“Bridging the gap: automated steady scaffoldings for 3D printing” by Dumas, Hergel and Lefebvre
Conference:
Type:
Title:
- Bridging the gap: automated steady scaffoldings for 3D printing
Session/Category Title: Fabrication
Presenter(s)/Author(s):
Moderator(s):
Abstract:
Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) is the process of 3D printing objects from melted plastic filament. The hot plastic exits a nozzle and fuses with the part just below, adding a layer of material to the object being formed. However, filament can only be deposited on top of an existing surface. Therefore, overhangs require a disposable support structure to be printed, temporarily supporting the threads of plastic that would otherwise hang in empty space.Existing techniques for support generation fall into two categories: The first allow for very reliable prints by enclosing the bottom of the object in a dense structure, at the expense of increased material usage and build times. The second generate thin hierarchical structures connecting to the surface in a sparse number of points. This uses less material, at the expense of reliability: the part might become unstable, the structure itself may become difficult to print, the bottom surface quality degrades. The user therefore has to correct the structure and its parameters for each new object.We propose to exploit the ability of FFF printers to print bridges across gaps. Since bridges are always supported by pillars at their extremities, they are both stronger and more stable than hierarchical tree structures. Our technique first selects the points to support based on overhang and part stability during the entire print process. It then optimizes for a printable scaffolding composed of bridges and vertical pillars, supporting all points. The result is an automated support generation technique using little material while ensuring fine surface quality and stability during the printing process.
References:
1. Alexander, P., Allen, S., and Dutta, D. 1998. Part orientation and build cost determination in layered manufacturing. Computer-Aided Design 30, 5, 343–356.Google ScholarCross Ref
2. Allaire, G. 2006. Conception optimale de structures. Springer. ISBN 3-540-36710-1.Google Scholar
3. Allen, S., and Dutta, D. 1995. Determination and evaluation of support structures in layered manufacturing.Google Scholar
4. Allison, J. W., Chen, T. P., Cohen, A. L., Smalley, D. R., Snead, D. E., and Vorgitch, T. J., 1988. Boolean layer comparison slice. US Patent 5854748, 3D Systems Inc.Google Scholar
5. Chalasani, K., Jones, L., and Roscoe, L. 1995. Support generation for fused deposition modeling. In Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, 229–241.Google Scholar
6. Cheng, W., Fuh, J., Nee, A., Wong, Y., Loh, H., and Miyazawa, T. 1995. Multi-objective optimization of part- building orientation in stereolithography. Rapid Prototyping Journal 1, 12–23.Google ScholarCross Ref
7. Eggers, G., and Renap, K., 2007. Method and apparatus for automatic support generation for an object made by means of a rapid prototype production method. US Patent 20100228369, Materialize.Google Scholar
8. Frank, D., and Fadel, G. 1995. Expert system-based selection of the preferred direction of build for rapid prototyping processes. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 6, 5, 339–345.Google ScholarCross Ref
9. Heide, E., 2011. Method for generating and building support structures with deposition-based digital manufacturing systems, 07. US Patent 20110178621 A1.Google Scholar
10. Huang, X., Ye, C., Mo, J., and Liu, H. 2009. Slice data based support generation algorithm for fused deposition modeling. Tsinghua Science and Technology 14, S1, 223–228.Google ScholarCross Ref
11. Huang, X., Ye, C., Wu, S., Guo, K., and Mo, J. 2009. Sloping wall structure support generation for fused deposition modeling. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 42, 11–12, 1074–1081.Google ScholarCross Ref
12. Kritchman, E., Gothait, H., and Miller, G., 2008. System and method for printing and supporting three dimensional objects, 04. US Patent 7364686.Google Scholar
13. Majhi, J., Janardan, R., Smid, M., and Gupta, P. 1999. On some geometric optimization problems in layered manufacturing. Computational Geometry 12, 34, 219–239. Google ScholarDigital Library
14. Prévost, R., Whiting, E., Lefebvre, S., and Sorkine-Hornung, O. 2013. Make It Stand: Balancing shapes for 3D fabrication. ACM Transactions on Graphics 32, 4, to appear. Google ScholarDigital Library
15. Smith, J., Hodgins, J. K., Oppenheim, I., and Witkin, A. 2002. Creating models of truss structures with optimization. ACM Transactions on Graphics 21, 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
16. Stava, O., Vanek, J., Benes, B., Carr, N. A., and Mech, R. 2012. Stress relief: improving structural strength of 3d printable objects. ACM Transactions on Graphics 31, 4, 48. Google ScholarDigital Library
17. Strano, G., Hao, L., Everson, R., and Evans, K. 2013. A new approach to the design and optimisation of support structures in additive manufacturing. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 66, 9–12, 1247–1254.Google ScholarCross Ref
18. Wang, W., Wang, T. Y., Yang, Z., Liu, L., Tong, X., Tong, W., Deng, J., Chen, F., and Liu, X. 2013. Cost-effective printing of 3d objects with skin-frame structures. ACM Transactions on Graphics 32, 5. Google ScholarDigital Library
