Advertisement

Fused Deposition Modelling and Parametric Optimization of ABS-M30

  • Hemant Cherkia
  • Sasmita KarEmail author
  • Sudhansu Sekhar Singh
  • Ashutosh Satpathy
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

In the current development of generative manufacturing industries, 3D printing technologies have a significant impact in the production of complex geometry with least time and the absence of human intercession, tools, fixtures and dies. Presently in engineering application, fused deposition modelling (FDM) has better demand in additive manufacturing. The improvement in design quality and manufacturing in FDM is based on the proper selection of principal operational parameters. This paper experimentally describes the influence of stereotypical operational variables, i.e. layer thickness, raster angle, raster width, part build orientation and their reciprocation on the precision of change in length, width, thickness, hole diameter and angle orientation of test part of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene-M30 (ABS-M30) after generated by FDM approach. It was profound that shrinkage predominates along the diameter of hole but an increase in dimension of length, width, thickness and angle of inclination is more than the thirst value of the fabricated specimen. The most favourable parametric combination is followed to optimize the precise responses just as a change in length, width, thickness, hole diameter and angle orientation of build part by using a parametric design of Taguchi’s L9 orthogonal array. As Taguchi’s methodology is not much satisfactory for steady optimal factor amalgamation of each response Grey-Taguchi methods used to investigate the influence of FDM parameters on multi-performance characteristics, combining all the responses into a single response. The correlative effect of significant factors is determined by Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Finally, the ANOVA on Grey relational grade indicates layer thickness, part build orientation and raster width which are significant. Layer thickness is the most influencing factor for part build. The percentage errors are 12.05, 4.55, 2.45, 3.4, 5.07 and 0.74 for change in length, width, thickness, diameter, angle and Grey relational grade, respectively.

Keywords

Fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printing Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene-M30 (ABS-M30) Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 

References

  1. 1.
    Padhi, S.K., Sahu, R.K., Mahapatra, S.S., Das, H.C., Sood, A.K., Patro, B., Mondal, A.K.: Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters using a fuzzy inference system coupled with Taguchi philosophy. Adv. Manuf. 5(3), 231–242 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaveh, M., Etefagh, A.H., Badrossamay, M.: Optimization of the printing parameters affecting dimensional accuracy and internal cavity for HIPS material used in fused deposition modeling processes. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 226, 280–286 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahu, R.K., Mahapatra, S.S., Sood, A.K.: A study on dimensional accuracy of fused deposition modelling (FDM) processed parts using fuzzy logic. J. Manuf. Sci. Prod. 13(3), 183–197 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahapatra, S.S., Sood, A.K.: Bayesian regularization-based Levenberg–Marquardt neural model combined with BFOA for improving surface finish of FDM processed part. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 60, 1223–1235 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sood, A.K., Ohdar, R.K., Mahapatra, S.S.: Experimental investigation and empirical modelling of FDM process for compressive strength improvement. J. Adv. Res. 3, 81–90 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Equbal, A., Sood, A.K., Toppo, V., Ohdar, R.K., Mahapatra, S.S.: Prediction and analysis of sliding wear performance of fused deposition modelling-processed ABS plastic parts. J. Eng. Tribol. 224, 70–80 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Senthilkumaran, K., Pandey, P.M., Rao, P.V.M.: Influence of building strategies on the accuracy of parts in selective laser sintering. Mater. Des. 30, 2946–2954 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Panda, S.K., Padhee, S., Sood, A.K., Mahapatra, S.S.: Optimization of fused deposition modelling (FDM) process parameters using bacterial foraging technique. Intell. Inf. Manage. 1, 89–97 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sood, A.K., Ohdar, R.K., Mahapatra, S.S.: Parametric appraisal of fused deposition modelling process using the grey Taguchi method. J. Eng. Manuf. 224 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang, R.J., Wang, L., Zhao, L., Liu, Z.: Influence of process parameters on part shrinkage in SLS. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 33, 498–504 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pandey, P., Raghunath, N.: Improving accuracy through shrinkage modelling by using Taguchi method in selective laser sintering. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 47, 985–995 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Campanelli, S.L., Cardano, G., Giannoccaro, R., Ludovic, A.D., Bohez, E.L.J.: Statistical analysis of stereolithographic process to improve the accuracy. Comput. Aided Des. 39(1), 80–86 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chacon, J.M., Caminero, M.A., Garcıa-Plaza, E., Nunez, P.J.: Additive manufacturing of PLA structures using fused deposition modelling: effect of process parameters on mechanical properties and their optimal selection. Mater. Des. 124, 143–157 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nizam, A., Gopal, R.N., Naing, L., Hakim, A.B., Samsudin, A.R.: Dimensional accuracy of the skull models produced by rapid prototyping technology using stereo lithography apparatus. Arch. Orofac. Sci. 32, 60–66 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhu, H.H., Lu, L., Fuh, J.Y.H.: Study on shrinkage behavior of direct laser sintering metallic powder. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. J. Eng. Manuf. 220, 183–190 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang, Y., Lan, H.: Dynamic reverse compensation to increase the accuracy of the rapid prototyping system. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 167, 167–176 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lehtihet, E., Tong, K., Joshi, S.: Software compensation of rapid prototyping machines. Precis. Eng. 28, 280–292 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xu, F., Wong, Y.S., Loh, H.T.: Toward generic models for comparative rapid prototyping and manufacturing. J. Manuf. Syst. 19, 283–296 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou, J., Herscovici, D., Chen, C.C.: Parametric process optimization to improve the accuracy of rapid prototyped stereo lithography parts. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 40, 363–379 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vasudevarao, B., Natarajan, D.P., Razdan, A., Mark, H.: Sensitivity of RP surface finish to process parameter variation. In: Solid Free Form Fabrication Proceedings, pp. 252–258. The University of Texas, Austin (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Es-Said, O.S., Foyos, J., Noorani, R., Mendelson, M., Marloth, R., Pregger, B.A.: Effect of layer orientation on mechanical properties of rapid prototyped samples. Mater. Manuf. Processes 15(1), 107–122 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dao, Q., Frimodig, J.C., Le, H.N., Li, X., Putnam, S.B., Golda, K., Foyos, J., Noorani, R., Fritz, B.: Calculation of shrinkage compensation factors for rapid prototyping (FDM 1650). Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 7(3), 186–195 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anitha, R., Arunachalam, S., Radhakrishnan, P.: Critical parameters influencing the quality of prototypes in fused deposition modelling. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 118, 385–388 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hemant Cherkia
    • 1
  • Sasmita Kar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sudhansu Sekhar Singh
    • 1
  • Ashutosh Satpathy
    • 1
  1. 1.CAPGSBiju Patnaik University of TechnologyRourkelaIndia

Personalised recommendations