Experimental Investigations of Printing Parameters of Fused Deposition Modeling-Based 3D Printers for Average Surface Roughness

  • Apoorv Srivastava
  • Jitendra BhaskarEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering book series (LNMUINEN)


The FDM technology-based 3D printers have become very popular for making models in the industry. Selection of printing parameters is the key issue in preparing models with good surface finish. An effort has been made to study the effect of printing parameters such as layer thickness, nozzle temperature and printing speed on the surface. Efforts were made to print test coupons using the FDM-based 3D printer, and surface roughness was measured using the stylus probe attached to surface tester to identify the role of printing parameters for surface roughness. ANOVA over L9 array of Taguchi for three variables has been used to study these parameters. Results by Taguchi method were validated by experiments and found reasonably well.


Fused deposition modeling 3D printing Surface roughness Response surface methodology 


  1. 1.
    Vaezi, M., Chua, C.K: Effects of layer thickness and binder saturation level parameters on 3D printing process. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 53, 275–284 (2011).
  2. 2.
    Jaya Christiyan, K.G., Chandrasekhar, U., Venkateswarlu, K.: A study on the influence of process parameters on the Mechanical Properties of 3D printed ABS composite. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 114, 012109 (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shofner, M.L., Lozano, K., Rodrıguez-Macıas, F.J., Barrera, E.V.: Nanofiber-reinforced polymers prepared by fused deposition modeling. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 89(11), 3081–3090 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shofner, M.L., Rodriguez-Macıas, F.J., Vaidyanathan, R., Barrera, E.V.: Single wall nanotube and vapor grown carbon fiber reinforced polymers processed by extrusion freeform fabrication. Composites 34(12), 1207–1217 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shah, V.: Handbook of Plastic Testing Technology, Second edn. New York (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Es Said, O.S., Foyos, J., Noorani, R., Mandelson, M., Marloth, R., Pregger, B.A.: Effect of layer orientation on mechanical properties of rapid prototyped samples. Mater. Manuf. Process 15(1), 107–122 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alafaghania, A., Qattawia, A., Alrawia, B., Guzmana, A.: Experimental Optimization of Fused Deposition Modelling Processing Parameters: A Design-for-Manufacturing Approach, pp. 791–803 (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sukindar, N.A. et al.: Optimization of the parameters for surface quality of the open-source 3D printing. J. Mech. Eng. 3(1), 33–43 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chaidas, D., Kitsakis, K. et al.: The impact of temperature changing on surface roughness of FFF process. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 161, 012033 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mendonsa, C., Naveen, K.V., Upadhyaya, P., Shenoy, V.D.: Influence of FDM process parameters on build time using Taguchi and ANOVA approach. Int. J. Sci. Res. 4(2), 2013–2016 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Akande, S.O.: Dimensional Accuracy and Surface Finish Optimization of Fused Deposition Modelling Parts using Desirability Function Analysis, vol. 4(4), pp. 196–202 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaji, F., Barari, A.: Evaluation of the surface roughness of additive manufacturing parts based on the modelling of cusp geometry. IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(3), 658–663 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringHarcourt Butler Technical UniversityKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations