[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.9
Journals
Designs
Special Issues
Design Process for Additive Manufacturing
share announcement

Design Process for Additive Manufacturing

A special issue of Designs (ISSN 2411-9660). This special issue belongs to the section "Smart Manufacturing System Design".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 June 2025 | Viewed by 7916

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Paweł Turek

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszów University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland
Interests: additive manufacturing; polymer material; quality control; medical models; computer measurement systems
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Additive manufacturing (AM) processes are rapidly growing technologies that can produce highly complex models. Depending on the manufacturing method, the size of the part, and its complexity, it can take several hours or even days to create finished models using additive techniques. There is currently a wide variety of additive manufacturing methods available. AM models are widely utilized in the automotive, aerospace, and medical industries. Since functional models are often produced using additive technologies, they must meet the requirements related to, for example, strength assessments, dimensional-geometric tolerancing, and surface roughness.

A person designing a 3D-CAD model for 3D printing must prepare it so that its geometric parameters meet the most favorable operating conditions related to tightness, accuracy, connection between components, wear, or deformation, among other things. This task is challenging as each 3D printing technology has its technical limitations, which cause the produced model to often differ significantly from the designer's assumptions. Therefore, it is necessary to develop procedures at the design and manufacturing stages to minimize these differences.

When creating a 3D-CAD model for 3D printing, traditional modeling using Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems is commonly used. Challenges arise when technological or material documentation is not available for a product. This is especially common when designing models of anatomical structures, museum artifacts, or other complex geometric models where solid or surface design is usually impossible. The reverse engineering (RE) process can solve this problem thanks to the advancements in coordinate measuring systems, data processing software, and modern manufacturing techniques. This design process is also frequently used for developing 3D-CAD models for 3D printing, but it can lead to geometric mapping errors during the design stage. Therefore, it is necessary to develop procedures at the geometry design stage of the RE process to minimize these errors.

Given the current state of the literature, standards related to the traditional design of 3D-CAD models and the RE process for AM still need to be developed. The lack of a development of assumptions using the AM technique in the design and manufacturing stage greatly restricts the commercialization of finished products for the automotive, aerospace, and/or medical industries. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to this research problem.

Dr. Paweł Turek
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Designs is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • innovative design
  • computer-aided design
  • reverse engineering
  • additive manufacturing
  • static and dynamic me-chanical properties
  • finite element method
  • coordinate measurements
  • surface roughness
  • numerical studies

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (6 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

19 pages, 4301 KiB  
Article
Three-Dimensional Printed Auxetic Insole Orthotics for Flat Foot Patients with Quality Function Development/Theory of Inventive Problem Solving/Analytical Hierarchy Process Methods
by Tadeus Pantryan Simarmata, Marcel Martawidjaja, Christian Harito and Cokisela C. L. Tobing
Designs 2025, 9(1), 15; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9010015 - 28 Jan 2025
Viewed by 626
Abstract
Foot disorders affect approximately 10% of adults, with plantar heel pain significantly impacting foot-related quality of life and altering walking patterns. Flat feet, characterized by a lack of longitudinal arches, can lead to fatigue during walking. This study aims to develop 3D-printed shoe [...] Read more.
Foot disorders affect approximately 10% of adults, with plantar heel pain significantly impacting foot-related quality of life and altering walking patterns. Flat feet, characterized by a lack of longitudinal arches, can lead to fatigue during walking. This study aims to develop 3D-printed shoe insoles tailored to the needs of patients. The design process incorporates Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ), and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methods to create insoles that alleviate concentrated loads while meeting patient requirements. The AHP analysis indicated that patients prioritize insoles that effectively manage pressure distribution to achieve optimal functionality. QFD and TRIZ facilitated the identification of four product alternatives and production specifications. The analysis indicated that 3D-printed insoles made from TPU filament with 20% auxetic infill best align with patient preferences. This auxetic TPU option emerged as the top choice, achieving a priority value of 0.2506 due to its superior functionality and comfort. Load distribution measurements confirmed that TPU with auxetic infill resulted in the lowest load distribution, with a standard deviation of 0.1434 and a 25.4% reduction in maximum load compared to conditions without the insole. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Research flowchart.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Testing the distribution of load using the RPPS 2500 array sensor distribution system.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>AHP Hierarchy I: comparison between criteria.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>House of Quality structure.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Alternative improvements based on the TRIZ contradiction matrix.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Insole production process: (<b>a</b>) 3D scanning of the consumer’s foot; (<b>b</b>) insole design using the Gensole website; (<b>c</b>) slicing process using Bambuu Lab.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Auxetic insole design process: (<b>a</b>) auxetic structure design; (<b>b</b>) design structure for insoles; (<b>c</b>) combined structure and insole.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The results of the printing for each alternative.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Results of the center-of-mass measurements and load distribution: (<b>a</b>) without footwear; (<b>b</b>) using ABS material; (<b>c</b>) using PETG material; (<b>d</b>) using TPU material; (<b>e</b>) using TPU material with auxetic structure; (<b>f</b>) using traditional insole from marketplace.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Interval plot of load distribution at each measurement point.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>AHP Hierarchy II: comparisons between alternatives.</p> Full article ">
27 pages, 2896 KiB  
Article
Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Additive or Conventional Process Selection in the Preliminary Design Phase
by Alessandro Salmi, Giuseppe Vecchi, Eleonora Atzeni and Luca Iuliano
Designs 2024, 8(6), 110; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8060110 - 29 Oct 2024
Viewed by 883
Abstract
Additive manufacturing (AM) has become a key topic in the manufacturing industry, challenging conventional techniques. However, AM has its limitations, and understanding its convenience despite established processes remains sometimes difficult, especially in preliminary design phases. This investigation provides a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method [...] Read more.
Additive manufacturing (AM) has become a key topic in the manufacturing industry, challenging conventional techniques. However, AM has its limitations, and understanding its convenience despite established processes remains sometimes difficult, especially in preliminary design phases. This investigation provides a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method (MCDM) for comparing AM and conventional processes. The MCDM method consists of the Best Worst Method (BWM) for the definition of criteria weights and the Proximity Index Value (PIV) method for the generation of the final ranking. The BWM reduces the number of pairwise comparisons required for the definition of criteria weights, whereas the PIV method minimizes the probability of rank reversal, thereby enhancing the robustness of the results. The methodology was validated through a case study, an aerospace bracket. The candidate processes for the bracket production were CNC machining, high-pressure die casting, and PBF-LB/M. The production of the bracket by AM was found to be the optimal choice for small to medium production batches. Additionally, the study emphasized the significance of material selection, process design guidelines, and production batch in the context of informed process selection, thereby enabling technical professionals without a strong AM background in pursuing conscious decisions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Methodology flowchart.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Isometric view of the aerospace bracket initial concept, mechanical loads and constraints highlighted. Bounding box represented as a dashed line.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Dimensioned technical drawing of the aerospace bracket.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Concept refinements of the aerospace bracket, product requirements, and subsequent FE static validation. Colored maps refer to the Safety Factor computed during static validation. Maximum stress and maximum deformation were reported for each refined concept.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Proposed brackets orientations on the EOS M 290 building platform.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) TO results. (<b>b</b>) Redesigned bracket. (<b>c</b>) FE validation of the redesigned bracket.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>PIV of CNC machining, HPDC, and PBF-LB/M as a function of batch number.</p> Full article ">
23 pages, 4093 KiB  
Article
4D Printing: Research Focuses and Prospects
