Design, fabrication and characterization of auxetic

lattice composites elastic polishing pad (1920-00032)

Submitted by
Chew Jun Teck
A0165246A

Supervisor:
Assistant Professor Wang Hao

Examiner:
Associate Professor A Senthil Kumar

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of Bachelor of Technology
Mechanical Engineering

National University of Singapore

2019/2020
 ABSTRACT

This Final Year Project (FYP) report, aim to design at the functionally graded material (FGM)

which can be fabricated by 3D printing technology, to make elastic polishing pad for the

sake of achieving uniform material removal rate in chemical mechanical polishing (CMP).

Comprehensive analysis and careful experiment were conducted on various selected auxetic

lattice structure with certain compression speed at compression length on building direction

of lattice sample. This able to provide handful of data for analysis to select the suitable

auxetic reinforced composite elastic polishing pad. Icosahedron lattice structure has the

highest compression force and Young’s modulus follow by Hexagon, Snowflake and X at

compression speed at 5mm/min and compression distance at 35mm. Hexagon and X lattice

specimens has share almost the same similar Young’s modulus with X lattice specimens

when the compression speed and compression distance at much lower value.

Additionally, the capability of the new formed auxetic lattice reinforced composite elastic

polishing pad was aimed to reduce the abrupt change of boundary stress and the contact

stress in the single gradient ring at constant. The new creation may explore on solving

inconsistent problem of central stress under static and dynamic condition in the future work.

i|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author sincerely appreciates and thank from the bottom of my heart to FYP supervisor,

Dr Wang Hao, and graduate tutors Mr Zhang Jiong and Ms Hong Ruochen for their precious

time and guidance throughout the entire project journey. Their relevant experience in the

industry, advice and feedback were of paramount important in helping the author to improve

as well as to generate better ideas. Help and support were also provided whenever the author

faced challenges from create CAD file to conversion of STL files with suitable software.

The author would like to thank National of Singapore (NUS) Manufacturing Department for

allocating the necessary equipment and fabrication services as well as giving the author

permission to conduct experiments in Mechanical Lab. It was due to recent pandemic issue

that causes NUS has tighten restriction on visitor on entering the school premise and

operating machine. With the help of Mr Zhang Jiong on collecting lattice samples from

Center for Additive Manufacturing (AM.NUS) once ready for collection and Mr Zhang Jiong

to proceed on compression test with the pre allocation time slot.

The author learnt a great deal and gained an in-depth understanding of concepts pertaining to

publication of scientific journals, design of experiment, liaising with external suppliers,

stakeholder management skills, internal surface finishing methodology and lab investigation

techniques.

ii | P a g e
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................................. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................... ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... iii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. v

LIST OF EQUATIONS ......................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. vii

LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................................. ix

ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................. x

CHAPTER 1 INRODUCTION ........................................................................................ - 1 -

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE SURVEY .......................................................................... - 3 -

2.1 Brief Introduction to Additive Manufacturing ...................................................... - 3 -

2.2 Material Removal in Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP) .............................. - 5 -

CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES AND RESULTS ............................ - 9 -

3.1 Materials and method ............................................................................................ - 9 -

3.1.1 Model Analysis .................................................................................................. - 9 -

3.1.2 CAD Software .............................................................................................. - 10 -

3.1.3 Design of lattice structure specimen and fabrication parameters of 3D printed

lattice structure ........................................................................................................... - 10 -

3.2 Compression tests on lattice specimens .............................................................. - 16 -

3.2.1 Experimental arrangement for compression tests ........................................ - 16 -

3.2.2 Mechanical properties of tested lattices ....................................................... - 18 -

3.2.3 Engineering stress-strain curves from compression tests on 4 different lattice

specimen designs ........................................................................................................ - 20 -
iii | P a g e
 3.2.4 Summary of experimental results ................................................................ - 36 -

3.3 Analyses of deformation modes .......................................................................... - 38 -

3.3.1 Deformation of unit cell lattices .................................................................. - 38 -

3.3.2 Parameters affecting deformation modes ..................................................... - 40 -

CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSIONS ......................................................................................... - 42 -

4.1 Effect of Compression Speed and Compression Distance .................................. - 42 -

4.2 Effect of Lattice Structure Size and Design ........................................................ - 42 -

4.3 Tensile testing machine versus compression test machine ................................. - 43 -

4.4 Effect of Fabrication and Post Processing Technique ......................................... - 44 -

4.5 Limitation ............................................................................................................ - 44 -

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... - 46 -

CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK ............................. - 48 -

6.1 Gather more data through experiment on selected lattice structure specimens .. - 48 -

6.2 Working on lattice cell modeling with Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software . - 48
-

6.3 Fabrication of Auxetic Lattice Reinforced Composites for simulation .............. - 49 -

7.REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. - 51 -

8.APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... - 53 -

Table 1 ............................................................................................................................... - 53 -

iv | P a g e
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Lattice Density of Second Batch Lattice Specimens

Table 2: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Hexagon lattice specimens in 3 different parameters

Table 3: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Icosahedron lattice specimens in 3 different

parameters

Table 4: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Snowflake lattice specimens in 3 different

parameters

Table 5: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 X lattice specimens in 3 different parameters

Table 6: Average Young’s Modulus of 4 different designs of lattice specimens

Table 7: Deformation of lattice structure specimens at different strain during quasi-static

compression test

v|Page
 LIST OF EQUATIONS

Eq. (1) Young’s modulus

Eq. (2) Polishing pressure

Eq. (3) velocity

vi | P a g e
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 1: Functional principle of CMP Process [4] .................................................................. - 4 -

Fig 2: Wafer manufacturing without CMP (a) and with CMP (b) [6] ................................. - 7 -

Fig 3: Novel processing method of CMP process [8] .......................................................... - 9 -

Fig 4: CAD models and actual printed lattice specimens: ................................................. - 12 -

Fig 5: Visual arrangement of lattice structure on Autodesk Netfabb ................................ - 13 -

Fig 6: FormLab Form 2 Desktop 3D SLA 3D Printer and its available printing materials- 14 -

Fig 7: Shimadzu AGX-V Series Universal Testing Machines .......................................... - 16 -

Fig 8: Blue marking on top corner of lattice specimens .................................................... - 17 -

Fig 9: Blue marking on bottom of lattice specimens ......................................................... - 17 -

Fig 10: Experimental arrangement of compression test on lattice specimen..................... - 18 -

Fig 11: Example of Stress-Strain Curve [13] ..................................................................... - 19 -

Fig 12: First batch of 40 lattice specimens of Hexagon, Icosahedron, Snowflake and X -

20 -

Fig 13: Unwanted printing support found on the lattice structure specimen ..................... - 21 -

Fig 14: Lattice specimen before compression test ............................................................. - 21 -

Fig 15: Lattice specimen after compression test until densification .................................. - 22 -

Fig 16: First Batch Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke Graph ............................................ - 22 -

Fig 17: First Batch Lattice Structure of Stress-Strain Graph ............................................. - 23 -

Fig 18: Second batch of 50 Hexagon lattice specimens............................................ - 24 -

Fig 19: Second Batch Hexagon Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph- 25

Fig 20: Second batch of 50 Icosahedron lattice specimens ...................................... - 26 -

vii | P a g e
Fig 21: Second Batch Icosahedron Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke Graph ................... - 27 -

Fig 22: Second Batch Icosahedron Lattice Structure of Stress-Strain Graph .................... - 28 -

Fig 23: Second batch of 50 Snowflake lattice specimens ......................................... - 30 -

Fig 24: Second Batch Snowflake Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph .. -

31 -

Fig 25: Second batch of 50 X lattice specimens ....................................................... - 33 -

Fig 26: Second Batch Snowflake Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph .. -

34 -

Fig 28: Reference from [14] schematic lattice structures design ....................................... - 43 -

Fig 29: Unwanted printing support found on the lattice structure specimen ..................... - 44 -

Fig 30: Sample of FCC cell structure[13] .......................................................................... - 45 -

Fig 31: Strain error of 0.002 found on calibration test ...................................................... - 45 -

viii | P a g e
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

Symbols

µm Micrometer

mm Millimeter

N Newton

MPa Mega Pascal

Min Minute

E Young’s Modulus

Engineering Stress

Engineering Strain

Radius

V Relative Velocity

ix | P a g e
 ABBREVIATIONS

3D 3-Dimensional

AM Additive Manufacturing

BCC Body centered cubic

CAD Computer-aided Design

CMP Chemical Mechanical Polishing

FCC Face centered cubic

FEA Finite element analysis

FYP Final Year Project

IPA isopropyl alcohol

LYP Lower yield point

MRR Material Removal Rate

Rpk Reduced Peak Height

Rk Core roughness depth

Rvk Reduced valley depth

SLA Silithography

STL Stereolithograpghy

TPM Tripropylene Glycol Monomethyl

UTS Ultimate tensile strength

x|Page
 CHAPTER 1 INRODUCTION

Chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) is the most important processing technology that

could provide global and local planarization. However, the critical problem of material

removal uniformity remains to be solved. CMP models based on the Preston equation

represented the material removal rate (MRR) as a function of the pressure and relative

velocity.

The vital of uniform removal of workpiece surface, and meant to regulate the stress and

mechanical properties in the process of polishing hard and brittle materials through various

techniques. Previous studies suggested that stress could be regulated and composites would

be used in the polishing process However, the Young’s modulus of conventional single

polishing tool remained the same, so the stress distribution in contact zone was theoretically

the same.

This Final Year Project (FYP) is dedicated to have a novel research on through designing

and fabrication of auxetic lattice composites elastic polishing pad to remove the abrupt

phenomenon of edge stress and working on stabilize the central stress and boundary stress as

well. The further studies on characterization of auxetic lattice will also be investigated via

experimental verification. Over the course of two academic semesters, the design of the

experiment will also be improved to accommodate more compressive experiment with

several batches and different machine parameter input to generate more data for analysis.

The auxetic lattice structure will be designed by author through the careful study on other

reference lattice structure. Finite Element Analysis of deformation modes of lattice cells will
-1-|Page
decide by intermediate reports and analyses of the experimental results were carried out to

illustrate the compressive data through different parameter in terms of compression speed

and compression distance as well.

Lastly, with this novel method that was established, limitations and recommendation for

further work will be carefully analyzed.

-2-|Page
 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 Brief Introduction to Additive Manufacturing

Additive Manufacturing or 3D printing is the official industry standard term (ASTM F2792)

for all applications of the technology. It is defined as the process of joining materials to make

objects from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer, as opposed to

subtractive manufacturing methodologies. Synonyms are additive fabrication, additive

processes, additive techniques, additive layer manufacturing, layer manufacturing, and

freeform fabrication.

AM technologies are the use of 3D modeling software (Computer Aided Design or CAD),

machine equipment and layering material. Once a CAD sketch is produced, the Additive

Manufacturing equipment reads in data from the CAD file and lays downs or adds successive

layers of liquid, powder, sheet material or other, in a layer-upon-layer fashion to fabricate a

3D object. However, the latter is more accurate in that it describes a professional production

technique which is clearly distinguished from conventional methods of material removal.

Instead of milling a workpiece from solid- block, for example, AM builds up components

layer by layer using materials which are available in fine powder form. A number of material

option are available including composite materials, metals, thermoplastics, rigid prototyping

plastics and nylon. Each selected material was researched are perfectly fit within tolerances

to meet customer’s demands and requirements.

-3-|Page
Additive Manufacturing was rose above the other process in 1980s and rapidly developed at

the fast pace from the past until today. AM technology involves in many sectors such as

rapid prototyping, customized production and product designs. Numerous of leading

industrial companies also adopted AM technology as their part of company development too.

As the commercialized of AM technology, the price has drop drastically which inversely

proportional to the growth of the sales of AM machines [1] [2] [3].

Fig 1: Functional principle of CMP Process [4]

-4-|Page
2.2 Material Removal in Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP)

The chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) has emerged in the last two decades and grown

rapidly as a basic technology and is widely used in semiconductor device fabrication because

of its excellent planarization capacity. The CMP process is composed of a rotating table, a

polishing head, a pad and slurry. The CMP process is affected by several factors, such as the

type of abrasive, downward pressure on the specimen, relative velocity between the

polishing pad and specimen, the material quality of the polishing pad, and the slurry

chemistry.

The CMP process occurs when the wafer surface is moved across the pad, mechanical

motion down force are applied to the wafer with elastic polishing pad in the presence of

slurry by the polishing machine. The pad surface provides the rough points which make

contact with the wafer. The slurry (commonly a colloid) provides the abrasive particles and

the appropriate chemistry for the CMP process to proceed. This smoothens or removes on the

surface of irregular topography making the wafer flat. Typical depth-of-field requirements

are down to Angstrom for the latest 22nm technology [5].

CMP tools are consists of a rotating and extremely flat plate which is covered by a pad to

protect it from damaged it flatness. The wafer that mounted on the opposite of flat plate is

polished by with the retaining ring keep the wafer in the correct horizontal position. With the

present of slurry, it washes away the unwanted particles from stacking up on the wafer

surface. A downward pressure is applied to the carrier, pushing it against the pad with the

-5-|Page
down force on the contact point/area. Typically pads roughness has 50 μm; contact is made

by asperities (which typically are the high points on the wafer) and, as a result, the contact

area is only a fraction of the wafer area. If the wafer has a slightly bowed structure, the

pressure will be greater on the edges than it would on the center, which causes non-uniform

polishing. Pressure can be applied to the wafer's backside in order to compensate for the

wafer bow, which will contribute the centre-edge differences. The pads used in the CMP tool

should be rigid in order to uniformly polish the wafer surface. However, these rigid pads

must be kept in alignment with the wafer at all times.

The material removal rate depends on the pad micro texture which defined as localized

roughness of the pad surface. Pad conditioning has a strong effect on the removal rate and

direct related to the removal rate stability. The role of the conditioning process is to create

asperities on the pad surface which contact the wafer. It is known that the pad surface

features deform during the polishing and as a result the polishing ability of the drastically

weaken without the presence of conditioning process. The material removal rate (MRR)

rapidly declines with the increase of the polishing time without regeneration of the pad

surface during polishing,

The surface roughness parameters can be separated into three basic types: amplitude

parameters, spacing parameters and hybrid parameters. It is impossible to completely

characterize the pad surface with a single parameter [5]. Hybrid parameters are Rpk, Rk and

Rvk were often chosen were specially design for control of potential wear. The Rpk means

―reduced peak height‖ and is an estimate of the peaks above the main plateau and is related

to the wear characteristics of the pad. These peaks will be the area of most rapid wear when
-6-|Page
the polishing is performed. The Rk means ―Core roughness depth‖ and is referring to the

depth of the working part of the surface, which carries the load and closely contacts the

wafer surface. The Rvk means the reduced valley depth of the valleys and is related to the

ability of the surface to retain polishing slurry. Rpk should be considered to understand

correlation with the removal rate, because the Rpk is the area of most rapid wear when the

polishing is first run. Therefore, this research will focus on the Rpk among the hybrid

parameters of the pad surface roughness.

Fig 2: Wafer manufacturing without CMP (a) and with CMP (b) [6]
The roughness of the pad surface is influenced by the pad conditioning process. The Rpk

increases according to the pad break-in time and the conditioning pressures. Therefore, the

pad conditioning is necessary to obtain the required steady state condition of the pad surface.

Also, the removal rate and the Rpk drop off significantly according to the polishing time

without the pad conditioning. Without the pad conditioning, the pad surface becomes

smoother according to the polishing time so that the Rpk decreases according to the

polishing time which cause a decrease of the removal rate. In addition, the removal rate and

the friction force are proportional to the Rpk of the pad surface

-7-|Page
In CMP process, the conventional polishing pad results in uneven material removal rate

along the radial direction of the polishing pad due to the linear increase of the polishing

velocity along the redial direction of the polishing pad due to linear increase of the polishing

velocity. Hence, there is a need to design auxetic lattice composite elastic polishing pad to

achieve uniform material removal rate.

-8-|Page
 CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

3.1 Materials and method

3.1.1 Model Analysis

Young’s modulus, Eq. (1) where is the stress and is the strain

E is the Young’s modulus or the modulus of elasticity in tension is mechanical property that

measures the tensile stiffness of a solid material. It quantifies the relationship between

uniaxial stress (force per area) axial strains (proportional deformation) in the linear elastic

region of a material. The polishing pressure and velocity is expressed as Eq. (2) and Eq. (3)

respectively [7].

Eq. (2)

And Eq. (3)

Rotational angular velocity, of the elastic polishing pad and r represents the distance of the

contact point from the rotation center.

Fig 3: Novel processing method of CMP process [8]

When and are constants, MRR at a point (x,y) of contact area would keep constant if E is

inversely proportional to r [6].

-9-|Page
Elastic polishing pad are designed composite material sandwiched with rubber with mixing

different kinds of mass ratio. Young’s modulus changed in the radial direction where forced

is applied to the rotating circular elastic polishing pad.

3.1.2 CAD Software

Before start with experimental analysis and verification, Autodesk Inventor Professional and

Autodesk Netfabb were selected among other choices such as Simpleware ScanIP and

Materialise 3-Matic.

The reasons of chose both software due to 3 main reasons- software integrations on the same

platform which provide seamless transfer of data, personal positive experiences on 3D

modeling software with Autodesk software and lastly was the 1 year subscription free for

registered student.

3.1.3 Design of lattice structure specimen and fabrication parameters of 3D printed

lattice structure

Autodesk Netfabb allows to venture for creation of body-centered cubic (BCC) of lattice

structure. Four lattice structure designs were selected as below Hexagon, Icosahedron,

Snowflake and X in BCC lattice structure state.

- 10 - | P a g e
 a)

b)

c)

- 11 - | P a g e
 d)

Fig 4: CAD models and actual printed lattice specimens:

(a) Hexagon (b) Icosahedron (c) Snowflake (d) X

Data for the designed lattice structure was stored in step file and transfer to Netfabb in

stereolithograpghy (.STL). The lattice structure sizes were designed in 40 and

50 respectively. The selected printing material is clear resin to use on FormLabs Form 2

3D printer. Density acquired from Safety Data Sheet of clear resin is 1.09 (SI Unit:

1090 ) [9].

Lattice
Average
Design Average
Mass (kg) Density (kg/m3) Density
X- Mass (kg)
(kg/m3)
Lattice
#1 0.0107 0.0107 0.0107 85.730 85.735 85.732
85.10
#2 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 0.011 85.033 85.034 85.034
#3 0.0106 0.0106 0.0106 84.529 84.530 84.532
Hexa
-gon
#1 0.0159 0.0159 0.0159 127.288 127.286 127.287
#2 0.0157 0.0157 0.0157 0.016 125.964 125.985 125.982 125.95
#3 0.0156 0.0156 0.0156 124.580 124.594 124.594

- 12 - | P a g e
 Icosahe
-dron
#1 0.0312 0.0312 0.0312 249.914 249.916 249.912
#2 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.031 245.578 245.578 245.576 247.72
#3 0.0308 0.0308 0.0307 246.696 246.694 245.576
Snow
-flake
#1 0.0197 0.0197 0.0197 157.824 157.822 157.822
#2 0.0198 0.0198 0.0198 0.020 158.418 158.419 158.417 156.63
#3 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 153.643 153.642 153.642
Table 1: Lattice Density of Second Batch Lattice Specimens

To prepare arrangement on the 3D printer in order to maximize the space efficiency and

print at one go, virtual arrangement able to showcase on Autodesk Netfabb with selected 3D

printer Formlab Form 2 and preset parameter given. Thus, 3D files in either mesh triangle or

CAD parametric was generated thru Autodesk Netfabb and sent for laboratory for printing.

