Effectiveness of virtual models in design for

additive manufacturing: a laser sintering

case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA

Abstract
Purpose – Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies have conventionally focused on producing prototypes. However, recent trends show that AM is
being increasingly used for production parts. With this shift from prototypes to production parts, there is a need to determine whether established
engineering design techniques can be applied to AM processes, particularly techniques characteristic of the final implementation phase such as virtual
(mathematical) modeling, or whether AM process-specific adjustments must be made.
Design/methodology/approach – The effectiveness of applying virtual models to design problems utilizing AM processes was addressed using two
approaches in this research. Literature was first reviewed to determine the current focus of the AM industry on virtual modeling, both analytical and
numerical, and its implementation. Second, experiments were conducted to validate virtual models applied to fastener mechanism designs
manufactured using laser sintering (LS).
Findings – Limited research has been published that demonstrates the effectiveness of applying established design techniques, particularly virtual
modeling techniques, to parts manufactured with AM processes. The experimental case study has demonstrated that, for the limited cases considered,
design techniques capable of accommodating the complex material properties of LS materials, such as finite element analysis, are effective methods for
predicting part performance in accordance with desired outcomes.
Practical implications – The research indicates that designers can focus on designing quality LS parts with existing technology and methods rather
than revamping their design methods due to the introduction of a new manufacturing technology.
Originality/value – This research provides support for the application of established design methods to LS AM processes; validating what has
previously been an assumed part of AM.

Keywords Design, Sintering, Manufacturing systems, Modelling, Production planning and control, Selective laser sintering, Production parts,
Additive manufacturing, Virtual modeling

Paper type Research paper

Introduction performance – both physically and theoretically. Physical

Conventional uses of additive manufacturing (AM) have
focused on producing parts whose primary purpose is concept
demonstration (prototypes). For such applications, verifying
basic functionality and fit are the primary objectives of
designers. There is also an increasing trend toward using AM
for the fabrication of final production parts. With this shift
comes an added emphasis on predicting the behavior of
manufactured parts based on the requirements of their intended
applications. Of particular interest for mechanical applications
is the ability to predict the strength and deformation of parts
under a variety of anticipated loading conditions.
In contemporary engineering, virtual models are regularly
used to determine appropriate materials and dimensions for
final production parts. Using the terminology of Otto and
Wood (2000), these virtual models are a subset of system
models with which a designer can predict product
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2546.htm
models include concept models for aesthetic evaluation,
targeted experimental models to test functionality, and full
design and production prototypes. (Interestingly, many AM
technologies were originally developed to provide rapid
fabrication of physical models for design.) Virtual models
include analytical models, such as closed-form equations, by
which the behavior of the system can be predicted prior to
manufacturing a prototype. Numerical models, such as finite
element analysis (FEA), are also common for systems where
closed-form equations are not readily available.
In theory, established design methodologies that utilize these
virtual models should be applicable to design projects
implementing AM processes. However, the appropriateness of
using such design techniques with AM processes has not been
thoroughly verified or documented. In this paper, a survey of
published literature is presented to establish the current focus of
virtual modeling and its relative success in design for AM. In
addition, a case study is presented where fastener mechanisms
were designed using common methodologies and manufactured
using laser sintering (LS). Together, these provide an

Rapid Prototyping Journal

19/1 (2013) 11– 19 Received: 3 May 2011
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1355-2546] Revised: 4 July 2011
[DOI 10.1108/13552541311292682] Accepted: 12 July 2011

11
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
understanding of the level to which established virtual models
are applicable to design problems utilizing AM processes.
Background
Product design processes generally consist of three basic stages:
defining the (re)design problem, development of a product
concept, and embodiment for final production. Table I
summarizes these three product design phases and significant
steps recommended within each by Otto and Wood (2000).
Having primarily been used for physical modeling, AM
techniques have traditionally been used in the concept
development phase or the early stages of concept
implementation (Bak, 2003; Wohlers, 2009). During the
concept development phase, the design process focuses on
generating a range of plausible concepts, based on the fully
understood opportunity, and refines them down to a final
concept for embodiment. Physical models are often produced
to determine the validity of a concept prior to final
implementation. Physical models are also produced during
embodiment, primarily to verify geometric details and
assemblability. Rapid manufacturing processes, such as AM,
are particularly suited to these applications.
In addition to prototypes, there is a trend towards using
AM techniques for manufacturing production parts (Bak,
2003; Wohlers, 2009). In 2006, 9.6 percent of parts produced
using AM were for production parts (Wohlers, 2009). This
has grown to 15.6 percent by 2009, is reported to be the
second most common application of AM, and is anticipated
to encompass 50 percent of AM parts produced by 2018
(Wohlers, 2009). As this is a recent shift in standard practice,
it is uncertain whether standard design techniques,
particularly virtual modeling techniques, can be successfully
coupled with AM processes or whether AM process-specific
adjustments must be made. This uncertainty stems from the
lack of documented success in applying virtual models as well
as from the differing nature of AM materials from standard
manufacturing materials (such as anisotropic material
properties).
The use of performance verification techniques in product
design for AM has not been widely reported in the literature.
Many of the reported applications of virtual modeling in AM
have focused on modeling the manufacturing processes
rather than anticipated performance characteristics of the
parts produced. For instance, for LS, heat transfer from
internal heaters and lasers into the powder bed has been
widely modeled (Dressler et al., 2010; Gusarov et al., 2003;
Roberts et al., 2009; Wiria et al., 2010). Other models also
include powder deposition in the thermal model (Hu and
Kovacevic, 2003). Models for laser path planning and part
orientation have also been developed that seek to optimize the
resulting energy distribution over the surface of the powder
Table I Typical phases of the product development process
Understand the opportunity Develop a concept
Develop a vision Portfolio planning
Market opportunity analysis Functional modeling
Customer needs analysis Product architecture development
Competitive analysis Concept engineering
Source: Otto and Wood (2000)
12
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
bed and the resulting part surface finish (Yang et al., 2003;
Ahn et al., 2007; Abe et al., 2001). These models have helped
streamline the sintering process by improving understanding
of sintering mechanisms, improving placement of heaters for
optimal heat distribution, and providing more efficient
scanning patterns.
Other virtual models have focused on the impact of process
parameters on produced parts. Modeling the impact of these
parameters enables designers to optimize the sintering process
for the machine and material being used. Studies have
demonstrated how the physical and mechanical properties of
final sintered parts can be predicted based on the energy
density transmitted into the powder bed (Caulfield et al.,
2007; Tontowi and Childs, 2001; Singh and Prakash, 2010).
Other research has investigated residual stresses in parts
manufactured using LS and selective laser melting, which can
cause dimensional changes, such as curl, and can reduce the
strength of the final parts (Mercelis and Kruth, 2006). These
published studies, however, are concerned with addressing
process-specific phenomena rather than validating the
performance of parts according to their intended applications.
In some cases where AM production parts have been
evaluated based on intended application, the criteria focused
on evaluating prototypes for basic functionality and geometric
tolerance, rather than more rigorous requirements of the
intended application. For example, where AM has been used
to produce dentures, evaluation relied on adherence to
geometric constraints and therefore did not require virtual
modeling (Gao and Wu, 2009; Germani et al., 2010). Others
have demonstrated the use of product design techniques such
as quality function deployment and customer interactions
combined with AM to produce prototypes (Booysen et al.,
2006). Published analysis of AM also tends to focus heavily
on cost-benefit analysis rather than part performance
(Hopkinson and Dickens, 2003; Atzeni et al., 2010).
A limited number of studies have been published that
demonstrate the effective use of existing virtual models to
predict the performance of final production AM parts. FEA and
computational fluid dynamics were applied to the development
of wind tunnel physical models (Yang, 2010). Topology
optimization and FEA were employed to design compliant
regions in transtibial prosthetic sockets (Faustini et al., 2005).
FEA was also used for comparison with experimental
compression results of bone tissue scaffolds manufactured
from laser sintered polycaprolactone (Williams et al., 2005).
Rather than applying existing models to a new technology,
published analysis of AM production parts illustrates
development of models specific to the process and/or
application. Whether conventional virtual modeling
techniques are applicable to AM production parts remains
unclear. The following case study provides insight into the
Implement a concept
Embodiment engineering
Physical/analytical modeling
Design for X
Robust design
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
effectiveness of applying established virtual models to
designing products manufactured with AM processes.
Case study
To determine the effectiveness of using common analytical and
numerical virtual models in designing products fabricated using
AM, generally accepted design techniques were utilized in the
development of mechanical fastening mechanisms. AM is often
used to simplify manufacturing while maintaining functionality
in production parts by introducing modular or adjustable
components. Threaded connector and hook style mechanisms
could prove beneficial when incorporated into such AM parts.
In addition, these fasteners were specifically designed for
implementation in a volume adjustable prosthetic socket
(Vaughan and Crawford, 2009). Each fastener study
represents a common virtual modeling technique, analytical
or numerical, for a single, tensile, loading condition. These were
selected to determine the extent to which virtual models can be
applied in a tensile loading condition. For the sake of this study,
LS was chosen as the AM process, since it is a widely used
process and machines were readily available.
1. Threaded fastener design
Threaded fastener test specimens were designed to focus on
the strength of the threads under axial loading and
demonstrate the application of an analytical model.
The virtual model of the threaded specimens is based on
threaded fastener design principles for a power screw with
square threads (Shigley et al., 2004). The design and
validation process followed for the threaded fastener
included the following basic steps:
1 Initial specimen design based on virtual model.
2 Preliminary builds to determine basic geometry.
3 Final specimen design based on results of model and
initial specimen builds.
4 Specimen testing for geometric accuracy, load capacity,
and model accuracy.
1.1 Threaded fastener analytical model
Shown in Figure 1, the threaded fastener specimens include
an externally threaded bolt and corresponding internally
threaded end cap. On the opposite ends of each threaded
component is a tab to be clamped in a tensile testing machine.
Figure 1 Basic threaded specimen geometry
13
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
As growth and dimensional accuracy are issues with parts
manufactured using LS, a clearance c was specified between
mating surfaces. Due to the added clearance, the pitch p is equal
to twice the thickness plus twice the clearance. Since
experiments have shown that the seventh tread is the first
thread experiencing no load, the desirable number of engaged
threads, nt, was chosen to be less than seven (Shigley et al.,
2004). For this study, nt equal to four was used to ensure all
teeth engage during testing. Values for dr, and t used in testing
were obtained using the relationship between these dimensions
at failure, which occurs when the stress at the base of the threads
exceeds the yield strength of the material. The bending stress at
the base of the threads due to the moment caused by the applied
axial force F is (Shigley et al., 2004):
Mc 6F
sb ¼ ¼ ð1Þ
I pd r nt t
The final form of equation (1) is derived from the basic bending
stress caused by a moment M at a distance c from the neutral
axis, which are related to each other by the moment of inertia I
(Shigley et al., 2004). By setting this stress equal to the yield
strength of the material and solving for the minor diameter, the
relationship between dr and t at yield, sy, becomes:
6F
dr ¼ ð2Þ
s y p nt t
Using equation (2), and thread thicknesses greater than a
typical (for LS) minimum feature size of 0.5 mm, specimens
were modeled using the solid modeling software Rhinocerosw
(Seattle, WA, USA). As the maximum available force from the
tensile testing machine is 5,000 N, the modeled samples were
designed to fail at 3,000 N (3300 Series, 2007). This failure is
defined as the point at which the threads on the specimens begin
to yield under the applied load and then disengage or break.
To verify the functionality of manufactured threaded specimens
and the clearance between mating surfaces, a series of
preliminary builds was completed. Five bolt and end cap
specimen pairs for each dimensional set were fabricated based
on the geometries determined using the analytical model and
results from preliminary builds (Table II).
A 3D Systems (Rock Hill, SC, USA) Vanguardw HiQ SLSw
machine was used to manufacture the specimens. In the build
setup, ASTM D638 tensile bars were also included for
comparison with published material properties. Care was
taken during arrangement of the parts in the build setup to
ensure cylindrical parts were built vertically and to avoid
portions of the build volume where known part curling issues
occurred. All part and build parameter settings were
determined in a previous factorial experiment described in
more detail in Montgomery et al. (2010). The material used
for this study was Rislanw D80 (Nylon 11) powder
manufactured by Arkema (Colombes, France). Equal parts
Table II Threaded fastener specimen nominal dimensions
Set Pitch ( p) Minor diameter (dr) Thread thickness (t)
A 2.2 15 0.74
B 2.5 12.5 0.93
C 2.8 10 1.12
Note: All units mm
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
virgin and overflow powder were used and all parts, including
those in the following ratchet case study, were included in the
same build.
1.2 Threaded specimen testing
Manufactured parts were tested for geometric accuracy, load
capacity, and model accuracy. Geometric accuracy was
determined by comparing the measured geometry of the
sintered test specimens with the nominal geometry. Load
capacity and model accuracy were established through testing
of manufactured parts based on a modified version of the
ASTM D638 standard (Figure 2).
The geometric accuracy of the threaded testing specimens
was determined by measuring the primary dimensions, t, dr,
and p, prior to loading and comparing to the nominal
dimensions in Table II. Figure 3 shows the average percent
difference for all specimens for each of the primary dimensions.
Error bars are included and show one standard deviation.
All three major dimensions experienced some growth; however,
the greatest growth was in the tooth thickness (max 10.75%diff ,
mean 4.75%diff).
In addition to determining the geometric accuracy of the
manufactured specimens, load versus extension curves were
obtained from tensile tests for each of the threaded fastener
specimen pairs to determine their load capacity. Fastener test
specimens were pulled in tension to failure at a rate of 0.5 mm/
min using an Instronw 3345 (Norwood, MA, USA) single
column tensile machine with a load capacity of 5 kN. Figure 4
shows the load vs extension curve obtained for each of the five
specimen pairs tested from the C sample set (Table II).
The average maximum load at yield and average final specimen
dimensions for each sample set were used in the verification of
the analytical model.
For the specimens designed using the expected dimensions,
the stress on the threads based on the analytical model when
loaded to 3,000 N is predicted to be 64.81 MPa. This
anticipated tooth stress is greater than the yield strength of the
material, which was 48.84 MPa (average of X and Y
directions as determined from tensile bars, Table III). Thus,
the specimens are expected to fail by 3,000 N.
Figure 2 Male threaded specimens (left) and testing setup (right)
14
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
The stress on the threads, when compensating for actual loads
and measured dimensions, remained above the yield strength of
the material, the lowest being 49.01 MPa. Therefore, all
specimen pairs were still predicted to fail based on the analytical
model. As shown in Table IV, 60 percent of specimen pairs failed
as predicted and 13.33 percent failed such that they were no
longer functional (due to permanent thread deformation or
breakage). The resulting load and anticipated bending stress
values on the threads used in determining whether the model
and actual results agree are summarized in Table IV.
1.3 Threaded fastener results discussion
In the threaded fastener case study, the square thread closed-
form model used was found to be conservative as it resulted in
parts stronger than predicted: 60 percent of parts failed at the
anticipated failure load while the rest failed at greater loads.
This suggests that the use of existing analytical models with
AM is a valid method for obtaining initial estimates of final
part performance. However, more refined models that take
into account the anisotropic material characteristics of AM
materials may be necessary for applications that require
higher precision in load capacity prediction.
One of the limitations of this case study is the failure modes
accounted for in the threaded fastener virtual model. Failure
in the threads due to the applied load resulted in two observed
failure modes. Due to the elasticity of the material, bending
stress due to the applied load caused deformation of the
threads that resulted in the treads slipping, rather than
permanent failure, in some specimen pairs. Yielding as well as
breakage of the threads occurred in other specimens. In its
current design, the virtual model only accounts for yielding;
therefore, a model that accounts for elastic deformation in
addition to yielding may be a better predictor of part
performance.
As is common in manufacturing with plastics, an assumption
was made in this study when applying an existing square thread
design intended for metals. Manufacturers suggest some
modifications in order to compensate for weaknesses in
this assumption: increasing the pitch to more than 28 threads
per inch (,1.1 threads per mm) and adding a radius to any
sharp edges. Also recommended is the use of a Buttress
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
Figure 3 Geometric accuracy of final threaded fasteners
9%
8%
% Change in Dimension
7%
6%
t
5%
dr
4%
p created with the integrated COSMOSWorksw FEA package.
3%
2%
1%
0%
style thread profile to improve resistance to shear (Beall, 2006).
In this study, due to the curl and growth issues inherent in
LS, the square threads resulted in rounded edges as well as a
profile approaching that of the Buttress. In addition, the
pitch used was nearly twice the minimum recommended for
injection molding. These factors may account for the improved
performance seen in 40 percent of the test specimens.
2. Ratchet fastener design
Ratchet or hook style fasteners were also developed using a
design methodology closely mimicking that of the threaded
fasteners. However, this fastener style was modeled using the
finite element method (FEM) rather than closed-form
equations.
2.1 Ratchet fastener numerical model
Seven dimensions define the geometry of the two-part hook
style fastener test specimen. These include the overall length
L, width W, tooth face width b, tooth radius R, internal tooth
angle u, external tooth angle f, and the tooth height H
(Figure 5).
The length L was chosen such that the total length of the two-
part specimen is 145 mm. A width W of 5 mm and tooth face
width b of 38.1 mm were selected based on theoretical
dimensions of a potential prosthetic socket application
(Vaughan and Crawford, 2009). For all specimens, f was five
degrees less than the angle u such that the teeth locked smoothly
and provided clearance between successive teeth when used
Figure 4 Threaded fastener load vs extension curves – sample set C
Note: Each curve represents a single specimen and the load at yield and failure are marked
15
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
in a ratcheting application. The remaining dimensions were
varied to determine their impact on the strength of the fastener.
As these specimens are intended for use in optimizing the
strength of the fastener while minimizing its size, a series of
preliminary builds was completed to determine minimum
feature size and to minimize possible growth issues.
A numerical model was developed using SolidWorksw
(Dassault Systèmes, Concord, MA, USA) according to the
desired geometry of the ratchet specimen. The FEM was
Since the specimens were clamped during testing (Figure 6),
the model was simplified by shortening the specimen by the
length fixed in the clamp. The model was fully constrained at
the end. Model boundary conditions also included a pressure
load oriented parallel to the length of the specimen and
distributed over the contacting surface area of the tooth
(Figure 7).
The model was meshed for a solid static analysis using
COSMOSWorksw. An iterative solution method for large
displacements was used due to the large tooth displacement
relative to tooth thickness during testing. This FEM was used
to obtain load versus extension curve points for comparison
with actual experimental results. Ranges of values for the
internal tooth angle u and tooth fillet radius R were selected
for testing based on preliminary results from the FEA and
builds (Table V).
2.2 Ratchet specimen testing
Testing of these ratchet specimens included determination of
geometric accuracy, load capacity, and model accuracy.
Geometric measurements and load versus elongation curves
were obtained for the samples using the testing method
described previously for threaded fastener specimens.
Manufactured ratchet test specimens, four pairs per
dimensional set, were measured for comparison with the
nominal values for the H, R and L dimensions. The percent
difference between the nominal and measured values for each
of these dimensions were averaged (Figure 8).
The greatest differences were found in the smaller part
features, particularly the tooth height H. (The percent
difference for L was 20.16 percent, which is difficult to see
in the figure.) The average values for each of the major
dimensions obtained from these measurements were used in
the final FEM discussed later.
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
Table III Material property results
Tensile strength Modulus
Direction (MPa) SD (Mpa)
X (top and bottom) 48.69 0.64 1,670.82
Y (top and bottom) 48.99 0.96 1,572.97
Z 33.08 5.76 1,730.71
The load capacity of the specimens was also determined using
the testing method described above for the threaded
specimens. Each of the 20 specimen pairs was tested to
failure using the Instronw 3345 tensile testing machine and a
load vs extension curve obtained. The maximum load at yield,
zero slope on the curve, was obtained and plotted versus the
intended angle u and tooth thickness 2 *R (Figure 9). All of
the ratchet specimen pairs failed at more than nine times the
maximum anticipated load of 47.5 N for the intended
application of these fasteners (Vaughan and Crawford, 2009).
The accuracy of the FEM described above was determined
by comparing the performance of the model at points along
the load vs extension curve for each specimen set.
Material properties for Nylon 11 (tensile strength of
48.3 MPa, modulus of elasticity of 1,635 MPa, and density
of 0.97 g/cm3) were used. These properties were determined
using tensile bars included in the build and tested according
to ASTM D638 (Table III). The value used for Poisson’s
ratio, 0.4145, was the average ratio available from CES
EduPack Software produced by GRANTA (PA (Type 11,
Unfilled), 2008). Average specimen dimensions obtained
while ascertaining the geometric accuracy were used in
verifying this model. Using the FEA, load-extension pairs
were obtained at five different loads: at yield, three equally
spaced along the linear elastic range of the curve, and at the
maximum anticipated working load of 45.7 N. These were
then compared with the corresponding average load-extension
pair on the experimental curve (Figures 10 and 11).
The actual experimental load-extension curve points used
for comparison with the model were the average extensions
achieved by the tested specimen pairs.
The percent relative difference was used to quantify the
amount of deviation of the numerical model from the
experimental data. This is defined by:
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
the increasing trend of the relative percentage difference with
respect to applied load.
Deviation of the model from the experimental data is
SD
greatest as the load on the ratchet tooth approaches the
225.66 yield strength of the material. At this load, the model deviates
48.06 13-35 percent from the experimental data. In the linear
200.84 portion of the curve however, the difference between the
predicted and experimental data is less than 10 percent.
2.3 Ratchet fastener results discussion
Since a closed-form analytical model was not available, the
ratchet fastener model was developed to take into account
more of the variability in the AM material through the use of a
FEM. In this case study, part deformation was predicted with
less than 10 percent relative difference from experimental
data. This demonstrates the applicability of widely used basic
FE methods and software for use in virtual modeling of LS
part performance. Deviation of FE results from experimental
data for plastic parts is not an unexpected phenomenon.
Unlike metal parts, plastic parts undergo significant amounts
of strain while being tested under tensile loads and can exhibit
nonlinear behavior at stress levels approaching yield. The
static analysis completed for this study assumed linearly
elastic and isentropic material properties for nylon. These
assumptions are only valid for small amounts of strain.
Therefore, the accuracy of the FEA results at loads
approaching the yield strength of the material is limited by
this assumption. Using a custom stress-strain curve in the
material definition as well as nonlinear analysis that better
approximates the differences between metals and plastics at
larger strain percentages could improve these results. Neither
of these options was available from the finite element package
used for this study (Introducing COSMOSWorks, 2003).
In an attempt to compensate for the inability to use a custom
stress-strain curve, a linear approximation of the stress-strain
curve was developed by the software using the Poisson’s ratio
(from published literature) and Young’s modulus (from test
samples). The measured part density, rather than the software
default, was also used. Further improvements could be
obtained through the use of an orthotropic material
definition, since the Young’s modulus in the vertical
direction differs from those in the build plane (Table III).
 
