Abstract

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a valuable addition to engineering design by enabling complex geometries, reduced waste, and rapid prototyping. Despite these advantages, the structural integrity of 3D-printed components can be limited by several factors, such as anisotropy, porosity, and layer adhesion [1]. Adhesive bonding has gained relevance as an effective method to join 3D-printed components, offering benefits such as stress distribution, energy absorption, and compatibility with complex geometries. Adhesive bonding, unlike mechanical fastening or welding, distributes stresses more uniformly and eliminates the need to drill holes, which are required for bolted joints. In 3D-printed components, adhesives offer a versatile solution to join dissimilar materials or repair parts without inducing heat-affected zones, oppositely to welded joints. However, the effectiveness of adhesive bonding relies on parameters such as surface energy, adhesive type, and the quality of surface preparation [2]. Adhesive bonding of 3D-printed components entail difficulties such as high surface roughness, internal defects, and anisotropic properties due to layer-by-layer deposition. These factors complicate adhesion and require an additional design effort in the adhesive selection, surface treatment, and joint design.

Experimental research in adhesive bonding of 3D-printed components focuses on understanding the effects of material properties, surface treatments, and adhesive performance. Recent studies have provided relevant design guidelines to optimize bonding techniques for additive manufacturing [3]. Surface preparation is critical for efficient adhesion by improving wettability and removing contaminants. Techniques such as mechanical abrasion, chemical etching, and plasma treatment have been extensively explored. Selecting the most convenient adhesive is also crucial for the bonding process of 3D-printed materials. Epoxies, cyanoacrylates, and polyurethanes have been experimentally evaluated. Epoxies are particularly effective due to their high strength and thermal resistance. However, tailoring adhesives to the anisotropic nature of 3D-printed materials remains an active area of research [4]. Adhesive joints in 3D-printed components are evaluated through mechanical tests such as lap shear and peel tests. Recent studies have also explored the use of Digital Image Correlation (DIC) to map strain distributions in bonded joints, providing information into failure mechanisms [5].

Finite element analysis (FEA) has become an indispensable tool to understand and optimize adhesive bonding in 3D-printed structures. Numerical models allow for detailed analysis of stress distributions, failure modes, and the impact of geometric complexities. 3D-printed components exhibit anisotropic properties due to their layered structure. Numerical models must account for directional variations in stiffness and strength. For instance, cohesive zone models (CZMs) have been employed to simulate interfacial failure in adhesive joints, considering anisotropic material behavior [6]. Recent advancements in multiscale modeling have enabled the integration of microscale features (e.g., porosity, surface roughness) into macroscale simulations. This approach provides a more accurate representation of real-world bonding scenarios [7]. FEA models are validated using experimental data, such as load-displacement curves and strain maps from DIC. The integration of experimental and numerical approaches has led to improved joint designs with optimized geometry and adhesive selection [8].

The combined use of additive manufacturing and adhesive bonding has provided innovations in materials, processes, and simulation techniques. Smart adhesives with properties such as self-healing, thermal conductivity, and electrical insulation are being proposed. For instance, adhesives with embedded nanoparticles have demonstrated enhanced mechanical and thermal performance, making them suitable for aerospace and electronics applications [9]. Hybrid bonding, combining adhesives with mechanical fasteners or welding, has been explored to address the limitations of traditional adhesive joints. For example, ultrasonic welding combined with adhesive bonding has shown promise in improving joint strength for 3D-printed thermoplastics [10]. Sustainability considerations are shifting research into bio-based adhesives and recyclable joint designs. Adhesive bonding of biodegradable 3D-printed materials, such as polylactic acid (PLA), aligns with the goals of a circular economy [11].

To conclude, adhesive bonding is a technology to join 3D-printed components, addressing the limitations of traditional joining methods. Experimental advancements and numerical simulations have provided design guidelines into optimizing adhesive joints for additive manufacturing. As the field progresses, innovative adhesives, hybrid bonding techniques, and sustainable practices will provide new opportunities for adhesive bonding in 3D printing.

References

1. Skibicki S., et al. “The effect of interlayer adhesion on stress distribution in 3D printed beam elements”. Journal of Building Engineering 87 (2024): 109093.
2. Öztürk FH. “Optimization of adherend thickness and overlap length on failure load of bonded 3D printed PETG parts using response surface method”. Rapid Prototyping Journal 30.8 (2024): 1579-1591.
3. Pizzorni M, E Lertora and A Parmiggiani. “Adhesive bonding of 3D-printed short-and continuous-carbon-fiber composites: An experimental analysis of design methods to improve joint strength”. Composites Part B: Engineering 230 (2022): 109539.
4. Yap YL., et al. “Evaluation of structural epoxy and cyanoacrylate adhesives on jointed 3D printed polymeric materials”. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 100 (2020): 102602.
5. Atahan MG and MK Apalak. “Loading-rate effect on tensile and bending strength of 3D-printed polylactic acid adhesively bonded joints”. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology 36.3 (2022): 317-344.
6. Khosravani MR., et al. “Structural integrity of adhesively bonded 3D-printed joints”. Polymer Testing 100 (2021): 107262.
7. Zhao K., et al. “Effect of roughness and adhesive on the strength of concrete-to-concrete interfaces cast from 3D-printed prefabricated plastic formworks”. Construction and Building Materials 368 (2023): 130423.
8. Ribeiro TFR., et al. “Structural behaviour of adhesive bonds in 3D printed adherends”. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology (2024): 1-25.
9. Bali G and T Topkaya. “Effect of graphene nano-particle reinforcement on the fatigue behavior of adhesively bonded single lap joints”. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 120 (2023): 103279.
10. Tiwary VK, Arunkumar P and VR Malik. “An overview on joining/welding as post-processing technique to circumvent the build volume limitation of an FDM-3D printer”. Rapid prototyping journal 27.4 (2021): 808-821.
11. Tiwary VK, A Padmakumar and V Malik. “Adhesive bonding of similar/dissimilar three-dimensional printed parts (ABS/PLA) considering joint design, surface treatments, and adhesive types”. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 236.16 (2022): 8991-9002.

Citation

R.D.S.G. Campilho. “Advances in Adhesive Bonding Techniques for 3D-Printed Components". Clareus Scientific Science and Engineering 2.1 (2025): 01-02

Copyright

© 2025 R.D.S.G. Campilho. Licensee Clareus Scientific Publications. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.