| Literature DB >> 35815121 |
Amanuel Diriba Tura1, Hana Beyene Mamo1.
Abstract
Additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, is a cutting-edge industrial production technique that enables the creation of lighter, stronger components and systems. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a popular AM process for creating prototypes and functional components out of common engineering polymers. The mechanical characteristics of printed items are dramatically altered as a result of various process factors. As a result, it is critical to examine the impact of printing settings on the quality of the printed item. In terms of flexural strength, this study presents an experimental examination into the quality analysis of parameters on printed components utilizing FDM. By adjusting process factors such as layer height, raster width, raster angle, and orientation angle, the experiment was carried out utilizing Taguchi's L18 mixed orthogonal array approach. The UNITEK-94100 universal testing equipment was used to evaluate the flexural strength of Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) specimens that had been conditioned as per ASTM D790 standard. The impacts of parameters on experimental results were examined and optimized using the hybrid genetic algorithm with response surface methods, response surface approach, and Taguchi method. When the optimal solutions of each technique were studied, the response surface approach and Taguchi methods were determined to be less promising than the genetic algorithm method.Entities:
Keywords: Additive manufacturing; Flexural strength; Fused deposition modeling; Genetic algorithm; Response surface method; Taguchi method
Year: 2022 PMID: 35815121 PMCID: PMC9257345 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09832
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Process parameters to be controlled and its range.
| S.No. | Process parameters | Units | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layer height | mm | 0.15 | 0.25 | ||
| Raster width | mm | 0.4064 | 0.4364 | 0.4664 | |
| Raster angle | ˚ | 0 | 22.5 | 45 | |
| Orientation angle | ˚ | 0 | 15 | 30 |
L18 orthogonal array Taguchi experimental design matrix and measured responses.
| Exp. Trials | Layer height (mm) | Raster width (mm) | Raster angle (˚) | Orientation angle (˚) | Flexural Strength (MPa) | S/N ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 0.15 | 0.4064 | 0.0 | 0 | 15.34 | 23.7165 |
| 2. | 0.15 | 0.4064 | 22.5 | 15 | 22.79 | 27.1549 |
| 3. | 0.15 | 0.4064 | 45.0 | 30 | 22.13 | 26.8996 |
| 4. | 0.15 | 0.4364 | 0.0 | 0 | 22.82 | 27.1663 |
| 5. | 0.15 | 0.4364 | 22.5 | 15 | 28.14 | 28.9865 |
| 6. | 0.15 | 0.4364 | 45.0 | 30 | 29.83 | 29.4931 |
| 7. | 0.15 | 0.4664 | 0.0 | 15 | 20.29 | 26.1456 |
| 8. | 0.15 | 0.4664 | 22.5 | 30 | 31.24 | 29.8942 |
| 9. | 0.15 | 0.4664 | 45.0 | 0 | 18.79 | 25.4785 |
| 10. | 0.25 | 0.4064 | 0.0 | 30 | 14.09 | 22.9782 |
| 11. | 0.25 | 0.4064 | 22.5 | 0 | 22.12 | 26.8957 |
| 12. | 0.25 | 0.4064 | 45.0 | 15 | 31.64 | 30.0047 |
| 13. | 0.25 | 0.4364 | 0.0 | 15 | 18.81 | 25.4878 |
| 14. | 0.25 | 0.4364 | 22.5 | 30 | 27.92 | 28.9183 |
| 15. | 0.25 | 0.4364 | 45.0 | 0 | 30.69 | 29.7399 |
| 16. | 0.25 | 0.4664 | 0.0 | 30 | 13.45 | 22.5744 |
| 17. | 0.25 | 0.4664 | 22.5 | 0 | 27.78 | 28.8746 |
| 18. | 0.25 | 0.4664 | 45.0 | 15 | 25.04 | 27.9727 |
Figure 1The ASTM D790 - flexural test (size: mm).
Figure 2Flexural test specimens.
Figure 3Experimental setup of flexural test.
GA parameter setting and its value.
| Population type | Double vectors |
|---|---|
| Population size | 200 |
| Creation function | Feasible population |
| Fitness scaling function | Rank |
| Selection function | Tournament |
| Tournament size | 4 |
| Reproduction | Default values |
| Elite count | 1.5 (0.05∗ Population size) |
| Crossover fraction | 0.8 |
| Mutation function | Adaptive feasible |
| Crossover function | Constraint dependent |
| Number of generations | 400 |
| Function tolerance | 1e-6 |
| Constraint tolerance | 1e-3 |
ANOVA for flexural strength.
| Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 13 | 552.090 | 42.4684 | 3.95 | 0.097 |
| A | 1 | 12.115 | 12.1150 | 1.13 | 0.348 |
| B | 1 | 69.462 | 69.4617 | 6.47 | 0.064 |
| C | 1 | 1.177 | 1.1767 | 0.11 | 0.757 |
| D | 1 | 5.895 | 5.8946 | 0.55 | 0.500 |
| B∗B | 1 | 60.712 | 60.7116 | 5.65 | 0.076 |
| C∗C | 1 | 58.752 | 58.7520 | 5.47 | 0.079 |
| D∗D | 1 | 0.374 | 0.3741 | 0.03 | 0.861 |
| A∗B | 1 | 14.920 | 14.9204 | 1.39 | 0.304 |
| A∗C | 1 | 60.594 | 60.5940 | 5.64 | 0.076 |
| A∗D | 1 | 12.832 | 12.8316 | 1.19 | 0.336 |
| B∗C | 1 | 2.383 | 2.3831 | 0.22 | 0.662 |
| B∗D | 1 | 2.821 | 2.8207 | 0.26 | 0.635 |
| C∗D | 1 | 3.708 | 3.7085 | 0.35 | 0.588 |
| Error | 4 | 42.966 | 10.7416 | ||
| Total | 17 | 595.056 |
Response table for flexural strength.
| Levels | Layer height mm | Raster width mm | Raster angle | Orientation angle |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 23.49 | 21.35 | 17.47 | 22.92 |
| 2 | 23.50 | 26.37 | 26.67 | 24.45 |
| 3 | 22.77 | 26.35 | 23.11 | |
| Delta | 0.02 | 5.02 | 9.20 | 1.53 |
| Rank | 4 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
ANOVA for flexural strength.
| Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.00 | 0.993 | |
| 2 | 80.297 | 40.148 | 2.24 | 0.157 | |
| 2 | 327.359 | 163.679 | 9.14 | 0.006 | |
| 2 | 8.341 | 4.171 | 0.23 | 0.796 | |
| 10 | 179.057 | 17.906 | |||
| 17 | 595.056 |
Figure 4Contour plots of flexural strength with process parameters.
Figure 5Factorial plots for flexural strength and inputs parameters.
Figure 6Average spread as a function of iteration number for flexural strength.
GA, RSM, and Taguchi methods optimized response parameters.
| Optimization methods | Optimum setting | Optimum flexural strength (MPa) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layer height (mm) | Raster width (mm) | Raster angle (˚) | Orientation angle (˚) | ||
| 0.25 | 0.432 | 43.871 | 29.991 | 33.096 | |
| Response surface methods (RSM) optimization | 025 | 0.4306 | 43.6364 | 30 | 33.315 |
| Taguchi methods optimization | 0.25 | 0.4064 | 45 | 15 | 31.640 |
Figure 7Optimization of response parameters using RSM.