Fig 5: Visual arrangement of lattice structure on Autodesk Netfabb

- 13 - | P a g e
 Fig 6: FormLab Form 2 Desktop 3D SLA 3D Printer and its available printing materials
All of the lattice structures were manufactured through Stereolithography (SLA) process in

commercial desktop 3D printer FormLab Form 2 in NUS Center for Additive Manufacturing

(AM.NUS).

Material clear V4 material and the printed specimens are post processed with IPA washing.

Mechanical properties can vary with part geometry, print orientation, print settings and

temperature. Data was obtained from the clear datasheet. [Refer to Appendices Table 1]

Temperature guide from FormLabs SLA printers automatically heats resin to a set

temperature before starting a print. Once the ideal temperature for the inserted consumable is

met, the print begins. The printer may periodically pause to sense the resin temperature and

adjust it accordingly. Pre-heating may take up to 15 minutes. Print start temperature starts at

30 and maintain at room temperature or up to 35 during fabrication.

- 14 - | P a g e
There are 2 important finishing post processes such as perform Form Cure to help 3D printed

parts achieve highest possible strength and stability. Optimal post-curing settings depend on

equipment and the geometry of the part. The interactive tool below recommends Form Cure

settings for each Formlabs resin to achieve ideal mechanical performance. Formlabs updates

post-curing settings periodically with new and improved materials.

Second post process is the Form Wash removes uncured resin from the surface of printed

parts by simultaneously soaking and moving them in a solvent. The Form Wash can be used

with isopropyl alcohol (IPA) or tripropylene glycol monomethyl ether (TPM). When using

TPM, wash your printed parts as you would with IPA. Use longer wash times if necessary—

some resins will not absorb TPM or swell as much with exposure to the solvent. When

washed in TPM, standard resins remain waxy when printed with a layer thickness of 50

microns or 100 microns. Post-curing removes the waxiness. Without post-curing, the

waxiness goes away after about a week [10] 11] [12].

- 15 - | P a g e
3.2 Compression tests on lattice specimens

3.2.1 Experimental arrangement for compression tests

These experiments look at the parameterizing of lattice structure design in terms of overall

specimen unit cell size while also refer to different lattice structure designs. Specimens were

tested on a Shimadzu AGX-V Series Universal Testing Machines with a 50kN load cell.

Specimen sample were placed between two metal platens – the lower one fixed and the upper

one movable to building direction at desire compression speed to compress the specimens up

to densification. Grease was suggested to apply on the surface of the loading platens to

reduce frictions. Specimen sample were placed between metal plates and compressed along

the longitudinal building direction. The compressive force (N) and displacement of the

moving platen were recorded. Two batches of printed lattice specimen design – first batch 1

each of 40 lattice design specimens and second batch 3 each (total 12pcs) 50 of

lattice design specimens were tested to verify consistency of compressive test results. Videos

were recorded of the deformation process with normal phone camera for further analysis.

Fig 7: Shimadzu AGX-V Series Universal Testing Machines

- 16 - | P a g e
 Fig 8: Blue marking on top corner of lattice specimens

Fig 9: Blue marking on bottom of lattice specimens

Blue marking on the top corner of the lattice specimens to distinguish number label on

printed lattice structure. Next, the bottom of latice specimens are marked with blue marking

to indicate on the building direction of lattice specimen base. The reason of agreed upon on

the printing direction with compression direction is to improve reproductibility of the overall

compression tests for the subsequent batches and elimante one parameter that may affect on

the compression tests.

- 17 - | P a g e
3.2.2 Mechanical properties of tested lattices

Compression tests are underwent and data are collected for analyzing to have comparison

between the mechanical properties and energy absorption characteristic of each lattice

structure from batch 1 (40 ) and batch 2 (50 ). Based on the force-stroke data

recorded, engineering stress-strain curves are constructed as below. The engineering stress

and strain are based on the initial cross-sectional area and height of the cubic sample

respectively. A total of 16 specimens were fabricated and tested to verify the repeatability of

the experimental results in term of change of compression speed and compression length as

shown.

Load Cell

Movable Top Plate

Printed Sample

Rigid Plate

Printing
direction

Fig 10: Experimental arrangement of compression test on lattice specimen.

- 18 - | P a g e
Red arrow pointing downward indicates direction of compression against the building the

direction. Blue arrow pointing upward indicates building direction against the compression

direction.

Model of stress strain curves can be sections it into three distinct regions- linear elastic zone,

strain hardening and final densification (necking).

Fig 11: Example of Stress-Strain Curve [13]

The first stage is the linear elastic zone where by the stress increases directly proportional to

strain that obey to Hooke’s law and the slope is formed with stress over strain to form

Young’s modulus. The graph reaches the elastic limit and hit yield point to enter plastic zone.

The material undergoes only elastic deformation. The highest point of the graph will be

ultimate tensile strength and the end of the stage is the initiation point of plastic deformation.

The stress component of this point is defined yield strength.

The second stage is the strain hardening region. The region starts as the stress goes beyond

- 19 - | P a g e
the yield point. The materials will reach a maximum at the ultimate strength point which is

the maximal stress and is called the ultimate tensile strength (UTS). The stress of the flat

region is defined as the lower yield point (LYP). Plastic deformation forms bands at the

upper yield strength and these bands carrying with deformation spread along the sample at

the lower yield strength. This stage is the most significant in term of quantifying the energy

absorption capacity.

The third stage is the necking region. A neck forms where the local cross-sectional area

becomes significantly smaller than the average beyond the tensile strength. The necking

deformation will reinforce itself as the stress concentrates more at small section. The positive

feedback leads to quick development of necking and leads to fracture. With the pulling force

is decreasing, the work strengthening is still progressing, the true stress keeps growing but

the engineering stress decreases because the shrinking section area is not considered. This

region ends up with the fracture. After fracture, percent elongation and reduction in section

area can be calculated.

