3.8 Article

On the achieving uniform finishing allowance through identifying shape deviation for additive manufacturing

Journal

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 480-498

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14484846.2021.1873067

Keywords

Additive manufacturing; slicing; shape deviation; uniform post-processing allowance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study proposes a new technique to provide uniform post-processing allowance by considering the effects of oversized, undersize, mixed size, and equal size situations. New algorithms have been developed to identify shape deviation and provide uniform post-processing allowance throughout the part.
While additive manufacturing (AM), due to the stair-stepping effect, post-processing is required for which parts should be made with uniform post-processing allowance on all surfaces. Four shape deviation situations, namely, oversized, undersize, equal size and mixed-size situations may occur at various surfaces of the part depending on the surface orientation. In this study the initial effort has been made to estimate and control the effect of mixed size shape deviation situation, i.e. combined effect of both oversized and undersize shape deviation situations on the single-layer during slicing which is usually neglected in the existing literature. Thus, this research presents a novel technique to provide uniform finishing allowance by considering the oversized, undersize, mixed size and equal size situation effect simultaneously. New algorithms have been developed to identify shape deviation and to provide uniform post-processing allowance throughout the part. Case studies have been presented to demonstrate the capabilities of developed algorithms. This work also presents a novel computer-aided visualisation (CAV) tool for the computational validation of the proposed algorithm in the virtual environment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available