SpringerLink
Log in

Investigating the effect of process parameters for fused filament fabrication

  • Full Research Article
  • Published:
Progress in Additive Manufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 26 January 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) is a promising technology that is largely developed in small series, as this technology optimizes supply chains by reducing production time and costs. However, its shortcomings have slowed its adoption as a dominant production technology. Among its weaknesses, this work focuses on geometric and dimensional accuracy within tolerance range. There is a need for understanding the sources of geometrical inaccuracies and for methods of characterizing them, in order to modify the input parameters to eventually obtain the desired geometry. This work first focuses on the geometric and dimensional accuracy of parts printed by the FFF process by studying the influence of the inner radius of a cylindrical part, the type of material and the type of filling pattern. The levels with the greatest dimensional dispersion are the largest radius, the nylon material, and the hexagonal filling pattern. Secondly, a defect characterization method associated with a parametric mathematical model is developed. The 3D scanner enables the retrieval of the coordinates of the printed geometry; this allows to characterize the errors with respect to the theoretical 3D model and to modelize the printed part by a series of ellipses of which we obtain the analytical equations, as a first step of a correction process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The experimental part was carried out in the Product Design and Innovation laboratory of the National School of Arts et Metiers. The materials used were the Mark Two™ Markforged® 3D printer, the Solutionix D500 3D Scanner, and the Geomagic® Control X™ software to recover the data of dimensional comparison between the designed part and the 3D printed model.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Change history

References

  1. Huang Y, Leu MC, Mazumder J, Donmez A (2015) Additive manufacturing: current state, future potential, gaps and needs, and recommendations. ASME J Manuf Sci Eng 137(1):014001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kruth JP, Leu MC, Nakagawa T (1998) Progress in additive manufacturing and rapid prototy**. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 47(2):525–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0007-8506(07)63240-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Levy GN, Schindel R, Kruth JP (2003) Rapid manufacturing and rapid tooling with layer manufacturing (LM) technologies, state of the art and future perspectives 2003. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 52(2):589–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0007-8506(07)60206-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chua CK, Leong KF (2015) 3D printing and additive manufacturing: principles and applications, fourth edition of rapid prototy**, 978–981. World Scientific Publishing Company, ISBN

    Google Scholar 

  5. Adanur S, Jayswal A (2021) Additive manufacturing of interlaced fibrous structures. J Rapid Prototyp 27(4):671–681. https://doi.org/10.1108/rpj-05-2020-0095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Melnikova R, Ehrmann A, Finsterbusch K (2014) 3D printing of textile-based structures by fused deposition modelling (FDM) with different polymer materials. IOP Confer Series Mater Sci Eng. 62:012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/62/1/012018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Quan Z, Wu A, Keefe M, Qin X, Yu J, Suhr J, B, JH, Kim BS, Chou TW, (2015) Additive manufacturing of multi-directional preforms for composites: opportunities and challenges. Mater Today 18(9):503–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2015.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wohlers Associates (2013) Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing State of the Industry. Wohlers Associates, Fort Collins, CO, Wohlers Report