xactual 2 xpredicted 
RD ¼    £ 100% ð3Þ Conclusion
maxðxactual Þ 
where the difference between the extension value calculated
by the model, xpredicted, is subtracted from the measured value
for a given load, xactual, and normalized by the maximum
measured extension for the particular specimen across tested
loads. This normalization enables comparison of results since
the magnitudes of the extension value differences vary across
specimen designs as well as along the curve. Figure 12 shows
A survey of literature has shown that there is an increasing
trend to use AM as the means of fabricating final production
parts, not simply for traditional prototyping. However, few
studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of applying
conventional design tools that include the development of
virtual models to predict performance of AM final
production parts. Previous work tends to focus on process
optimization and development.

Table IV Threaded fastener model results

A B C
Average max load (SD) 2,489.75 (612.31) 3,059.81 (599.28) 2,415.09 (796.75)
Expected s (MPa) 64.81 64.81 64.81
Actual s (MPa) 50.57 58.11 49.01
No. of failures in set 4 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5

16
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study Rapid Prototyping Journal
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19

Figure 5 Basic ratchet specimen geometry Figure 7 Constrained ratchet FEM

R
θ H
φ
W
L

Figure 6 Ratchet specimen tensile testing setup

Specimen
part 1
P Fixed in
U Clamp
L
L

Notes: Red arrows – applied pressure load; green

Specimen
arrows – fully constrained end fixed in clamps
part 2
Fixed in Table V Ratchet dimensions
Clamp
Set Length, L (mm) Height, H (mm) Fillet, R (mm) Angle, u (deg)
D 80.65 4.82 0.5 35
E 74.8 4.41 0.5 30
F 73.28 4.07 0.5 25
G 71.87 4.52 0.75 25
H 76.02 3.15 0.25 25

This research focused on a case study of two fastener

mechanisms designed utilizing conventional design Figure 8 Geometric accuracy – ratchet specimens
techniques and fabricated by LS in order to determine the
50%
effectiveness of predicting part performance based on virtual
models, both analytical and numerical, according to desired
applications. Based on this study, conventional design 40%
% Change in Dimension

methodologies based on existing virtual models that are

capable of accommodating the complex material properties of 30%
LS materials, such as FEM, appear to be effective methods H
for predicting part performance in accordance with desired T
outcomes. Other closed-form analytical models, however, are 20%
L
not as precise at predicting part performance and have limited
application to situations where very accurate estimates of part 10%
performance are required.
The analytical model implemented here only accounts for
yielding. A model that accounts for elastic deformation in 0%
addition to yielding may be better at predicting part
performance. In addition to including additional failure –10%
modes, more refined models should be considered that take Note: Error bars of one standard deviation
into account the anisotropic material characteristics of LS
materials for applications where more precision is required. stereolithography, are advisable so that designers can
The use of automated measurement techniques may also be confidently apply this research beyond the LS
beneficial in the determination of geometric accuracy in technology used in this study. In addition, other loading
future studies. Additional studies that incorporate other AM conditions, such as bending or compression, should also be
processes, such as fused deposition modeling or considered.

17
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study Rapid Prototyping Journal
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19

Figure 9 Load capacity vs angle (left) and expected fillet diameter (right)

1,200 1,200

Load (N) 1,000 1,000

Load (N)
800 800
600 600
400 400
200 200
0 0
25 30 35 0.5 1 1.5
Expected Angle (Degrees) Expected Diameter (mm)

Figure 10 Comparison of ratchet numerical model to experimental Figure 12 Relative percent difference of ratchet FEM results from
data – range of fillet radii (0.25, 0.5, and 0.75 mm) experimental data vs load
1,400 40%
1,200 35%

1,000 30%
Load (N)

Load (N)
25%
800
20%
600
15%
400 10%
200 5%
0 0%
0 2 4 6 8 0 100 200 300 400 500
Extension (mm) Extension (mm)
Model r = 0.25 Actual r = 0.25 Model r = 0.5 30 Deg 1.25 mm 35 Deg 1.25 mm 25 Deg 1.25 mm
Actual r = 0.5 Model r = 0.75 Actual r = 0.75
25 Deg 1.5 mm 25 Deg 1.00 mm Load at yield
Note: Load at yield circled
Figure 11 Comparison of ratchet numerical model to experimental
data – range of internal tooth angles (25, 30, and 35 deg)
References
1,400
Abe, F., Osakada, K., Shiomi, M., Uematsu, K. and
1,200 Matsumoto, M. (2001), “The manufacturing of hard
1,000 tools from metallic powders by selective laser
Load (N)

800
melting”, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 111,
pp. 210-13.
600 Ahn, D., Kim, H. and Lee, S. (2007), “Fabrication direction
400 optimization to minimize post-machining in layered
manufacturing”, International Journal of Machine Tools
200
& Manufacture, Vol. 47, pp. 593-606.
0 Atzeni, E., Iuliano, L., Minetola, P. and Salmi, A. (2010),
–1 1 3 5 7 “Redesign and cost estimation of rapid manufactured plastic
Extension (mm) parts”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 308-17.
Model 25 r = 0.5 Actual 25 r = 0.5 Model 30 r = 0.5 Bak, D. (2003), “Rapid prototyping or rapid production?
Actual 30 r = 0.5 Model 35 r = 0.5 Actual 35 r = 0.5
3D printing processes move industry towards the latter”,
Assembly Automation, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 340-5.
Beall, G. (2006), “By design: molded threads – part 2”,
Injection Molding Magazine, available at: www.plasticstoday.
This case study indicates that designers can confidently com/articles/design-molded-threads%E2%80%94part-2
develop final production parts by applying existing design (accessed 17 November 2010).
techniques utilizing virtual models and the LS AM processes, Booysen, G.J., Barnard, L.J., Truscott, M. and de Beer, D.J.
but should account for the anisotropic material properties (2006), “An aesthetic mouthpiece development through
using numerical methods such as FEA. With additional QFD and customer interaction with functional
study, the validity of applying these methods to other AM prototypes”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4,
technologies can be established. pp. 189-97.

18
 Effectiveness of virtual models in design for AM: LS case study
Meagan R. Vaughan and Richard H. Crawford
Caulfield, B., McHugh, P.E. and Lohfeld, S. (2007),
“Dependence of mechanical properties of polyamide
components on build parameters in the SLS process”,
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 182 Nos 1-3,
pp. 477-88.
Dressler, M., Röllig, M., Schmidt, A. and Maturilli, J. (2010),
“Temperature distribution in powder beds during 3D
printing”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 No. 5,
pp. 328-36.
Faustini, M.C., Crawford, R.H., Neptune, R.R. and
Rogers, W.E. (2005), “Design and analysis of orthogonally
compliant features for local contact pressure relief in
transtibial prostheses”, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering,
Vol. 127, pp. 946-51.
Gao, B., Wu, J., Zhao, X. and Tan, H. (2009), “Fabricating
titanium denture base plate by laser rapid forming”, Rapid
Prototyping Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 133-6.
Germani, M., Raffaeli, R. and Mazzoli, A. (2010), “A method
for performance evaluation of RE/RP systems in dentistry”,
Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 345-55.
Gusarov, A.V., Laoui, T., Froyen, L. and Titov, V.I. (2003),
“Contact thermal conductivity of a powder bed in selective
laser sintering”, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, Vol. 46, pp. 1103-9.
Hopkinson, N. and Dickens, P. (2003), “Analysis of rapid
manufacturing – using layer manufacturing processes for
production”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science,
Vol. 217, pp. 31-9.
Hu, D. and Kovacevic, R. (2003), “Sensing, modeling and
control for laser-based additive manufacturing”,
International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture,
Vol. 43, pp. 51-60.
Introducing COSMOSWorks (2003), Structural Research
and Analysis Corporation (SRAC), Los Angeles, CA
(Brochure).
Mercelis, P. and Kruth, J.P. (2006), “Residual stresses in
selective laser sintering and selective laser melting”, Rapid
Prototyping Journal, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 254-65.
Montgomery, J.T., Vaughan, M.R. and Crawford, R.H.
(2010), “Design of an actively actuated prosthetic socket”,
Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 194-201.
Otto, K. and Wood, K. (2000), Product Design: Techniques in
Reverse Engineering and New Product Development,
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
PA (Type 11, Unfilled) (2008), CES Edupack 2008, Materials
Reference Software, GRANTA, Cambridge.
Roberts, I.A., Wang, C.J., Esterlein, R., Stanford, M. and
Mynors, D.J. (2009), “A three-dimensional finite element
analysis of the temperature field during laser melting of
metal powders in additive layer manufacturing”,
International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture,
Vol. 49 Nos 12/13, pp. 916-23.
Shigley, J.E., Mischke, C.R. and Budynas, R.G. (2004),
Mechanical Engineering Design, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill,
Boston, MA.
Singh, A.K. and Prakash, R.S. (2010), “DOE based three-
dimensional finite element analysis for predicting density of
a laser-sintered part”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16
No. 6, pp. 460-7.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
19
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 19 · Number 1 · 2013 · 11 –19
3300 Series (2007), Single Column Models: Affordable
Solutions for Materials Testing, Instron, Norwood, MA
(Brochure).
Tontowi, A.E. and Childs, T.H.C. (2001), “Density prediction
of crystalline polymer sintered parts at various powder bed
temperatures”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 180-4.
Vaughan, M. and Crawford, R. (2009), “Design of a volume
adjustable below knee sls prosthetic socket for pediatric
amputees in developing countries”, Proceedings of the
Twentieth International Solid Freeform Fabrication
Symposium, Austin, TX, August.
Williams, J.M., Adewunmi, A., Schek, R.M., Flanagan, C.L.,
Krebsbach, P.H., Feinberg, S.E., Hollister, S.J. and Das, S.
(2005), “Bone tissue engineering using polycaprolactone
scaffolds fabricated via selective laser sintering”,
Biomaterials, Vol. 26, pp. 4817-27.
Wiria, F.E., Leong, K.F. and Chua, C.K. (2010), “Modeling
of powder particle heat transfer process in selective laser
sintering for fabricating tissue engineering scaffolds”, Rapid
Prototyping Journal, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 400-10.
Wohlers, T.T. (2009), Wohlers Report, Wohlers Associates,
Inc., Fort Collins, CO.
Yang, D., Zhang, Z., Sun, Y. and Zhu, W. (2010),
“A preliminary design and manufacturing study of hybrid
lightweight high-speed wind-tunnel models”, Rapid
Prototyping Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1.
Yang, J., Bin, H., Zhang, X. and Liu, Z. (2003), “Fractal
scanning path generation and control system for selective
laser sintering (SLS)”, International Journal of Machine Tools
& Manufacture, Vol. 43, pp. 293-300.
About the authors
Meagan R. Vaughan received a BS in Engineering,
Mechanical Engineering concentration, in 2007 from
LeTourneau University in Longview, Texas, USA. During
her time at LeTourneau University, she was an active
participant for two years in the LeTourneau Engineering
Global Solutions (LEGS) program, now LeTourneau
Empowering Global Solutions, designing low-cost lower
limb prosthetic components for developing countries. She
received a MS in Engineering, with a concentration in
Biomechanics, in 2009 from The University of Texas at
Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
Richard H. Crawford received a BS in Mechanical
Engineering from Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, USA, in 1982, and MS and PhD degrees
in Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University,
West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, in 1985 and 1989, respectively.
He is currently a Professor with the Department of Mechanical
Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin. His research
interests include development of computational representations
and tools to support exploration of complex engineering design
spaces, and geometric processing, design tools, and applications
of additive manufacturing. Richard H. Crawford is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: rhc@mail.
utexas.edu