3.2.3 Engineering stress-strain curves from compression tests on 4 different lattice

specimen designs

Fig 12: First batch of 40 lattice specimens of Hexagon, Icosahedron, Snowflake and X

- 20 - | P a g e
First batch of lattice specimens are printed for experimental verification. Compression test

parameters are defined with compression speed at 5mm/min with average compression

distance at 35mm using compression test machine at maximum force of 50kN.

The lattice structures are placed on between metal plates to be compressed until densification.

The lattice structures internal plays vital part of providing strength to withstand 50kN force

on compression machine.

Fig 13: Unwanted printing support found on the lattice structure specimen

Fig 14: Lattice specimen before compression test

- 21 - | P a g e
Fig 15: Lattice specimen after compression test until densification

Fig 16: First Batch Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke Graph

- 22 - | P a g e
 Fig 17: First Batch Lattice Structure of Stress-Strain Graph

The descending orders of highest Young modulus, ultimate tensile strength and able to

withstand highest compression force is Icosahedron, Hexagon, and Snowflake and X lattice

specimens. Icosahedron lattice structure specimen has highest Young’s Modulus at

and ultimate tensile strength around 12MPa due to its rigid and close

arrangement of BCC lattice structure to form strong support to withstand loaded pressure.The

reason of X stress-strain graph having minor up and down on the graph due to human error.

- 23 - | P a g e
 Fig 18: Second batch of 50 Hexagon lattice specimens
The polishing force exerted on contact point of elastic polishing pad during polishing with

downward pressure will not cause permanent transform on the physical structure. Thus, the

compression test on the second batch of lattice specimens will have optimal downward

pressure that will not cracks the lattice structure to densification as well.

Second batch of 3 lattice specimens are printed and placed on between metal places for

experimental verification. Compression test parameters are defined with compression speed

at different compression speed and compression distance on compression test machine at

maximum force of 50kN.

 Compression speed, 0.25mm/min compressed to 3.5mm

 Compression speed, 0.25mm/min compressed to 4.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.50mm/min compressed to 4.5mm

The lattice structures internal plays vital part of providing strength to withstand 50kN force

on compression machine. At the start of the experiment, the force seems unstable due to 2

reasons: (1) force exerted only on the peak of lattice points before fully compressed and (2)

- 24 - | P a g e
there are some unwanted support stuck in between lattice specimens that unable to remove

during post process.

Fig 19: Second Batch Hexagon Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph
- 25 - | P a g e
Based on the 3-graphs shown, slow start on the beginning of the experiments reflected a flat

region whereby the compression values remain relatively low due to top movable metal plates

touched on the peak of lattice specimens. The top movable metal plates fully conform on the

top surface of lattice structure and, the force able to contact more point on the top surface of

lattice structures. This is the region where graph reflected actual compressed region. The

graph eventually response to normal stress-strain graph behavior where compression

experiments to proceed further.

Lattice Specimens: Hexagon

Young's Modulus (MPa)/ 0.25mm 0.25mm 0.50mm
Parameter Compressed at 3.5mm Compressed at 4.0mm Compressed at 4.5mm
Beginning Flat Region 0.682 0.583 0.520
Actual Compressed
2.857 2.389 1.648
Region
Final Value
(Actual Compressed
2.175 1.806 1.128
Region -Beginning Flat
Region)
Average Young's Modulus 1.703
Table 2: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Hexagon lattice specimens in 3 different parameters

The average lattice structure specimens have Young’s Modulus around from

3 Hexagon lattice specimens with 3 different parameters and ultimate tensile strength unable

to determine to experiment was halt before reach densification.

Fig 20: Second batch of 50 Icosahedron lattice specimens

- 26 - | P a g e
Second batch of 3 lattice specimens are printed placed on between metal plates for

experimental verification. Compression test parameters are defined with compression speed

at different compression speed and compression distance on compression test machine at

maximum force of 50kN.

 Compression speed, 0.05mm/min compressed to 2.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.40mm/min compressed to 4.5mm

 Compression speed, 1.20mm/min compressed to 5.0mm

The lattice structures internal plays vital part of providing strength to withstand 50kN force

on compression machine. At the start of the experiment, the force seems unstable due to 2

reasons: (1) force exerted only on the peak of lattice points before fully compressed and (2)

there are some unwanted support stuck in between lattice specimens that unable to remove

during post process.

Fig 21: Second Batch Icosahedron Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke Graph

- 27 - | P a g e
 Fig 22: Second Batch Icosahedron Lattice Structure of Stress-Strain Graph

Based on the 3-graphs shown, there were no sign of slow start on the beginning of the

experiments reflected a flat region whereby the compression values remain relatively low due

to top movable metal plates touched on the peak of lattice specimens. The compression

experiments took no longer time to proceed with actual compressed region further on the

experiments without having the same issue on Hexagon lattice specimens. The graph

response to normal stress-strain graph behavior

- 28 - | P a g e
 Lattice Specimens: Icosahedron
Young's Modulus (MPa)/ 0.05mm 0.40mm 1.20mm
Parameter Compressed at 2.0mm Compressed at 5.0mm Compressed at 5.0mm
Beginning Flat Region - - -
Actual Compressed Region 7.273 4.889 7.121
Final Value
(Actual Compressed Region 7.273 4.889 7.121
-Beginning Flat Region)
Average Young's Modulus
6.428
Value
Table 3: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Icosahedron lattice specimens in 3 different

parameters

The average lattice structure specimens have Young’s Modulus around

from 3 Icosahedron lattice specimens with 3 different parameters and ultimate tensile

strength unable to determine to experiment was halt before reach densification. The stress-

strain graph with compression speed at 0.05mm/min and compression distance at 2mm

unable to provide accurate data due to experiment halted before yield point reached.

- 29 - | P a g e
 Fig 23: Second batch of 50 Snowflake lattice specimens
Second batch of 3 lattice specimens are printed placed on between metal plates for

experimental verification. Compression test parameters are defined with compression speed

at different compression speed and compression distance on compression test machine at

maximum force of 50kN.

 Compression speed, 0.30mm/min compressed to 5.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.30mm/min compressed to 5.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.30mm/min compressed to 5.0mm

The lattice structures internal plays vital part of providing strength to withstand 50kN force

on compression machine. At the start of the experiment, the force seems unstable due to 2

reasons: (1) force exerted only on the peak of lattice points before fully compressed and (2)

there are some unwanted support stuck in between lattice specimens that unable to remove

during post process.

