4.7 Article

Design, stiffness analysis and experimental study of a cable-driven parallel 3D printer

Journal

MECHANISM AND MACHINE THEORY
Volume 132, Issue -, Pages 207-222

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2018.11.003

Keywords

Additive manufacturing; Cable-driven parallel robots; 3D printer; Stiffness analysis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51575150, 51605126]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although additive manufacturing (AM) has been developed rapidly and become an absolutely necessary tool for reducing the cycle and cost of new product development, the mechanical structures of most 3D printers based on Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) technology are still traditional serial or parallel mechanisms with rigid components. In this paper, a novel cable-driven parallel 3D printer (CDPP) is developed. Compared with the traditional rigid mechanisms, CDPP has the advantages of larger workspace, higher payload-to-weight ratio, easier modularity and reconfigurability. A cable-driven module with three translational degrees of freedom and a follow-up tensioning module with a spring are adopted for positioning. Firstly, the inverse kinematics of the CDPP is derived considering the cable length constraint. The inverse dynamics model of the CDPP is established based on the Newton-Euler equation and the kinematics. Secondly, the system stiffness of the CDPP and stiffness along three coordinate axes are derived, respectively. The system static stiffness with respect to the stiffness constant of the spring and the coordinates of the moving platform are obtained. Finally, the experiments are performed based on numerical simulation. The results of experiments without executing extrusion demonstrate the simulation results about the static stiffness. The feasibility of the CDPP is verified via the experiments while executing extrusion. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available