Open AccessFABRICATION CYCLES COMPARISON OF ASSEMBLIES AND MONOLITHIC PARTS MADE BY 3D PRINTING METHOD
Author(s) -
Kinga Skrzek,
AUTHOR_ID,
M. Hetmańczyk,
AUTHOR_ID
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of modern manufacturing technologies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.197
H-Index - 7
ISSN - 2067-3604
DOI - 10.54684/ijmmt.2021.13.3.158
Subject(s) - palette (painting) , fused filament fabrication , fused deposition modeling , 3d printing , fabrication , computer science , process (computing) , engineering drawing , protein filament , mechanical engineering , mixing (physics) , screen printing , process engineering , materials science , engineering , composite material , medicine , alternative medicine , physics , pathology , quantum mechanics , operating system
The article presents an analysis of the time-consuming, energy-consuming, and cost-consuming nature of 3D printing a three-dimensional polymer components made in two separate approaches: assembly and monolith structure of various materials (automatic filament change required). The introduction includes the definition of 3D printing, its advantages and examples of practical applications, as well as the reason for undertaking the researches described in the article. The justification of the form of 3D sample models was discussed in detail, as well as the methodology adopted by the authors for comparing the print characteristics and the steps of the printing cycles (print preparation, the course of the printing process and post-processing). A comparison of the materials consumption in the phasess of manual and automatic filament change in the mixer were also described. The test printout was made on the Prusa i3 MK3S printer for filament deposition (FDM or FFF methods). For automatic filament mixing, the Palette 2 Pro device was used. The conclusions also include guidelines for the design and production of models made in one continuous printing cycle (using automatic filament feeding devices). Monolithic elements are less accurate, while elements with replaceable filaments are cheaper, less energy-consuming and the material consumption is lower.