- 30 - | P a g e
Fig 24: Second Batch Snowflake Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph
- 31 - | P a g e
Based on the 3-graphs shown, there were 2 out of 3 graphs shown sign of slow start on the

beginning of the experiments reflected a flat region whereby the compression values remain

relatively low due to top movable metal plates touched on the peak of lattice specimens. The

compression experiments took no longer time to proceed with actual compressed region

further on the experiments. There was only a set of data able to carry out compression

experiments smoothly and the graph response to normal stress-strain graph behavior

Lattice Specimens: Snowflake

Young's Modulus (MPa)/ 0.30mm 0.30mm 0.30mm
Parameter Compressed at 5.0mm Compressed at 5.0mm Compressed at 5.0mm
Beginning Flat Region 1.167 0.500 0.091
Actual Compressed Region 3.053 1.969 2.381
Final Value
(Actual Compressed Region 1.886 1.469 2.290
-Beginning Flat Region)
Average Young's Modulus
1.882
Value
Table 4: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 Snowflake lattice specimens in 3 different

parameters

The average lattice structure specimens have Young’s Modulus around

from 3 Snowflake lattice specimens with 3 different parameters and ultimate tensile strength

unable to determine to experiment was halt before reach densification.

- 32 - | P a g e
 Fig 25: Second batch of 50 X lattice specimens
Second batch of 3 lattice specimens are printed placed on between metal plates for

experimental verification. Compression test parameters are defined with compression speed

at different compression speed and compression distance on compression test machine at

maximum force of 50kN.

 Compression speed, 0.20mm/min compressed to 3.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.20mm/min compressed to 3.0mm

 Compression speed, 0.20mm/min compressed to 3.0mm

The lattice structures internal plays vital part of providing strength to withstand 50kN force

on compression machine.

- 33 - | P a g e
Fig 26: Second Batch Snowflake Lattice Structure of Force-Stroke and Stress-Strain Graph
- 34 - | P a g e
Based on the 3-graphs shown, slow start on the beginning of the experiments reflected a flat

region whereby the compression values remain relatively low due to top movable metal plates

touched on the peak of lattice specimens. The top movable metal plates fully conform on the

top surface of lattice structure and, the force able to contact more point on the top surface of

lattice structures. This is the region where graph reflected actual compressed region. The

graph eventually response to normal stress-strain graph behavior where compression

experiments to proceed further.

Lattice Specimens: X
Young's Modulus (MPa)/ 0.20mm 0.20mm 0.20mm
Parameter Compressed at 3.0mm Compressed at 3.0mm Compressed at 3.0mm
Beginning Flat Region 0.769 1.231 1.000
Actual Compressed Region 1.267 1.969 1.297
Final Value
(Actual Compressed Region - 0.497 0.738 0.297
Beginning Flat Region)
Average Young's Modulus
0.511
Value
Table 5: Average Young’s Modulus of 3 X lattice specimens in 3 different parameters

The average lattice structure specimens have Young’s Modulus around

from 3 X lattice specimens with 3 different parameters and ultimate tensile strength unable to

determine to experiment was halt before reach densification.

- 35 - | P a g e
3.2.4 Summary of experimental results

Based on the numerical data analysis and experimental verification, first batch lattice

structure specimens were printed under same printing condition with printing volume at

40 each on the same SLA 3D printer platform to work on consistency of variables.

Quasi-static compression tests were run on 1 each lattice specimens design with same

compression speed at 5mm/min with compression distance around 35mm.

Although metal plates will touched of peak of lattice structure specimens and unwanted

lattice supports existed in lattice specimens, it did not reflect on the beginning of the

experiment compared to second batch lattice specimens due to high force generated with

high compression speed compressed till densification. Thus, ultimate tensile strengths were

able to determine from the stress-strain graph and higher Young’s Modulus shown compared

to second batch lattice specimens.

From the first batch, the stress-strain graph reflected that Icosahedron has the highest

Young’s Modulus follows by Snowflake, Hexagon and X; whereas from the second batch,

the stress-strain graph reflected that Icosahedron has the highest Young’s Modulus follows

by Snowflake, Hexagon and X.

- 36 - | P a g e
Lattice Specimens Average Young’s Modulus (MPa) Ignore Flat Region

Hexagon 1.703 Yes

Icosahedron 6.428 No

Snowflake 1.882 Yes

X 0.511 Yes

Table 6: Average Young’s Modulus of 4 different designs of lattice specimens

- 37 - | P a g e
3.3 Analyses of deformation modes

3.3.1 Deformation of unit cell lattices

The unit cell geometry leads to alteration of the cell deformation mode and thus determine

the global deformation pattern of lattice. The evolutions of deformation of cells in different

designs at different global nominal strains are examined in details as shown in Table 1.

Lattice Specimen 1 Specimen 2

Hexagon

Strain 0 0.08 0 0.08

values, ,
Icosahe-
dron

Strain 0 0.07 0 0.07

values, ,
Snowflake

Strain 0 0.09 0 0.09

values, ,

- 38 - | P a g e
 X

Strain 0 0.06 0 0.06

values,
Table 7: Deformation of lattice structure specimens at different strain during quasi-static
compression test

The strain values are less than 0.1mm with compression speed less than 1.2mm/min and

compression length around 5mm. The reasons of naming only 2 specimens are some

specimens has not recorded properly due to long duration of experiment such as Hexagon #1

at compression speed at 0.05mm/min and stress-strain curves behaved different from average

such as one of lattice specimens from Icosahedron, Snowflake and X. With strain value less

than 0.1mm and experiment halts before densification, the portion of cell did not fully

collapses and the bottom half did not begin to deform as well.

Although a dominant strut-axis loading structure results in a high stiffness and initial yield

stress, the lattice specimens’ layer should collapse in layer-by-layer cell mode leads to a

fluctuating post-yield response. Hence, the octet is preferable for non-deforming load-

bearing applications. The inner lattice structures are rigid and able to withstand incoming

load effectively and whole structure specimens are stronger.

- 39 - | P a g e
The shorter strut linked connection and visible lattice support on Hexagon, Icosahedron and

Snowflake lattice structure design provides larger strain value and able to withstand lattice

deformation at higher rate. Although the strain value of X lattice structure specimens are

closer to other 3 design, the visible supports were affecting the overall consistency and

genuine of experimental results for verification.

3.3.2 Parameters affecting deformation modes

Based on the earlier analysis and summary from quasi-static compression test, it can be

deduced that stress-strain reflects and lattice deformation modes of the lattices are the

fabrication technique. The chosen additive manufacturing method was SLA determines the

mechanical properties of the lattice structures and consistency is the key of this experiment.

Understand that printing a perfect a support free FCC lattice specimen are nearly impossible,

lattice support are required to generate to withstand the internal constitute structure of lattice.

The fabrication process may results the irregular of strut thickness, voids and micro damage

during removal.

Thus, FE analyses are required to deliver on simulation results on lattice deformation from

the experimental stress-strain curve. By simulated the lattice deformation on compression

lattice structure from the top to bottom, it able to show more data via FE models.[14] Dr Sun

indicated that the cell geometries of all three lattices generate localized

- 40 - | P a g e
deformation associated with the buckling of axially-loaded struts, because none of them

comprises struts that are purely bending-dominated. This form of topology-governed

deformation localization is evident, as they are widespread and generally occur across the

width of the lattice, e.g. in a row of cells.

- 41 - | P a g e
 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Effect of Compression Speed and Compression Distance

Overall, it is evident that the use of high compression speed not able to fully shown data in

details with comparison of first and second batch of lattice structure. With cubic lattice

specimen placed on between two metal plates of compression test fitted with a 50kN load

cell, the experiments should carried out at a constant speed of 0.0064m/s, corresponding to a

global nominal strain rate of ~0.001 to compress the specimens down with movable top

plate till densification to complete the each compression test. The compressive cyclic true

stress-strain curve shown varies in value even with same parametric setup and same

compression distance [15].

Overall, it is evident that compression distance are required to remain longer such as 35mm

in first batch of lattice specimens to have full experiment data for analysis. With the number

of lattice specimens included for second batch lattice specimen, it will take much longer time

to complete the data collection and analysis. Under such circumstance, the author has

compromised on keep compression distance at much shorter range of 2mm~5mm where the

experiment will not carry out fully compressed for densification.

4.2 Effect of Lattice Structure Size and Design

Overall, it is evident that lattice structure size of 40 and 50 did not effect on

compressive test results. With the increases of contact area, the force exerted will increase

proportionally as well.

- 42 - | P a g e
 Fig 27: Reference from [14] schematic lattice structures design
Lattice structure design was inspired with fellow researches and thesis that author analyzed.

With handpicked of 4 available mesh lattice from available designs from Autodesk Netfabb

with reference to [14] lattice structure on Fig 28. The reason of having different strut distance

and strut arrangement on lattice structure to have range of compressive results to pick a

suitable auxetic lattice composite for elastic polishing pad.

4.3 Tensile testing machine versus compression test machine

Elastic polishing pad operates with constant force downward on movable top plates between

fixed bottom plates to perform polishing on wafer. It involved on the compressive force

instead of pulling force. Thus, the introduction of uniaxial compressive testing machine are

introduced to obtain the ultimate strength, ultimate strain and Young’s modulus of the lattices

which was prepared into a cubic shape BCC lattice specimens and tested at room temperature

and 50kN compressive force available.

- 43 - | P a g e
4.4 Effect of Fabrication and Post Processing Technique

Mesh lattice structures were designed using Autodesk Netfabb and verified with Autodesk

Inventor. The strut thickness was set at 2-3 mm and the outcome of the 3D printed lattice

specimens has range of strut thickness. Knowing the fact the SLA 3D printer has laser spot

size as 140 . Thus, this may contribute to the explanation on working on several same

lattice specimens to have average compressive results.

Another factor was post processing technique such as washing on the finishing printed part

by washing-soaking and moving simultaneously parts in solvent to remove the thin layer of

liquid resin from the surface of printed parts. Thigh spot in between lattice structure may

have lattice supports were unable to move. Thus, this may contributes of the accuracy of

compressive results.

4.5 Limitation

1. Extensive operating on compressive test if we follow nominal strain rate of 0.001mm

High compression speed may not provide accurate data.

Fig 28: Unwanted printing support found on the lattice structure specimen
2. Lattice support unable to remove from the printed lattice structure specimens

3. Lattice specimens printed as BCC cell structure may not be accurate as face-centered

- 44 - | P a g e
 cubic (FCC) structure due to several of peak contact point on the outer wall of BCC cell

structure. More contact area for compressive test data are gathered for FCC structure.

Fig 29: Sample of FCC cell structure[13]

4. Uniaxial compressive testing machine may have combined effect of the lattice

deformation and the machine error. Calibration is required to determine machine error

value to deduct from the compressive data.

Fig 30: Strain error of 0.002 found on calibration test

5. Difficulty on operating on finite element analysis software to familiarize on software to

provide more comprehensive data on lattice deformation.

- 45 - | P a g e
 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

Overall of the experiment concluded that low Young’s modulus, ultimate tensile strength and

high strain value that affected elastic deformation are suitable to select as suitable lattice

structure design for elastic polishing pad.

Thus, with experiments verification and numerical data analysis shown that Snowflake

design is suitable to select as auxetic lattice reinforced composites work with elastic layer as

elastic polishing pad.

The auxetic lattice reinforced composites exhibit enhanced stiffness and energy absorption

under uniaxial compression. The degree of auxetic behavior can be used to tune the stiffness

and energy absorption of the composites. The author hopes that chosen lattice structure able

to enhanced mechanical performance, achieving a unique combination of stiffness and lattice

deformation, compared to existing composite material in elastic polishing pad. Aiming at the

mechanical properties of the auxetic lattice reinforce composites, it also able to help the edge

stress mutation of the contact was out of the effective material removal range.

In the future of continuous experiments, it should be carried out at a constant speed of

0.0064m/s, corresponding to a global nominal strain rate of ~0.001 and define

compression distance at 70% of lattice specimens to compress the specimens down with

movable top plate till densification to complete the each compression test.

- 46 - | P a g e
The following conclusions could be drawn based on this research:

1. The auxetic lattice structure exhibits enhanced stiffness and energy absorption under

compression load.

2. The effect of pad conditions has directly influenced on the pad surface roughness.

3. Compression speed and compression distance are recommended to have constant

throughout the compressive experiments to evaluation on consistency of results.

4. 3D printed end product may have printing defect such as lattice support unable to remove

that affect the genuine of compressive results.

5. FE analyses are required to further study and analysis on the deformation modes of unit

cell corresponding to each lattice structure designs.

In the next section, recommendations of further work would be made as an extension and

potential application to what was discussed in earlier sections of this report.

- 47 - | P a g e
 CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK

6.1 Gather more data through experiment on selected lattice structure specimens

Consistency is the key to deliver excellent results with minimum error. Thus, experiments

suggested continuing effort on printing several batches of selected suitable lattice structure to

work on a constant speed of 0.0064m/s, corresponding to a global nominal strain rate of

~0.001 and defined compression distance.

Overall of experiments, author noticed that the data analyses are fairly important to minimize

the affected parameter such as fabrication technique. By identified the issues, experiment

data reflects to its genuine from the parameter

6.2 Working on lattice cell modeling with Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software

To further understand the analysis of microstructure of lattice structure during cell

deformation observed in experiments, finite element models comprising breakdown of lattice

structure in unit cells are required to establish with FEA software such as ANSYS FEA

mechanical software. [14]

ANSYS FEA mechanical not only able to work closely with Autodesk platform such as

Fusion 360 seamless without thinking of data transfer issue and it also provide fatigue and

material analysis. Being able to understand the immediate stresses and deformations a part

undergoes is critical to structural analysis. Any part undergoing repeated loading may

accumulate damage that will eventually result in part failure even though the loading is not

close to the material’s strength limits. Fatigue analysis lets you visualize damage during

- 48 - | P a g e
cyclic loading and can help to predict when and where failure may occur and increase

product durability.

With explicit tool, it allows user to stimulate the quasi-static compression tests this enabled

nonlinearities in the material properties and large deformation crushing to be accommodated,

whereas use of an implicit solver might encounter convergence problems.

As with simulation experiments, BBC lattice structure were construct with the suggested

mesh sensitivity at 0.6~0.8mm, all the degrees of freedom were fixed on the building

direction that placed on the bottom plate. A prescribed parametric data such as compression

speed at a speed of 0.064mm/s, corresponding to a global strain rate of 0.001 are required

to input as well. A general contact algorithm, with the friction coefficient set at 0.35 was

employed as well. With the high sensitivity of mesh sensitivity, it will take longer time to

generate the data with higher accuracy and simulation time.

6.3 Fabrication of Auxetic Lattice Reinforced Composites for simulation

Fabrication of actual auxetic lattice reinforced composites with define lattice structure are

suggested with back up comprehensive data of stress-strain curve, cell deformation data, and

FEA.

It required to find a suitable epoxy to adhere on the on the bottom of rubber before proceed

to mount on work module for simulation. The aim is to counter check with the increasing the

gradient rings could reduce the abrupt change of boundary stress and the contact stress in the

single gradient ring was basically keep in minimum and constant basis.
- 49 - | P a g e
Comparison of actual elastic polishing pad and auxetic lattice reinforce composites elastic

polishing pad in term of boundary stress analysis and central stress analysis are required.

Both pads are required to dry run to examine on the both analyses and observed under high

power microscope.

Comparison specimens with the mass ratio of 20phr and 50phr respectively, were prepared

according to identical composites. It was not only to simplify the experiment, but also verify

whether the identical composites could replace the FGMs served as the elastic layer applied

on the elastic polishing pad for stress test [15].

Thermal expansion was reported in several thesis and researches .the heats are created

through friction that might influence of the consistency of mechanical properties and

efficiency application of polishing. Coefficient of thermal expansion will involves with the

temperature rises. Further experiment on polishing around room temperature with 30 +/-

10 is suggested.

6.4 Design of functional graded Auxetic lattice structure

The existing work only focuses on uniform lattice structure for fundamental mechanical

properties testing. Thus, the future work should consider changing the lattice density, strut

diameter, and lattice type to achieve the adjustable /tunable Young’s modulus of the lattice

specimens so that we are able to produce the ideal polishing pad with uniform material

removal rate.

- 50 - | P a g e
7. REFERENCES

[1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing - Introduction to Additive Manufacturing/3D

printing

[2]. https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2013/09/05/3d-printing-scales-up

[3]. http://www.theengineer.co.uk/in-depth/the-big-story/the-rise-of-additive-

manufacturing/1002560.article

[4]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical-mechanical_polishing - Introduction to

Chemical-mechanical polishing

[5]. K.H. Park, H.J. Kim, O.M. Chang, H.D. Jeong (2007), - Effects of pad properties on

material removal in chemical mechanical polishing

[6]. https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=12527 –Surface Metrology for In-situ Pad

Monitoring in Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP)

[7]. Mingsheng Jin, Xiaoxing Dong, Liming Wang, Dongjie Zhu, Jie Kang (2019), Design

and mechanical properties of particle-reinforced polymer-matrix functionally graded

materials applied on elastic polishing pad

[8]. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Color-online-Schematic-illustration-of-chemical-

mechanical-planarizer-and-the-contact_fig11_241472740

[9]. https://formlabs-media.formlabs.com/datasheets/Safety_Data_Sheet_EN_-_Clear.pdf

[10]. https://support.formlabs.com/s/article/Form-Cure-Time-and-Temperature-

Settings?language=en_US – Form Cure time and temperature setting for FormLab Form

2 machine

[11]. https://support.formlabs.com/s/article/Form-Wash-Time-Settings?language=en_US –

Form Wash time setting for FormLab Form 2 machine

- 51 - | P a g e
[12]. https://support.formlabs.com/s/article/Maintaining-Resin-

Temperature?language=en_US – Maintaining resin temperature for FormLab Form 2

machine

[13]. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/stress-strain-curve

[14]. Z.P. Sun ∗, Y.B. Guo, V.P.W. Shim (2021), Characterization and modeling of

additively-manufactured polymeric hybrid lattice structures for energy absorption

[15]. Tiantian Li, Yanyu Chen, Xiaoyi Hua, Yangbo Li, Lifeng Wang (2018), Exploiting

negative Poisson's ratio to design 3D-printed composites with enhanced mechanical

properties

- 52 - | P a g e
8. APPENDICES

Table 1

Table 1: Material Properties Data Clear V4 Formlab Standard Resin

Clear Post-Cured
Tensile Properties
Ultimate Tensile 38 MPa 65 MPa
Strength
Tensile Modulus 1.6 GPa 2.8 GPa
Elongation at Failure 12% 6.2 %
Flexural Properties
Flexural Modulus 1.25 GPa 2.2 GPa
Impact Properties
Notched IZOD 16 J/m 25 J/m
Temperature
Properties
Heat Deflection Temp. 42.7 58.4
@ 264 psi
Heat Deflection Temp. 49.7 73.1
66 psi

- 53 - | P a g e