0
Research Papers

Integration of Design for Manufacturing Methods With Topology Optimization in Additive Manufacturing

[+] Author and Article Information
Rajit Ranjan

Center for Global Design and Manufacturing,
Department of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering,
University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH 45221
e-mail: ranjanrt@mail.uc.edu

Rutuja Samant

Center for Global Design and Manufacturing,
Department of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering,
University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH 45221
e-mail: samantrv@mail.uc.edu,

Sam Anand

Center for Global Design and Manufacturing,
Department of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering,
University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, OH 45221
e-mail: sam.anand@uc.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received February 6, 2016; final manuscript received November 8, 2016; published online January 25, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Xiaoping Qian.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(6), 061007 (Jan 25, 2017) (14 pages) Paper No: MANU-16-1094; doi: 10.1115/1.4035216 History: Received February 06, 2016; Revised November 08, 2016

Additive manufacturing (AM) processes are used to fabricate complex geometries using a layer-by-layer material deposition technique. These processes are recognized for creating complex shapes which are difficult to manufacture otherwise and enable designers to be more creative with their designs. However, as AM is still in its developing stages, relevant literature with respect to design guidelines for AM is not readily available. This paper proposes a novel design methodology which can assist designers in creating parts that are friendly to additive manufacturing. The research includes formulation of design guidelines by studying the relationship between input part geometry and AM process parameters. Two cases are considered for application of the developed design guidelines. The first case presents a feature graph-based design improvement method in which a producibility index (PI) concept is introduced to compare AM friendly designs. This method is useful for performing manufacturing validation of pre-existing designs and modifying it for better manufacturability through AM processes. The second approach presents a topology optimization-based design methodology which can help designers in creating entirely new lightweight designs which can be manufactured using AM processes with ease. Application of both these methods is presented in the form of case studies depicting design evolution for increasing manufacturability and associated producibility index of the part.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Re-coater arm movement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Sample bracket with supports

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Internal angle and offsetting, (b) thin region detection, and (c) detection of thin openings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Flowchart for contour offset algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Hollow cylinder: (a) facet requiring support and (b) facet touching support

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Flowchart for triangular facet algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Algorithm for making feature graph

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Representative feature graph

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Sample part for feature graph

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Feature graph for sample part

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Support elements for (a) nonboundary element, (b) boundary element with six bottom elements, and (c) boundary element with four bottom elements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Plot for penalty function

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Flowchart for DFAM topology optimization

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Process of design evolution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Design 1 for heat exchanger

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Design 2 for heat exchanger

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Bicycle pedal: (a) design iteration1, (b) design iteration2, and (c) design iteration3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Problem definition for cantilever beam

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

(a) Topology optimization result, (b) design for cantilever beam, and (c) design with support

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

(a) Results for constrained topology optimization process, (b) 3D model for design, and (c) support structures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Deformation results for (a) standard top. opt. and (b) constrained top. opt.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Design space and loading conditions for case study 4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

(a) Results for standard topology optimization process, (b) 3D model for design, and (c) support structures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

(a) Results for constrained topology optimization process, (b) 3D model for design, and (c) support structures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

Deformation results for (a) standard top. opt. and (b) constrained top. opt.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In