4.6 Article

Additively Manufactured Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) with Carbon Nanostructure Reinforcement for Biomedical Structural Applications

期刊

ADVANCED ENGINEERING MATERIALS
卷 22, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/adem.202000483

关键词

additive manufacturing; bioactivity; carbon nanotube; polyetheretherketone (CNT; PEEK) and graphene nanoplatelet (GNP; PEEK) nanocomposites; fused filament fabrication; sulfonation

资金

  1. Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) [EX2016-000006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is focused on carbon nanostructures (CNS), including both carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs), reinforcement of medical-grade polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and in vitro bioactivity for biomedical structural applications. CNS/PEEK scaffolds and bulk specimens, realized via fused filament fabrication (FFF) additive manufacturing, are assessed primarily in the low-strain linear-elastic regime. 3D printed PEEK nanocomposites are found to have enhanced mechanical properties in all cases while maintaining the desired degree of crystallinity in the range of 30-33%. A synergetic effect of the CNS and sulfonation toward bioactivity is observed-apatite growth in simulated body fluid increases by 57% and 77%, for CNT and GNP reinforcement, respectively, doubling the effect of sulfonation and exhibiting a fully-grown mushroom-like apatite morphology. Further, CNT- and GNP-reinforced sulfonated PEEK recovers much of the mechanical losses in modulus and strength due to sulfonation, in one case (GNP reinforcement) increasing the yield and ultimate strengths beyond the (non-sulfonated) printed PEEK. Additive manufacturing of PEEK with CNS reinforcement demonstrated here opens up many design opportunities for structural and biomedical applications, including personalized bioactivated surfaces for bone scaffolds, with further potential arising from the electrically conductive nanoengineered PEEK material toward smart and multifunctional structures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据