2020) Additively manufactured carbon fber- fiber content. Compos B Eng 189(15):107893
reinforced composites: State of the art and perspective. Addit 59. Sugiyam K, Matsuzaki R, Malakhov AV, Polilov AN, Ueda M,
Manuf 31:100962 Todoroki A, Hirano Y (2020) 3D printing of optimized com-
39. Turner NB, Strong R, Gold SA (2014) A review of melt extrusion posites with variable fiber volume fraction and stiffness using
additive manufacturing processes: I. Process design and mod- continuous fiber. Compos Sci Technol 186:107905
eling. Rapid Prototyp J 20:192–204 60. Josepha K, Varghese S, Kalaprasad G, Thomas S, Prasannku-
40. Ahn D, Kweon J-H, Kwon S, Song J, Lee S (2009) Representa- mariL KP, Pavithran C (1996) Influence of interfacial adhesion
tion of surface roughness in fused deposition modeling. J Mater on the mechanical properties and fracture behaviour of short sisal
Process Technol 209:5593–5600 fibre reinforced polymer composites. Eur Polym J 32:1243–1250
41. Sun Q, Rizvi GM, Bellehumeur CT, Gu P (2008) Effect of pro- 61. Rankouhi B, Javadpour S, Delfanian F, Letcher T (2016) Fail-
cessing conditions on the bonding quality of FDM polymer fila- ure analysis and mechanical characterization of 3D printed ABS
ments. Rapid Prototyp J 14:72–80 with respect to layer thickness and orientation. J Fail Anal Prev
42. Zhang W, Wu AS, Sun J, Quan Z, Gu B, Sun B (2017) Charac- 16(3):467–481
terization of residual stress and deformation in additively manu- 62. Sood AK, Ohdar R, Mahapatra S (2010) Parametric appraisal of
factured ABS polymer and composite specimens. Compos Sci mechanical property of fused deposition modelling processed
Technol 150:102–110 parts. Mater Des 31:287–295
43. Matsuzaki R, Ueda M, Namiki M, Jeong TK, Asahara H, Hori- 63. Dinwiddie RB, Kunc V, Lindal JM, Post B, Smith RJ, Love
guchi K, Nakamura T, Todoroki A, Hirano T (2016) Three- L (2014) Infrared imaging of the polymer 3D-printing pro-
dimensional printing of continuous fiber composites by in-nozzle cess. Thermosense: Thermal Infrared Applications XXXVI
impregnation. Sci Rep 6:23058 9105:910502
44. Namiki M, Ueda M, Todoroki A, Hirano Y, Matsuzaki R (2014) 64. Ahn SH, Montero M, Odell D, Roundy S, Wright PK (2002)
3D printing of continuous fiber reinforced plastic. Proceedings Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling
of the Society of the Advancement of Material and Process Engi- ABS. Rapid Prototyp J 8:248–257
neering (45):187-196 65. Liu Y, Zhang X, Song C, Zhang Y, Fang Y, Yang B, Wang X
45. ATSM D2344/D2344M:2000 Standard Test Method for Short- (2015) An effective surface modification of carbon fiber for
Beam Strength of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials and improving the interfacial adhesion of polypropylene composites.
