Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78bd46657c-9sqjz Total loading time: 0.129 Render date: 2021-05-10T02:55:47.629Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Model for Evaluating Additive Manufacturing Feasibility in End-Use Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Matti Ahtiluoto
Affiliation:
Enmac Ltd.;
Asko Uolevi Ellman
Affiliation:
Tampere University of Technology
Eric Coatanea
Affiliation:
Tampere University of Technology
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

In practical design work, a designer needs to consider the feasibility of a part for a manufacturing using additive manufacturing (AM) instead of conventional manufacturing (CM) technology. Traditionally and by default parts are assumed to be manufactured using CM and using AM as an alternative need to be justified. AM is currently often a more expensive manufacturing method than CM, but its employment can be justified due to number of reasons: improved part features, faster manufacturing time and lower cost. Improved part features means usually reduced mass or complex shape. However, in low volume production lower manufacturing time and lower part cost may rise to the most important characteristics.

In this paper, we present a practical feasibility model, which analyses the added value of using AM for manufacturing. The approach is demonstrated in the paper on four specific parts. They represent real industrial design tasks that are ordered from an engineering office company. These parts were manufactured by Selective Laser Meting (SLM) technology and the original design done for conventional manufacturing is also presented and used for comparison purpose.

Type
Article
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

Adam, G. and Zimmer, D. (2014), “Design for additive manufacturing – element transitions and aggregated structures”, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, Vol. 7, pp. 2028. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2013.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barclift, M., Armstrong, A., Simpson, T.W. and Joshi, S.B. (2017), “CAD-Integrated Cost Estimation and Build Orientation Optimization to Support Design for Metal Additive Manufacturing”, ASME. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Vol. 2A: 43rd Design Automation Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-68376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, J.W., Alperovich, J., Chawla, P., Ma, J., Reid, T.N. and Ramani, K. (2017), “The design for additive manufacturing worksheet”, ASME. Jounal of Mechanical. Design, Vol. 139 No. 10, pp. 100904–100904-9. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037251.Google Scholar
Gao, W., Zhang, Y., Ramanujan, D., Ramani, K., Chen, Y., Williams, C., Wang, C., Shin, Y., Zhang, S. and Zavattieri, P. (2015), “The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering”, Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 69. pp. 6589. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-12-2014-0179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiasian, S., Jaiswal, P., Rai, R. and Lewis, K. (2018), “From Conventional to Additive Manufacturing: Determining Component Fabrication Feasibility”, ASME. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 2A: 44th Design Automation Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2018-86238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorguluarslan, R.M., Park, S-I., Rosen, D.W. and Choi, S-K. (2015), “A multilevel upscaling method for material characterization of additively manufactured part under uncertainties”, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 137 No. 11. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4031012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindemann, C., Reiher, T., Jahnke, U. and Koch, R. (2015), “Towards a sustainable and economic selection of part candidates for additive manufacturing”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 216227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2015.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, M., Witherell, P. and Jee, H. (2017), “Design Rules for Additive Manufacturing: A Categorization”, ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 1: 37th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-68446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michopoulos, J.G., Steuben, J.C. and Iliopoulos, A.P. (2018), “Differential Performance Signature Qualification for Additively Manufactured Parts”, ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 1A: 38th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2018-85985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montero, J., Paetzold, K., Bleckmann, M. and Holtmannspoetter, J. (2018), “Re-Design and Re-Manufacturing of Discontinued Spare Parts Implementing Additive Manufacturing in the Military Field”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International Design Conference, pp. 12691278. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panesar, A., Abdi, M., Hickman, D. and Ashcroft, I. (2018), “Strategies for functionally graded lattice structures derived using topology optimisation for additive manufacturing”, Additive manufacturing, Vol. 19, pp. 8194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranjan, R., Samant, R. and Anand, S. (2017), “Integration of design for manufacturing methods with topology optimization in additive manufacturing”, ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. Vol. 139 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4035216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, J., Owen, S.J., Clark, B.W. and Voth, T.E. (2016), “An efficient and scalable approach for generating topologically optimized cellular structures for additive manufacturing”, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 12 No. Part B, pp. 296304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.06.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saaty, T.L. (2008), “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process”, International Journal of Services Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 8398.http://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, T.W. and Williams, M.H. (2017), “Preparing industry for additive manufacturing and its applications: Summary & recommendations from National Science Foundation workshop”, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 13, pp 166178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanković, T., Mueller, J., Egan, P. and Shea, K. (2015), “A generalized optimality criteria method for optimization of additively manufactured multimaterial lattice structures”, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 137. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wohlers Associates, Inc. (2018), Wohlers Report 2018 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing State of the Industry Annual Worldwide Progress Report, ISBN 978-0-9913332-4-0.Google Scholar
Zegard, T. and Paulino, G.H. (2016), “Bridging topology optimization and additive manufacturing”, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 175192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-015-1274-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have Access
Open access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Model for Evaluating Additive Manufacturing Feasibility in End-Use Production
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Model for Evaluating Additive Manufacturing Feasibility in End-Use Production
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Model for Evaluating Additive Manufacturing Feasibility in End-Use Production
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *