Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Curved-Layered Additive Manufacturing of non-planar, parametric

lattice structures
John C.S. McCaw a, b , Enrique Cuan-Urquizo b, *
a
Purdue University School of Mechanical Engineering, 610 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
b
Escuela de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Epigmenio González 500 Fracc. San Pablo, Querétaro Mexico, 76130

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• A novel method for fabrication of

non-planar, engineered lattice struc-
tures was created based on Curved-
Layer Manufacturing.
• The method presented can be used to
fabricate engineered lattice shells, on
a variety of 3D parent surfaces.
• The engineered lattices manufactured
included auxetic patterns, showing
its potential to fabricate mechanical
metamaterials.
• Structural properties of differ-
ent lattice shells were compared
experimentally.
• The fabricated auxetic lattice shells
withstood more strain than simi-
lar disrupted patterns and quadratic
lattices.

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Curved-Layer Manufacturing (CLM) is a method of depositing material along the local curvature of the
Received 20 August 2018 manufactured part, rather than building up parts in planar layers like traditional additive manufacturing.
Received in revised form 13 October 2018 Lattice-based materials have been shown to have useful structural properties and wide-ranging applica-
Accepted 15 October 2018 tions, though they are limited to patterns along Cartesian axes. Additionally, materials with a negative
Available online 21 October 2018
Poisson’s ratio, called auxetics, can be created with engineered lattices and have wide applications across
biomedical, aeronautical, and structural fields, though manufacturing is often limited to 2D. This provides an
Keywords:
opportunity to explore applications of CLM in the fabrication of metamaterial lattices such as auxetics out-
Parametric auxetic pattern
side of Cartesian planes. Here, the development of a process for the fabrication of non-planar lattice-shells
CLM (Curved-Layer Manufacturing)
Additive manufacturing along parametric surfaces is described. This method employs Bézier surfaces of arbitrary order, allowing a
Engineered lattice wide variety of parent surfaces. Using this method, a variety of lattices were fabricated on Bézier surfaces
to demonstrate the propensity of the method, while showing it has zero waste material when a reusable
mandrel is used. Further, a brief experimental exploration demonstrates the differences among lattice types,
finding that significantly auxetic lattice-shells are more resistant to fracture than quadratic and disrupted
lattices of similar patterns and densities.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mccaw@purdue.edu (J.C.S. McCaw), Materials with an engineered arrangement of matter are often
ecuanurqui@itesm.mx (E. Cuan-Urquizo). produced to meet desired structural performance; for example,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.10.024
0264-1275/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
950 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

materials with a negative Poisson’s ratio. These are better known as 1.2. Applications of additively manufactured lattices
auxetics, and they present a wealth of applications including static
mechanical support, vibration damping, and mechanical metama- The production of lattices through additive manufacturing has cre-
terials. The majority of work in auxetics and lattice structures has ated many opportunities for the creation of new metamaterials and
been limited to patterns along Cartesian axes or using disordered functional lattices. For example, the ability to create ordered waveg-
foams, largely limited by the difficulty to manufacture more complex uide lattices through additive manufacturing has led to advances
ordered patterns. Recent developments in Fused Deposition Manu- in the directional control of waves [20]. 3D lattices have also been
facturing (FDM) have introduced robust and demonstrated methods proposed for aeronautical wing structures, due to their high strength-
for CLM, introducing a variety of benefits to additive manufacturing to-weight ratio and ability to incorporate novel properties [21]. The
particularly with complex 3D shells. As such, CLM presents an oppor- use of additive manufacturing has enabled the creation of such struc-
tunity for robust and reliable creation of 3D shells with engineered tures, with positive results [22]. Given this growing interest in the
lattices. applications of lattice structures, Maskery et al. [23] conducted a
study on design parameters for 3D lattices constructed of unit cell
1.1. Applications and development of auxetic lattices surfaces, presenting both a methodology for the characterization of
lattices as well as providing useful data towards the design of engi-
Auxetic structures do not merely exist as a mechanical novelty; neered 3D lattices. While this contribution was a significant step
examples of their applications and benefits have been introduced towards standard design procedures of 3D lattices, the scope of unit
both in theory and realized applications. For example, in an extended cells considered was limited compared to the near-infinite diversity
analysis Lim [1] showed that bending stress in shell structures is of lattice structures and mechanical metamaterials, such as auxetic
minimized for perfectly auxetic materials and stress is better dis- patterns, were not considered.
tributed across the shell. Within biomedical engineering, applica- Controlled porosity lattices also have important implications for
tions have been shown in cushioning and impact absorption due biomedical engineering, particularly for lattices to promote tissue and
to the improved energy damping, conformability to natural curves, bone growth [24,25]. The area of cranioplasty presents a well-suited
and the ability to increase density under positive pressure [2]. All challenge for lattices, and particularly lattice shells; the require-
of these make it a more suitable material to sustain impacts and ment of complicated curvature with high strength and low weight
provide padding in sports applications. When combined with micro- make lattices an ideal candidate, and while lattice-type structures
machining technology, auxetic lattices also have allowed for the are often a preferred design, the current state-of-the-art does not
creation of a drug delivery stent with improved placement [3]. Addi- consider manipulations of the lattice itself [26,27]. Therefore, there
tionally, wherever structured materials are employed in implants, is an opportunity to explore novel methods of rapid 3D manufacture
there are opportunities to explore applications of auxetics as meta- for non-Cartesian, lattice-based cranial implants with engineered
materials. Due to the synclastic nature of auxetics, they can mold to structure.
the form of bi-curved shapes better than traditional materials. Fur- Perhaps most notably, nearly all of these structures would be
ther, auxetic materials have been shown to have superior vibration difficult if not impossible to fabricate without additive manufacturing.
damping capabilities especially at medium to high frequencies, and Analytical exploration of lattices is increasingly facilitated by tools
have been combined with other novel materials to create unique such as Finite Element Analysis, leading to validation of new complex
metamaterials for damping applications [4]. structures such as the 3D auxetic metamaterial presented by Chen
Researchers have had knowledge of auxetic materials for some and Fu [28]. This only serves as an example of the benefits of complex
time; certain crystals, molecular arrangements, and animal tissues
have been observed to have a negative Poisson’s ratio [5-7]. How-
ever, the structural usefulness of these materials was dubious, and
remained as an observation and question of material theory until the
introduction of easily fabricated auxetic foams by Lakes [8]. Major
contributions were made by Grima et al. [9] with the understanding
that auxetic cellular lattices can be understood through the rota-
tion of rigid units, providing a driving philosophy in engineered
auxetic patterns. Other investigations into auxetic materials intro-
duced and analyzed other cellularly structured materials that exhib-
ited auxeticity as a result of their engineered shape [10-14]. These
two avenues of investigation, disordered microstructured materials
and engineered micro- and macro-structures, are the two bases of
research in synthetic auxetic materials. As this work is focused on the
manipulation of lattices, the former category is not considered here.
Within engineered structures, a variety of fundamental architec-
tures have been listed in multiple reviews [5-7]; re-entrant struc-
tures [10], chiral structures [15], rigid rotating bodies [16], and
polymeric structures [17,18]. Körner and Liebold-Ribeiro [19] for-
malized a subset of re-entrant auxetic lattices by explaining them as
eigenmodes of basic, straight-beamed cellular structures and select-
ing lattices with a high number of rotational centers, or points
about which all connected beams rotate in the same direction. This
approach yielded several well-known chiral lattices from the litera-
ture, as well as new auxetic patterns in two- and three-dimensions.
Similar to other work on engineered auxetic patterns, the auxetic-
ity was only considered in Cartesian axes. The present work employs Fig. 1. The third and ninth eigenmodes of the quadratic lattice. The amplitude is arbi-
the patterns defined by Körner and Liebold-Ribeiro due to their trary and was adjusted for visibility. The side length of each quadratic unit cell is
straightforward mathematical definition. lambda (k).
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963 951

the length of the part, and increasing speed of manufacture by reduc-

Fig. 2. Sketch of a Bézier surface with parameterized sinusoids. The parameters u and
v define the surface r, and by creating new functions of these parameters ū and v̄ the
sinusoid patterns can be created. The total pattern of all constituent lines is T.
geometries, validating the need for novel approaches to manufacture
of lattices.
1.3. Development of Curved-Layer FDM
Curved-Layer Manufacturing (CLM) is the method of following the
local geometry of a part during additive manufacturing rather than
traditionally planar stacked layers. This leads to significant increases
in the quality of the surface finish by removing the stairs effect of flat
layers, improving strength through maintaining primary fibers along
ing support structures. Originating as a method for manufacturing of
curved paper laminates with Klosterman et al. [29], the method has
been expanded to FDM. Chakraborty et al. [30] first introduced an
algorithmic approach to path planning in Curved Layer Fused Depo-
sition Manufacturing (CLFDM), though the method went untested.
Singamneni et al. [31] introduced a method of slicing toolpaths
from geometric models for CLFDM and produced several samples
demonstrating the expected benefits. Further, Allen and Trask [32]
demonstrated experimentally that for shell structures, CLFDM was
faster and produced smoother curved parts. Later, Llewellyn-Jones et
al. [33] conducted several case studies on the technology, showing the
potential in various applications. In recent years, improvements have
been made in both the algorithms used in CLFDM and applications,
with positive results [34-38].
There has been some effort to incorporate curvature into auxetic
metamaterials. Naboni and Mirante [39,40] have introduced the
concept of ‘bending-active’ auxetic sheets, that take specific forms
when bent out of plane aided by the synclastic property of auxetics.
Naboni and Mirante used these to create complex geometries from
planar auxetic materials as well as solving the backwards problem,
determining the planar structure to create a specific curvature.
Similarly, Konaković et al. [41] explored a computational method for
wrapping non-uniform surfaces with flat auxetic sheets. Still, there
would be stresses from the bending in the auxetic material in both
of these techniques, making these methods unsuitable for any load-
bearing applications. Coulter et al. [42,43] have pioneered a method
of direct-writing patterns onto silicone balloons, including chiral
auxetic patterns. The intent of their work is in biomedical appli-
cations of soft materials, resulting in their workflow being highly

Fig. 3. Examples of the described parameterizations, with the base surface in black and the generated patterns in gold. For each example, the XZ, YZ, and XY views are shown in
descending order. A–C: ‘Saddle’ surface, D–F: Convex Surface, G–I: ‘Draping’ Surface, J–L: ‘Cone’ Surface. The sample pattern used is auxetic mode 3 chiral sinusoids with standard
amplitude and high density. Control points for these Bézier surfaces can be found in Appendix A. Note that for the ‘Draping’ and ‘Cone’ surfaces, the auxetic traces are distorted
with the curvature of the Bézier surfaces.
952 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963
specific to the writing of soft silicones onto inflated silicone sub-
strate. Thus, there still lacks a systematic method for the definition
and fabrication of engineered patterns along arbitrary curved bodies
and exploration of how these structures behave.
Here, we demonstrate the design and fabrication of engineered
lattices along 3D Bézier surfaces, only utilizing common FDM equip-
ment and common academic software. The described method incor-
porates reusable mandrels, allowing for repeated fabrication of shells
with zero waste material. Since this methodology employs a 3-axis
FDM machine there are limitations in what can be fabricated; how-
ever, the methods described here may be easily extended to machines
with higher degrees of mobility due to the use of Bézier surfaces
for numerical control manufacturing. Finally, the auxetic sinusoidal
lattices were compared to similar sinusoidal lattices with disrupted
chirality and quadratic lattices of equivalent density, demonstrating
the effect of the auxetic pattern on the overall shell.
2. Method
2.1. Mathematical parameterization of sinusoidal patterns and surfaces
It has been shown that the eigenmodes of basic lattice structures
include auxetic patterns with the same base-unit cell [19]. Here, a
quadratic lattice is considered to obtain this set of sinusoidal patterns
(see Fig. 1). Let x represent the local length along a segment in
this lattice, y the displacement of the eigenmode, and k the side
length of the unit cell, as shown in Fig. 1. To allow rotation but not
displacement on the nodes of the lattice, the following boundary
conditions are applied to the Equation of Free Oscillations [44]; y(0) =
0, y(k) = 0, y (0) = 0 and y (k) = 0. The possible solutions
Fig. 4. Unit cells of the patterns used. The high density patterns have a unit cell of p mm in side length, and the low density patterns have a unit cell of p2 mm in side length. Only
the primary auxetic unit cells are shown for the low density samples for brevity, though all patterns were generated at low density.
for these boundary conditions, which are the eigenmodes of the
quadratic lattice, are described as follows;
y = A sin(kx)
k = wp/k w∈Z (1)
where w is the order of the eigenmode of the beam element, and A is
an arbitrary amplitude of the sinusoid. Thus, the factorial set of com-
binations of eigenmodes and their chiral forms in the two directions
of the lattice beams includes several auxetic patterns as described in
[19]. Two of these, the 3rd and 9th eigenmodes of the quadratic lattice
shown in Fig. 1, were selected for this study because the Poisson’s ratio
was reported to be equal in x and y in planar samples [19]. Note that
the 3rd eigenmode of the quadratic lattice refers to the factorial com-
bination resulting in the first eigenmode occurring in both directions
of the lattice; likewise, the 9th eigenmode of a quadratic lattice refers
to the second eigenmode occurring in both directions of the lattice.
Bézier surfaces were selected for the parameterization of the
sinusoidal patterns because of their common use in Computer-Aided
Design (CAD), Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM), and useful
mathematical properties such as transforming and translating with
its control points. The Bézier surface is a tensor product of two sets
of Bézier curves, the equation for which is reproduced in Eq. (2) for
the convenience of the reader.

n 
m
r(u, v) = Bni (u)Bm
j (v)pij (2)
i=0 j=0
In Eq. (2), u, v are the parametric variables; n, m represent the order
of the Bézier curve in u, v; B is the Bernstein Polynomial; and pij is the
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963 953

for the 3rd eigenmode and Au = −a, Av = a for the 9th eigenmode
where a is the standard amplitude of all sinusoids in the pattern.
Similarly, the equivalent unit cell quadratic lattice is found by let-
ting the amplitude of the sinusoid equal zero. Given these definitions,
parametric sinusoidal patterns based on eigenmodes of a quadratic
lattice, including auxetic patterns from the literature, are described
fully by T;

T = [U, V]
U = r(ū, v) V = r(u, v̄) (4)

To extract the Cartesian coordinates of the traces, these new

Fig. 5. The designed testing frame, mounted in the TA Plus Texture Analyser with
the probe mounted above. A high-density, high amplitude auxetic mode 3 lattice
fabricated along the convex Bézier curve is mounted in the adjustable jaws of the
testing frame.
set of control points m × n. These are also depicted in Fig. 2. If the
points p are in Cartesian coordinates, the surface r can be collected
into the parametric equations rx , ry , and rz .
Two new parameters were defined for the sinusoidal patterns, ū
and v̄, based on the eigenmodes described in Eq. (1) and arranging
these sinusoids and their chiral forms at intervals of the desired unit
cell size, k. These requirements are achieved in Eqs. (3a)–(3b), and a
representative sketch is shown in Fig. 2.

n
ū = Au sin(kv) + ki
i=0

m mode for each auxetic pattern. The unit cell of each pattern examined
v̄ = Av sin(ku) + kj
j=0
where A encompasses both the amplitude of the sinusoids and the
alternating chiral form. In this work, Au = (−1)i a, Av = (−1)j+1 a
parameters ū and v̄ are substituted back into the parametric
equations rx , ry , and rz . Using this method, an engineered lattice can
be parameterized onto an arbitrary Bézier surface.
Examples of parameterized auxetic patterns are shown in Fig. 3.
To explore the influence of pattern type and lattice parameters, sev-
eral types of pattern were generated for each mode. First, the unit
cell size was varied to produce samples of 5 × 5 and 16 × 16 unit
cell lattices, with normalized amplitudes of 1 mm and pmm respec-
tively. For each of these, the amplitude of the sinusoid was varied
by factors of 1.25 and 1/p for mode 3 to create high and low ampli-
tude samples and by 1.5 and 1/p for mode 9 to create high and
low amplitude samples. Subsequently, the curve lengths for all para-
metric sinusoids were calculated numerically and quadratic lattices
of equivalent density, rather than equivalent unit cell size, were
(3a) designed by maintaining the same summed curve length for the
entire lattice. Finally, the chirality of the auxetic patterns was inter-
rupted to produce disrupted patterns of the same amplitude and
(3b) here is shown in Fig. 4.
The method presented here can be applied to different lattice
patterns. However, local disruption of the lattices can be present at
locations where the change in slope is too abrupt or at local minima
or maxima. These specific cases are dependent on the local curvature

Fig. 6. Examples of lattices fabricated along the ‘Saddle’ Bézier surface at left and the Convex Beziér surface at center and right. At upper center is the convex lattice on the convex
mandrel; at right the pattern has been removed and retains the curvature of the mandrel. The pattern, shown in detail in the bubble, is a high density, normal amplitude, auxetic
mode 3 chiral sinusoid lattice. The same auxetic pattern is shown at left, fabricated on top of a non-auxetic quasi-solid shell, forming two-thirds of a sandwich structure with the
same shape as the mandrel. The ‘Saddle’ mandrel is shown in the alignment jig used.
954 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

of the surface, the geometry of the lattice, and the density of the lat-
tice with respect to the local curvature and thus were not considered
in the present work, as they are beyond the scope of it.
2.2. Path selection and generation of G-code
the machine used also limited the path angle and the shells were
significantly thin (given thickness t and side-length l, t/l  50), the
effects of this are considered insignificant. Specific coefficients used
in printing and header and footer files were created specific to the
AM machine used and incorporated into the MATLAB script [46].

As discussed, there has been substantial work on path planning
for Curved-Layer Manufacturing. However, previously developed
algorithms were not employed since trajectories along the sinu-
soidal or quadratic lattices were required. Instead, the patterns were
divided into constituent sinusoids which were discretized into 100
points, ordered in alternating directions to improve route efficiency,
scaled to 50 mm × 50 mm lattices, and transformed to the location
of the mandrel surface on the print bed, then exported into G-Code
using a custom MATLAB script [45]. The print parameters used were
nozzle diameter of 0.4 mm, extrusion rate of 0.0461 mm/mm, print-
ing feedrate of 600 mm/s, rapid traverse feedrate of 3000 mm/s, and
nozzle temperature of 210◦ C. This script was configured to traverse
to subsequent sinusoids at a positive z-height above the surface,
preventing any collisions. The generated paths were repeated with
an increasing z-height of 0.2 mm for four complete layers. Due to
the limitations in degrees of freedom of the FDM machine used, the
deposition was not perpendicular to the surface; however, because
2.3. Fabrication of the mandrel
A process of mathematical definition, conversion to 3D data, and
manufacturing was used to create the mandrel. To define the non-
planar surface, a custom MATLAB script [45] was used to define a
Bézier surface with the input of n × m control points; in this study,
bicubic Bézier surfaces were fabricated, requiring an input of 4 × 4
control points. The surface was scaled to 70 mm × 70 mm, discretized
into a point cloud and written to file in the XYZ file format, which
can be opened in many CAD packages. This point cloud was input
into the CAD package SolidWorks [47], where it was converted back
into a B-spline surface and a prism was extruded up to the surface
to give it structure. Using this process, rectangular prisms with con-
vex and saddle-shaped Bézier surfaces as one face were designed and
exported in an STL (Stereolithography Interface Format) file, a com-
mon 3D file for additive manufacturing. The resultant 3D files were
sliced in the proprietary software Z-Suite with 0.09 mm layer height,

Fig. 7. Top view of the high density variants of the auxetic mode 3 sinusoidal patterns, with variants in amplitude, equivalent quadratic lattices, and disrupted sinusoidal patterns.
The patterns are shown in detail in the bubbles. All shells have the convex curvature shown in Fig. 6.
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963
a 10% rectilinear infill, ‘ HIGH’ print quality, and were printed in Z-
ULTRAT on a Zortrax M200 3D printer [48]. The Z-ULTRAT material
was selected to maintain dissimilar materials between the printed
auxetic shells and the mandrel, which facilitated removing parts
from the mandrel.
2.4. Additive manufacturing of shell-like structures
First, an alignment jig was printed onto the print bed of a Prusa
i3 Mk2 additive manufacturing machine [46] in PLA using a 0.4 mm
nozzle at 210◦ C, and the preset feedrate and extrusion rate for the
slicer. Subsequently, the mandrel was glued into the jig with a water
soluble glue stick. The mandrel was aligned and leveled by moving
the printhead to each of the four corners and making visual adjust-
ments. Afterward, the generated G-Code files were run directly. Due
to the use of contrasting materials between the printed shells and
the mandrel, little manual force was required to remove the parts. To
demonstrate a potential application of the method, two-thirds of a
sandwich panel was fabricated with auxetic infill. This was achieved
by parsing the point clouds of the mandrels into G-Code and print-
ing a near-solid base layer, then offsetting the G-Code for the auxetic
pattern by adding the thickness of the base layer to the height of the
print.
Fig. 8. Top view of the low density variants of the auxetic mode 3 sinusoidal patterns, shown with variants in amplitude, equivalent quadratic lattices, and disrupted sinusoidal
patterns. All shells have the convex curvature shown in Fig. 6.
955
2.5. Structural characterization of the mechanical properties
To facilitate mechanical testing and ensure boundary conditions
preventing displacement and allowing rotation, a testing frame,
shown in Fig. 5, was designed with movable jaws to support the shells
with 5 mm ledges on all sides leaving a 45 mm × 45 mm open space,
leaving the corners unobstructed as well. The frame was then sliced
and manufactured using Z-Suite with the following parameters on
a Zortrax M200 printer; Z-ULTRAT material, 50% octagonal infill, ‘
HIGH’ print quality, and 0.09 mm layer height [48]. The frame was
assembled with standard hardware (SAE #6 bolts, nuts, and washers).
After placing the frame in the test environment, the movable jaws
could be adjusted to the slight changes in size of the lattices due to the
variance in amplitude of the sinusoids and maintained their position
through a designed interference fit with the bolts.
All mechanical testing was carried out on a TA Plus Texture Analyser
with a 1 KN Lloyd Instruments load cell [49]. A loading-to-failure
test (20 mm total extension from preload of 0.1 N, 2 mm /s extension
rate) was programmed in the software package NEXYGEN Plus and
performed on three identical samples of each shell. The loading probe
was a 10 mm steel sphere loading along the normal of the horizontal
center of each shell, and preloading to 0.1 N was included before the
test.
956 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

3. Results
3.1. Additive manufacturing of parametric lattice shells
The described methodology successfully fabricated shells with
engineered patterns across arbitrary Bézier surfaces. An example is
shown in perspective view in Fig. 6, showing that the curvature is
maintained after removing the part from the mandrel, and all samples
are shown from above in Figs. 7—10 . The mandrel shown in Fig. 6 was
used for over 220 samples, and continues to be reusable with high
repeatability of produced parts. Upon manual inspection, the convex
auxetic sinusoidal patterns and disrupted sinusoidal patterns had
no snap-through (in other words, a tendency towards bi-stability)
when bent through the normal of the shell, whereas the quadratic
lattices did. Further, the auxetic sinusoidal patterns were visibly aux-
etic, whereas the quadratic samples were visibly non-auxetic. All
of the disrupted sinusoidal patterns could not be described as all
auxetic or non-auxetic; rather, different levels of auxetic and non-
auxetic behavior were seen when manually loaded depending on
the amplitude, density, pattern, and whether loading in tension or in
compression. Because all noted auxetic behavior was small in com-
parison to the designed auxetic shells, this phenomenon was not
further investigated.
In order to show the versatility in manufacturability of the shells,
non-auxetic layers were combined with the mode 3 auxetic patterns
to create the basis for 3D sandwich structures, shown in Fig. 6 on top
of the saddle-shaped mandrel, which is in the alignment jig printed
in white. The structure shown in Fig. 6 was created with PLA in two
colors, achieving strong bonding between the two colors while the
composite part still could easily be removed from the mandrel. As
with the convex mandrel, no visible damage to the mandrel was
found after printing.
The chord error, or the distance error between a local maxi-
mum in the curve and the straight line between two discretized
points, was used to quantify the error of the fabrication process.
This was extended to the sinusoids used in this work to evaluate
the position error of the FDM machine (Appendix B). The maximum
chord error for all low density samples was lower than the error of
the machine, making it negligible. For the high density samples, the
chord error of the high-amplitude, auxetic mode 3 sinusoidal lattice
was 0.15302 mm, and the chord error of the corresponding mode 9
sinusoidal lattice was 1.0777 mm. Assuming a linear relationship of
motion in all three axes, the machine error was approximated using
information from the manufacturer to be 0.2857 mm.
3.2. Mechanical testing to failure
In Figs. 11 and 12, an averaged load curve is shown with the
mean fracture point with 1s error bars for each pattern, to demon-
strate the general failure behavior and relate the statistical difference

