4.6 Article

Additive manufacturing process selection based on parts' selection criteria

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00170-015-7092-4

Keywords

Additive manufacturing; 3D printing; Manufacturing process planning; Analytic hierarchy process; Rapid prototyping

Funding

  1. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES)
  2. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  3. State of Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Additive manufacturing (AM) has been used to produce complex parts usually in small batch sizes. Recently, AM has been gaining importance with the development of new production technologies encompassing a wider range of materials. These new technologies allow broader AM application in the industry, beyond traditional usage in rapid prototyping. As a result, the number of parts being produced by AM technologies has been increasing. The differences among AM production technologies and the specific capabilities and restrictions of each available manufacturing machine result in complex manufacturing process definition. Moreover, process technology knowledge in the area is still limited to few professionals. In order to support process manufacturing to evaluate which AM technology would be best suited to produce a particular part, this paper presents a method for selecting the AM process based on the technical specifications of a part. The method relies on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to rank the most appropriate technologies and machines. Relevant parameters of the main machines available in the market were raised. These parameters are considered in the selection of machines able to produce a particular part considering its specifications. Practical applications of the method resulted in adequate responses to support manufacturing process definition.

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