Predictive modelling and analysis of roundness of cylindrical parts 3D printed with FDM technology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58368/MTT.22.9-10.2023.1-9Keywords:
3D Printing, Roundness, Fused Deposition, Modelling, Dimensional Accuracy, Geometric Tolerance, Additive Manufacturing, Layer ThicknessAbstract
The most promising technology in the production environment today is additive manufacturing (AM). The term “3D printing” also applies to this technology. Layers of material are added to create components in additive manufacturing. With the development of technology, additive manufacturing is now used to create components out of metal, polymers, and composites in practically every industrial industry. It provides enormous design flexibility and produces intricate forms and components of sophisticated patterns. This article presents an approach to predict roundness and a dimension using regression Taguchi, Regression, Mean Effect Plots, and Surface Plots. It is observed during analysis that with a low p-value of 0.214, the ANOVA findings show that infill density, which is essential for obtaining the optimal print quality, has the greatest influence on the roundness of 3D-printed items. Although layer thickness does affect roundness, the effect is not as strong as it could be. Thinner layers, such as 0.14 mm, perform better than larger ones, increasing roundness by up to 8.41%. In contrast, printing speed has a minimal impact on roundness, as indicated by its p-value of 0.532. The contour plots advise aiming for an infill density between 74% and 80%, a layer thickness between 0.14 mm and 0.16 mm, and a printing speed between 90 mm/s and 100 mm/s to attain the best roundness.
Metrics
References
Ameta, G., Lipman, R., Moylan, S., & Witherell, P. (2015). Investigating the role of geometric dimensioning and tolerancing in additive manufacturing. Journal of Mechanical Design, 137(11), 111401.
Boschetto, A., & Bottini, L. (2014). Accuracy prediction in fused deposition modeling. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 73, 913-928.
Boschetto, A., & Bottini, L. (2016). Design for manufacturing of surfaces to improve accuracy in fused deposition modeling. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 37, 103-114.
D’Addona, D. M., Raykar, S. J., Singh, D., & Kramar, D. (2021). Multi objective optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters with desirability function. Procedia CIRP, 99, 707-710.
Deomore, S. A., & Raykar, S. J. (2021). Multi-criteria decision making paradigm for selection of best printing parameters of fused deposition modeling. Materials Today: Proceedings, 44, 2562-2565.
Lieneke, T., Adam, G. A. O., Leuders, S., Knoop, F., Josupeit, S., Delfs, P., ... & Zimmer, D. (2015). Systematical determination of tolerances for additive manufacturing by measuring linear dimensions. In 2015 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium. University of Texas at Austin.
Mahesh, M., Wong, Y. S., Fuh, J. Y. H., & Loh, H. T. (2004). Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of RP systems and processes. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 10(2), 123-135.
Nagendra, J., & Prasad, M. G. (2020). FDM process parameter optimization by Taguchi technique for augmenting the mechanical properties of nylon–aramid composite used as filament material. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 101, 313-322.
Nagendra, J., Srinath, M. K., Sujeeth, S., Naresh, K. S., & Prasad, M. G. (2021). Optimization of process parameters and evaluation of surface roughness for 3D printed nylon-aramid composite. Materials Today: Proceedings, 44, 674-682.
Ollison, T., & Berisso, K. (2009). Three-dimensional printing build variables that impact cylindricity. Journal of Industrial Technology, 26(1).
Patil, P., Raykar, S. J., Bhamu, J., & Singh, D. (2022). Modeling and analysis of surface roughness in fused deposition modeling based on infill patterns.
Patil, P., Singh, D., Raykar, S. J., & Bhamu, J. (2021). Multi-objective optimization of process parameters of fused deposition modeling (FDM) for printing polylactic acid (PLA) polymer components. Materials Today: Proceedings, 45, 4880-4885.
Raykar, S. J., & D’Addona, D. M. (2020). Selection of best printing parameters of fused deposition modeling using VIKOR. Materials Today: Proceedings, 27, 344-347.
Raykar, S. J., Narke, M. M., Desai, S. B., & Warke, S. S. (2020). Manufacturing of 3D printed sports helmet. In Techno-Societal 2018: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Societal Applications-Volume 2 (pp. 771-778). Springer International Publishing.
Sood, A. K. (2011). Study on parametric optimization of fused deposition modelling (FDM) process (Doctoral dissertation).
Sood, A. K., Ohdar, R. K., & Mahapatra, S. S. (2009). Improving dimensional accuracy of fused deposition modelling processed part using grey Taguchi method. Materials & design, 30(10), 4243-4252.
Standard, A. (1984). AS1100, Technical drawing, part 201-1984, mechanical drawing. The Standards Association of Australia, Sydney.
Sutar, C. V., Mandavkar, A. A., Patil, S. B., Mohite, T. U., Patole, T. A., & Raykar, S. (2022). Analysis and prediction of working range of process parameters for surface roughness of 3D printed parts with fused deposition modelling. Journal of Manufacturing Engineering, 17(2), 044-050.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All the articles published in Manufacturing Technology Today (MTT) Journal are held by the Publisher. Central Manufacturing Technology Institute (CMTI) as a publisher requires its authors to transfer the copyright prior to publication. This will permit CMTI to reproduce, publish, distribute, and archive the article in print and electronic form and also to defend against any improper use of the article.
