Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-30T20:00:52.363Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design Automation for Customised and Large-Scale Additive Manufacturing: A Case Study on Custom Kayaks

Part of: Design for Additive Manufacturing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Drew Lithgow ,
Cara Morrison ,
George Pexton ,
Massimo Panarotto ,
Jakob R. Müller ,
Lars Almefelt  and
Andrew McLaren
Drew Lithgow
Affiliation:
University of Strathclyde;
Cara Morrison
Affiliation:
University of Strathclyde;
George Pexton
Affiliation:
University of Strathclyde;
Massimo Panarotto*
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology
Jakob R. Müller
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology
Lars Almefelt
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology
Andrew McLaren
Affiliation:
University of Strathclyde;
*
Contact: Panarotto, Massimo, Chalmers University of Technology, Industrial and Materials Science, Sweden, massimo.panarotto@chalmers.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Additive Manufacturing (AM) offers the potential to increase the ability to customise large-scale plastic components. However, a substantial amount of manual work is still required during the customisation process, both in design and manufacturing.

This paper looks into how the additive manufacturing of mass customised large-scale products can be supported. Data was collected through interaction with industrial partners and potential customers in a case study regarding the customisation of kayaks.

As a result, the paper proposes a model-based methodology which combines design automation with a user interface.

The results point to the benefit of the proposed methodology in terms of design efficiency, as well as in terms of displaying results to the end user in an understandable format.

Keywords

Additive ManufacturingDesign methodsProduct modelling / models
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 699 - 708
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Amadori, K., Tarkian, M., Olvander, J. and Krus, P. (2012), “Flexible and robust CAD models for design automation”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.01.004Google Scholar
Avison, D., Lau, F., Myers, M., Nielsen, P.A. (1999), “Action Research”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 94–97, https://doi.org/10.1145/291469.291479Google Scholar
Bertoni, M., Bertoni, B., Isaksson, O., Amnell, H. and Johnsson, C. (2013), “Value-oriented concept selection in aero-engine sub-systems design: The EVOKE approach,” 23rd Annual INCOSE International Symposium, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 770–784, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2013.tb03053.xGoogle Scholar
Buur, J. (1990), A Theoretical Approach to Mechatronics Design, Doctoral Dissertation, Institute for Engineering Design, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.Google Scholar
Borgue, O., Müller, J., Panarotto, M. and Isaksson, O. (2018), “Function modelling and constraints replacement to support design for additive manufacturing of satellite components”. DS 91: Proceedings of NordDesign 2018, Linköping, Sweden, 14th–17th August 2018.Google Scholar
Camba, J. D., Contero, M. and Company, P. (2016), “Parametric CAD modeling: An analysis of strategies for design reusability,” Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 18–31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2014.08.005Google Scholar
Campbell, R. I., Bourell, D. and Gibson, I. (2012), “Additive manufacturing: rapid prototyping comes of age”, Rapid prototyping journal, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 255–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541211231563Google Scholar
Dellaert, B.G.C. and Dabholkar, P.A. (2009), “ “Increasing the Attractiveness of Mass Customization: The Role of Complementary On-line Services and Range of Options,” International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 43–70. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415130302Google Scholar
Franke, N. and Piller, F.T. (2003), “Key Research Issues in User Interaction with Configuration Toolkits in a Mass Customization System”, The International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 5/6, pp. 578–599.zGoogle Scholar
Heikkinen, T. and Müller, J. (2015), Multidisciplinary analysis of jet engine components: Development of methods and tools for design automatisation in a multidisciplinary context, Master Thesis, Jönköping University.Google Scholar
Heikkinen, T., Johansson, J. and Elgh, F. (2018), “Review of CAD-model capabilities and restrictions for multidisciplinary use”, Computer-Aided Design and Applications, Vol. 4360 No. January, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2017.1419639Google Scholar
Helms, B. and Shea, K. (2012), “Computational Synthesis of Product Architectures Based on Object-Oriented Graph Grammars”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 134 No. 2, p. 021008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4005592Google Scholar
Hvam, L., Mortensenm, N.H. and Riis, J. (2008), Product Customization, Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Isaksson, O. (2013), “A Generative Modeling Approach to Engineering Design”, International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm, August 19–21.Google Scholar
Isaksson, O., Kossmann, M., Bertoni, M., Eres, H., Monceaux, A., Bertoni, A. and Zhang, X. (2013), “Value-Driven Design–A methodology to Link Expectations to Technical Requirements in the Extended Enterprise”, INCOSE International Symposium, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 803–819. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2013.tb03055.xGoogle Scholar
Kukec, G. (2015), “Decreasing Engineering Time with Variable CAD Models: Parametric Approach to Process Optimisation,” Computer-Aided Design and Applications, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 651–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2015.1014744Google Scholar
La Rocca, G. and Van tooren, M. (2007), “Enabling distributed multi-disciplinary design of complex products: a knowledge based engineering approach”, Journal of Design Research, Vol. 5 No. 3 pp. 333–352. https://doi.org/10.1504/JDR.2007.014880Google Scholar
Langmaak, S., Wiseall, S., Bru, C., Adkins, R., Scanlan, J. and Sobester, A. (2013), “An activity-based-parametric hybrid cost model to estimate the unit cost of a novel gas turbine component”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 142 No. 1, pp. 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.09.020Google Scholar
Le Bourhis, F., Kerbrat, O., Dembinski, L., Hascoet, J.Y. and Mognol, P. (2014), “Predictive model for environmental assessment in additive manufacturing process”. Procedia CiRP, Vol. 15, pp. 26–31.Google Scholar
Lindwall, A., Dordlofva, C. and Öhrwall Rönnbäck, A. (2017), “Additive manufacturing and the product development process: Insights from the space industry”, 21st International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 2017, Vol. 5 No. DS87-5, pp. 345–354.Google Scholar
Lokgård, M. and Grandicki, A. (2017), Parametric CAD Modelling to Aid Simulation-Driven Design, Master Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden.Google Scholar
Mcutcheon, D.M., Raturi, A.S. and Meredith, J.R. (1994), “The Customisation-Responsiveness Squeeze”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 89–99.Google Scholar
Panarotto, M. (2015). A Model-Based Methodology for Value Assessment in Conceptual Design. Doctoral dissertation, Blekinge Institute of Technology (Blekinge Tekniska Högskola), Sweden.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), “Co-Creation Experiences: The Next Practise in Value Creation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20015Google Scholar
Reeves, R., Tuck, C. and Hauge, R. (2011), “Additive Manufacturing for Mass Customisation,” In: Fogliatto, F.S. and Da Silveria, G.J.C., Mass Customisation: Engineering and Managing Global Operations, pp. 274–289.Google Scholar
Rickenbacher, L., Spierings, A., Wegener, K. (2013), “An integrated cost-model for selective laser melting (SLM)”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 208–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541311312201Google Scholar
Roth, M., Ulrich, C. M., Holle, M. and Lindemann, U. (2016). “The impact of user-driven customization on the development process”, Proceedings of International Design Conference, DESIGN, DS, Vol. 84, pp. 1357–1366.Google Scholar
Sandberg, M., Tyapin, I., Kokkolaras, M., Isaksson, O., Aidanpää, J. and Larsson, T. (2011), “A Knowledge-based Master-model Approach with Application to Rotating Machinery Design,” CONCURRENT ENGINEERING: Research and Applications, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063293X11424511Google Scholar
Spallek, J. and Krause, D. (2016), “Process types of customisation and personalisation in design for additive manufacturing applied to vascular models”, 26th CIRP Design Conference, Stockholm, 15–17 June, Elsevier, pp. 281–286, https://doi.org/10.15480/882.1907Google Scholar
Thompson, M. K. et al. (2016), “Design for Additive Manufacturing: Trends, opportunities, considerations, and constraints”, CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 737–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.05.004Google Scholar
Ulrich, K., Eppinger, S. (2011), Product design and development (5th edition). McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
Van der Velden, C. A., Bil, C. and Xu, X. (2012), “Adaptable methodology for automation application development”, Advanced Engineering Informatics. Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.02.007Google Scholar