Creation and Assessment of a Novel Design Evaluation Tool for Additive Manufacturing

IF 2.9 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL
Alexander Cayley, Jayant Mathur, Nicholas Meisel
{"title":"Creation and Assessment of a Novel Design Evaluation Tool for Additive Manufacturing","authors":"Alexander Cayley, Jayant Mathur, Nicholas Meisel","doi":"10.1115/1.4063566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) is a rapidly growing technology within the industry and education sectors. Despite this, there lacks a comprehensive tool to guide AM novices in evaluating the suitability of a given design for fabrication by the range of AM processes. Existing design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) evaluation tools tend to focus on only certain key process-dependent DfAM considerations. By contrast, the purpose of this research is to propose a tool that guides a user to comprehensively evaluate their chosen design and educates the user on an appropriate DfAM strategy. The tool incorporates both opportunistic and restrictive elements, integrates the seven major AM processes, outputs an evaluative score, and recommends processes and improvements for the input design. This paper presents a thorough framework for this evaluation tool and details the inclusion of features such as dual-DfAM consideration, process recommendations, and a weighting system for restrictive DfAM. The result is a detailed recommendation output that helps users to determine not only “Can you print your design?” but also “Should you print your design?” by combining several key research studies to build a comprehensive user design tool. This research also demonstrates the potential of the framework through a series of user-based studies, in which the opportunistic side of the tool was found to have significantly improved novice designers’ ability to evaluate designs. The preliminary framework presented in this paper establishes a foundation for future studies to refine the tool’s accuracy using more data and expert analysis.","PeriodicalId":50137,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mechanical Design","volume":"76 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mechanical Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4063566","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) is a rapidly growing technology within the industry and education sectors. Despite this, there lacks a comprehensive tool to guide AM novices in evaluating the suitability of a given design for fabrication by the range of AM processes. Existing design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) evaluation tools tend to focus on only certain key process-dependent DfAM considerations. By contrast, the purpose of this research is to propose a tool that guides a user to comprehensively evaluate their chosen design and educates the user on an appropriate DfAM strategy. The tool incorporates both opportunistic and restrictive elements, integrates the seven major AM processes, outputs an evaluative score, and recommends processes and improvements for the input design. This paper presents a thorough framework for this evaluation tool and details the inclusion of features such as dual-DfAM consideration, process recommendations, and a weighting system for restrictive DfAM. The result is a detailed recommendation output that helps users to determine not only “Can you print your design?” but also “Should you print your design?” by combining several key research studies to build a comprehensive user design tool. This research also demonstrates the potential of the framework through a series of user-based studies, in which the opportunistic side of the tool was found to have significantly improved novice designers’ ability to evaluate designs. The preliminary framework presented in this paper establishes a foundation for future studies to refine the tool’s accuracy using more data and expert analysis.
一种新型增材制造设计评估工具的创建与评估
增材制造(AM)在工业和教育领域是一项快速发展的技术。尽管如此,缺乏一个全面的工具来指导增材制造新手通过增材制造工艺范围评估给定设计的适用性。现有的增材制造(DfAM)设计评估工具往往只关注某些关键的过程相关的DfAM考虑因素。相比之下,本研究的目的是提出一种工具,指导用户全面评估他们选择的设计,并教育用户适当的DfAM策略。该工具结合了机会性和限制性因素,集成了七个主要的增材制造过程,输出一个评估分数,并为输入设计推荐过程和改进。本文提出了该评估工具的全面框架,并详细介绍了包括双重DfAM考虑,过程建议和限制性DfAM加权系统等功能。结果是一个详细的推荐输出,帮助用户确定不仅仅是“你可以打印你的设计吗?”,还有“你应该把你的设计打印出来吗?”,通过结合几个关键的研究来构建一个全面的用户设计工具。本研究还通过一系列基于用户的研究证明了该框架的潜力,其中发现该工具的机会主义方面显着提高了新手设计师评估设计的能力。本文提出的初步框架为未来的研究奠定了基础,以利用更多的数据和专家分析来完善工具的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Mechanical Design
Journal of Mechanical Design 工程技术-工程:机械
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
139
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mechanical Design (JMD) serves the broad design community as the venue for scholarly, archival research in all aspects of the design activity with emphasis on design synthesis. JMD has traditionally served the ASME Design Engineering Division and its technical committees, but it welcomes contributions from all areas of design with emphasis on synthesis. JMD communicates original contributions, primarily in the form of research articles of considerable depth, but also technical briefs, design innovation papers, book reviews, and editorials. Scope: The Journal of Mechanical Design (JMD) serves the broad design community as the venue for scholarly, archival research in all aspects of the design activity with emphasis on design synthesis. JMD has traditionally served the ASME Design Engineering Division and its technical committees, but it welcomes contributions from all areas of design with emphasis on synthesis. JMD communicates original contributions, primarily in the form of research articles of considerable depth, but also technical briefs, design innovation papers, book reviews, and editorials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信