An Experimental Investigations for Improving Part Strength in Fused Deposition Modeling

  • Authors

    • Nagendra Kumar Maurya
    • Vikas Rastogi
    • Pushpendra Singh
    2018-12-13
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.39.24124
  • Design of experiment, FDM process, Grey relational analysis, Taguchi design and Tensile strength

  • Abstract

    This paper aims to experimentally investigate the impact of process parameter on ultimate tensile strength & rate of fabrication through fused deposition modeling. For this purpose MakerBot Replicator -2, 3D desktop printer was used for the fabrication of test samples. ASTM D638 standard was selected for the preparation of test specimen of poly lactic acid (PLA) material. The process parameters used in this investigation were layer thickness, raster angle, infill pattern and orientation. Experiment was conducted as per the Taguchi      orthogonal design array (L16). Finally Gray relational analysis (GRA) was employed to select the optimum best level of process         parameter. A regression model was developed in terms of process parameters. For checking the goodness of fit for the model, a          confirmation test was conducted which reveals that developed model was good enough to predict the response in the CI of 95%. The     optimum level of process parameters was found to be layer thickness of 0.1 mm, raster angle 450, honeycomb infill pattern and flat        orientation.

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] Cheah CM, Chua CK, Lee CW, Feng C & Totong K (2005), Rapid prototyping and tooling techniques: a review of applications for rapid investment casting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 25, 308–320.

      [2] Durgun I & Ertan R (2014), Experimental investigation of FDM process for improvement of mechanical properties and production cost. Rapid Prototyping Journal 20 (3), 228 – 235.

      [3] Bellini A & Guceri S (2003), Mechanical characterization of parts fabricated using fused deposition modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal 9(4), 252–264.

      [4] Cantrell J, Rohde S, Damini D, Gurnani R, Sandro LD, Anton J, Young A and Jerez A (2016), Experimental Characterization of the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed ABS and Polycarbonate Parts. Rapid Prototyping Journal 23(4), 811-824.

      [5] Raut S, Kumar V, Jatti S, Khedkar NK and Singh TP, (2014), Investigation of the effect of built orientation on mechanical properties and total cost of FDM parts. Procedia Materials Science. 6, 1625 – 1630.

      [6] Onwubolu GC & Rayegani F (2014),Characterization and Optimization of Mechanical Properties of ABS Parts Manufactured by the Fused Deposition Modelling Process. International Journal of Manufacturing Engineering. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/598531.

      [7] Dawoud M, Taha I & Ebeid SJ (2016), Mechanical behaviour of ABS: An experimental study using FDM and injection moulding techniques. Journal of Manufacturing Process 21,39–45.

      [8] Wu W, Geng P, Li G, Zhao D, Zhang H & Zhao J (2015), Influence of Layer Thickness and Raster Angle on the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PEEK and a Comparative Mechanical Study between PEEK and ABS, Materials 8, 5834-5846.

      [9] Sajan N, John TD, Sivadasan M & Singh NK (2018), An investigation on circularity error of components processed on Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM). Materials Today: Proceedings 5, 1327–1334.

      [10] Wang CC, Lin TW & Hu SS (2010), Optimizing the rapid prototyping process by integrating the Taguchi method with the Gray relational analysis. Rapid Prototyping Journal 13(5), 304–315.

      [11] Roy R, (1990). A primer on the Taguchi method, Society of Manufacturing Engineers.

      [12] Jain PK, Pandey PM & Rao PVM (2008), Experimental investigations for improving part strength in selective laser sintering. Virtual and Physical Prototyping 3(3), 177-188.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Kumar Maurya, N., Rastogi, V., & Singh, P. (2018). An Experimental Investigations for Improving Part Strength in Fused Deposition Modeling. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.39), 457-461. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.39.24124

    Received date: 2018-12-16

    Accepted date: 2018-12-16

    Published date: 2018-12-13