by Yuran Jin and Jiahui Liu
Designs 2024, 8(6), 106; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8060106 - 23 Oct 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1457
Abstract
As an emerging technology in the field of additive manufacturing, 4D printing is highly disruptive to traditional manufacturing processes. Therefore, it is necessary to systematically summarize the research on 4D printing to promote the development of related industries and academic research. However, there [...] Read more.
As an emerging technology in the field of additive manufacturing, 4D printing is highly disruptive to traditional manufacturing processes. Therefore, it is necessary to systematically summarize the research on 4D printing to promote the development of related industries and academic research. However, there is still an obvious gap in the visual connection between 4D printing theory and application research. We collected 2070 studies from 2013 on 4D printing from the core collection of Web of Science. We used VOSviewer 1.6.20 and CiteSpace software 6.3.3 to visualize the references and keywords to explore focuses and trends in 4D printing using scientometrics. In addition, real-world applications of 4D printing were analyzed based on the literature. The results showed that “tissue engineering applications” is the most prominent focus. In addition, “shape recovery”, “liquid crystal elastomer”, “future trends”, “bone tissue engineering”, “laser powder bed fusion”, “cervical spine”, “4D food printing”, “aesthetic planning” are also major focuses. From 2013 to 2015, focuses such as “shape memory polymers” and “composites” evolved into “fabrication”. From 2015 to 2018, the focus was on “technology” and “tissue engineering”. After 2018, “polylactic acid”, “cellulose”, and “regenerative medicine” became emerging focuses. Second, emerging focuses, such as polylactic acid and smart polymers, have begun to erupt and have become key research trends since 2022. “5D printing”, “stability” and “implants” may become emerging trends in the future. “4D + Food”, “4D + Cultural and Creative”, “4D + Life” and “4D + Clothing” may become future research trends. Third, 4D printing has been widely used in engineering manufacturing, biomedicine, food printing, cultural and creative life, and other fields. Strengthening basic research will greatly expand its applications in these fields and continuously increase the number of applicable fields. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The number of times publications related to 4D printing are cited.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The visual landscape map of co-cited references of 4D printing.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The intellectual landscapes of the 4D printing based on co-citation of the literature.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The co-cited reference network of the cluster “shape memory polymers”.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Co-occurrence keyword networks of the 4D printing.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Keyword hotspot network.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Top 25 burst keywords on 4D printing in 2013–2024.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Timeline view of 4D printing keywords.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Time zone view of 4D printing keywords.</p> Full article ">
18 pages, 17110 KiB  
Article
Contribution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Code-Based 3D Modeling Tasks
by Marianna Zichar and Ildikó Papp
Designs 2024, 8(5), 104; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8050104 - 18 Oct 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1231
Abstract
The rapid advancement of technology and innovation is also impacting education across different levels. The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is beginning to transform education in various areas, from course materials to assessment systems. This requires educators to reconsider how they evaluate students’ [...] Read more.
The rapid advancement of technology and innovation is also impacting education across different levels. The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is beginning to transform education in various areas, from course materials to assessment systems. This requires educators to reconsider how they evaluate students’ knowledge. It is crucial to understand if and to what extent assignments can be completed using AI tools. This study explores two hypotheses about the risks of using code-based 3D modeling software in education and the potential for students to delegate their work to AI when completing assignments. We selected two tasks that students were able to successfully complete independently and provided the same amount of information (both textual and image) to AI in order to generate the necessary code. We tested the widely used ChatGPT and Gemini AI bots to assess their current performance in generating code based on text prompts or image-based information for the two models. Our findings indicate that students are not yet able to entirely delegate their work to these AI tools. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>User interface of TinkerCAD application. Complex shapes can be designed from primitives of predefined libraries. All shapes can be used as solids or holes. Grouping is the tool to apply union or difference of the selected objects.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>User interface of SolidWorks. The Command Manager Toolbar (horizontal bar at the top of the window) presents all available 3D Feature tools. The separated panel on the left shows tools building the model in the so-called design tree.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Sample print-in-place design. On the left is the model in the slicer software with removed top layers to illustrate separate parts with required gaps. The middle figure shows the printed object. The right figure shows the movement capability of this model immediately after the printing.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>User interface of OpenSCAD application. Based on the sample code in the left window, the OpenSCAD logo is rendered.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>This slide includes a photo of the bridge railing and instructions on the main components of one item. Syntax forms of for loops and a sample code snippet about their usage are also available to help.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The second slide belonging to this task contains a CAD drawing with the dimensions and an image captured in OpenSCAD of the rendered item and its cross-section.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The models generated by ChatGPT based on the screenshot (located on the right-hand side of <a href="#designs-08-00104-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>). The left model is the first version, while code for the right-hand side column was proposed after a new prompt.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The models generated by ChatGPT based on the CAD drawing (located in the middle of <a href="#designs-08-00104-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>). The left model was proposed first, then the middle one after a second prompt. Since the middle model still consists of only cylinders, another prompt was asked, which resulted in the right model that is worse than the previous one.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The wrong script that Gemini generated after the prompt suggested using only modules instead of variables. The code directly passes the points to the function <span class="html-italic">polygon()</span> that is nested into <span class="html-italic">rotate_extrude()</span> function.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The solids designed by Gemini Advanced based on the OpenSCAD screenshot (right in <a href="#designs-08-00104-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>). Code for the left model was generated after the first prompt. The model on the right-hand side was rendered based on the code after the second and third prompts.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The model generated by Gemini Advanced based on the CAD drawing (right in <a href="#designs-08-00104-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>), and the introduced variables from the script. Inappropriate calculations resulted in a self-intersecting polygon that caused the two disjoint parts after rotating.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The three main components of the stone ornament, along with a photo and screenshot in OpenSCAD. The middle component has the most challenging shape, which justifies the need for more detailed instructions in the slide.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Detailed instruction on designing the middle part of the ornament. The right screenshot was taken in TinkerCAD to help understand the position and orientation of solids used to form the handle.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>ChatGPT generated models based on the OpenSCAD screenshot of the stone ornament. The left image was created based only on the screenshot; in the case of the middle and right ones, textual information was also provided to refine the shape.</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The solids generated by Gemini using only text prompts for the ornament. The same instructions were given as ChatGPT received in the first round. The left solid is the first model that is far from the desired one. The right-hand side model was created after a second prompt but resulted in no relevant changes.</p> Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The model generated by Gemini Advanced based on the screenshot of the ornament model. The left model represents all four parts, while the right one does not show the cutouts (whose role is unclear).</p> Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Models generated by Gemini Advanced after two further prompts. The first prompt resulted in the left model with a smooth circle but no improvement in the middle part. The right-hand side model has better-aligned parts but is still far from the desired shape.</p> Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Gemini Advanced generated the right-hand side model after resolving the syntax errors. The left image shows the wrong positions of the cylinders caused by using the centered cube.</p> Full article ">
15 pages, 7363 KiB  
Article
Integrating Pneumatic and Thermal Control in 3D Bioprinting for Improved Bio-Ink Handling
by Perrin Woods, Carter Smith, Scott Clark and Ahasan Habib
Designs 2024, 8(4), 83; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8040083 - 22 Aug 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1539
Abstract
The rapid advancement of 3D bioprinting has created a need for cost-effective and versatile 3D printers capable of handling bio-inks at various scales. This study introduces a novel framework for a specialized nozzle-holding device designed for an extrusion-based 3D bioprinter, specifically tailored to [...] Read more.
The rapid advancement of 3D bioprinting has created a need for cost-effective and versatile 3D printers capable of handling bio-inks at various scales. This study introduces a novel framework for a specialized nozzle-holding device designed for an extrusion-based 3D bioprinter, specifically tailored to address the rigorous requirements of tissue engineering applications. The proposed system combines a pneumatically actuated plunger mechanism with an adaptive nozzle system, ensuring the safe inhibition and precise dispensing of bio-inks. Rigorous thermal management strategies are employed to maintain consistently low temperatures, thereby preserving bio-ink integrity without changing chemical stability. A key component of this design is a precision-milled aluminum block, which optimizes thermal characteristics while providing a protective barrier. Additionally, a 3D-printed extruder head bracket, fabricated using a high-precision resin printer, effectively mitigates potential thermal inconsistencies. The integration of these meticulously engineered components results in a modified extrusion-based 3D bioprinter with the potential to significantly advance tissue engineering methodologies. This study not only contributes to the advancement of bioprinting technology but also underscores the crucial role of innovative engineering in addressing tissue engineering challenges. The proposed bioprinter design lays a solid foundation for future research, aiming to develop more accurate, efficient, and reliable bioprinting solutions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>An overview of the nozzle holder design: (<b>a</b>) a schematic of the bioprinter with a processing unit and process parameters, (<b>b</b>) a concept proposition, and (<b>c</b>) a flow chart of related experiments to modify for the final design and development.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Extruder head replacement from concept development to enhanced design.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Engineering drawing for extruder bracket: (<b>i</b>) Top view, (<b>ii</b>) Front view, (<b>iii</b>) Isometric view, and (<b>iv</b>) Side view.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Engineering drawings for (<b>a</b>) nozzle holder: (<b>i</b>) Top view, (<b>ii</b>) Front view, (<b>iii</b>) Isometric view, and (<b>iv</b>) Side view. and (<b>b</b>) nozzle syringe assembly: (<b>i</b>) Top view, (<b>ii</b>) Front view, (<b>iii</b>) Isometric view, and (<b>iv</b>) Side view.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) Workflow to manufacture the nozzle holder from material selection to final product.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Resin-printed extruder bracket; (<b>b</b>) assembly of aluminum syringe holder and resin bracket; (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) pneumatic connector, heating element, and temperature sensor.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) A schematic of all connections, (<b>b</b>) all components used to build air control systems and assembled air control systems, (<b>c</b>) assembled air control system connected to the customized nozzle holder, and (<b>d</b>) nozzle holder attached to the Ender 3 printer and working with our customized G-code.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) Connection between Arduino and voltage divider and detailed view of voltage divider connection with resistors and (<b>b</b>) circuit diagram generated using LTspice (Linear Technology, Milpitas, CA, USA).</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Extruding a single filament using our custom-made nozzle-holding system, (<b>b</b>) a series of printed filaments to show consistency, and (<b>c</b>) a 3D-printed construct. Additionally, 4% alginate and 4% CMC were used to print the filament and scaffold.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Proposed 3D models for next step extruders: (<b>a</b>) syringe mount, (<b>b</b>) hose mount, and (<b>c</b>) UV light mount.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Three-dimensional-printed models as proof of concept: (<b>a</b>) hose mount, (<b>b</b>) syringe mount, and (<b>c</b>) UV light mount.</p> Full article ">
13 pages, 13613 KiB  
Article
A Simplified Design Method for the Mechanical Stability of Slit-Shaped Additively Manufactured Reactor Modules
by David F. Metzger, Christoph Klahn and Roland Dittmeyer
Designs 2024, 8(3), 41; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8030041 - 7 May 2024
Viewed by 1270
Abstract
Equipment integrity is an essential aspect of process engineering. Design guidelines facilitate the design and production of safe-to-operate and economic devices. Thin-walled, slit-shaped modules form a subgroup of process engineering devices made via additive manufacturing (AM). Being subject to internal pressure, they have [...] Read more.
Equipment integrity is an essential aspect of process engineering. Design guidelines facilitate the design and production of safe-to-operate and economic devices. Thin-walled, slit-shaped modules form a subgroup of process engineering devices made via additive manufacturing (AM). Being subject to internal pressure, they have lacked design guidelines until now. We derived a user-centered calculation model for such modules with regular internal structures. It was validated with Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and practical pressure tests for which the modules were manufactured additively. The performance of the calculation could be confirmed, and a design graph was derived. Slit-shaped modules with appropriate internal structures can withstand high pressure at a minimum wall thickness, and they are efficiently fabricated. These structures, being pins, fins, lattice, or heat transfer enhancing fluid-guiding elements (FGEs), occupied approximately 10% of the modules’ internal volume. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design Process for Additive Manufacturing)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Designs for mechanical stability testing.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Definitions concerning FGE.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>CAD representation of module connectors. (<b>a</b>) Additive threaded connection: G1/8″. (<b>b</b>) Hybrid threaded connection: G1/8″ (possible at bottom end only).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Hybrid manufacturing of modules on nuts with an exemplary empty module (three-quarter cut).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Experimental procedure to test the mechanical stability. (<b>a</b>) Place marking in the middle of a module wall, measure the outside depth <span class="html-italic">D</span><sub>0</sub>, and attach to the test port of the pressure test rig. (<b>b</b>) Fill with water via a manual pump, close the opposite connector, and increase the pressure to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>p</mi> <mi>test</mi> </msub> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mo>=</mo> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mn>30</mn> <mi>bar</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>c</b>) After a minimum Time <span class="html-italic">t</span> = 15 <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>min</mi> </semantics></math>, measure the outside depth, <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>D</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> </semantics></math>, before decreasing to the ambient pressure.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Modules after pressure test. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">w</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = 1 mm. (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">w</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>0.6</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm. Green check marks indicate passing; red x marks indicate failing. (<b>a</b>) Empty planar. (<b>b</b>) Corrugated-10. (<b>c</b>) Arced-45. (<b>d</b>) Pins: <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">p</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = 3 mm <span class="html-italic">a</span> = 9. (<b>e</b>) Pins: <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">p</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = 4 mm <span class="html-italic">a</span> = 20 mm. (<b>f</b>) Pins: <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">p</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>0.42</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm <span class="html-italic">a</span> = 5 mm.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Results of mechanical stability calculation and experiment.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Failed pin-equipped module <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>t</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">p</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> = 4 mm <span class="html-italic">a</span> = 20 mm: photography of cross-cut in background, calculated deformation (dotted red line), and simulated deformation (multicolored area). Maximum deformation is visible at <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>x</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>11</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Calculated stability criterion for various thicknesses at constant load.</p> Full article ">
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-6
Back to TopTop