See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322745252

A REVIEW OF ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES

Conference Paper · January 2018

CITATION READS

1 4,879

6 authors, including:

Gokberk Serin Müge Kahya

TOBB University of Economics and Technology TOBB University of Economics and Technology
9 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   36 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hakki Ozgur Unver Nuri Durlu

TOBB University of Economics and Technology TOBB University of Economics and Technology
45 PUBLICATIONS   293 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   21 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A Virtual Factory Framework for SMEs View project

Production of Ti-6Al-4V Alloys Used in Aerospace Industry by Additive Manufacturing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hakki Ozgur Unver on 27 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

A REVIEW OF ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES

Gökberk SERİN, [email protected] TOBB University of Economics and Technology, 06560,

Ankara, Turkey
Müge KAHYA, [email protected] TOBB University of Economics and Technology, 06560,
Ankara, Turkey
Hakkı Özgür ÜNVER, [email protected] TOBB University of Economics and Technology,
06560, Ankara, Turkey
Yavuz GÜLEÇ, [email protected] Turkish Aerospace Industries, 06980, Ankara, Turkey

Nuri DURLU, [email protected] TOBB University of Economics and Technology,

06560, Ankara, Turkey
Osman EROĞUL, [email protected] TOBB University of Economics and Technology,
06560, Ankara, Turkey

ABSTRACT
Since last decade, additive manufacturing technology has been improved rapidly to fulfil the
needs of people and various industries. Additive manufacturing is a growing new technology
to manufacture more complex parts with lower energy costs and shorter manufacturing time.
Additive manufacturing also enables to manufacture complicated product that is impossible
with traditional manufacturing methods. Additive manufacturing is layer-by-layer building
technology. It is powder-based technology that is custom-designed, high value. Also it is
more efficient than machining. Additive manufacturing technology includes several
technologies such as selective laser sintering, selective laser melting and electron beam
melting. Despite these processes are very similar, they differ from one another due to
materials used, melting point, melting ratio and type of beam. There are several limitations of
additive manufacturing technology such as porosity, shrinkage, dimensional accuracy,
support structure and surface quality. The aim of the this study is to review about optimizing
process parameters such as scan speed, scan spacing, laser power, powder layer thickness
and temperature of the machine bed. Optimizing process parameters provides to overcome
limitations.
Keywords: Additive manufacturing, Selective laser sintering, Selective laser melting,
Electron beam melting, Optimization of process parameters, Topological optimization,
Porosity, Shrinkage
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

1. INTRODUCTION

Many rapid prototyping (RP) machines with different methods have been developed since
1987 [1]. The need to use rapid prototyping machines was to have the ability of producing
complex parts for various products. In order to respond the need of several industrial
requirements, the variations of RP as fused deposition modelling (FDM), ballistic particle
manufacturing (BPM), solid creation system (SCS), solid ground curing (SGC), laminated
object manufacturing (LOM), 3-dimensional printing (3DP), multiphase jet solidification
(MJS), selective laser sintering (SLS), selective laser melting (SLM) and electron beam
melting (EBM) have been developed.
While this technology has just been emerged, several kinds of polymers have been used as
material in general. As the technology develops, the use of metals rather than polymers as
main material has been foreseen as more appropriate and efficient way in need of industrial
usage. Thus, the machines that use metals as copper, tungsten, titanium and stainless steel
have been manufactured. The usage of metal powders was started in 1991 with the aim of
developing SLS technology to produce metal parts without using any polymer binder. Each
high-strength power mixtures comprise at least two metal powders such as Fe-Cu, WC-Co,
TiC-Ni/Co/Mo, Fe3C-Fe, Ti-6Al-4V, Al-12Si [Wang et al., 2002, Kruth et al., 1996, Laoui et al
1998].
Generally, the additive manufacturing processes can be defined as layer-by-layer building
technology. Surface or solid models are designed by engineers or scientists with any CAD
systems. The CAD data prepared as .prt, .step, .model are converted a STL file. The STL file
defines the list of triangular facets. The triangular facet knows as the surfaces of the object
that engineers or scientists want to create. In the same time, it is unit normal vector related to
the outer surface of each triangle. Facets in STL file called ''tesellation''. Triangles created is
approximately the object surface formed in any CAD solid model. This file prepared is
transferred any additive manufacturing system to fabricate the model created. The time for
building process can take several hours or even sometimes overnights depends on the parts
but AM systems doesn't require to observe by an engineer. Therefore, the operators can
leave the machines run by itself. As mentioned above, the computer program works with
.STL files, which create the supports depends on the model cross-sections to manufacture
the shape required. During production of the model, fusing of solid, spreading layer by layer
and solidification of liquids or powders are followed respectively. Lastly, after the part is
completed, post-curing, sanding, painting and removal of supports can be necessary [Chua
et al., 1998].
Solid freeform fabrication (SFF) that is a variation of SLS is used to produce three-
dimensional complex parts with CAD models without molds [Gu et al., 2012, Liu et al., 2007].
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

In selective laser melting differently from SLS, the temperature is higher in the powder
binding process. Laser beam is used in SLS and SLM process. Unlike SLS and SLM
processes, electron beam is used in EBM process. In this paper, SLS, SLM and EBM
processes have been reviewed and the usage for various purposes have been indicated.
Also process parameter optimization studies carried out for these processes are categorised
and then results are critically reviewed.

2. SELECTIVE LASER SINTERING

Selective laser sintering takes part as additive manufacturing process. Customised metal
based parts were fabricated easily without dedicated tools and diverse powder materials are
used in this process [Wang et al., 2002, Boillat et al., 2004, Kruth et al., 1997]. In SLS, fine
powder is used to spread each layer on machine bed (Fig. 1). Spreading fine powder is
scanned by using laser beam to cope with surface tension of grains and to sinter fine
powder. High-temperature laser is required to sinter layers of fine powders punctiliously.
Therefore, all machine bed is preheated until a certain temperature that is below the melting
point of material like aluminium, titanium alloy and stainless steel etc. before the laser scans.
Meanwhile, the sufficient value of the laser power is attained to sinter powder particle. It is
automatic process in which a roller spread a new layer of powder by one layer thickness on
the machine bed after each layer is completed. This process repeats until the desired part is
fabricated completely [Subramanian et al., 1995, Prashant et al., 2009]. At the present time,
available commercial SLS systems are still insufficient to manufacture microcomponents that
are smaller than 500 μm, because laser focus diameter is generally restricted (50–300 μm).
SLS is a layer manufacturing process so, when smaller parts are needed to produce,
correspondingly, thinner layers and finer powders are required. In the contrary case, parts
designed by engineers are not fabricated exactly. Therefore, when finer powder and thinner
layer are used, vacuum system is necessary to solve powder corrosion problem and the
hardships of humidity. Additionally, overcoming interparticle forces is troublesome so, finer
powders are very abundant on the bed [Vaezi et al., 2013, Kruth et al., 1997].
Despite the potential application in several areas, manufacturing is limited in SLS process
because dimensional accuracy and surface roughness of its products are poor [Wang et al.,
2007]. Therefore, many researchers try to determine and overcome manufacturing defects
resulting from various scanning strategy are tried to determine and overcome [Song et al.,
2015].
Also, direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) is derived from selective laser sintering. It is used to
produce near net-shaped parts directly by means of the computer-aided design data. Various
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

layers are melted through laser source. There are several researches about the surface
roughness of aluminium specimens manufactured by DMLS [Calignano et al., 2013].

Figure 1. Selective laser sintering process [Lu et al., 2008].

3. SELECTIVE LASER MELTING

Selective laser melting process has been recognized as one of the RM technology. The
process is shown in Fig. 2. It is the same as SLS process. However there are some
differences between SLM and SLS process. The requirement energy is higher in SLS
method compared to SLM because intricate parts are fabricated at higher temperature during
SLM process to melt or fuse the powders. In the recent years scientists have searched to
enhance quality of product and correspondingly has found optimal parameters like minimum
layer thickness and thickness of fine powders. In SLM process, generally super alloys,
stainless steel, cobalt (Co), titanium (Ti) and aluminium (Al) are used [Clare et al., 2008].
Just as in the SLS, SLM process is restricted because dimensional accuracy is second rate.
For this purpose, several research is done to cope with low dimensional accuracy. So, during
the manufacturing, diverse parameters like laser power, scan speed, layer thickness are
modified to produce better quality product. Accordingly, studies have shown that the value of
laser power and scanning speed has varied from 100 to 120 W and from 200 to 700 mm/s
respectively in the selective laser melting. Depending on the value of the laser power, the
thickness of the thin wall has varied from 123 to 276 µm [Song et al., 2015].
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Figure 2. Selective laser melting process [Bikas et al., 2015].

4. ELECTRON BEAM MELTING (EBM)

Electron beam melting process is a powder bed additive layer manufacturing which is similar
to SLM. In the EBM process, electron beam is used instead of laser beam as an energy
source to sinter or fuse the materials (Fig. 3). They are two powder bed additive layer
manufacturing process by fusing metallic powders like titanium, aluminium and vanadium
alloys [Formanoir et al., 2016]. There are various advantages of EBM in comparison to such
other process like SLS and SLM. This process allows fabricating complex geometries by
scanning the cross-section of a layer selectively. The laser scans locally by melting or fusing
by means of software and hardware to form a layer of part desired by engineers. The next
step is repeated by constructing one over the other. The building platform is pulled down as
the layer thickness [Rafi et al., 2013].

Figure 3. Electron Beam Melting process [Bikas et al., 2015].

 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Also, electron beam has some advantages as compared with SLS. EBM is more energy-
friendly due to that electric energy converts more efficiently to electron beam energy. EBM
provides more uniform thermal field distribution and much higher throughput. Nevertheless,
in EBM method, surface roughness and dimensional accuracy are lower [Guoa et al., 2015].

Table 1. Comparison of SLS, SLM and EBM.

Selective Laser Selective Laser Electron Beam

Sintering Melting Melting
below the melting above the melting above the melting
Melting Point
point point point
all materials,
Materials all materials all materials especially titanium
alloys
Type of Beam laser beam laser beam electron beam

Energy Saving ++ + +++

Melting Ratio partial fully fully

Albeit the AM processes can be varied based on melting point, materials, type of beam,
energy saving and melting ratio as it is shown in table 1, SLS,SLM and EBM processes are
very similar.

5. REVIEW OF OPTIMIZATION STUDIES

Process parameters which influence mechanical properties is given in Fig. 4. In line with
optimization studies, the effect of these parameters such as laser power, scan count, scan
spacing, hatch length and scanning speed have been analysed. Laser power is identified as
amount of power of laser (watts) while it scans the area of each layer. Scan spacing is
defined as the distance between two adjacent laser scan lines. Scanning speed is described
as the speed of laser spot between heating points. Hatch spacing is distance covers by laser
light along X- or Y-direction in one run. Scan count is number of times the laser beam
transverses a scan vector per layer [Sachdeva et al., 2013].
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Figure 4. Process Parameters Affecting Mechanical Properties [Prashant et al., 2009].

Approaching with Taguchi to process parameter is method to procure near-optimum

parameters of the experimental process. Orthogonal arrays are used in Taguchi method.
Taguchi method analyse the results required depend on the quality characteristics of the
process to be optimised [Jailani et al., 2009]. Taguchi’s L18 orthogonal array is selected to
perform design of experiments. Laser power, scan speed and hatching distance are
identified as process factors. In order to investigate the samples, the upper surfaces of the
samples are analysed before and after shot peening. Scanning electron microscope is used
for analysis of morphology by means of field emission. Scan speed is identified as the most
significant process parameter on surface roughness. Besides, shot peening is specified as
the factor which can effectively reduce the surface roughness [Calignano et al., 2013].
In topology optimization process, several constrains that is significant to fabricate product
designed are considered by engineers to create a reasonable design. There are new
problems related to additive manufacturing like multiple physics, weight, cost, material
failure, nonlinear structure and non-uniform material distribution etc. Therefore this process
aims to enhance and automate the conventional design process using CAD optimization
techniques. The attention on this method is looking for the best geometry of components.
Topology optimization generates optimized designs in the form of material distributions in
2D/3D space [Brackett et al., 2011, Gardan and Schneider, 2015]. Recent developments in
topology, optimized components which have complex geometries can be manufactured
without compromising.
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Figure 5. Flowchart of Optimization Procedure [Nishiwaki et al., 1998].

Topology optimization procedures should be necessary technology for additive

manufacturing. This process provides to reduce cost as the part designed is more complex
because of that the necessity of support structure is reduced by optimizing. There can be
finer microstructure if the part that is wanted to manufacture is more complex. By using
topological optimization method, optimal stiffness values are attained for complex parts.
During manufacturing complex part, more material is used for support structures so, some of
material that is usually wasted. By means of this process, reducing wasted material is aimed.
Also, to remove support structure is tedious after production is complete [Brackett et., 2011,
Gardan and Schneider, 2015, Nishiwaki et al., 1998, Gaoa et al., 2015, Suzuki and Kikuchi,
1989].
As shared in the optimization process flowchart in the Figure 5, after homogenized elastic
coefficients are calculated, sensitivities determined by using α and β, bezier curves. In the
optimization part, Sequential Linear Programming (SLP) that can include massive amount of
design variables is used and by that microscale variables α and β determined in Figure 6.
Linearization of the system has been made by using simplex method. When the criteria are
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

contented, process is finished [Nishiwaki et al., 1998, Suzuki and Kikuchi, 1989, Ma et al.,
1995].

Figure 6. A Unit Cell of a Microstructure [Nishiwaki et al., 1998].

Topology shape optimization allows that efficient for final finish of designs. On the other
hand, there are limitations in fabrication. Every shape has its unique geometry, there are
accuracy limitations, particularly at the microscale.
Additionally, in SLS and SLM process there are some limitations that are muddled through to
obtain better surface quality, dimensional accuracy, machinability and precision. One of the
limitations that are tried to overcome is high porosity. High amount of the porosity induces to
occur crack formation, to propagate and to create residual stress in the part. Crack formation
is very detrimental to trigger unexpectedly breaking the part fabricated. The percentage of
porosity in the part depends on some parameters such as scan speed, scan spacing,
temperature, layer thickness, and laser power. In several studies, the percentage of porosity
is tried to reduce thereby, some parameters are changed to enhance mechanical properties
[Olakanmi et al., 2015, Gong et al., 2014, Xiea et al., 2013, Yasa et al., 2011].
The most important parameters to fabricate better product are layer thickness and laser
power. These parameters are more effective than other parameters like scan speed, scan
spacing, temperature because modifications related to laser power and layer thickness
directly affect changes in other parameters. The powder layer thickness should be low
enough by reason of that laser beam penetrates more effectively to machine bed. If layer
thickness is high, the energy required for laser beam to melt completely powder particles is
not adequate. In that case, for fixed all parameters except layer thickness, as layer thickness
increases, amount of the porosity increases and the density reduces in Figure 7. This
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

situation causes poor surface quality, dimensional accuracy and to occur crack formation.
Nonetheless, layer thickness is further low, spreading homogeneous layers of powder gets
more difficult and surface roughness increases [Olakanmi et al., 2015, Olakanmi et al.,
2011].

Figure 7. Effect of Layer Thickness on The Microstructure of Laser Sintered Al-Si12 Powder
at Scan Speed of 120 mm/S, Laser Power of 200W and Scan Spacing of 1 mm (A) 1.0 mm
(B) 0.5 mm and (C) 0.25 mm for Al-12Si [Olakanmi et al., 2011].

For fixed other parameters like scan speed, scan spacing, layer thickness and temperature,
the density increases or the percentage of the porosity decreases if the laser power
increases in Figure 8. Nevertheless, if further increasing laser power after a certain level is
not very efficient to improve density. Therefore, the experiments are carried out at low laser
power because of that optimum parameters are obtained [Olakanmi et al., 2015, Gong et
al.,2014, Chandrika et al., 2014, Yasa et al., 2011].

Figure 8. Scanning Electron Microscopy of the Surface of SLM Processed Ti-6AL-4V

(a) P= 160 W, V = 360 mm/s, (b) P=120 W, V= 360 mm/s for Ti6AL4V [Gong et al., 2014].
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Figure 9. Effect of Laser Scan Speed on the Percentage Porosity at Various Scan Spacing
for 316L Stainless Steel [Xiea et al., 2013].
As the scan speed increases, the density relatively decreases. Also, increasing scan speed
is not as effective as other parameter as it is shown in Figure 9. The effect of scan spacing
on the density is the same of scan speeding. In other words, if the scan spacing increases,
the percentage of the porosity increases and the density decreases in Figure 10 [Olakanmi et
al., 2015, Xiea et al., 2013, Chandrika et al., 2014, Yasa et al., 2011].

Figure 10. . Effect of Laser Scan Spacing on the Percentage Porosity for Al-12Si [Olakanmi
et al., 2015].

Laser beam penetrates more easily powder particles on the machine bed at high
temperature. Therefore, for fixed all the above mentioned parameters, as the sintering
temperature increases, amount of the porosity decreases in Figure 11 [Xiea et al., 2013].
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

Figure 11. SEM Images of Porous 316L Stainless Steel Sintered at Various Temperatures:
(a) 1100 ˚C; (b) 1150 ˚C; (c) 1200 ˚C; (d) 1250 ˚C; (e) 1300 ˚C. [Xiea et al., 2013].

By changing above mentioned parameters, the density is obtained about %98-99. The
purpose of the experiments performed is to attain %100 density. In accordance with this
purpose, variant methods are tried to improve density by researchers and engineers. One of
the variant methods performed is laser re-melting process. Laser re-melting process can be
performed during or after SLM and SLS process to improve mechanical properties and to
reduce the percentage of the porosity as it is shown in Figure 12 [Olakanmi et al., 2015,
Yasa et al., 2011, Yasa et al., 2011].

Figure 12. (a) SLM only, (b) SLM with Laser Re-melted at Scan Speed of 200m/s and Laser
Power of 95 W for 316 L Stainless Steel [Yasa et al., 2011].

Laser re-melting process is defined as that the same layer is scanned multiple times again
before a roller spread a new layer of the powder on the bed. This method aims to reduce
amount of the porosity so, the residual stress decreases, to improve surface quality. Just like
SLS and SLM process, in re-melting process there are some parameters like scan speed,
scan spacing and power that can be changed to fabricate better product. High energy carried
out during laser re-melting provides to reduce amount of the porosity and residual stress. If
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

re-melting scan speed decreases in combination with low laser-power, the lower density is
obtained. As mentioned above, scan spacing is distance between scan tracks. Because
connection between scan tracks is stronger, the scan spacing should not be far. However, if
the scan spacing is low, amount of the porosity is greater. Therefore, optimum scan spacing
is significant to reduce porosity and to ensure good connection between scan tracks. Re-
melting process is performed several times, but this situation is not very effective to
overcome some of limitations such as porosity and residual stress. Generally, re-melting
process is carried out 1 or 3 times. Thus, decreasing the percentage of the porosity by
means of laser re-melting process provides to improve some mechanical properties like
surface quality and dimensional accuracy etc. [Olakanmi et al., 2014, Yasa et al., 2011,Yasa
et al., 2011, Lamikiz et al., 2007, Shiomil et al., 2004].
Shrinkage is one of the problems to be solved in SLS process. Thermal unbalance of SLS
parts arise from that SLS is a process of sintering powder particle heated by means of CO2
laser beam in the build chamber during the sintering process. This situation triggers to occur
shrinkage. Total shrinkage consists of material shrinkage, process shrinkage and thermal
shrinkage. Occurring shrinkage affects the dimensional accuracy and surface quality.
Powder parameters and process parameters like scanning speed, scanning spacing, layer
thickness, the laser power, delay time and bed temperature are the reasons for the shrinkage
of SLS. If scan speed, scan spacing increases, the more process shrinkage occurs in part
fabricated or if laser power, layer thickness, delay time and temperature increases, the
percentage process shrinkage decreases. Crystallization induce to arrange the molecules
themselves and to be formed smaller volume. In that case, material shrinkage can be
occurred. As the laser power increases or scan speed and scan spacing decreases, the
percentage shrinkage increases [Wang et al., 2007, Senthilkumaran et al., 2009, Raghunath
and Pandey., 2007]. Thus, in order to increase process quality and to reduce the percentage
shrinkage, there are multitudinous and nonlinear input system related shrinkage.
Correspondingly, optimizing the process parameters by using conventional mathematical
method is unreasonable. Therefore, the algorithms and theories of the neural network are
carried out to obtain optimum process parameters for analysing nonlinear complex systems.
The neural network generally consists of input variables, output variables, network, training
data and weight coefficients [Wang et al., 2009].

6. CONCLUSION

In this paper, a review about additive manufacturing is given. Complex parts can easily be
manufactured by additive manufacturing. According to materials type, type of beam and
melting ratio, the AM technology has been categorized as SLS, SLM and EBM. AM
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

technology has some limitation like porosity, shrinkage, dimensional accuracy and surface
quality. AM technology has been improved to respond the need of high-value product,
customized product up to now. This technology provides to obtain better surface quality by
consuming lower energy and wasted material. There is nearly no wasted material like chip in
AM technology in comparison with other technology like machining. Only wasted material in
SLS, SLM and EBM is support structure. Reducing the necessity of the support structure is
aimed during manufacturing especially complex parts by using topological optimization
method. Moreover, process parameters is optimized to reduce consuming energy, the
percentage porosity and shrinkage and this process helps to overcome poor surface quality.
Scan speed, scan spacing should be low enough in combination with high laser power, low
layer thickness and high temperature to obtain optimal process parameters that improve the
density. Additionally, changes in process parameter affect consumption of energy.
One of the challenges of additive manufacturing is shrinkage. Shrinkage results from thermal
unbalance. Understanding cause of shrinkage occurred in SLS, SLM and EBM is very
significant to solve this complication. Other challenges related to additive manufacturing are
building time, layer resolution, material heterogeneity and standardization. Cycle time
depends on changes about process parameters such as especially scan speed, layer
thickness, scan spacing and designed product. If designed product is low volume, building
time in AM technology is shorter than traditional manufacturing. However, if part that is
wanted to manufacture is high-volume, the building time increase in AM technology by
comparison with conventional manufacturing. Meanwhile, increasing layer thickness results
in poor surface quality and causes increasing the building time. If perchance the layer
thickness is low, higher layer resolution and better surface quality is obtained. Thus, the
building time decreases. There exists a narrow variety of materials that is appropriate to use
in AM technology. This situation precludes to manufacture products that are custom-
designed with desired material. The standardization is significant to provide part quality,
consistency, reliability and repeatability. Nevertheless, the standardization for AM technology
has been recently initiated. AM is a growing and promising technology. Mentioned
challenges have been still tried to be overcome by researchers and engineers.

Nomenclature
AM Additive Manufacturing MJS Multiphase Jet Solidification
RP Rapid Prototyping SLS Selective Laser Sintering
FDM Fused deposition modelling SLM Selective Laser Melting
BPM Ballistic Particle Manufacturing EBM Electron Beam Melting
SCS Solid Creation System CAD Computer Aided Design
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

SGC Solid Ground Curing SFF Solid Freeform Fabrication

LOM Laminated Object Manufacturing DMLS Direct Metal Laser Sintering
3DP 3-Dimensional Printing

REFERENCES:

1. Wang X. C., Laoui T., Bonse J., Kruth J. P., Lauwers B., and Froyen L., (2002),
“Direct Selective Laser Sintering of Hard Metal Powders: Experimental Study and
Simulation’’, Int J Adv Manuf Tech,19(5): pp 351-357.
2. Kruth J. P., Schueren B. Van Der, Bonse J., and Morren B., (1996), “Basic Powder
Metallurgical Aspects In Selective Metal Powder Sintering”, CIRP Annals Manuf Tech,
45(1): pp. 183–186.
3. Laoui T., Froyen L., and Kruth J. P., (1998), “Selective Laser Sintering of Hard Metal
Powders”, Proceedings, Rapid Prototyping And Manufacturing Conference, Dearborn,
Michigan, USA, pp. 435–467.
4. Chua C. K., Chou S. M., and Wong T. S., (1998), “A Study of The State-of-the-Art Rapid
Prototyping Technologies’’, Int J Adv Manuf Tech,14(2): Pp 146-152.
5. Gu D.D., Meiners W., Wissenbach K., and Poprawe R., (2012), “Laser Additive
Manufacturing of Metallic Components: Materials’’, Processes and Mechanisms, Int
Mater Rev, 57(3): pp.133– 164.
6. Liu J.H., Shi Y.S., Chen K.H., and Huang S.H., (2007), “Research on Manufacturing Cu
Matrix Fe-Cu-Ni-C Alloy Composite Parts by Indirect Selective Laser Sintering“, Int J Adv
Manuf Tech, 33(7–8): pp.693– 697.
7. Boillat E., Kolossov S., and Glardon R., (2004), “Finite Element and Neural Network
Models For Process Optimization In Selective Laser Sintering“, Proceedings of The
Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B-journal of Engineering Manufacture, pp. 607–
614.
8. Kruth J. P., Froyen L., Morren B., and Bonse J., (1997), “Selective Laser Sintering of
WC-Co Hard Metal Parts“, Proc. 8th International Conference on Production Engineering,
Sapporo, Japan, pp.149–156.
9. Subramanian K., Vail N., Barlow J., and Marcus H., (1995), “Selective Laser Sintering
of Alumina with Polymer Binders“, Rapid Prototyping J, Vol 1: Pp.24–35.
10. Prashant K., Pandey P.M., and Rao P.V.M., (2009), “Effect of Delay Time on Part
Strength In Selective Laser Sintering“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 43(1): pp.117-126.
11. Vaezi M., Seitz H., and Yang S., (2013), “A Review on 3D Micro-Additive Manufacturing
Technologies“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 67(5): pp.1721-1754.
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

12. Wang R.J., Wang L., Zhao L., and Liu Z., (2007), “Influence of Process Parameters on
Part Shrinkage In SLS“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 33(5): pp.498-504.
13. Song S., Yang Y., Liu Y., Luo Z., and Yu J.K., (2015), “Study on manufacturing of W-
Cu Alloy Thin Wall Parts By Selective Laser Melting“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 78(5): pp.
885-893.
14. Calignano F., Manfredi D., Ambrosio E. P., Iuliano L., and Fino P., (2013), “Influence
of Process Parameters on Surface Roughness of Aluminum Parts Produced by DMLS“, ,
Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 67(9): pp.2743-2751.
15. Lu Z. L., Shi Y. S., Liu J. H., Chen Y., and Huang S.H., (2008), “Manufacturing AISI304
Metal Parts By Indirect Selective Laser Sintering Combined with Isostatic Pressing“, Int J
Adv Manuf Tech, 39(11): pp.1157-1163.
16. Clare A.T., Chalker P.R., Davies S., Sutcliffe C.J., and Tsopanos S., (2008),
“Selective Laser Melting of High Aspect Ratio 3D Nickel–Titanium Structures Two Way
Trained For MEMS Applications“, Int J Mech, 4(2): pp.181–187.
17. Bikas H., Stavropoulos P., and Chryssolouris G., (2015), “Additive Manufacturing
Methods and Modelling Approaches: A Critical Review“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, pp. 1-17.
18. Formanoir C.D., Michotte S., Rigo O., Germain L., and Godet S., (2016), “Electron
Beam Melted Ti-6Al-4V: Microstructure, Texture And Mechanical Behaviour of The As-
Built And Heat-Treated Material“, Materials Science & Engineering, Vol 652: pp. 105-119.
19. Rafi, H.K., Karthik, N.V., Gong, H., Starr, T.L., and Stucker B.E., (2013),
“Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Ti6Al4V Parts Fabricated by Selective
Laser Melting and Electron Beam Melting“, Journal of Materials Engineering and
Performance, 22(12): pp. 3872-3883.
20. Guoa C., Gea W., and Lin F., (2015), “Effects of Scanning Parameters on Material
Deposition During Electronbeam Selective Melting Of Ti-6Al-4V Powder“, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Vol 217: pp.148-157.
21. Sachdeva A., Singh S., and Sharma V.S., (2013), “ Investigating Surface Roughness of
Parts Produced by SLS Process“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 64(9): pp.1505-1516.
22. Jailani H. S., Rajadurai A., Mohan B., Kumar A. S., and Sornakumar T., (2009),
“Multi-Response Optimisation of Sintering Parameters of Al–Si Alloy/Fly Ash Composite
Using Taguchi Method And Grey Relational Analysis“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, 45(3):
pp.362-369.
23. Brackett D.J., Ashcroft I.A., and Hague R., (2011), “Topology Optimization For Additive
Manufacturing“, 22nd Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium,
Texas, USA, pp. 348-362.
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

24. Gardan N. and Schneider A., (2015), “Topological Optimization of Internal Patterns and
Support in Additive Manufacturing“, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol 37: pp.417-
425.
25. Nishiwaki S., Frecker M.I., Min S., and Kikuchi N., (1998), “Topology Optimization of
Compliant Mechanisms Using The Homogenization Method“, International Journal For
Numerical Methods In Engineering, Vol42: pp.539-559.
26. Gaoa W., Zhanga Y., Ramanujana D., Ramania K., Chenc Y., Williams C.B., Wange
C.L., Shin Y.C., Zhanga S., and Zavattieri P.D., (2015), “The Status, Challenges, And
Future of Additive Manufacturing in Engineering“, Computer-Aided Design, Vol 69: pp.65-
89.
27. Suzuki K. and Kikuchi N., (1989), “A Homogenization Method For Shape And Topology
Optimization, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering“, Vol 93: pp.291-
318.
28. Ma Z.D., Kikuchi N., and Cheng H.C., (1995), “Topological Design For Vibrating
Structures“, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 121(1-4): pp.259-
280.
29. Olakanmi E.O., Cochrane R.F., and Dalgarno K.W., (2015), “A Review on Selective
Laser Sintering/Melting (SLS/SLM) of Aluminium Alloy Powders: Processing,
Microstructure, and Properties“, Progress In Materials Science, Vol 74: pp.401-477.
30. Gong H., Rafi K., Gu h., Starr T., and Stucker B., (2014), “Analysis of Defect
Generation in Ti–6Al–4V Parts Made Using Powder Bedfusion Additive Manufacturing
Processes“, Additive Manufacturing, Vol 1-4: pp87-98.
31. Xiea F., Heb X.,∗, Caoa S., and Qua X., (2013) “Structural And Mechanical
Characteristics of Porous 316L Stainless Steel Fabricated By Indirect Selective Laser
Sintering“, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 213(6): pp.838-843.
32. Yasa E., Deckers J., and Kruth J.P., (2011), “Manufacturing by Combining Selective
Laser Melting and Selective Laser Erosion/Laser Re-Melting“, CIRP Annals Manuf Tech,
60(1): pp.263-266.
33. Olakanmi E.O., Cochrane R.F., and Dalgarno K.W., (2011), “Densification Mechanism
And Microstructural Evolution In Selective Laser Sintering of Al–12Si Powders“, Journal
of Materials Processing Technology, 211(1): pp.113-121.
34. Chandrika K., Bassem E., Gilbert F. G., Wayne E. K., and Aaron S., (2014), “Density
of Additively-Manufactured, 316L SS Parts Using Laser Powder-Bed Fusion at Powers
Up To 400W“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech, Vol 74: pp.65-78.
35. Yasa E., Deckers J., and Kruth J.P., (2011), “The Investigation of The Influence Of
Laser Re-Melting on Density, Surface Quality And Microstructure of Selective Laser
Melting Parts“, Rapid Prototyping Journal, 17(5): pp.312 – 327.
 The 17th International Conference on Machine Design and Production
July 12 – July 15 2016, Bursa, Turkiye

36. Lamikiz A., Sanchez J.A., Lopez De Lacalle L.N., and Arana J.L., (2007), “Laser
Polishing of Parts Built Up by Selective Laser Sintering“, International Journal of Machine
Tools & Manufacture, 47(12-13): pp. 2040-2050.
37. Shiomil M., Osakadal K., Nakamural K., Yamashital T., and Abe F., (2004), “Residual
Stress within Metallic Model Made by Selective Laser Melting Process“, CIRP Annals
Manuf Tech, 53(1): pp. 195-198.
38. Senthilkumaran K., Pandey P.M., and Rao P.V.M., (2009), “Influence of Building
Strategies on The Accuracy Of Parts in Selective Laser Sintering“, Materials and Design,
30(8): pp.2946-2954.
39. Raghunath N. and Pandey P.M., (2007), “Improving Accuracy Through Shrinkage
Modelling by Using Taguchi Method in Selective Laser Sintering“, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture, 47(6): pp.985-995.
40. Wang R.J., Li X., and Wu Q., (2009), “Optimizing Process Parameters For Selective
Laser Sintering Based on Neural Network And Genetic Algorithm“, Int J Adv Manuf Tech,
42(11): pp. 1035-1042.

View publication stats