Fig. 9. Top view of the high density variants of the auxetic mode 9 sinusoidal patterns, with variants in amplitude, equivalent quadratic lattices, and disrupted sinusoidal patterns.
The patterns are shown in detail in the bubbles. All shells have the convex curvature shown in Fig. 6.
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963
of where fracture occurred, respectively. The nomenclature of these
figures corresponds with that of Figs. 7—10 to better visualize what
patterns have which loading behavior. In Fig. 11, the failure mode of
the high density auxetic samples is shown to be dependent on the
amplitude of the sinusoids, with the lowest amplitude approaching
the behavior of the non-auxetic samples and the highest amplitude
sustaining significantly more deflection before slipping through the
test frame without fracture. For mode 3, the high amplitude aux-
etic sinusoidal patterns had a 136% increase in the deflection at the
beginning of fracture over the disrupted sinusoidal pattern, and a
84% increase over the equivalent density quadratic pattern. Similarly,
the mode 9 auxetic sinusoidal pattern had an increase of 76% and 61%
over the disrupted sinusoidal pattern and the equivalent quadratic
pattern of mode 9, respectively. The high density, normalized ampli-
tude auxetic samples were also able to delay fracture noticeably past
the quadratic lattices and the disrupted sinusoidal pattern, for both
modes (41% increase over both disrupted sinusoidal and quadratic
patterns in mode 3, 18% and 54% increase over the disrupted sinu-
soidal and quadratic patterns, respectively). At low amplitude, only
the mode 9 sinusoidal auxetic pattern had a large increase of 48%
over the quadratic pattern; for both modes, the disrupted sinusoidal
pattern was within 4% difference in the beginning of fracture. When
Fig. 10. Top view of the low density variants of the auxetic mode 9 sinusoidal patterns, shown with variants in amplitude, equivalent quadratic lattices, and disrupted sinusoidal
patterns. All shells have the convex curvature shown in Fig. 6.
957
comparing the equivalent quadratic patterns against the disrupted
sinusoidal patterns, in mode 3 only the high amplitude samples
showed a difference of 28% delay in extension at fracture whereas
in mode 9 normalized and low amplitude, the disrupted sinusoidal
patterns had an increase of 24% and 32%, respectively.
Mechanical tests to failure for low density lattices are shown in
Fig. 12, where the naming of each plot corresponds to the samples
shown in Figs. 8—10. For the low density patterns across all ampli-
tudes, the auxetic sinusoidal patterns generally performed similarly
than the disrupted sinusoidal patterns and equivalent quadratic pat-
terns, with some exceptions. The mode 3 high amplitude auxetic
sinusoidal pattern delayed fracture by 23% over the disrupted sinu-
soidal pattern, and the mode 9 normalized and high amplitude
delayed fracture over the equivalent quadratic lattice (15% and 16%,
respectively). At low amplitude, neither mode had a pattern with a
larger than 15% difference in extension at fracture. When compar-
ing quadratic equivalent patterns to disrupted sinusoidal patterns in
mode 3, the normalized and high amplitude patterns showed a delay
in fracture by 16% and 17%, respectively. Conversely, mode 9 normal-
ized and high amplitude patterns showed an increase of 26% and 20%
in the extension at fracture of the disrupted sinusoidal patterns over
the equivalent quadratic patterns. As with the high density patterns,
958 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

Fig. 11. Average failure traces for all high density samples with 1s error bars for the start of fracture. Each set of test data was aligned along the maximum deflection, which was
limited by the testing machine, and the force was averaged per point extension across three samples. The error in the start of fracture is given separately for force and extension.
All smooth drop-offs correspond to observations that the deflection of the lattice was too great for the test frame to hold, and slipped through before fracture. Note that the high
density, high amplitude samples for both modes did not fracture. The y-axis of the high density, normalized amplitude Mode 9 sample has been extended slightly for the visibility
of the error bars.

none of the low amplitude samples for either mode had a difference
above the threshold of 15%.
Shown in Fig. 12, the defining characteristic for the low-density
auxetic samples was sustaining deformation at a lower load. For high
amplitudes, fracture in the auxetic samples was again delayed rel-
ative to the quadratic lattice, but only had an advantageous effect
against the non-auxetic sinusoidal lattice for mode 3. Once the
amplitude was lowered, however, there was negligible effect in the
delay of fracture.
Finally, the fabricated shells were deformed against the normal
of the surface in Fig. 13 to exhibit the ability of auxetic lattices to
conform to the curvature of a body. In essence, the lattices with a
pre-manufactured negative Gaussian curvature were forced into a
negative Gaussian curvature with an opposite surface normal. From
observation, it is noted that the auxetic sinusoidal patterns have sig-
nificant deflection in bending and torsion along unit cell walls, which
is lacking in the other two patterns. Additionally, the amount of vis-
ible deflection is greater with increasing amplitude for the auxetic
sinusoidal lattices, which is not seen for the other two classes of
patterns.
4. Discussion
Hundreds of samples were fabricated with high repeatability on
the same platform with zero support waste, demonstrating this is a
reliable, time- and material-efficient method. This achieves compa-
rable or better levels of material waste to traditional methods of 3D
printing, while using open-source, affordable, and widely available
hardware. Additionally, by removing the need for support material
by using CLFDM with a pre-fabricated mandrel, the method is con-
siderably faster at the fabrication of lattice shells than any common
method of additive manufacturing, based on common fabrication
times for SLS, FDM, Stereolithography (SLA), and Laminated Object
Manufacturing (LOM). The fidelity of the fabricated lattices was also
validated through the measurement of the chord error, which pro-
vides a tool for determining the resolution of the discretization.
As mentioned, there have been advances in creating planar auxetic
metamaterials that conform to surfaces with complicated curvature
[41] and active-bending auxetic materials [39,40]; however, these
will result in residual stresses in the material, reducing the overall
strength of the structure. With the method reported here, the shells
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963 959

Fig. 12. Average failure traces for all low density samples with 1s error bars for the start of fracture. Each set of test data was aligned along the maximum deflection, which was
limited by the testing machine, and the force was averaged per point extension across three samples. The error in the start of fracture is given separately for force and extension.
The y-axis of the low density, high amplitude Mode 9 sample has been extended slightly for the visibility of the error bars.

are fabricated in the final curvature, imparting no residual stress.
Finally, the arbitrary nature of the method means that it can apply to
a Bézier surface of any order. While this requires that the surface be
derivable, sharp points and edges can still be approximated by using
higher order Bézier surfaces and more complicated surfaces can be
handled by separating the surface into a series of Bézier patches.
Further, the patterns used are not limited to sinusoids; any function
defined and derivable on the range occupied by the Bézier surface
can be used with this method in a similar manner.
The mechanical analysis of the fabricated shells demonstrated
that there are key differences among the pattern types considered
here, particularly at normalized and high amplitudes. As the ampli-
tude was lowered, the behavior of the lattices approached that
of the quadratic lattices. Particularly in the method of failure, all
lattices except the high-amplitude, high density auxetic patterns
fractured during the extension to failure. While both modes of the
high-amplitude, high density auxetic patterns did suffer plastic fail-
ure, they strained with the tensile testing machine until deforming
to a point they slipped from the testing frame, never fracturing.
Along these results, the normalized-amplitude, high density aux-
etic patterns did significantly delay fracture until after the disrupted
sinusoidal patterns and the quadratic patterns, though they did
finally fracture. The difference in the patterns is attributed to the
deformation mechanism; specifically, the auxetic lattices respond in
nearly purely bending, whereas the quadratic lattices respond in a
mixture of stretching and bending and to a lesser extent the dis-
rupted sinusoidal lattices in a non-1D state of stress. Though the
auxetic shells considered by Lim [1] were spherical segments and
were isotropically auxetic, the data for the parametric shells corrobo-
rate the analytical analysis that an auxetic shell will have minimized
bending stress and better distribution of stress throughout the shell.
Notably, there was no significant difference observed between the
patterns of the two considered eigenmodes, which could be of use to
future designers since mode 9 provides a higher density lattice and,
according to the literature, a higher Poisson’s ratio in plane. Unlike
the high density patterns, the low density auxetic sinusoidal patterns
showed no significant advantages over the other patterns. This may
be attributed to the weakness of the shells or the significantly vari-
able end effects shown in Fig. 8, whereas the high density samples
all had similar edges as seen in Fig. 7. As the lower values of defor-
mation had similar magnitude to the pre-loading and error of the
tensile testing machine, this data does not yield a conclusive result
960 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963
Fig. 13. The shells fabricated on the Convex Bézier surface were deflected against the end of a rounded cylinder to demonstrate the differences in deformation mechanism among
the different patterns that derived from the high-density 3rd eigenmode.
in whether the relationships seen in the high density patterns apply
across all unit cell sizes and dimensions of arrays.
Some of the disrupted sinusoidal traces exhibited minor auxetic
behavior. Upon inspection of the shells, however, it is noted that as
the amplitude increases, the thickened sinusoids coincide along a
short section, effectively enlarging certain nodes and preventing the
flexure of some lattice segments. Though the symmetry of rotational
centers was disrupted, some rotational centers remain distributed
uniformly. Across the entire lattice, this effect explains the variations
in auxeticity, also explaining the dependence of the phenomena on
the eigenmode, the amplitude, and the unit cell size, all of which
result in a deformed node. These non-ideal lattices did not have a sig-
nificantly different mechanical response, however, which follows the
fact that over the lattice of many unit cells the same effective density
is reached.
The results presented and analyzed here represent the start-
ing point towards the understanding of curved- and parametrically
distorted lattices. Conventional approaches to characterize and pre-
dict the effective mechanical properties of planar-lattices need to
be reconsidered or adapted for the curved and distorted cases. The
unit cell approach relies on periodicity, or in other words, the struc-
ture can be considered as continuum represented by the unit cell.
In the cases of curved and distorted lattices, this is not necessar-
ily preserved. If there is disruption of the lattice on the surface, a
local distortion or stretching, or a change in the unit cell size and
direction across the surface, the unit cell approach cannot longer be
applied and a more detailed analysis should be employed. Further,
the disruption of the lattices is a particular characteristic that is dif-
ferent for each surface and lattice, this on its own prompts different
modelling techniques.
5. Conclusions
A method for the creation of thin, 3D shell lattices is described,
permitting the fabrication of shells with equation-defined patterns
parameterized onto n × m order Bézier surfaces. By including ele-
ments of Curved Layer Manufacturing, this method allows manu-
facture of lattice shells without wasted support material increasing
the speed and decreasing the waste compared to traditional addi-
tive manufacturing techniques. A mechanical characterization of the
fabricated shells revealed that certain auxetic sinusoidal lattices
withstood higher strains depending on their sinusoidal amplitude,
which is attributed to their bending-dominated deformation typical
of auxetic lattice materials. Additionally, a new group of disrupted
sinusoidal lattices were created that have a unique behavior, vary-
ing between the behavior of the auxetic sinusoidal lattices and the
quadratic lattices. This opens up a new avenue of investigation, as
these non-ideal nodes may be used to ‘tune’ near-zero auxeticity of
lattice structures. Altogether, these results suggest that the auxetic
sinusoidal lattice shells are suitable for structural roles where high-
deformation shells are required, and suggest that they are suitable
for energy absorption applications.
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963 961

The present work is limited in the maximum possible cur-
vature during manufacture due to the nozzle geometry and the
restricted kinematic mobility of the FDM machine used. How-
ever, because of the use of derivable mathematical splines, cal-
culating surface normals already has been well-explored and this
method can be easily ported to a machine with higher mobility.
This would allow for not only exploration of open Bézier surfaces
with higher curvature, but closed structures like cylinder- and cone-
type surfaces. Additionally, the ability of the Bézier surfaces to
stretch and distort the lattice patterns along parametric surfaces
was only briefly demonstrated in Fig. 3, though it provides inter-
esting opportunities for the exploration of design applications in
load distribution and aesthetic design. Other future work should
include the exploration of alternate lattice patterns and the mechan-
ics of how they behave along a parametric surface, including how
the auxeticity of different auxetic patterns and shells behaves with
curvature.
This method shows high variability in both the parametric geom-
etry and the lattice structure contained therein, resulting in a widely
applicable manufacturing technique. This both enables novel design
applications and provides a basis for experimental exploration of 3D
engineered lattices.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
John C.S. McCaw: Worked on the design of experiments,
Fabricated the samples and did the mechanical testing, Analysed
the data and contribute to the writing of the manuscript. Enrique
Cuan-Urquizo: Supervised the project, Worked on the design of
experiments, Analysed the data, Interpreted the data and contribute
to the writing of the manuscript.
Acknowledgments
Authors thank the Global Engineering Alliance for Research and
Education (GEARE) at Purdue University for their assistance in facil-
itating international study and research initiatives developed at
Tecnológico de Monterrey in Querétaro, Mexico. The support from
Dr. Eduardo Morales (CICATA), Dr. Alfonso Gomez, Cecilia Sanchez
(CICATA), and Ulises Rojas in the development of the experimental
work is acknowledged. Additional thanks goes to Miguel Ambas for
assistance with photography.
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Appendix A

The control points for the Bézier surfaces used in this study are listed below in xyz form:

‘Saddle’ Shaped Surface, 4 × 4:

⎛ ⎞
xi,j 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1
⎝
yi,j = 0 0 0 0 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 1 1 1 1⎠
zi,j 0 1/12 1/6 1/4 1/12 1/9 5/36 1/6 1/6 5/36 1/9 1/12 1/4 1/6 1/12 0

Convex Surface, 4 × 4:

⎛ ⎞
xi,j 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1
⎝
yi,j = 0 0 0 0 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 1 1 1 1⎠
zi,j 0 0 0 0 0 1/3 1/3 0 0 1/3 1/3 0 0 0 0 0

‘Draping’ Surface, 4 × 4:

⎛ ⎞
xi,j 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1 0 1/3 2/3 1/3
yi,j = ⎝ 0 0 1/10 1/10 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 3/5 1 1 1/3 ⎠
zi,j 1/4 1/12 1/6 1/40 1/12 1/36 1/4 1/6 1/6 1/36 1/4 1/12 1/12 1/6 1/12 0

‘Cone’ Surface, 3 × 5:

⎛ ⎞
xi,j 1/4 0 1 1 1/4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
yi,j = ⎝ 0 0 0 0 0 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 ⎠
zi,j 1/4 2/5 2/5 3/20 1/4 3/20 1/2 1/2 3/20 3/20 1/10 1/10 1/10 1/10 1/10
962 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963

Appendix B

Fig. B-1. The chord error of a sinusoidal trace, which represents the worst-case error for a discretized sinusoid. The thickness of the trace was not accounted for, as a thin line
presents the worst-case error.

The chord error can be calculated from the geometry of the sinusoids used and the step size of the machine. The maximum step-size after
parameterization and discretization to 100 points was less than 1 mm, and the total error moving in x, y, and z axes equally was 0.2857 mm. A
visual representation is shown in Fig. B1, where di is the step size and h is the maximum chord error. Here, the maximum chord error is
 

p di
h = a • 1 − sin − (B.1)
2f 2

References
[1] T.-C. Lim, Auxetic Materials and Structures, 1st ed. ed., Springer Singapore.
2015.
[2] M. Sanami, N. Ravirala, K. Alderson, A. Alderson, Auxetic materials for sports
applications,the Engineering of Sport 10. Procedia Eng. 72 (2014) 453–458.
[3] S. Bhullar, J. Ko, F. Ahmed, M. Jun, Design and fabrication of stent with negative
Poissons ratio, Int. J. Mech., Ind. Sci. Eng. 8 (2) (2014) 213–219.
[4] Y. Chen, T. Li, F. Scarpa, L. Wang, Lattice metamaterials with mechanically
tunable Poisson’s ratio for vibration control, Phys. Rev. Appl. 7 (2017) 024012.
[5] H.A. Kolken, A.A. Zadpoor, Auxetic mechanical metamaterials, RSC Adv. 7
(2017) 5111–5129.
[6] Y. Liu, H. Hu, A review on auxetic structures and polymeric materials, Sci. Res.
Essays 5 (2010) 1052–1063.
[7] Y. Prawoto, Seeing auxetic materials from the mechanics point of view: a
structural review on the negative Poissons ratio, Comput. Mater. Sci. 58 (2012)
140–153.
[8] R. Lakes, Foam structures with a negative Poisson’s ratio, Science 235 (4792)
(1987) 1038–1040.
[9] J. Grima, A. Alderson, K. Evans, Auxetic behaviour from rotating rigid units,
Phys. Status Solidi B 242 (3) (2005) 561–575.
[10] N. Gaspar, X. Ren, C. Smith, J. Grima, K. Evans, Novel honeycombs with auxetic
behaviour, Acta Mater. 53 (8) (2005) 2439–2445.
[11] A. Alderson, K. Alderson, D. Attard, K. Evans, R. Gatt, J. Grima, W. Miller, N.
Ravirala, C. Smith, K. Zied, Elastic constants of 3-, 4- and 6-connected chiral
and anti-chiral honeycombs subject to uniaxial in-plane loading,special issue
on Chiral Smart Honeycombs. Compos. Sci. Technol. 70 (7) (2010) 1042–1048.
[12] F.D. Reis, J. Ganghoffer, Equivalent mechanical properties of auxetic lattices
from discrete homogenization, Comput. Mater. Sci. 51 (1) (2012) 314–321.
[13] F. Scarpa, K. Virk, A. Monti, T. Trehard, K. Hazra, K. Boba, C. Remillat, M. Marsh,
I.R. Farrow, SILICOMB PEEK Kirigami cellular structures: mechanical response
and energy dissipation through zero and negative stiffness, Smart Mater. Struct.
22 (2013) 084014.
[14] J.N. Grima, N. Ravirala, R. Galea, B. Ellul, D. Attard, R. Gatt, A. Alderson,
J. Rasburn, K.E. Evans, Modelling and testing of a foldable macrostructure
exhibiting auxetic behaviour, Phys. Status Solidi B 248 (1) (2010) 117–122.
[15] D. Prall, R. Lakes, Properties of a chiral honeycomb with a Poisson’s ratio of 1,
Int. J. Mech. Sci. 39 (3) (1997) 305–314.
[16] J.N. Grima, K.E. Evans, Auxetic behavior from rotating triangles, J. Mater. Sci. 41
(10) (2006) 3193–3196.
[17] B.D. Caddock, K.E. Evans, Microporous materials with negative Poisson’s ratios.
I. Microstructure and mechanical properties, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 22 (12)
(1989) 1877.
[18] K.E. Evans, B.D. Caddock, Microporous materials with negative Poisson’s ratios.
II. Mechanisms and interpretation, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 22 (12) (1989) 1883.
[19] C. Körner, Y. Liebold-Ribeiro, A systematic approach to identify cellular auxetic
materials, Smart Mater. Struct. 24 (2) (2015) 025013.
[20] R.C. Rumpf, J. Pazos, C.R. Garcia, L. Ochoa, R. Wicker, 3D printed lattices with
spatially variant self-collimation, Prog. Electromagn. Res. 139 (2013) 1–14.
[21] P.R. Budarapu, Y.B. Sudhir Sastry, R. Natarajan, Design concepts of an aircraft
wing: composite and morphing airfoil with auxetic structures, Front. Struct.
Civ. Eng. 10 (4) (2016) 394–408.
[22] S.K. Moon, Y.E. Tan, J. Hwang, Y.-J. Yoon, Application of 3D printing technology
for designing light-weight unmanned aerial vehicle wing structures, Int. J.
Precis. Eng. Manuf.-Green Technol. 1 (3) (2014) 223–228.
[23] I. Maskery, A. Aremu, L. Parry, R. Wildman, C. Tuck, I. Ashcroft, Effective design
and simulation of surface-based lattice structures featuring volume fraction
and cell type grading, Mater. Des. 155 (2018) 220–232.
[24] X. Tan, Y. Tan, C. Chow, S. Tor, W. Yeong, Metallic powder-bed based 3D
printing of cellular scaffolds for orthopaedic implants: a state-of-the-art
review on manufacturing, topological design, mechanical properties and
biocompatibility, Mater. Sci. Eng. C 76 (2017) 1328–1343.
[25] J. Taboas, R. Maddox, P. Krebsbach, S. Hollister, Indirect solid free form
fabrication of local and global porous, biomimetic and composite 3D
polymer-ceramic scaffolds, Biomaterials 24 (1) (2003) 181–194.
[26] S. Aydin, B. Kucukyuruk, B. Abuzayed, S. Aydin, Cranioplasty: review of
materials and techniques, J. Neurosci. Rural Pract. 2 (2) (2011) 162–167.
[27] J. Parthasarathy, 3D modeling, custom implants and its future perspectives in
craniofacial surgery, Ann. Maxillof. Surg. 4 (1) (2014) 9–18.
[28] Y. Chen, M.-H. Fu, A novel three-dimensional auxetic lattice meta-material with
enhanced stiffness, Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (10) (2017) 105029.
[29] D.A. Klosterman, R.P. Chartoff, N.R. Osborne, G.A. Graves, A. Lightman, G. Han,
A. Bezeredi, S. Rodrigues, Curved Layer LOM of Ceramics and Composites,
Proceedings of the 1998 Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 1998,
671–680.
[30] D. Chakraborty, B.A. Reddy, A.R. Choudhury, Extruder path generation for curved
layer fused deposition modeling, Comput. Aided Des. 40 (2) (2008) 235–243.
[31] S. Singamneni, A. Roychoudhury, O. Diegel, B. Huang, Modeling and evalua-
tion of curved layer fused deposition, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 212 (1) (2012)
27–35.
 J.C.S. McCaw, E. Cuan-Urquizo / Materials and Design 160 (2018) 949–963
[32] R.J. Allen, R.S. Trask, An experimental demonstration of effective curved layer
fused filament fabrication utilising a parallel deposition robot, Addit. Manuf. 8
(2015) 78–87.
[33] T. Llewellyn-Jones, R. Allen, R. Trask, Curved layer fused filament fabrication
using automated toolpath generation, 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing
3 (4) (2016) 236–243.
[34] B. Huang, S. Singamneni, Curved layer fused deposition modeling with varying
raster orientations, Appl. Mech. Mater. 446-447 (2013) 263–269.
[35] B. Huang, S.B. Singamneni, Curved Layer Adaptive Slicing (CLAS) for fused
deposition modelling, Rapid Prototyp. J. 21 (4) (2015) 354–367.
[36] Y. Jin, J. Du, Y. He, G. Fu, Modeling and process planning for curved layer fused
deposition, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 91 (1) (2017) 273–285.
[37] G. Zhao, G. Ma, J. Feng, W. Xiao, Nonplanar slicing and path generation methods
for robotic additive manufacturing, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 96 (9) (2018)
3149–3159.
[38] D. Coupek, J. Friedrich, D. Battran, O. Riedel, Reduction of support structures
and building time by optimized path planning algorithms in multi-axis
additive manufacturing,11th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in
Manufacturing Engineering, 19-21 July 2017, Gulf of Naples, Italy. Procedia
CIRP 67 (2018) 221–226.
[39] R. Naboni, L. Mirante, Metamaterial computation and fabrication of auxetic
patterns for architecture., Blucher Des. Proc. 2 (3) (2015) 129–136.
963
[40] R. Naboni, L. Mirante, Computational design and simulation of bending-active
auxetic structures, Gestão & Tecnologia de Projetos 11 (2016) 59.
[41] M. Konaković, K. Crane, B. Deng, S. Bouaziz, D. Piker, M. Pauly, Beyond
developable: computational design and fabrication with auxetic materials,
ACM Trans. Graph. 35 (4) (2016) 89:1–89:11.
[42] F.B. Coulter, A. Ianakiev, 4D printing inflatable silicone structures, 3D Printing
and Additive Manufacturing 2 (3) (2015) 140–144.
[43] F.B. Coulter, B.S. Coulter, E. Papastavrou, A. Ianakiev, Production techniques for
3D printed inflatable elastomer structures: part ii four-axis direct ink writing
on irregular double-curved and inflatable surfaces, 3D Printing and Additive
Manufacturing 5 (1) (2018) 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2017.0069.
[44] A. Polyanin, V. Zaitsev, Handbook of Exact Solutions for Ordinary Differential
Equations, 2002.
[45] The Mathworks, Inc., The MATLAB (sep 2017), https://la.mathworks.com/
products/matlab.html.
[46] Prusa Research s.r.o., Prusa i3 (may 2012), https://www.prusa3d.com/.
[47] Dassault Systémes SE, SolidWorks (jan 2014)., http://www.solidworks.es/.
[48] Zortrax, Z-Suite 2 (apr 2018)., https://support.zortrax.com/.
[49] AMETEK, Inc., TA Plus Texture Analyser, Lloyd Instruments (may 2018)., https://
www.ametektest.com/.