journal article·2024-01-12Open access

Comparison of Quality of Porous Structure Specimens Produced by Different Additive Technologies and from Different Materials

Jozef Tkac, Teodor Toth, Ondrej Mizera, Vieroslav Molnar, Gabriel Fedorko, Miroslav Dovica

Applied Sciences· Volume 14· Issue 2

Abstract

Lattice and gyroid structures are often subjected to additive technologies to produce various types of products, and the current market has a number of 3D printers that can be used for their production. The quality of the products produced in this way can be assessed on the basis of technical parameters and the filament used. Such an approach, however, is insufficient. In terms of quality, other product parameters need to be assessed, such as the surface texture and the internal structure’s porosity. For such an assessment, we can use the industrial tomography method and the method of roughness measurement via an optical microscope. The paper presents research on the assessment of the surface texture and porosity in lattice and gyroid structures. For the research, two types of test specimens—a specimen with a lattice structure and a specimen with a gyroid structure—were prepared. The obtained results proved that the 3D printing technology directly impacted the surface texture and porosity. For experimental specimens produced by SLS technology, we found that it was very important to carefully remove the excess powder, as unremoved powder can significantly affect the porosity results. For specimens produced by FDM technology, the research confirmed that some “gaps” between the layers were not pores but defects created during specimen production. When analyzing the surface using the Alicon Infinite G5 optical microscope, we found that the measured roughness results were directly impacted by the specimen’s surface color, the structure’s geometry, and the ambient light, which was confirmed by a red lattice experimental specimen, the surface of which could not be scanned. Based on the above, it can be stated that the selection of 3D technology for additive production needs must be given adequate attention regarding the quality of the created structures and textures.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, Technical University of Košice with a Seat in Prešov, Bayerova 1, 080 01 Prešov, Slovakia

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Kosice, Letna 9, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, VSB-Technical University of Ostrava, 17. Listopadu 2172/15, 80700 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic

Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnology, Technical University of Kosice, Park Komenskeho 14, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia

Funding

KEGA · VEGA

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. New system of functional parameters for surface texture analysis10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.488 ↗
2. A review of methods of random surface topography modeling10.1016/j.triboint.2020.106530 ↗
3. Feature-based characterisation of surface topography and its application10.1016/j.cirp.2021.05.001 ↗
4. Lou, S., Zeng, W., Scott, P., and Jiang, J. (2022, January 11–14). 3D Surface Texture Characterisation Techniques for Additive Manufacturing Components. Proceedings of the 2022 ASPE and euspen Summer Topical Meeting on Advancing Precision in Additive Manufacturing, Knoxville, TN, USA. American Society for Precision Engineering, ASPE.
5. A review on quality control in additive manufacturing10.1108/RPJ-03-2017-0048 ↗
6. Holistic approach for industrializing AM technology: From part selection to test and verification10.1007/s40964-017-0018-y ↗
7. Angel, J.A.B. (2014). Quality Assurance of CT Scanning for Industrial Applications, Technical University of Denmark.
8. Bauza, M.B., Moylan, S.P., Panas, R.M., Burke, S.C., Martz, H.E., Taylor, J.S., Alexander, P., Knebel, R.H., Bhogaraju, R., and O’Connell, M.T. (2014, January 13–16). Study of accuracy of parts produced using additive manufacturing. Proceedings of the ASPE 2014 Spring Topical Meeting: Dimensional Accuracy and Surface Finish in Additive Manufacturing, Berkeley, CA, USA.
9. Slotwinski, J.A., and Moylan, S.P. (2014, January 13–16). Metals-based additive manufacturing: Metrology needs and standardization efforts. Proceedings of the ASPE 2014 Spring Topical Meeting: Dimensional Accuracy and Surface Finish in Additive Manufacturing, Berkeley, CA, USA.
10. Dimensional metrology of additively manufactured lattice structures by combined tactile probe and X-ray tomography
11. Industrial perspectives of 3D scanning: Features, roles and it’s analytical applications10.1016/j.sintl.2021.100114 ↗
12. X-ray computed tomography for additive manufacturing: A review10.1088/0957-0233/27/7/072001 ↗
13. X-Ray Microcomputed Tomography in Additive Manufacturing: A Review of the Current Technology and Applications10.1089/3dp.2018.0060 ↗
14. Computed tomography for dimensional metrology10.1016/j.cirp.2011.05.006 ↗
15. Industrial applications of computed tomography10.1016/j.cirp.2014.05.011 ↗
16. Münstedt, H., and Schwarzl, F.R. (2014). Deformation and Flow of Polymeric Materials, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-55409-4 ↗
17. Density of laser molten polymer parts as function of powder coating process during additive manufacturing10.1016/j.proeng.2015.01.331 ↗
18. Kudelski, R., Cieslik, J., Kulpa, M., Dudek, P., Zagorski, K., and Rumin, R. (2017, January 20–23). Comparison of cost, material and time usage in FDM and SLS 3D printing methods. Proceedings of the 2017 13th International Conference Perspective Technologies and Methods in MEMS Design, MEMSTECH 2017—Proceedings, Lviv, Ukraine.10.1109/MEMSTECH.2017.7937521 ↗
19. Comparative Study on Mechanical Properties of Various Additive Manufacturing Methods
20. Tagliaferri, V., Trovalusci, F., Guarino, S., and Venettacci, S. (2019). Environmental and economic analysis of FDM, SLS and MJF additive manufacturing technologies. Materials, 12.10.3390/ma12244161 ↗
21. Determination of Robust Material Qualities and Processing Conditions for Laser Sintering of Polyamide 1210.1002/pen.23696 ↗
22. Aging effects of polyamide 12 in selective laser sintering: Molecular weight distribution and thermal properties
23. Characterization of typical surface effects in additive manufacturing with confocal microscopy10.1088/2051-672X/3/1/014001 ↗
24. (2022). Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface Texture: Profile—Part 1: Indication of Surface Texture (Standard No. EN ISO 21920-1).
25. (2023, December 01). InfiniteFocus G6. Available online: https://www.alicona.com/products/infinitefocus/.
26. (1998). Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface Texture: Profile Method—Terms, Definitions and Surface Texture Parameters (Standard No. EN ISO 4287).
27. (1997). Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface Texture: Profile Method—Rules and Procedures for the Assessment of Surface Texture (Standard No. EN ISO 4288).
28. Areal topography measurement of metal additive surfaces using focus variation microscopy