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jayswal A, Adanur S (2022) Effect of heat treatment on crystallinity and mechanical properties of flexible structures 3D printed with fused deposition modeling (2022). J Ind Text 51(2):2616S-2641S. https://doi.org/10.1177/15280837211064937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dommati H, Ray SS, Wang JC, Chen SS (2019) A comprehensive review of recent developments in 3D printing technique for ceramic membrane fabrication for water purification. RSC Adv. https://doi.org/10.1039/c9ra00872a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Afrose MF, Masood SH, Iovenitti P, Nikzad M, Sbarski I (2016) Effects of part build orientations on fatigue behaviour of FDM-processed PLA material. Prog Addit Manuf 1:21–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-015-0002-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yao SS, ** FL, Rhee KY, Hui D, Park SJ (2017) Recent advances in carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites: a review. Composit Part B. 142(2018):241–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sobha AP, Sreekala PS, Narayanankutty SK (2017) Electrical, thermal, mechanical and electromagnetic interference shielding properties of PANI/FMWCNT/TPU composites. Prog Org Coat 113:168–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2017.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Melenka GW, Cheung BKO, Schofield JS, Dawson MR, Carey JP (2016) Evaluation and prediction of the tensile properties of continuous fiber-reinforced 3D printed structures. Compos Struct 153(2016):866–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dickson AN, Barry JN, Mcdonnell KA, Dowling DP (2017) Fabrication of continuous carbon, glass and kevlar fibre reinforced polymer composites using additive manufacturing. Addit Manuf 16:146–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2017.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Justo J, Tavara K, Garcia-Guzman L, Paris F (2017) Characterization of 3D printed long fibre reinforced composites. Compos Struct 185(2018):537–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Omar Ahmed M, Syed Hasan M, Jahar Lal B (2015) Experimental investigations of process parameters influence on rheological behaviour and dynamic mechanical properties of FDM manufactured parts. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 31(15):1983–1994. https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2015.1127955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fernandez-Vicente M, Calle W, Ferrandiz S, Conejero A (2016) Effect of infill parameters on tensile mechanical behavior in desktop3d printing. 3D Print Add Manufact. 3(3):183–192. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2015.0036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Baich L, Manogharan G, Marie H (2015) Study of infill print design on production cost-time of 3D printed ABS parts. Int J Rapid Manuf 5(3–4):308–319. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJRAPIDM.2015.074809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Akhoundi B, Behravesh AH (2019) Effect of filling pattern on the tensile and flexural mechanical properties of FDM 3D printed products. Exp Mech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-018-00467-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Maurya S, Malik B, Sharma P (2022) Investigation of different parameters of cube printed using PLA by FDM 3D printer. Mater Today. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.03.700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Alafaghania A, Qattawia A, Alrawia B, Guzman A (2017) A experimental optimization of fused deposition modelling processing parameters: a design-for-manufacturing approach. Procedia Manufact 10(2017):791–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B (2010) Additive manufacturing technologies rapid prototy** to direct digital manufacturing. Springer, Boston, MA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Jiang L, Ye H, Zhou C, Chen S, Xu W (2017) Parametric topology optimization toward rational design and efficient prefabrication for additive manufacturing. J Manufact Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/msec2017-2954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sood A, Ohdar R, Mahapatra S (2009) Improving dimensional accuracy of fused deposition modeling processed part using grey taguchi method Mater, 2009. Des Mater Des 30(2009):4243–4252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.04.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang Y, Leu MC, Mazumder J, Donmez A (2015) Additive manufacturing: current state, future potential, gaps and needs, and recommendations. J Manuf Sci Eng 137(1):14001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Aboutaleb AM, Tschopp MA, Rao PK, Bian L (2017) Multi-objective accelerated process optimization of part geometric accuracy in additive manufacturing. J Manuf Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mahesh M, Wong Y, Fuh J, Loh H (2004) Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of rp systems and processes. Rapid Prototyp J 10(2):123–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540410526999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kruth JP (1991) Material incress manufacturing by rapid prototy** techniques. CIRP Ann 40:603–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61136-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bochmann L, Bayley C, Helu M, Transchel R, Wegener K, Dornfeld D (2015) Understanding error generation in fused deposition modeling. Surf Topogr Metrol Prop 3:014002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mahesh M, Wong YS, Fuh JYH, Loh HT (2004) Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of RP systems and processes. Rapid Prototyp. J. 10(2):123135. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540410526999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Weheba G, Sanchez-Marsa A (2006) Using response surface methodology to optimize the stereolithography process. Rapid Prototyp J 12(2):72–77. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540610652401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. El-Katatny I, Masood SH, Morsi YS (2010) Error analysis of FDM fabricated medical replicas. Rapid Prototy** J 16(1):36–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541011011695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tootooni MS, Dsouza A, Donovan R, Rao P, Kong Z, Borgesen P (2017) Assessing the geometric integrity of additive manufactured parts from point cloud data using spectral graph theoretic sparse representation-based classification. ASME Paper No. https://doi.org/10.1115/MSEC2017-2794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tootooni MS, Dsouza A, Donovan R, Rao P, Kong Z, Borgesen P (2017) Classifying the dimensional variation in additive manufactured parts from laser-scanned three-dimensional point cloud data using machine learning approaches. ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 139(9):091005. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rao PK, Kong Z, Duty CE, Smith RJ, Kunc V, Love LJ (2015) Assessment of dimensional integrity and spatial defect localization in additive manufacturing using spectral graph theory. ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 138(5):051007. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4031574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Garg N, Rastogi V, Kumar P (2022) Process parameter optimization on the dimensional accuracy of additive manufacture Thermoplastic Polyurethane (TPU) using RSM. Today. Proc, Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.02.309

