Preprint Data Descriptor Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Full-Density Fused Deposition Modeling Dimensional Error as a Function of Raster Angle and Build Orientation: Large Dataset for Eleven Materials

Version 1 : Received: 10 December 2018 / Approved: 12 December 2018 / Online: 12 December 2018 (12:58:13 CET)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Messimer, S.L.; Pereira, T.R.; Patterson, A.E.; Lubna, M.; Drozda, F.O. Full-Density Fused Deposition Modeling Dimensional Error as a Function of Raster Angle and Build Orientation: Large Dataset for Eleven Materials. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2019, 3, 6. Messimer, S.L.; Pereira, T.R.; Patterson, A.E.; Lubna, M.; Drozda, F.O. Full-Density Fused Deposition Modeling Dimensional Error as a Function of Raster Angle and Build Orientation: Large Dataset for Eleven Materials. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2019, 3, 6.

Journal reference: J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2019, 3, 6
DOI: 10.3390/jmmp3010006

Abstract

This report describes the collection of a large dataset (6930 measurement) on dimensional error in the fused deposition modeling (FDM) additive manufacturing process for full-density parts. Three different print orientations were studied, as well as seven raster angles (0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°, and 90°) for the rectilinear infill pattern. All measurements were replicated ten times on ten different samples to ensure a comprehensive dataset. Eleven polymer materials were considered: acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polylactic acid (PLA), high-temperature PLA, wood-composite PLA, carbon-fiber-composite PLA, copper-composite PLA, aluminum-composite PLA, high-impact polystyrene (HIPS), polyethylene terephthalate glycol-enhanced (PETG), polycarbonate, and synthetic polyamide (nylon). The samples were ASTM-standard impact testing samples, since this geometry allows the measurement of error on three different scales; the nominal dimensions were 3.25mm thick, 63.5mm long, and 12.7mm wide. This dataset is intended to give engineers and product designers a benchmark for judging the accuracy and repeatability of the FDM process for use in manufacturing of end-user products.

Subject Areas

Additive manufacturing; fused deposition modeling; FDM; dimensional accuracy; manufacturing process repeatability; polymer testing

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.