Optimizing Energy Consumption, Surface Quality, and Production Time in Fused Deposition Modeling Based 3D Printing of Polylactic Acid Polymers
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a detailed analysis of impact of process parameters on performance of Fused Deposition Modeling-based 3D Printing of Polylactic Acid Polymers. The performance of FDM here is measured in terms of energy consumption, surface roughness and build time. As energy consumption is very important aspect in 3D printing main focus is given on energy consumption. Response Optimizer based on desirability function is used for multi-objective optimization of layer thickness, infill% and printing speed. This investigation suggests that the process parameters layer thickness, printing speed and Infill% have a significant effect on energy consumption as all have p values less than 0.05. Optimum process parameters are 0.14 mm layer thickness, 65% Infill% and 92.52 mm/s printing speed. At these optimum parameters energy consumption is 0.1093 w, build time is 27.65 min and surface roughness is 4.973 µm.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (27)
Show source-provided references
1. I. Gibson, D.W. Rosen, and B. Stucker, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Springer, New York, 2010.10.1007/978-1-4419-1120-9 ↗
2. Additive manufacturing available at URL: https://www.optomec.com/additive-manufacturing/, Accessed 15th June 2017
3. S. Mellor, L. Hao, and D. Zhang, Additive Manufacturing: A Framework for Implementation, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 2014, 149, p 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.07.00810.1016/j.ijpe.2013.07.008 ↗
4. M. KhorramNiaki and F. Nonino, Additive Manufacturing Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda, Int. J. Prod. Res., 2017, 55(5), p 1419–1439. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.122906410.1080/00207543.2016.1229064 ↗
5. S.A. Deomore and S.J. Raykar, Multi-Criteria Decision Making Paradigm for Selection of Best Printing Parameters of Fused Deposition Modeling, Mater. Today Proc., 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.63210.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.632 ↗
6. P. Patil, D. Singh, S.J. Raykar, and J. Bhamu, Multi-Objective Optimization of Process Parameters of Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) for Printing Polylactic Acid (PLA) Polymer Components, Mater. Today ProC., 2021 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.01.35310.1016/j.matpr.2021.01.353 ↗
7. D.M. D’Addona, S.J. Raykar, D. Singh, and D. Kramar, Multi Objective Optimization of Fused Deposition Modeling Process Parameters with Desirability Function, Procedia CIRP, 2021, 99, p 707–710.10.1016/j.procir.2021.03.117 ↗
8. S.J. Raykar and D.M. D’Addona, Selection of Best Printing Parameters of Fused Deposition modeling using VIKOR, Mater. Today Proc., 2019 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.10410.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.104 ↗
9. S.J. Raykar, M.M. Narke, S.B. Desai, and S.S. Warke, Manufacturing of 3D Printed Sports Helmet. in Techno-Societal 2018: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Societal Applications. Vol 2 . (Springer International Publishing 2018), (pp. 771-778)https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16962-6_7710.1007/978-3-030-16962-6_77 ↗
10. Y. Zhang and Y.K. Chou, Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis Simulations of The Fused Deposition Modelling Process, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 2006 https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM5710.1243/09544054JEM57 ↗
11. A. Tsouknidas, M. Pantazopoulos, I. Katsoulis, D. Fasnakis, S. Maropoulos, and N. Michailidis, Impact Absorption Capacity of 3D-printed Components Fabricated By Fused Deposition Modelling, Mater. Des., 2016, 102, p 41–44.10.1016/j.matdes.2016.03.154 ↗
12. M. Faes, E. Ferraris, and D. Moens, Influence of Inter-layer Cooling Time on The Quasi-static Properties of ABS Components Produced Via Fused Deposition Modelling, Procedia Cirp, 2016, 42, p 748–753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.31310.1016/j.procir.2016.02.313 ↗
13. M. Yosofi, O. Kerbrat, and P. Mognol, Energy and Material Flow Modelling of Additive Manufacturing Processes, Virtual Phys. Prototyp., 2018, 13(2), p 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2017.141890010.1080/17452759.2017.1418900 ↗
14. M.S. Azmi, R. Ismail, R. Hasan, and M.R. Alkahari, Vibration Analysis of Fused Deposition Modelling Printed Lattice Structure Bar for Application in Automated Device, Int. J. Eng. Technol., 2018, 7, p 21–24. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.17.1661410.14419/ijet.v7i3.17.16614 ↗
15. M. Kucewicz, P. Baranowski, J. Małachowski, A. Popławski, and P. Płatek, Modelling, and Characterization of 3D Printed Cellular Structures, Mater. Des., 2018, 142, p 177–189.10.1016/j.matdes.2018.01.028 ↗
16. L. Suárez and M. Domínguez, Sustainability and Environmental Impact of Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) Technologies, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2020, 106, p 1267–1279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04676-010.1007/s00170-019-04676-0 ↗
17. J. Jiang, J. Lou, and G. Hu, Effect of Support on Printed Properties in Fused Deposition Modelling Processes, Virtual Phys. Prototyp., 2019, 14(4), p 308–315.10.1080/17452759.2019.1568835 ↗
18. V. Lunetto, P.C. Priarone, M. Galati, and P. Minetola, On The Correlation Between Process Parameters and Specific Energy Consumption in Fused Deposition Modelling, J. Manuf. Process., 2020, 56, p 1039–1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.06.00210.1016/j.jmapro.2020.06.002 ↗
19. B. Liu, Y. Wang, Z. Lin, and T. Zhang, Creating Metal Parts By Fused Deposition Modeling and Sintering, Mater. Lett., 2020, 263, p 127252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.12725210.1016/j.matlet.2019.127252 ↗
20. C.L. Perez, Analysis of The Surface Roughness and Dimensional Accuracy Capability of Fused Deposition Modelling Processes, Int. J. Prod. Res., 2002, 40(12), p 2865–2881. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020754021014609910.1080/00207540210146099 ↗
21. S. Upcraft and R. Fletcher, The Rapid Prototyping Technologies, Assem. Autom., 2003, 23(4), p 318–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/0144515031069863410.1108/01445150310698634 ↗
22. B.V. Reddy, N.V. Reddy, and A. Ghosh, Fused Deposition Modelling Using Direct Extrusion, Virtual Phys. Prototyp., 2007 https://doi.org/10.1080/1745275070133648610.1080/17452750701336486 ↗
23. G.D. Kim and Y.T. Oh, A Benchmark Study on Rapid Prototyping Processes and Machines: Quantitative Comparisons of Mechanical Properties, Accuracy, Roughness, Speed, and Material Cost, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf., 2008, 222(2), p 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM72410.1243/09544054JEM724 ↗
24. N.S.A. Bakar, M.R. Alkahari, and H. Boejang, Analysis on Fused Deposition Modelling Performance, Zhejiang daxue xuebao yingwenban, 2010, 11(12), p 972.
25. A. Boschetto, V. Giordano, and F. Veniali, Modelling Micro Geometrical Profiles in Fused Deposition Process, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2012, 61, p 945–956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3744-110.1007/s00170-011-3744-1 ↗
26. A. Boschetto, V. Giordano, and F. Veniali, Surface Roughness Prediction in Fused Deposition Modelling By Neural Networks, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2013, 67, p 2727–2742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-4687-x10.1007/s00170-012-4687-x ↗
27. A. Boschetto, V. Giordano, and F. Veniali, 3D Roughness Profile Model in Fused Deposition Modelling, Rapid Prototyp. J., 2013, 19(4), p 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1108/1355254131132325410.1108/13552541311323254 ↗