Teaching Creativity As a Method to Overcome Limitations in Design for Additive Manufacturing

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergei Chekurov
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Teaching Approach ◽  
Major Influence ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Student Assignment ◽  
Entry Level ◽  
Material Extrusion ◽  
Teaching Design ◽  
Manufacturing Machine

Abstract This paper describes the challenges and solutions of modifying a normally contact-reliant Design for Additive Manufacturing teaching approach in view of the COVID-19 outbreak. The approach has been put into practice since 2014 in the form of a student assignment that does not provide a specific functional objective but asks students to invent a unique geometry that demonstrates the capabilities of additive manufacturing and manufacture it with an entry level material extrusion machine. The students are asked to use their imaginations to develop an intricate geometry without first considering technical limitations of additive manufacturing. They are then asked to identify the issues with their designs and solve them, while modifying their original vision as little as possible. The goal of the approach is to teach students to identify the limitations of additive manufacturing and to overcome them with creativity when possible. As physical iterative testing using an additive manufacturing machine is essential to the assignment, the outbreak of COVID-19 had a major influence on it. The paper describes how the assignment was adjusted in the spring of 2020 to meet the challenges of not being able to conduct contact teaching. Although the presented exceptional measures should be avoided as the primary way to educate students, they are shown to facilitate teaching Design for Additive Manufacturing with no access to machines. Notable designs developed by students in 2020 are provided as examples of the generated results.

scholarly journals Design for additive manufacturing - effects of part orientation, printer selection, and infill density on mechanical properties and production cost

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruiqi Chen ◽  
Liseli Baich ◽  
James Lauer ◽  
Debbie G. Senesky ◽  
Guha Manogharan
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Production Cost ◽  
Manufacturing Systems ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Beam Theory ◽  
Mechanical Stiffness ◽  
Entry Level ◽  
Material Extrusion ◽  
Part Orientation

This original work investigates the influence of infill design, printer selection, and part orientation on the mechanical properties and production cost of parts fabricated using material extrusion additive manufacturing systems. Flexural test specimens are fabricated in both production-grade (Fortus 250mc) and entry-level (MakerBot Replicator 2X) material extrusion systems with varying infill densities (1 mm to 10 mm spacing between rasters). In addition, solid infill specimens are printed in three orientations to establish baseline mechanical stiffness and strength. Finite element simulations and a simplified analytical model based on Euler-Bernoulli beam theory are developed. Results show reasonable agreement between analytical, simulation, and experimental results; 10-20% and 10-40% deviation for production-grade and entry-level specimens specimens, respectively. There is a 40% reduction in stiffness and strength between the solid XY specimen and 1 mm infill specimen. As infill density is further decreased, stiffness and strength asymptotically reduces by 60-70% when compared to solid specimens. This effect is more pronounced in specimens fabricated using entry-level printers, which indicates that printer selection plays a role in printing highly sparse parts. Cost analysis suggests that up to 40% savings can be achieved with highly sparse structures. However, for structural parts, it is recommended that parts be printed with solid infill and with the loading direction aligned in the XY plane to achieve high stiffness, high strength, and reasonable cost. Findings from this study show that there is minimal cost savings but high reduction in mechanical stiffness and strength when sparse infills are used in both production-grade and entry-level printers. Hence, it is recommended that solid infill should be used in all regions of parts that carry significant mechanical stress and sparse infill be used solely to support internal geometries and overhangs.

scholarly journals GEOMETRICAL BENCHMARKING OF LASER POWDER BED FUSION SYSTEMS BASED ON DESIGNER NEEDS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1657-1666
Author(s):  
Joaquin Montero ◽  
Sebastian Weber ◽  
Christoph Petroll ◽  
Stefan Brenner ◽  
Matthias Bleckmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Use Case ◽  
Powder Bed Fusion ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Laser Powder Bed Fusion ◽  
Measuring Systems ◽  
Powder Bed ◽  
Geometric Dimensioning And Tolerancing ◽  
Uncertainty Map ◽  
New System

AbstractCommercially available metal Laser Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) systems are steadily evolving. Thus, design limitations narrow and the diversity of achievable geometries widens. This progress leads researchers to create innovative benchmarks to understand the new system capabilities. Thereby, designers can update their knowledge base in design for additive manufacturing (DfAM). To date, there are plenty of geometrical benchmarks that seek to develop generic test artefacts. Still, they are often complex to measure, and the information they deliver may not be relevant to some designers. This article proposes a geometrical benchmarking approach for metal L-PBF systems based on the designer needs. Furthermore, Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) characteristics enhance the approach. A practical use-case is presented, consisting of developing, manufacturing, and measuring a meaningful and straightforward geometric test artefact. Moreover, optical measuring systems are used to create a tailored uncertainty map for benchmarking two different L-PBF systems.

scholarly journals REVIEW OF DESIGN HEURISTICS AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES IN DESIGN FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 2571-2580
Author(s):  
Filip Valjak ◽  
Angelica Lindwall
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Design Principles ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Design Heuristics ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Support Methods

AbstractThe advent of additive manufacturing (AM) in recent years have had a significant impact on the design process. Because of new manufacturing technology, a new area of research emerged – Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) with newly developed design support methods and tools. This paper looks into the current status of the field regarding the conceptual design of AM products, with the focus on how literature sources treat design heuristics and design principles in the context of DfAM. To answer the research question, a systematic literature review was conducted. The results are analysed, compared and discussed on three main points: the definition of the design heuristics and the design principles, level of support they provide, as well as where and how they are used inside the design process. The paper highlights the similarities and differences between design heuristics and design principles in the context of DfAM.

scholarly journals Smooth Design of 3D Self-Supporting Topologies Using Additive Manufacturing Filter and SEMDOT

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 238
Author(s):  
Yun-Fei Fu ◽  
Kazem Ghabraie ◽  
Bernard Rolfe ◽  
Yanan Wang ◽  
Louis N. S. Chiu
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Compliant Mechanism ◽  
Optimization Method ◽  
Light Weight ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Compliance Minimization ◽  
Performance Requirements ◽  
Specific Performance ◽  
Smooth Design ◽  
Compliant Mechanism Design

The smooth design of self-supporting topologies has attracted great attention in the design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) field as it cannot only enhance the manufacturability of optimized designs but can obtain light-weight designs that satisfy specific performance requirements. This paper integrates Langelaar’s AM filter into the Smooth-Edged Material Distribution for Optimizing Topology (SEMDOT) algorithm—a new element-based topology optimization method capable of forming smooth boundaries—to obtain print-ready designs without introducing post-processing methods for smoothing boundaries before fabrication and adding extra support structures during fabrication. The effects of different build orientations and critical overhang angles on self-supporting topologies are demonstrated by solving several compliance minimization (stiffness maximization) problems. In addition, a typical compliant mechanism design problem—the force inverter design—is solved to further demonstrate the effectiveness of the combination between SEMDOT and Langelaar’s AM filter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document