Djamila Olivier, Salvador Borros and Guillermo Reyes
A structured customer-driven and integrative methodology to develop materials is described. The proposed methodology is aimed to drive analysis and prioritization of the multiple…
Abstract
Purpose
A structured customer-driven and integrative methodology to develop materials is described. The proposed methodology is aimed to drive analysis and prioritization of the multiple variables involved in a new application case for 3D printing, which involves the development of a new alumina-starch-based powder.
Design/methodology/approach
The development of new powder mixture designed for 3D printing of refractory supports for metal casting moulds is presented. The quality function deployment (QFD) method was applied. Inputs for QFD analysis were found using total quality management tools. Using this approach, six process and material variables were considered to drive a prioritization analysis using a Plackett-Burman Design of Experiment (DOE) array. As performance parameter, compressive resistance was measured and assessed.
Findings
QFD analysis delivered standardized procedures, irrelevant factors and target values for intermediate step parameters. Sintering parameters were found to be the most influencing over compressive resistance.
Research limitations/implications
The methodology was based upon a materials development case for 3D printing.
Practical implications
Knowing in advance the influence of every affecting factor of the process provides a closer control on variability of final part properties, which is a key issue to launch parts into industrial applications. Quality planning and documentation in advanced is the basis for all the quality system of the new additive manufacturing (AM) process to be created.
Originality/value
Procedures for quality planning and control were proposed. This study, as methodological research, intends to introduce industrial engineering practices and quality management routines for AM material/process developers.
Details
Keywords
M.Z. Jali, S.M. Furnell and P.S. Dowland
The purpose of this paper is to assess the usability of two image‐based authentication methods when used in the web‐based environment. The evaluated approaches involve clicking…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to assess the usability of two image‐based authentication methods when used in the web‐based environment. The evaluated approaches involve clicking secret points within a single image (click‐based) and remembering a set of images in the correct sequence (choice‐based).
Design/methodology/approach
A “one‐to‐one” usability study was conducted in which participants had to complete three main tasks; namely authentication tasks (register, confirm and login), spot the difference activity and provide feedback.
Findings
From analysing the results in terms of timing, number of attempts, user feedback, accuracy and predictability, it is found that the choice‐based approach is better in terms of usability, whereas the click‐based method performed better in terms of timing and is rated more secure against social engineering.
Research limitations/implications
The majority of participants are from the academic sector (students, lecturers, etc.) and had up to seven years' IT experience. To obtain more statistically significant results, it is proposed that participants should be obtained from various sectors, having a more varied IT experience.
Practical implications
The results suggest that in order for image‐based authentication to be used in the web environment, more work is needed to increase the usability, while at the same time maintaining the security of both techniques.
Originality/value
This paper enables a direct comparison of the usability of two alternative image‐based techniques, with the studies using the same set of participants and the same set of environment settings.