Nicolas Boyard, Olivier Christmann, Mickaël Rivette, Olivier Kerbrat and Simon Richir
This paper aims to present a new methodology to optimize the support generation within the fused deposition modeling process.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to present a new methodology to optimize the support generation within the fused deposition modeling process.
Design/methodology/approach
Different methods of support generation exist, but they are limited with regards to complex parts. This paper proposes a method dedicated to support generation, integrated into CAD software. The objective is to minimize the volume of support and its impact on a part’s surface finish. Two case studies illustrate the methodology. The support generation is based on an octree’s discretization of the part.
Findings
The method represents a first solid step in the support optimization for a reasonable calculation time. It has the advantage of being virtually automatic. The only tasks to be performed by the designer are to place the part to be studied with respect to the CAD reference and to give the ratio between the desired support volume and the maximum volume of support.
Research limitations/implications
In the case studies, a low gain in manufacturing time was observed. This is explained by the honeycomb structure of the support generated by a common slicing software, whereas the proposed method uses a “full” structure. It would be interesting to study the feasibility of an optimized support, with a honeycomb structure but with a preservation of the surface which is in contact with the part.
Originality/value
This solution best fits the needs of the designer and manufacturer already taking advantage of existing solutions. It is adaptable to any part if the withdrawal of support is taken into account. It also allows the designer to validate the generation of support throughout the CAD without breaking the digital chain.
Details
Keywords
Olivier Kerbrat, Pascal Mognol and Jean‐Yves Hascoet
The purpose of this paper is to propose a methodology to estimate manufacturing complexity for both machining and layered manufacturing. The goal is to take into account…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to propose a methodology to estimate manufacturing complexity for both machining and layered manufacturing. The goal is to take into account manufacturing constraints at design stage in order to realize tools (dies and molds) by a combination of a subtractive process (high‐speed machining) and an additive process (selective laser sintering).
Design/methodology/approach
Manufacturability indexes are defined and calculated from the tool computer‐aided design (CAD) model, according to geometric, material and specification information. The indexes are divided into two categories: global and local. For local indexes, a decomposition of the tool CAD model is used, based on an octree decomposition algorithm and a map of manufacturing complexity is obtained.
Findings
The manufacturability indexes values provide a well‐detailed view of which areas of the tool may advantageously be machined or manufactured by an additive process.
Originality/value
Nowadays, layered manufacturing processes are coming to maturity, but there is still no way to compare these new processes with traditional ones (like machining) at the early design stage. In this paper, a new methodology is proposed to combine additive and subtractive processes, for tooling design and manufacturing. A manufacturability analysis is based on an octree decomposition, with calculation of manufacturing complexity indexes from the tool CAD model.
Details
Keywords
Luis Lisandro Lopez Taborda, Heriberto Maury and Jovanny Pacheco
There are many investigations in design methodologies, but there are also divergences and convergences as there are so many points of view. This study aims to evaluate to…
Abstract
Purpose
There are many investigations in design methodologies, but there are also divergences and convergences as there are so many points of view. This study aims to evaluate to corroborate and deepen other researchers’ findings, dissipate divergences and provide directing to future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective.
Design/methodology/approach
This study analyzes the previous reviews (about 15 reviews) and based on the consensus and the classifications provided by these authors, a significant sample of research is analyzed in the design for additive manufacturing (DFAM) theme (approximately 80 articles until June of 2017 and approximately 280–300 articles until February of 2019) through descriptive statistics, to corroborate and deepen the findings of other researchers.
Findings
Throughout this work, this paper found statistics indicating that the main areas studied are: multiple objective optimizations, execution of the design, general DFAM and DFAM for functional performance. Among the main conclusions: there is a lack of innovation in the products developed with the methodologies, there is a lack of exhaustivity in the methodologies, there are few efforts to include environmental aspects in the methodologies, many of the methods include economic and cost evaluation, but are not very explicit and broad (sustainability evaluation), it is necessary to consider a greater variety of functions, among other conclusions
Originality/value
The novelty in this study is the methodology. It is very objective, comprehensive and quantitative. The starting point is not the case studies nor the qualitative criteria, but the figures and quantities of methodologies. The main contribution of this review article is to guide future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective and this article provides a broad database with articles containing information on many issues to make decisions: design methodology; optimization; processes, selection of parts and materials; cost and product management; mechanical, electrical and thermal properties; health and environmental impact, etc.
Details
Keywords
Satabdee Dash, Axel Nordin and Glenn Johansson
Dual design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) takes into account both the opportunities and constraints of AM simultaneously, which research shows is more effective than…
Abstract
Purpose
Dual design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) takes into account both the opportunities and constraints of AM simultaneously, which research shows is more effective than considering them separately. Unlike existing reviews, this paper aims to map DfAM research within the engineering design process, focusing solely on studies adopting dual DfAM. Additionally, it aims to suggest future research directions by analysing prominent research themes and their inter-relationships. Special emphasis is on theme inter-relationships concerning the conceptual, embodiment and detail design phases.
Design/methodology/approach
The study is based on a systematic literature review of 148 publications from January 2000 to February 2024. After screening, prominent research themes were identified and systematically analysed. Theme inter-relationships were explored using quantitative analysis and chord diagrams.
Findings
The findings reveal that studies either span the entire design process, the early design phases or the later design phases. Most research focuses on the later design phases, particularly within themes of design optimisation, design evaluation and AM-specific manufacturing constraints. The most frequent theme inter-relationship occurs between design optimisation and AM-specific manufacturing constraints. Overall, the findings suggest future research directions to advance dual DfAM research, such as development of design rules and guidelines for cellular structures.
Originality/value
This review proposes a model by mapping prominent themes of dual DfAM research in relation to the engineering design process. Another original contribution lies in analysing theme inter-relationships and visualising them using chord diagrams – a novel approach that did not exist before.