Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the measure of the aesthetic quality of 3D printed plastic parts

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

3D printing is one of the most interactive recent manufacturing technologies at both design and manufacturing levels. To date, the interest and involvement that people have shown towards the possibility to model and produce parts by themselves have boosted the proliferation of 3D printers. Nevertheless, an uncorrected design or a design that does not fit the machine capabilities could lead to parts with poor aesthetic features that reduce the user-perceived quality and the expectation of the easy user-usability of the technology. The purpose of this paper is to validate the robustness of the aesthetic quality index (AQI) that is used for the evaluation of the user-perceived quality of 3D printed parts. A specific reference part that was designed for 3D printing defects to have a high probability of occurrence is considered to be representative and greatly significant for the aesthetic quality of 3D printed parts. In this work a replica of the reference part is printed with three different 3D printers and evaluated by nine users. An additional replica is also produced for consistency assessment, and the quality evaluation test was repeated twice in 1 month. The AQI indicator results to be consistent and robust over the users and time. The measure of the AQI and the reference part seem user-friendly tools and may provide a useful design-aid for an immediate understanding of the feasibility of a specific design feature in a framework of user interactivity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Calignano, F., Manfredi, D., Ambrosio, E.P., Biamino, S., Lombardi, M., Atzeni, E., Salmi, A., Minetola, P., Iuliano, L., Fino, P.: Overview on additive manufacturing technologies. Proc. IEEE 105(4), 593–612 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cheng, G.Z., Estepar, R.S.J., Folch, E., Onieva, J., Gangadharan, S., Majid, A.: Three-dimensional printing and 3D slicer: powerful tools in understanding and treating structural lung disease. Chest 149(5), 1136–1142 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Minetola, P., Galati, M.: A challenge for enhancing the dimensional accuracy of a low-cost 3D printer by means of self-replicated parts. Addit. Manuf. 22, 256–264 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fuwen, H., Jiajian, C., Yunhua, H.: Interactive design for additive manufacturing: a creative case of synchronous belt drive. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. (IJIDeM) 12(3), 889–901 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kostakis, V., Niaros, V., Giotitsas, C.: Open source 3D printing as a means of learning: an educational experiment in two high schools in Greece. Telemat. Inform. 32(1), 118–128 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pei, E., Minetola, P., Iuliano, L., Bassoli, E., Gatto, A.: Impact of additive manufacturing on engineering education–evidence from Italy. Rapid Prototyp. J. (2015)

  7. Nadeau, J.-P., Fischer, X.: Research in interactive design (vol. 3): virtual, interactive and integrated product design and manufacturing for industrial innovation. Springer, Berlin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sebastianelli, R., Tamimi, N.: How product quality dimensions relate to defining quality. Int. J. Quality Reliab Manag 19(4), 442–453 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wicks, A.M., Roethlein, C.J.: A satisfaction-based definition of quality. J. Bus. Econ. Stud. 15(1), 82 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Garvin, D.A.: What does “hltoduct quality” really mean? Sloan management review 25 (1984)

  11. Ulrich, K.T., Pearson, S.: Assessing the importance of design through product archaeology. Manage. Sci. 44(3), 352–369 (1998)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. De Toni, A., Nassimbeni, G., Tonchia, S.: An instrument for quality performance measurement. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 38(2–3), 199–207 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Monk, A., Lelos, K.: Changing only the aesthetic features of a product can affect its apparent usability. In: Home Informatics And Telematics: ICT for the Next Billion. pp. 221–233. Springer, Berlin (2007)

  14. Mata, M.P., Ahmed-Kristensen, S., Brockhoff, P.B., Yanagisawa, H.: Investigating the influence of product perception and geometric features. Res. Eng. Design 28(3), 357–379 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu, J.J., MacGregor, J.F.: Modeling and optimization of product appearance: application to injection-molded plastic panels. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44(13), 4687–4696 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maxfield, J., Dew, P.M., Zhao, J., Juster, N., Fitchie, M.: A virtual environment for aesthetic quality assessment of flexible assemblies in the automotive design process. In: SAE Technical Paper, (2002)