Their Laminates Mater Des 88:810–819
46. ISO 11339:2005 Adhesives —T-peel test for flexible-to-flexible 66. Yu T, Ren J, Li S, Yuan H, Li Y (2010) Effect of fiber surface-
bonded assemblies treatments on the properties of poly(lactic acid)/ramie compos-
47. Teixeira de Freitas S, Sinke J (2015) Test method to assess inter- ites. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 41:499–505
face adhesion in composite bonding. Appl Adhes Sci 3:9 67. Dong J, Jia C, Wang M, Fang X, Wei H (2017) Improved
48. Teixeira de Freitas S, Sinke J (2014) Adhesion Properties of mechanical properties of carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy compos-
Bonded Composite-to-Aluminium Joints Using Peel Tests. J ites by growing carbon black on carbon fiber surface. Compos
Adhes 90(5–6):511–525 Sci Technol 149:75–80
49. ASTM D3167-10:2010 Standard Test Method for Floating Roller 68. Pathak AK, Borah M, Ashish Gupta T, Yokozeki SR, Dhakate,
Peel Resistance of Adhesives (2016) Improved mechanical properties of carbon fiber/graphene
50. Mei H, Ali Z, Ali I, Cheng L (2019) Tailoring strength and mod- oxideepoxy hybrid composites. Compos Sci Technol 135:28–38
ulus by 3D printing different continuous fibers and filled struc- 69. Yang SS, Nasr N, Ong SK, Nee AYC (2017) Designing automo-
tures into composites. Adv Compos Hybrid Mater 2:312–319 tive products for remanufacturing from material selection per-
51. Bulut M, Erkliğ A, Yeter E (2016) Hybridization effects on quasi- spective. J Clean Prod 153:570–579
static penetration resistance in fiber reinforced hybrid composite 70. Akadiri PO, Olomolaiye PO, Chinyio EA (2013) Multi-criteria
laminates. Compos B Eng 98:9–22 evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for
52. Wang K, Li S, Rao Y, Wu Y, Peng Y, Yao S (2019) Flexure building projects. Autom Constr 30:113–125
Behaviors of ABS-Based Composites Containing Carbon and 71. Mousavi-Nasab SH, Sotoudeh-Anvari A (2018) A new multi-
Kevlar Fibers by Material Extrusion 3D Printing. Polymers criteria decision making approach for sustainable material selec-
11:1878 tion problem: a critical study on rank reversal problem. J Clean
53. Wang K, Li S, Wu Y, Rao Y, Peng P (2021) Simultaneous rein- Prod 182:466–484
forcement of both rigidity and energy absorption of polyamide- 72. Zhang H, Wu Y, Wang K, Peng Y, Wang D, Yao S, Wang J
based composites with hybrid continuous fibers by 3D printing. (2020) Materials selection of 3D-printed continuous carbon fiber
Compos Struct 267:113854 reinforced composites considering multiple criteria. Mater Des
54. Ming Y, Xin Z, Zhang J, Duan Y, Wang B (2020) Fabrication 196:109140
of continuous glass fiber-reinforced dual-cure epoxy composites 73. Wang J, Xie H, Weng Z, Senthil T, Wu L (2016) A novel
via UV-assisted fused deposition modeling. Compos Commun approach to improve mechanical properties of parts fabricated
21:100401 by fused deposition modeling. Mater Des 105:152–159
55. Chiang C, Koenig JL (1980) Chemical reactions occurring at the 74. Mori K-I, Maeno T, Nakagawa Y (2014) Dieless forming of car-
interface of epoxy matrix and amino silane coupling agents in bon fibre reinforced plastic parts using 3D printer. Procedia Eng
fiber-reinforced composites. Polym Compos 1(2):88–92 81:1595–1600
56. Compton BG, Lewis JA (2014) 3D-Printing of lightweight cel- 75. Wang K, Long H, Chen Y, Baniassadi M, Rao Y, Peng Y (2021)
lular composites. Adv Mater 26(34):5930–5935 Heat-treatment effects on dimensional stability and mechanical
57. Caminero MA, Rodríguez GP, Muñoz V (2016) Effect of stack- properties of 3D printed continuous carbon fiber-reinforced com-
ing sequence on Charpy impact and flexural damage behaviour posites. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 147:106460
of composite laminates. Compos Struct 136:345–357 76. Bhandari S, Lopez-Anido RA, Gardner DJ (2019) Enhancing
58. Hou Z, Tian X, Zheng Z, Zhang J, Zhe L, Li D, Malakhov the interlayer tensile strength of 3D printed short carbon fiber
AV, Polilov AN (2020) A constitutive model for 3D printed

13
 18   Page 18 of 18 International Journal of Material Forming (2022) 15:18

reinforced PETG and PLA composites via annealing. Addit 91. Passos AG, Luersen MA, Steeves CA (2016) Optimal curved
Manuf 30:100922 fibre orientations of a composite panel with cutout for improved
77. Ming Y, Xin Z, Zhang J, Duan Y, Wang B (2020) Fabrication buckling load using the Efficient Global Optimization algorithm.
of continuous glass fiber reinforced dual-cure epoxy composites Eng Optim 49(8):1354–1372
via UV-assisted fused deposition modeling. Compos Commun 92. Zhang H, Yang D, Sheng Y (2018) Performance-driven 3D
21:100401 printing of continuous curved carbon fibre reinforced polymer
78. Azarov A, Antonov F, Vasil’ev V, Golubev M, Krasovskii D, composites: A preliminary numerical study. Compos B Eng
Razin A, Salov V, Stupnikov VV, Khaziev A (2017) Develop- 151:256–264
ment of a two-matrix composite material fabricated by 3D print- 93. Sága M, Majko J, Handrik M, Vaško M, Sapietová A (2020)
ing. Polym Sci Ser D 10(1):87–90 Proposal of Physical Model for Damage Simulation of Com-
79. AzarovAV AFK, Golubev MV, Khaziev AR, Ushanov SA (2019) posite Structures Produced by 3D Printing. Acta Phys Pol A
Composite 3D printing for the small size unmanned aerial vehi- 138(2):245–248
cle structure. Compos B Eng 169:157–163 94. El Moumen A, Tarfaoui M, Lafdi K (2018) Computational
80. Melenka GW, Cheung BKO, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey homogenization of mechanical properties for laminate compos-
JP (2016) Evaluation and prediction of the tensile properties of ites reinforced with thin flm made of carbon nanotubes. Appl
continuous fiber-reinforced 3D printed structures. Compos Struct Compos Mater 25:569–588
153:866–875 95. Dong C (2016) Effects of process-induced voids on the prop-
81. Kregers A, Melbardis YG (1978) Determination of the deform- erties of fibre reinforced composites. J Mater Sci Technol
ability of three dimensionally reinforced composites by the stiff- 32(7):597–604
ness averaging method. Mech Compos Mater 14:1–5 96. Somireddy M, Czekanski A (2021) Computational modeling
82. Kreger A, Teters G (1980) Use of averaging methods to deter- of constitutive behaviour of 3D printed composite structures. J
mine the viscoelastic properties of spatially reinforced compos- Mater Res Technol 11:1710–1718
ites. Mech Compos Mater 15:377–383 97. Drach B, Tsukrov I, Gross T, Dietrich S, Weidenmann K, Piat R
83. Halpin JC, Kardos JL (1976) The Halpin-Tsai equations: a (2011) Numerical modeling of carbon/carbon composites with
review. Polym Eng Sci 16:5 nanotextured matrix and 3D pores of irregular shapes. Int J Sol-
84. Scida D, Aboura Z, Benzeggagha M, Bocherens E (1999) A ids Struct 48(18):2447–2457
micromechanics model for 3D elasticity and failure of woven- 98. Hyde A, He J, Cui X, Lua J, Liu L (2020) Effects of microvoids
fibre composite materials. Compos Sci Technol 59:505–517 on strength of unidirectional fiber-reinforced composite materi-
85. Moumen AE, Tarfaoui M, Lafdi K (2019) Additive manufactur- als. Compos B Eng 187:1359–1368
ing of polymer composites: Processing and modeling approaches. 99. Kwon YW, Allen DH, Talreja R (2008) Multiscale Modelling and
Compos B Eng 171:166–182 Simulation of Composite Materials and Structures. Springer, US,
86. Ashouri Vajari D, González C, Llorca J, Legarth BN (2014) A pp 317–357
numerical study of the influence of microvoids in the transverse 100. Seman SAHA, Ahmad R, Aki HM (2019) Meso-scale model-
mechanical response of unidirectional composites. Compos Sci ling and failure analysis of kenaf fiber reinforced composites
Technol 97:46–54 under high strain rate compression loading. Compos B Eng
87. Rao N, Wei N, Yao S, Wang K, Peng Y (2021) A process-struc- 163:403–412
ture-performance modeling for thermoplastic polymers via mate- 101. Bertevas E, Férec J, Khoo B, Ausias G, Phan-Thien N (2018)
rial extrusion additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 39:101857 Smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) modeling of fiber ori-
88. Wang K, Lu Y, Rao Y, Wei N, Ban J, Peng Y (2021) New insights entation in a 3D printing process. Physical Fluids 30:103103
into the synergistic influence of voids and interphase characteris- 102. Yang D, Wu K, Wan L, Sheng Y (2017) A Particle Element
tics on effective properties of unidirectional composites. Compos Approach for Modelling the 3D Printing Process of Fibre Rein-
Struct 255:112862 forced Polymer Composites. J Manuf Mater Process 1(1):10
89. Domingo-Espin M, Puigoriol-Forcada JM, Garcia-Granada
AA, Lluma J, Borros S, Reyes G (2015) Mechanical property Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
characterization and simulation of fused deposition modeling jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Polycarbonate parts. Mater Des 83:670–677
90. Malakhov AV, Polilov AN (2016) Design of composite struc-
tures reinforced curvilinear fibres using FEM. Compos Appl Sci
Manuf 87:23–28

13