Exploring the impact of design tool usage on design for additive manufacturing processes and outcomes
Name:
exploring-the-impact-of-design ...
Size:
939.7Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version
Affiliation
Department of Systems and Industrial Engineering, University of ArizonaIssue Date
2024-01-05Keywords
Computer-aided designDesign for additive manufacturing
Design for manufacturing
Engineering design tools
Manufacturability analysis system
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Cambridge University PressCitation
Budinoff HD, McMains S, Shonkwiler S. Exploring the impact of design tool usage on design for additive manufacturing processes and outcomes. Design Science. 2024;10:e1. doi:10.1017/dsj.2023.34Journal
Design ScienceRights
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Improving designers' ability to identify manufacturing constraints during design can help reduce the time and cost involved in the development of new products. Different design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) tools exist, but the design outcomes produced using such tools are often evaluated without comparison to existing tools. This study addresses the research gap by directly comparing design performance using two design support tools: a worksheet listing DfAM principles and a manufacturability analysis software tool that analyzes compliance with the same principles. In a randomized-controlled study, 49 nonexpert designers completed a design task to improve the manufacturability of a 3D-printed part using either the software tool or the worksheet tool. In this study, design outcome data (creativity and manufacturability) and design process data (task load and time taken) were measured. We identified statistically significant differences in the number of manufacturability violations in the software and worksheet groups and the creativity of the designs with novel build orientations. Results demonstrated limitations associated with lists of principles and highlighted the potential of software in promoting creativity by encouraging the exploration of alternative build orientations. This study provides support for using software to help designers, particularly nonexpert designers who rely on trial and error during design, evaluate the manufacturability of their designs more effectively, thereby promoting concurrent engineering design practices. © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Cambridge University Press.Note
Open access journalISSN
2053-4701Version
Final Published Versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1017/dsj.2023.34
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).