The past few decades have seen substantial growth in Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies. However, this growth has mainly been process-driven. The evolution of engineering design to take advantage of the possibilities afforded by AM and to manage the constraints associated with the technology has lagged behind. This paper presents the major opportunities, constraints, and economic considerations for Design for Additive Manufacturing. It explores issues related to design and redesign for direct and indirect AM production. It also highlights key industrial applications, outlines future challenges, and identifies promising directions for research and the exploitation of AM's full potential in industry.

/pdf/design-for-additive-manufacturing-trends-opportunities-22heccleea.pdf

Design for additive manufacturing: trends, opportunities, considerations, and constraints

Highly oriented carbon fiber–polymer composites via additive manufacturing

Parametric appraisal of mechanical property of fused deposition modelling processed parts

Design for manufacture and assembly (DFM) has typically meant that designers should tailor their designs to eliminate manufacturing difficulties and minimize manufacturing, assembly, and logistics costs. However, the capabilities of additive manufacturing technologies provide an opportunity to rethink DFM to take advantage of the unique capabilities of these technologies. As mentioned in Chap. 16, several companies are now using AM technologies for production manufacturing. For example, Siemens, Phonak, Widex, and the other hearing aid manufacturers use selective laser sintering and stereolithography machines to produce hearing aid shells; Align Technology uses stereolithography to fabricate molds for producing clear dental braces (“aligners”); and Boeing and its suppliers use polymer powder bed fusion (PBF) to produce ducts and similar parts for F-17 fighter jets. For hearing aids and dental aligners, AM machines enable manufacturing of tens to hundreds of thousands of parts, where each part is uniquely customized based upon person-specific geometric data. In the case of aircraft components, AM technology enables low-volume manufacturing, easy integration of design changes and, at least as importantly, piece part reductions to greatly simplify product assembly.

Design for Additive Manufacturing

Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a rapidly growing 3D printing technology. However, printing materials are restricted to acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) or poly (lactic acid) (PLA) in most Fused deposition modeling (FDM) equipment. Here, we report on a new high-performance printing material, polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK), which could surmount these shortcomings. This paper is devoted to studying the influence of layer thickness and raster angle on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed PEEK. Samples with three different layer thicknesses (200, 300 and 400 μm) and raster angles (0°, 30° and 45°) were built using a polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) 3D printing system and their tensile, compressive and bending strengths were tested. The optimal mechanical properties of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) samples were found at a layer thickness of 300 μm and a raster angle of 0°. To evaluate the printing performance of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) samples, a comparison was made between the mechanical properties of 3D-printed polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) parts. The results suggest that the average tensile strengths of polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) parts were 108% higher than those for acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), and compressive strengths were 114% and bending strengths were 115%. However, the modulus of elasticity for both materials was similar. These results indicate that the mechanical properties of 3D-printed polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) are superior to 3D-printed ABS.

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/8/9/5271/pdf

Influence of Layer Thickness and Raster Angle on the Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PEEK and a Comparative Mechanical Study between PEEK and ABS

Tensile strength, modulus of rupture, and impact resistance were found for different layer orientations of ABS rapid prototype solid models. The samples were fabricated by a Stratasys rapid prototyping machine in five different layer orientations. The 0° orientation where layers were deposited along the length of the samples displayed superior strength and impact resistance over all the other orientations. The anisotropic properties were probably caused by weak interlayer bonding and interlayer porosity.

M. Mendelson

Papers

Effect of Layer Orientation on Mechanical Properties of Rapid Prototyped Samples

Effects of Cryogenic Aging on a Rapid Prototyped (RP) Polymer