Accuracy prediction in fused deposition modeling

  • A. BoschettoEmail author
  • L. Bottini


Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a common additive manufacturing (AM) technology able to fabricate physical prototypes directly from virtual model without geometrical complexity limitations. Initially used to create concept models to help product design stage, FDM developed as regard materials, accuracy, and the overall quality of the output improved, becoming suitable for end use. At present, it is employed in process chains to significantly shorten product development times and costs and to produce parts in small and medium batch. A critical drawback which inhibits its diffusion is the obtainable accuracy. Only few indications, relating the dimensional deviations, exist, and they are conflicting each other, not allowing a reliable prediction. In this paper, a geometrical model of the filament, dependent upon the deposition angle and layer thickness, has been developed in order to predict the obtainable part dimensions. The model has been validated by an experimental campaign. The specimens have been investigated by means of profilometer analysis in order to study macrogeometrical and microgeometrical aspects. Finally, a case study highlighted the reliability of the model. The direct implication of this work is the capability, in process planning, to know in advance if the FDM part dimensions will satisfy the specification and the component will fit with others. Moreover, this model can be employed to choose the suitable manufacturing strategy in order to comply with industrial constrains and scopes.


Fused deposition modeling Accuracy Prediction model Obtainable tolerance Deposition angle 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Boschetto A, Veniali F (2010) Intricate shape prototypes obtained by FDM. Int J Mater Form 3(1):1099–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chua CK, Leong KF, Lim CS (2010) Rapid prototyping: principles and applications. World Scientific, River EdgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gebhardt A (2003) Rapid prototyping. Hanser, MunichCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooper KC (2001) Rapid prototyping technology. Selection and applications. Marcel Drekker, Inc., New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wohlers T (2012) Wohlers report 2012: executive summary. Wohlers Associates Inc., Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacobs PF (1992) Rapid prototyping and manufacturing: fundamentals of stereolithography. Society of Manufacturing Engineering, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Morvan S, Fadel G (2002) Virtual prototyping: a step before physical prototyping. In: Gibson I (ed) Software solution for rapid prototyping. Professional Engineering Publishing, London, pp 341–362Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO 10303 (2012) Industrial automation systems and integration - Product data representation and exchange. Technical Report ISOGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fadel GM, Kirschman C (1996) Accuracy issues in CAD to RP translations. Rapid Prototyp J 2(2):4–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boschetto A, Bottini L (2014) Surface characterization of fused deposition modeling. In: Santo L, Davim JP (eds) Surface engineering techniques and applications: research advancements. IGI Global, Harrisburg, pp 249–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Galantucci LM, Lavecchia F, Percoco G (2009) Experimental study aiming to enhance the surface finish of fused deposition modeled parts. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 58(1):189–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gibson I, Rosen DW, Stucker B (2009) Additive manufacturing technologies, rapid prototyping to direct digital manufacturing. Springer Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang TM, Xi JT, Jin Y (2007) A model research for prototype warp deformation in the FDM process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 33:1087–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vasudevarao B, Natarajan DP, Henderson M, Razdan A (2000) Sensitivity of RP surface finish to process parameter variation. In: Proceedings of Solid Free Form Fabrication Symposium, Austin, pp 252–258Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ahn DK, Kim H, Lee S (2007) Fabrication direction optimization to minimize post-machining in layered manufacturing. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(3–4):593–606CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hopkinson N, Hague R, Dickens P (2005) Rapid manufacturing an industrial revolution for the digital age. John Wiley & Sons, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Campbell I, Bourell D, Gibson I (2012) Additive manufacturing: rapid prototyping comes of age. Rapid Prototyp J 18(4):255–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moeskops E, Feenstra F (2008) Introduction to rapid prototyping. In: Raja V, Fernandes KJ (eds) Reverse engineering—an industrial perspective. Springer, London, pp 99–118Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ingole DS, Kuthe AM, Thakare SB, Talankar AS (2009) Rapid prototyping—a technology transfer approach for development of rapid tooling. Rapid Prototyp J 15(4):280–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liou FW (2007) Rapid prototyping and engineering applications. A Toolbox for Prototype Development. CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anitha R, Arunachalam S, Radhakrishnan P (2001) Critical parameters influencing the quality of prototypes in fused deposition modelling. J Mater Process Technol 118:385–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boschetto A, Giordano V, Veniali F (2011) Modelling micro geometrical profile in fused deposition process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 61(9–12):945–956Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thrimurthulu K, Pandey PM, Reddy NV (2004) Optimum part deposition orientation in fused deposition modelling. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 44(6):585–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Singh R (2014) Process capability analysis of fused deposition modelling for plastic components. Rapid Prototyp J 20(1):69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cunico MWM, De-Carvalho J (2013) Design of an FDM positioning system and application of an error-cost multiobjective optimization approach. Rapid Prototyp J 19(5):344–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tong K, Joshi S, Lehtihet EA (2008) Error compensation for fused deposition modeling (FDM) machine by correcting slice files. Rapid Prototyp J 14(1):4–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sood AK, Ohdar RK, Mahapatra SS (2009) Improving dimensional accuracy of fused deposition modelling processed part using grey Taguchi method. Mater Des 30(10):4243–4252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chang DY, Huang BH (2011) Studies on profile error and extruding aperture for the RP parts using the fused deposition modeling process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 53:1027–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Armillotta A (2006) Assessment of surface quality on textured FDM prototypes. Rapid Prototyp J 12(1):35–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pandey PM, Reddy NV, Dhande SG (2003) Improvement of surface finish by staircase machining in fused deposition modelling. Int J Mater Process Technol 132(1):323–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Campbell RI, Martorelli M, Lee HS (2002) Surface roughness visualization for rapid prototyping models. Comput Aided Design 34:717–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ahn DK, Kim H, Lee S (2009) Surface roughness prediction using measured data and interpolation in layered manufacturing. J Mater Process Technol 209(2):664–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ahn DK, Kweon JH, Kwon S, Song J, Lee S (2009) Representation of surface roughness in fused deposition modelling. J Mater Process Technol 209(15–16):5593–5600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boschetto A, Giordano V, Veniali F (2013) 3D roughness profile model in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyp J 19(4):240–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kruth JP (1991) Material incress manufacturing by rapid prototyping technologies. CIRP Ann 40(2):603–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Juster NP, Childs THC (1994) Linear and geometric accuracies from layer manufacturing. CIRP Ann 43(1):163–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ippolito R, Iuliano L, Gatto A (1995) A benchmarking of rapid prototyping techniques in terms of dimensional accuracy and surface finish. CIRP Ann 44(1):157–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mahesh M, Wong YS, Fuh JYH, Loh HT (2004) Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of RP systems and processes. Rapid Prototyp J 10(2):123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    El-Katatny I, Masood SH, Morsi YS (2010) Error analysis of FDM fabricated medical replicas. Rapid Prototyp J 16(1):36–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Singh R (2013) Some investigations for small-sized product fabrication with FDM for plastic components. Rapid Prototyp J 19(1):58–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Boschetto A, Bordoni M (2012) Thickening of surfaces for direct additive manufacturing fabrication. Rapid Prototyp J 18(4):308–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Montgomery DC (2009) Design and analysis of experiment. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gentle JE (2003) Random number generation and Monte Carlo methods. Springer Verlag, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    ISO 8785 (1998) Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) - Surface imperfections - Terms, definitions and parameters. Technical Report ISOGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Whitehouse DJ (2011) Handbook of surface and nanometrology. CRC Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    ISO 3274 (1996) Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface texture: Profile method - Nominal characteristics of contact (stylus) instruments. Technical Report ISOGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Whitehouse DJ (2004) Surfaces and their measurement. Kogan Page Science, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    ISO 3611 (2010) Geometrical product specifications (GPS) - Dimensional measuring equipment: micrometers for external measurements - Design and metrological characteristics. Technical Report ISOGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    DIN 863–1 (1999) Micrometers - Standard design external micrometers - Concepts, requirements and testing. Deutsches Institut Fur NormungGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    UNI 5708 (1984) Micrometri per esterni. Ente Nazionale Italiano di UnificazioneGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica e AerospazialeUniversità degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations