Determination of optimal build direction in rapid prototyping with variable slicing

Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Several important factors must be taken into consideration in order to maximize the efficiency of rapid prototyping (RP) processes. The ability to select the optimal orientation of the build direction is one of the most critical factors in using RP processes, since it affects part quality, build time, and part cost. This study aims to determine the optimal build-up direction when a part is built with the variable layer thickness for different RP systems. The average weighted surface roughness (AWSR) that is generated from the stair stepping effect, the build time, and the part cost using the variable layer thickness are all considered in the process. Using the multi-attribute decision-making method, the best orientation is determined among the orientation candidates chosen from the convex hull of a model. The validity of the algorithm is illustrated by an example. The algorithm can help RP users select the best build-up direction of the part and create an efficient process planning.

Keywords

Average weighted surface roughness (AWSR) Part orientation Rapid prototyping Variable layer thickness  
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Williams RE, Kormaragiri VL, Bishu, RR (1996) Investigation of the effect of various build methods on the performance of rapid prototyping (stereolithography). J Mater Proc Technol 61:173–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng W, Fuh JYH, Nee AYC, Wong YS, Loh HT, Miyazawa T (1995) Multi-objective optimization of part building orientation in stereolithography. RPJ 1:12–23MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xu F, Loh HT, Wong YS (1999) Considerations and selection of optimal orientation for different rapid prototyping systems. RPJ 5:54–60Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frank D, Fadel G (1995) Expert system-based selection of the preferred direction of build for rapid prototyping processes. J Intell Manuf 6:339–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hur J, Lee K (1998) The development of a CAD environment to determine the preferred build-up direction for layered manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 14:247–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Allen S, Dutta D (1995) Determination and evaluation of support structures in layered manufacturing. J Des Manuf 5:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexander P, Allen S, Dutta D (1998) Part orientation and build cost determination in layered manufacturing. Comput Aided Des 30:343–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pham DT, Dimov DT, Gault RS (1999) Part orientation in stereolithography. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 15:674–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Masood SH, Rattanawong W, Iovenitti P (2000) Part build orientations based on volumetric error in fused deposition modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19:162–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reeves PE, Cobb RC (1995) Surface deviation modeling of LMT processes – A comparative analysis. Proc Fifth European Conference on Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing, University of Nottingham, UK, pp 59–77Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Campbell RI, Martorelli M, Lee HS (2002) Surface roughness visualization for rapid prototyping models. Comput Aided Des 34:717–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Byun HS, Lee KH (2003) Design of a new test part for benchmarking the accuracy and surface finish of rapid prototyping processes. LNCS 2669:731–740Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision-making-methods and applications, a state-of-the-art Survey. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making-methods and application, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CAD/CAM Lab., Department of MechatronicsKwangju Institute of Science and Technology (K-JIST)GwangjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations