Optimization of Multi-part 3D Printing Build Strategies for Lean Product and Process Development

  • Nicola GarzanitiEmail author
  • Alessandro Golkar
  • Clément Fortin
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 540)


In recent years, the engineering community realized the potential of additive manufacturing (AM) technology to be a game changer in product development and manufacturing. The capability of AM to build tailored products within short lead-time can make it a key contributor to Industry 4.0 in a lean manufacturing perspective.

This paper aims to assess how additive manufacturing can enable the implementation of lean product and process development practices, within a Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) perspective. We propose the use and the implementation of Design of Experiments (DoE) in a PLM tool to evaluate how part orientation, nesting and support strategy affects the total costs and time for product development and manufacturing. Then, we use the results of DoE analysis to optimize the multi-part 3D printing build strategies, to reduce waste of raw material and increase the overall quality of the final component.

Finally, we foresee the integration of this work in a wider multidisciplinary approach to comprehensively evaluate the use the of AM in the design of systems as early as at the conceptual design phase.

In this paper we present one of the case studies experimentally tested and validated.


Additive manufacturing Lean manufacturing Cost-effectiveness analysis PLM 



The authors would like to thank Mr. Jonathan Meyer form Airbus for his valuable contribution, and for giving access to the data used to test and validate the tool.


  1. 1.
    Schumacher, A., Erol, S., Sihn, W.: A maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Proc. CIRP 52, 161–166 (2016). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.G., Feld, T., Hoffmann, M.: Industry 4.0. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 6, 239–242 (2014). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gao, W., et al.: The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering. Comput.-Aided Des. 69, 65–89 (2015). Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Wohlers Associates, Wohlers report 2017: 3D printing and additive manufacturing state of the industry : annual worldwide progress report (2017).
  5. 5.
    Yang, S., Zhao, Y.F.: Additive manufacturing-enabled design theory and methodology: a critical review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 80, 327–342 (2015). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Priarone, P.C., Ingarao, G.: Towards criteria for sustainable process selection: on the modelling of pure subtractive versus additive/subtractive integrated manufacturing approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 144, 57–68 (2017). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Santos, C., Mehrsai, A., Barros, A.C., Araújo, M., Ares, E.: Towards Industry 4.0: an overview of European strategic roadmaps. Proc. Manuf. 13, 972–979 (2017). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mrugalska, B., Wyrwicka, M.K.: Towards lean production in Industry 4.0. Proc. Eng. 182, 466–473 (2017). Scholar
  9. 9.
    ASTM F42.91, F2792-12a: Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies, pp. 1–3. ASTM International, West Consh (2012).
  10. 10.
    Uy, M., Telford, J.K.: Optimization by design of experiment techniques. In: 2009 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2009).
  11. 11.
    Montgomery, D.C.: Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley, Hoboken (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garzaniti, N.: Influences of additive manufacturing in concurrent engineering process for aerospace applications. Thesis, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sun, S., Brandt, M., Easton, M.: Powder bed fusion processes. In: Laser Additive Manufacturing, pp. 55–77. Elsevier (2017).
  14. 14.
    Calignano, F., Cattano, G., Manfredi, D.: Manufacturing of thin wall structures in AlSi10Mg alloy by laser powder bed fusion through process parameters. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 255, 773–783 (2018). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sellgren, U.: Simulation-driven design - motives, means, and opportunities. KTH (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sigmund, O., Maute, K.: Topology optimization approaches. Struct. Multidisc. Optim. 48, 1031–1055 (2013). Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola Garzaniti
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alessandro Golkar
    • 1
  • Clément Fortin
    • 1
  1. 1.Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Space CenterMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations