Effects of build orientation on tensile strength for stereolithography-manufactured ASTM D-638 type I specimens

A statistical design of experiments (DOE) approach was used to determine if specific build orientation parameters impacted mechanical strength of stereolithography (SL) fabricated parts. A single platform (25.4 × 25.4-cm cross-section) on the 3D Systems Viper si2 SL machine was designed to hold 18 ASTM D-638 type I samples manufactured in different orientations. The DOE tested three factors: axis, layout, and position. Samples were fabricated parallel with the x-axis or y-axis, or 45° to both axes (called axes 1, 2, and 3, respectively). For each axis, samples were fabricated either flat or on an edge relative to the x–y plane (called layouts 1 and 2, respectively). Three samples were manufactured for each layout and axis combination, and the samples were labeled as positions 1, 2, or 3 depending on the distance from the center of the platform with position 1 being the closest to the center. The results from the statistical analyses showed that axis and position had no significant effect on ultimate tensile stress (UTS) or modulus of elasticity in tension (E). However, layout (or whether a sample was built flat or on an edge) was shown to have a statistically significant effect on UTS and E (at a 95% level of confidence). The differences between average UTS and E for each of the samples built flat and on an edge were ~3.53% (43.2 versus 44.8 MPa) and ~4.59% (763.9 versus 800.7 MPa), respectively. Because of the relatively small differences in means for UTS and E, the statistical differences between layout most likely would not have been identified without performing the multifactor analysis of variance. Furthermore, layout was the only factor that tested different orientations of build layers (or layer-to-layer interfaces) with respect to the sample part, and thus, it appears that the orientation of the build layer (layer-to-layer interfaces) with respect to the fabricated part has a significant effect on the resulting mechanical properties. This study represents one of many to follow that is using statistical analyses to identify and classify important fabrication parameters on mechanical properties for layer-manufactured parts. Although SL is the focus of this work, the techniques developed and presented here can be applied to any layered manufacturing technology producing any ASTM-type specimen with any particular material.

[1]  J. Giannatsis,et al.  Decision support tool for selecting fabrication parameters in stereolithography , 2007 .

[2]  R. Wicker,et al.  Development of an automated multiple material stereolithography machine , 2006 .

[3]  Mark R. Cutkosky,et al.  PROCESS PLANNING FOR EMBEDDING FLEXIBLE MATERIALS IN MULTI-MATERIAL PROTOTYPES , 2003 .

[4]  Neil Hopkinson,et al.  Effects of electroplating on the mechanical properties of stereolithography and laser sintered parts , 2004 .

[5]  H. S. Byun,et al.  A decision support system for the selection of a rapid prototyping process using the modified TOPSIS method , 2005 .

[6]  Ryan B. Wicker,et al.  Functionalizing stereolithography resins: effects of dispersed multi‐walled carbon nanotubes on physical properties , 2006 .

[7]  Terry T. Wohlers,et al.  State of the industry : 1999 worldwide progress report : rapid prototyping & tooling , 1999 .

[8]  M. I. Heywood,et al.  Characterisation of Epoxy Resins for Microstereolithographic Rapid Prototyping , 1999 .

[9]  Ryan B. Wicker,et al.  Embedded micro-channel fabrication using line-scan stereolithography , 2005 .

[10]  Kwan H. Lee,et al.  Determination of optimal build direction in rapid prototyping with variable slicing , 2006 .

[11]  David W. Rosen,et al.  Building around inserts: methods for fabricating complex devices in stereolithography , 2001 .

[12]  N. Jawahar,et al.  Influence of layer thickness on mechanical properties in stereolithography , 2006 .

[13]  Janice M. Dulieu-Barton,et al.  Mechanical Properties of a Typical Stereolithography Resin , 2000 .

[14]  Chee Kai Chua,et al.  Dual Material Rapid Prototyping Techniques for the Development of Biomedical Devices. Part 2: Secondary Powder Deposition , 2002 .

[15]  N. Jawahar,et al.  Optimization of stereolithography process parameters for part strength using design of experiments , 2006 .

[16]  Eric MacDonald,et al.  Expanding rapid prototyping for electronic systems integration of arbitrary form , 2006 .

[17]  Ryan B. Wicker,et al.  Nanotailoring stereolithography resins for unique applications using carbon nanotubes , 2005 .

[18]  Eric MacDonald,et al.  Integrated layered Manufacturing of a Novel Wireless Motion Sensor System with GPS. , 2007 .

[19]  R. Hague,et al.  Materials analysis of stereolithography resins for use in Rapid Manufacturing , 2004 .

[20]  Constantinos Mavroidis,et al.  PROCEDURE FOR RAPID FABRICATION OF NON-ASSEMBLY MECHANISMS WITH EMBEDDED COMPONENTS , 2002 .

[21]  Yonghua Chen,et al.  Determining Build Orientation for Layer-Based Machining , 2001 .

[22]  Paul F. Jacobs,et al.  Stereolithography and Other Rp&m Technologies: From Rapid Prototyping to Rapid Tooling , 1995 .

[23]  Ryan B. Wicker,et al.  Mesoscale RF relay enabled by integrated rapid manufacturing , 2006 .