Smoothing the Rough Edges: Evaluating Automatically Generated Multi-Lattice Transitions
Source abstract
Abstract
Additive manufacturing is advantageous for producing lightweight components while addressing complex design requirements. This capability has been bolstered by the introduction of unit lattice cells and the gradation of those cells. In cases where loading varies throughout a part, it may be beneficial to use multiple, distinct lattice cell types, resulting in multi-lattice structures. In such structures, abrupt transitions between unit cell topologies may cause stress concentrations, making the boundary between unit cell types a primary failure point. Thus, these regions require careful design to ensure the overall functionality of the part. Although computational design approaches have been proposed, smooth transition regions are still difficult to achieve, especially between lattices of drastically different topologies. This work demonstrates and assesses a method for using variational autoencoders to automate the creation of transitional lattice cells, examining the factors that contribute to smooth transitions. Through computational experimentation, it was found that the smoothness of transition regions was strongly predicted by how closely the endpoints were in the latent space, whereas the number of transition intervals was not a sole predictor.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
School of Engineering Design and Innovation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/J.ADDMA.2020.10130110.1016/J.ADDMA.2020.101301 ↗
2. 10.1016/J.ADDMA.2020.10117110.1016/J.ADDMA.2020.101171 ↗
3. 10.1089/3dp.2021.008610.1089/3dp.2021.0086 ↗
4. 10.1089/3dp.2020.009110.1089/3dp.2020.0091 ↗
5. 10.1089/3dp.2019.003010.1089/3dp.2019.0030 ↗
6. 10.1177/1464420721104620010.1177/14644207211046200 ↗
7. 10.1089/3dp.2020.022210.1089/3dp.2020.0222 ↗
8. 10.1115/1.4042617/72718210.1115/1.4042617/727182 ↗
9. 10.1016/J.MATDES.2018.01.01110.1016/J.MATDES.2018.01.011 ↗
10. 10.1016/J.MATDES.2019.10816410.1016/J.MATDES.2019.108164 ↗
11. 10.1177/0021955X1663903510.1177/0021955X16639035 ↗
12. 10.1016/J.ADDMA.2017.11.00810.1016/J.ADDMA.2017.11.008 ↗
13. 10.1007/s00158-018-2009-010.1007/s00158-018-2009-0 ↗
14. 10.1126/sciadv.abf483810.1126/sciadv.abf4838 ↗
15. 10.1016/J.MTCOMM.2022.10315910.1016/J.MTCOMM.2022.103159 ↗
16. 10.1016/J.MATDES.2019.10778610.1016/J.MATDES.2019.107786 ↗
17. 10.48550/ARXIV.2106.0647810.48550/ARXIV.2106.06478 ↗
18. 10.1016/J.CMA.2020.11337710.1016/J.CMA.2020.113377 ↗
19. 10.1016/J.CMA.2022.11506010.1016/J.CMA.2022.115060 ↗
20. 10.1115/1.404862910.1115/1.4048629 ↗
21. 10.1089/3dp.2020.028610.1089/3dp.2020.0286 ↗
22. 10.1115/1.4053859/113667610.1115/1.4053859/1136676 ↗
23. 10.1115/1.405367110.1115/1.4053671 ↗
24. 10.48550/ARXIV.1312.611410.48550/ARXIV.1312.6114 ↗
25. 10.1016/J.EML.2020.10099210.1016/J.EML.2020.100992 ↗
26. 26. Murphy C, Meisel N, Simpson TW, et al. Using autoencoded voxel patterns to predict part mass, required support material, and build time. In: Solid Freeform Fabrication 2018: Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium; 2018.
27. 10.1007/978-3-030-05363-5_110.1007/978-3-030-05363-5_1 ↗
28. Arvanitidis G · ICLR · 2018
29. 10.48550/ARXIV.1412.698010.48550/ARXIV.1412.6980 ↗
30. 31. Shao H, Kumar A, Fletcher PT. The Riemannian Geometry of Deep Generative Models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops; 2018.10.1109/CVPRW.2018.00071 ↗
31. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.301631310.1109/ACCESS.2020.3016313 ↗
32. 10.1016/J.CAD.2021.10309110.1016/J.CAD.2021.103091 ↗
33. 10.1109/ICPR.2010.57910.1109/ICPR.2010.579 ↗
34. 10.1088/0957-0233/20/10/10401510.1088/0957-0233/20/10/104015 ↗
35. Shrivakshan GT · Int J Comput Sci Issues · 2012 · 9 · 269
36. 10.1007/S11770-015-0512-210.1007/S11770-015-0512-2 ↗
37. Baldwin M · Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium · 2022
38. 10.1080/00207543.2020.185963710.1080/00207543.2020.1859637 ↗