Abstract
Additive manufacturing technologies produce objects which present a characteristic surface texture. This is an inevitable and systematic error and has a predictable shape feature which depends on certain process parameters. In order to reduce manufacturing costs and obtain the best results from the point of view of quality, it is essential to predict this error in advance and choose the process parameters which minimise it. For the purpose of measuring the surface quality, the index R a (ISO 4287, 1997) is used in the related literature. In this paper, it is first demonstrated that the use of roughness parameters in FDM-manufactured surfaces is not adequate to quantify the surface error. The parameter P a (ISO 4287) is proposed as a more appropriate index to evaluate the surface quality; it is investigated and critically analysed in comparison with the R a index. A new original model to predict P a for FDM-manufactured surfaces is presented. The model prediction is compared with experimental data and with the estimation performed by the models described in the literature, within the limits of their capability to predict P a.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gibson I, Rosen DW, Stucker B (2010) Additive manufacturing technologies, vol 238. Springer, New York
Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL (2015) Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters: a review of current research and future prospects. Adv Manuf 3(1):42–53
Kim HC, Lee SH (2005) Reduction of post processing for stereolithography systems by fabrication direction optimization. Comput Aided Des 37(7):711–725
Ahn D, Kim H, Lee S (2009) Surface roughness prediction using measured data and interpolation in layered manufacturing. J Mater Process Technol 209(2):664–671
Ahn D, Kim H, Lee S (2007) Fabrication direction optimization to minimize post-machining in layered manufacturing. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(3–4):593–606
Reeves PE, Cobb RC (1997) Reducing the surface deviation of stereolithography using in-process techniques. Rapid Prototyp J 3(1):20–31
Byun HS, Lee KH (2006) Determination of the optimal build direction for different rapid prototyping processes using multi-criterion decision making. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 22:69–80
Pandey PM, Reddy NV, Dhande SG (2003a) Improvement of surface finish by staircase machining in fused deposition modelling. J Mater Process Technol 1(1–3):323–331
Taufik M, Jain PK (2016) A study of build edge profile for prediction of surface roughness in fused deposition modeling. J Manuf Sci Eng 138(6):1–11
Boschetto A, Bottini L (2014) Accuracy prediction in fused deposition modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73(5–8):913–928
Barari A, Kishawy HA, Kaji F, Elbestawi MA (2016) On the surface quality of additive manufactured parts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–6
Ahn D, Kweon JH, Kwon S, Song J, Lee S (2009) Representation of surface roughness in fused deposition modeling. J Mater Process Technol 209:5593–5600
Boschetto A, Giordano V, Veniali F (2013) 3D roughness profile model in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyp J 19:240–252
Rahmati S, Vahabli E (2015) Evaluation of analytical modeling for improvement of surface roughness of FDM test part using measurement results. J Adv Manuf Technol 79(5–8):823–829
ISO (1996) ISO 11562 Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—surface texture: profile method—metrological characteristics of phase correct filters
ISO (2011) ISO 16610-21 Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—filtration—part 21: linear profile filters: Gaussian filters
ISO (1996) ISO 3274 11562 Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—surface texture: profile method—nominal characteristics of contact (stylus) instruments
ISO (1996) ISO 4288 Geometrical product specifications (GPS)—surface texture: profile method—rules and procedures for the assessment of surface texture
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(XLSX 11 kb).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Di Angelo, L., Di Stefano, P. & Marzola, A. Surface quality prediction in FDM additive manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93, 3655–3662 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0763-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0763-6