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Borouchaki H, Frey PJ (2022) Simplification of surface mesh using Hausdorff envelope. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 15(194):48–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2004.11.016

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Véron P, Léon JC (1997) Static polyhedron simplification using error measurements. Aided Geom. Des, Comp. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4485(96)00057-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. H Borouchakiet et al. 1997 Maillage géométrique de surfaces. Partie II: appauvrissement RR-INRIA

  41. Frey PJ, Borouchaki H (2003) Surface meshing using a geometric error estimate. J. Numer. Methods Engrg, Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.766

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Escobar JM, Cascón JM, Rodríguez E, Montenegro R (2011) A new approach to solid modeling with trivariate T-splines based on mesh optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Engrg 200:3210–3222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2011.07.004.2011

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Dantan JY, Huang Z, Goka E (2017) Geometrical variations management for additive manufactured product. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 66:161–164162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2017.04.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Franco P, Sanchez MT, Nalda E (2021) Mathematical models for the dimensional accuracy of products generated by additive manufacturing. Adv Math for Industry. Elsevier., Amsterdam Netherland, pp 361–388

    Google Scholar 

  45. Zhu Z, Keimasi S, Anwer N, Mathieu L, Qiao L (2017) review of shape deviation modeling for additive manufacturing. Advanc Mech Desig Eng Manufact Lectur Note Mech Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL (2015) Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters: a review of current research and prospects. Adv Manuf 3(1):42–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-014-0097-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gebhardt A (2012) Understanding Additive Manufacturing. ISBN 978–3–446–42552–1 E-Book-ISBN 978–3–446–43162–1

  48. Minitab17.https://www.minitab.com/uploadedfiles/Documents/gettingstarted/Minitab17_gettingstarted-en.pdf.

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arts Et Métiers Institute of Technology, LCPI, HESAM University, 75013, Paris, France

    Asma Boumedine & Khaled Benfriha

  2. Faculté de Technologie, LDMV, University of M’Hamed Bougara 3500, Boumerdes, Algeria

    Asma Boumedine & Samir Lecheb

  3. Service de Thermo-Hydraulique Et de Mécanique Des Fluides, Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, 91191, Gif-Sur-Yvette, France

    Pascal Omnes

  4. Institut Galilée, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, LAGA, CNRS UMR 7539, 99 Av. J.-B. Clément, 93430, Villetaneuse, France

    Pascal Omnes

Authors
  1. Asma Boumedine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samir Lecheb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Khaled Benfriha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pascal Omnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asma Boumedine.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

I hereby declare that all the authors of this work have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: equations in section 5 were not correct.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 The experimental design matrix, an L9 (3^3), with 27 runs was chosen to account for the factors and their levels (Table 3).

Table 3 The DOE matrix for the factors and their levels
Full size table

1.2 ANOVA report for average deviation

1.2.1 Analysis of variance

See Table 4.

Table 4 Analysis of variance
Full size table

1.2.2 Model summary

See Table 5

Table 5 Model summary of variance
Full size table

1.2.3 Coefficients

See Table 6

Table 6 Coefficients of variance
Full size table

1.3 ANOVA report for variance

1.3.1 Analysis of variance

See Table 7

Table 7 Analysis of variance for variance
Full size table

1.3.2 Model summary

See Table 8

Table 8 Model summary for variance
Full size table

1.3.3 Coefficients

See Table 9

Table 9 Coefficients for variance
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boumedine, A., Lecheb, S., Benfriha, K. et al. Investigating the effect of process parameters for fused filament fabrication. Prog Addit Manuf 8, 1147–1160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-022-00375-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-022-00375-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation