4.5 Article

Selection of additive manufacturing processes

期刊

RAPID PROTOTYPING JOURNAL
卷 23, 期 2, 页码 434-447

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/RPJ-09-2015-0123

关键词

Additive manufacturing; Multi-criteria decision making; Decision-support systems; Decision theory; Design for additive manufacturing

资金

  1. New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) through the NZ Product Accelerator programme [UOAX1309]
  2. New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) [UOAX1309] Funding Source: New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - This study aims to review the existing methods for additive manufacturing (AM) process selection and evaluate their suitability for design for additive manufacturing (DfAM). AM has experienced a rapid development in recent years. New technologies, machines and service bureaus are being brought into the market at an exciting rate. While user's choices are in abundance, finding the right choice can be a non-trivial task. Design/methodology/approach - AM process selection methods are reviewed based on decision theory. The authors also examine how the user's preferences and AM process performances are considered and approximated into mathematical models. The pros and cons and the limitations of these methods are discussed, and a new approach has been proposed to support the iterating process of DfAM. Findings - All current studies follow a sequential decision process and focus on an a priori articulation of preferences approach. This kind of method has limitations for the user in the early design stage to implement the DfAM process. An a posteriori articulation of preferences approach is proposed to support DfAM and an iterative design process. Originality/value - This paper reviews AM process selection methods in a new perspective. The users need to be aware of the underlying assumptions in these methods. The limitations of these methods for DfAM are discussed, and a new approach for AM process selection is proposed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据