ANALYZING THE EFFECT OF NOZZLE DIAMETER IN FUSED DEPOSITION MODELING FOR EXTRUDING POLYLACTIC ACID USING OPEN SOURCE 3D PRINTING

Authors

  • Nor Aiman Sukindar Mechanical Department of Politeknik Kuching Sarawak, 93050 Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia
  • M. K. A. Ariffin Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, 43400 Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
  • B. T. Hang Tuah Baharudin Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, 43400 Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
  • Che Nor Aiza Jaafar Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, 43400 Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
  • Mohd Idris Shah Ismail Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, 43400 Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.6265

Keywords:

Nozzle diameter, pressure drop, fused deposition modeling, open source 3D printing

Abstract

Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is one of the Rapid Prototyping (RP) technologies. The 3D Printer has been widely used in the fabrication of 3D products. One of the main issues has been to obtain a high quality for the finished parts. The present study focuses on the effect of nozzle diameter in terms of pressure drop, geometrical error as well as extrusion time. While using polylactic acid (PLA) as a material, the research was conducted using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) by manipulating the nozzle diameter, and the pressure drop along the liquefier was observed. The geometrical error and printing time were also calculated by using different nozzle diameters. Analysis shows that the diameter of the nozzle significantly affects the pressure drop along the liquefier which influences the consistency of the road width thus affecting the quality of the product’s finish. The vital aspect is minimizing the pressure drop to be as low as possible, which will lead to a good quality final product. The results from the analysis demonstrate that a 0.2 mm nozzle diameter contributes the highest pressure drop, which is not within the optimum range. In this study, by considering several factors including pressure drop, geometrical error and printing time, a 0.3 mm nozzle diameter has been suggested as being in the optimum range for extruding PLA material using open-source 3D printing. The implication of this result is valuable for a better understanding of the melt flow behavior of the PLA material and for choosing the optimum nozzle diameter for 3D printing.

Author Biographies

  • Nor Aiman Sukindar, Mechanical Department of Politeknik Kuching Sarawak, 93050 Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia
    Lecturer at Mechanical Department (Manufacturing)
  • M. K. A. Ariffin, Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing, 43400 Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia

    PROF. MADYA DR. MOHD KHAIROL ANUAR BIN MOHD ARIFFIN (Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing)

References

Pandey, P. M. 2010. Rapid Prototyping Technologies, Applications and Part Deposition Planning. Retrieved Oct., 2010, 15.

Chua, C. K., Leong K. F. and Lim C. S. 2003. Rapid Prototyping, Principles and Applications. 2nd Edition. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co.Pte ltd.

Hull, C. W. 1986. Apparatus For Production Of Three-Dimensional Objects By Stereolithography. US 4575330 A. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Crump, S. S. 1992. Apparatus And Method For Creating Three-Dimensional Objects. U.S. Patent No. 5,121,329. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Wohlers, T. T. 2000. Rapid Prototyping & Tooling: State of the Industry: Annual Worldwide Progress Report. USA: Wohlers Associates.

Zein, I., Hutmacher, D. W., Tan, K. C. and Teoh, S. H. 2002. Fused Deposition Modeling Of Novel Scaffold Architectures For Tissue Engineering Applications. Biomaterials. 23(4): 1169-1185.

Roberson, D. A., Espalin, D. and Wicker, R. B. 2013. 3D Printer Selection: A Decision-Making Evaluation And Ranking Model. Virtual and Physical Prototyping. 8(3): 201-212.

Jones, R., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V., Palmer, C. and Bowyer, A. 2011. Reprap–The Replicating Rapid Prototyper. Robotica. 29(1): 177-191.

Wittbrodt, B. T., Glover, A. G., Laureto, J., Anzalone, G. C., Oppliger, D., Irwin, J. L. and Pearce, J. M. 2013. Life-Cycle Economic Analysis Of Distributed Manufacturing With Open-source 3-D printers. Mechatronics. 23(6): 713-726.

Rocholl, J. C. 2012. Rostock. .

Anzalone, G. C., Wijnen, B. and Pearce, J. M. 2015. Multi-Material Additive And Subtractive Prosumer Digital Fabrication With A Free And Open-source Convertible Delta RepRap 3-D Printer. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 21(5): 506-519.

Jackson, D. W. and Simon, T. M. 1999. Tissue Engineering Principles In Orthopaedic Surgery. Clinical Orthopaedics And Related Research. 367: S31-S45.

Park, H., Temenoff, J. and Mikos, A. 2007. Biodegradable orthopedic implants. Engineering of Functional Skeletal Tissues. 3: 55-68.

Drummer, D., Cifuentes-Cuéllar, S. and Rietzel, D. 2012. Suitability of PLA/TCP For Fused Deposition Modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 18(6): 500-507.

Bagsik, A., Schoeppner, V. and Klemp, E. 2010. FDM Part Quality Manufactured with Ultem* 9085. 14th Int. Sci. Conf. Polym. Mater. 15, 2010.

Novakova-Marcincinova, L. and Novak-Marcincin, J. 2013. Verification of Mechanical Properties of ABS Materials used in FDM Rapid Prototyping Technology. Proceedings in Manufacturing Systems. 8(2): 87-92.

Melenka, G. W., Schofield, J. S., Dawson, M. R. and Carey, J. P. 2015. Evaluation Of Dimensional Accuracy And Material Properties Of The Makerbot 3D Desktop Printer. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 21(5): 618-627.

Patel, P. B., Patel, J. D. and Maniya, K. D. 2015. Evaluation of FDM Process Parameter for PLA Material by Using MOORA-TOPSIS Method. International Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Technology. 3(1): 84-93.

Ahn, S. H., Montero, M., Odell, D., Roundy, S. and Wright, P. K. 2002. Anisotropic Material Properties Of Fused Deposition Modeling ABS. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 8(4): 248-257.

Akande, S. O. 2015. Dimensional Accuracy and Surface Finish Optimization of Fused Deposition Modelling Parts using Desirability Function Analysis. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology. 4(4):196-202.

Ramanath, H. S., Chua, C. K., Leong, K. F. and Shah, K. D. 2008. Melt Flow Behaviour Of Poly-Ε-Caprolactone In Fused Deposition Modelling. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine. 19(7): 2541-2550.

Mireles, J., Espalin, J., Roberson, D., Zinniel, B., Medina, F. and Wicker, R. 2012. Fused Deposition Modeling of Metals. Journal of Electronic Packaging. 836-845.

Mostafa, N., Syed, H. M., Igor, S. and Andrew, G. 2009. A Study of Melt Flow Analysis of an ABS-Iron Composite in Fused Deposition Modelling Process. Tsinghua Science and Technology. 14(1): 29-37.

Turner, B. N., Strong, R. and Gold, S. A. 2014. A Review Of Melt Extrusion Additive Manufacturing Processes: I. Process Design And Modeling. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 20(3): 192-204.

Liang J. Z. and Ness J. N. 1997. Effect Of Die Angle On Flow Behaviour For High Impact Polystyrene Melt. Polymer Testing. 16(4): 403-412.

Brooks, H. L., Rennie, A. E. W., Abram, T. N., McGovern, J. and Caron, F. 2011. Variable Fused Deposition Modelling-Analysis Of Benefits, Concept Design And Tool Path Generation. Innovative Developments in Virtual and Physical Prototyping: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping. Leiria, Portugal. 28 September-1 October. 511-517.

Downloads

Published

2016-09-29

Issue

Vol. 78 No. 10: October 2016

Section

Science and Engineering

License

Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.

How to Cite

ANALYZING THE EFFECT OF NOZZLE DIAMETER IN FUSED DEPOSITION MODELING FOR EXTRUDING POLYLACTIC ACID USING OPEN SOURCE 3D PRINTING. (2016). Jurnal Teknologi, 78(10). https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.6265