4.6 Article

3D Printed Parts with Honeycomb Internal Pattern by Fused Deposition Modelling; Experimental Characterization and Production Optimization

Journal

METALS AND MATERIALS INTERNATIONAL
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 1312-1325

Publisher

KOREAN INST METALS MATERIALS
DOI: 10.1007/s12540-019-00272-9

Keywords

3D printing; Fused deposition modelling; Mechanical properties; Part weight; Response surface method

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study additive manufacturing of Polylactic acid by fused deposition modeling were investigated based on statistical analysis. The honeycomb internal pattern was employed to build inside of specimens due to its remarkable capability to resist mechanical loads. Simplify 3D was utilized to slice the 3D model and to adjust fixed parameters. Layer thickness, infill percentage, and extruder temperature were considered as controlled variables, while maximum failure load (N), elongation at break (mm), part weight (g), and build time (min) were selected as output responses and analysed by response surface method. Analysis of variance results identified layer thickness as the major controlled variable for all responses. Interaction of infill percentage and extruder temperature had a significant influence on elongation at break and therefore, tough fracture of printed parts. The input parameters were optimized to materialize tow criteria; the first one was to rise maximum failure load and the second was to attain tough fracture and lessen build time and part weight at a time. Optimal solutions were examined by experimental fabrication to evaluate the efficiency of the optimization method. There was a good agreement between empirical results and response surface method predictions which confirmed the reliability of predictive models. The optimal setting to fulfill the first criterion could bring on a specimen with more than 1500 (N) maximum failure load and less than 9 (g) weight.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available