  17. Protolabs: Manufacturing design aids. https://www.protolabs.com/resources/design-aids/

  18. Systems, J.: Design Tool. https://www1.jayconsystems.com/design-tool/. Accessed Jan 2019

  19. Banerjee, A.G., Li, X., Fowler, G., Gupta, S.K.: Incorporating manufacturability considerations during design of injection molded multi-material objects. Res. Eng. Des. 17(4), 207–231 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhao, G., Wang, G., Guan, Y., Li, H.: Research and application of a new rapid heat cycle molding with electric heating and coolant cooling to improve the surface quality of large LCD TV panels. Polym. Adv. Technol. 22(5), 476–487 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee, B., Kim, B.: Automated selection of gate location based on desired quality of injection-molded part. Sep. Sci. Technol. 35(2), 253–269 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Childs, T.H.C., Juster, N.P.: Linear and geometric accuracies from layer manufacturing. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 43(1), 163–166 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62187-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ippolito, R., Iuliano, L., Gatto, A.: Benchmarking of rapid prototyping techniques in terms of dimensional accuracy and surface finish. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 44(1), 157–160 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62296-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Xu, F., Wong, Y.S., Loh, H.T.: Toward generic models for comparative evaluation and process selection in rapid prototyping and manufacturing. J. Manuf. Syst. 19(5), 283–296 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mahesh, M., Wong, Y., Fuh, J.Y.H., Loh, H.T.: Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of RP systems and processes. Rapid Prototyp. J. 10(2), 123–135 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dimitrov, D., van Wijck, W., Schreve, K., de Beer, N.: Investigating the achievable accuracy of three dimensional printing. Rapid Prototyp. J. 12(1), 42–52 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Scaravetti, D., Dubois, P., Duchamp, R.: Qualification of rapid prototyping tools: proposition of a procedure and a test part. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 38(7–8), 683–690 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brajlih, T., Valentan, B., Balic, J., Drstvensek, I.: Speed and accuracy evaluation of additive manufacturing machines. Rapid Prototyp. J. 17(1), 64–75 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Garg, H.K., Singh, R.: Pattern development for manufacturing applications with fused deposition modelling-a case study. Int. J. Automot. Mech. Eng. 7(1), 981–992 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Singh, R., Singh, J.P.: Comparison of rapid casting solutions for lead and brass alloys using three-dimensional printing. P I Mech. Eng. C-J Mech. 223(9), 2117–2123 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson, W.M., Rowell, M., Deason, B., Eubanks, M.: Comparative evaluation of an open-source FDM system. Rapid Prototyp. J. 20(3), 205–214 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh, R., Singh, G.: Investigations for statistically controlled investment casting solution of FDM-based ABS replicas. Rapid Prototyp. J. 20(3), 215–220 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Cruz Sanchez, F.A., Boudaoud, H., Muller, L., Camargo, M.: Towards a standard experimental protocol for open source additive manufacturing: this paper proposes a benchmarking model for evaluating accuracy performance of 3D printers. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 9(3), 151–167 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2014.919553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Minetola, P., Iuliano, L., Marchiandi, G.: Benchmarking of FDM machines through part quality using IT grades. Procedia CIRP 41, 1027–1032 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Qattawi, A., Ablat, M.A.: Design consideration for additive manufacturing: fused deposition modelling. Op. J. Appl. Sci. 7(06), 291 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Regina, F., Lavecchia, F., Galantucci, L.M.: Preliminary study for a full colour low cost open source 3D printer, based on the combination of fused deposition modelling (FDM) or fused filament fabrication (FFF) and inkjet printing. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. (IJIDeM) 12(3), 979–993 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Galati, M., Minetola, P., Marchiandi, G., Atzeni, E., Calignano, F., Salmi, A., Iuliano, L.: A methodology for evaluating the aesthetic quality of 3D printed parts. Procedia CIRP 79, 95–100 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Simplify3D: Print Quality Troubleshooting Guide. https://www.simplify3d.com/support/print-quality-troubleshooting/. Accessed Feb 2017

  39. Verkstan, D.: A visual Ultimaker Troubleshooting Guide. http://support.3dverkstan.se/article/23-a-visual-ultimaker-troubleshooting-guide. Accessed Feb 2017

  40. Horne, R.: The ‘Art’ of Failure—When 3D Prints Go Wrong and Lessons from Failure http://richrap.blogspot.it/2011/10/art-of-failure-when-3d-prints-go-wrong.html. Accessed Feb 2017

  41. GrabCad: https://grabcad.com/library/benchmarking-of-3d-printing-1. Accessed 30 April 2018

  42. Forrest, M., Andersen, B.R.: Ordinal scale and statistics in medical research. Br. Med. J. (Clin. Res. Ed.) 292(6519), 537–538 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Velleman, P.F., Wilkinson, L.: Nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio typologies are misleading. Am. Stat. 47(1), 65–72 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Brondino, G., Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Vicario, G.: Synthesis maps for multivariate ordinal variables. Stat. Appl. 16, 545–561 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Yager, R.R.: Fusion of ordinal information using weighted median aggregation. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 18(1–2), 35–52 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Lamata, M.T.: Ranking of alternatives with ordered weighted averaging operators. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 19(5), 473–482 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Varetto, M.: Qualitative ordinal scales: the concept of ordinal range. Qual. Eng. 16(4), 515–524 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Noll, H. -H.: Subjective social indicators: benefits and limitations for policy making—An introduction to this special issue. Soc. Ind. Res. 113, 1–11 (2013)

  49. Franceschini, F., Romano, D.: Control chart for linguistic variables: a method based on the use of linguistic quantifiers. Int. J. Prod. Res. 37(16), 3791–3801 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Production Engineering (DIGEP), Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi, 24 – 10129, Turin, Italy

    Manuela Galati & Paolo Minetola

Authors
  1. Manuela Galati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paolo Minetola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manuela Galati.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 5.

Table 5 Makerbot replicator (white replica) B: Stratasys Dimension EliteTM (orange replica) C: Stratasys Dimension EliteTM (grey replica) D: 3ntr A4 (yellow replica)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galati, M., Minetola, P. On the measure of the aesthetic quality of 3D printed plastic parts. Int J Interact Des Manuf 14, 381–392 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00627-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00627-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation