Chapter 6

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 36
 
CHAPTER 6 DIMENSIONAL ACCURACY ANALYSIS
The previous chapters discussed how six different input parameters affect the surfaceroughness and hardness of ABS composite implants. Mathematical models have been developedto achieve the desired surface properties. Although the vapor smoothing process improves thesurface finish and hardness of ABS replicas, it can cause dimensional changes. This happensbecause partial melting and the repositioning of layers can affect dimensional stability in variousareas. Since these replicas are intended for industrial use, it's crucial to control these dimensionalchanges. Dimensional accuracy is important for manufactured components as it shows howeffective the manufacturing and finishing processes are. For composite implants, accuracy isespecially important because even small variations can cause pain, discomfort, and jointdislocation after surgery (Sorrentino et al., 2010).
6.1 MEASUREMENT OF DIMENSIONAL ACCURACY
In this chapter, we aim to analyze the key process parameters of FDM and vaporsmoothing (VS) that cause dimensional changes in composite implant replicas. We focusedon three critical dimensions: head diameter, neck thickness, and stem thickness (Figure6.1). We used a Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) to measure these dimensions atthree points before and after the vapor smoothing process. To generate experimental datafor these critical dimensions, we used the Taguchi L18 Design of Experiments (DOE)method. We then analyzed the Signal-to-Noise (SN) ratio plots to see how differentparameters of the combined FDM-VS process affect the dimensions. Response tables of SNratios helped us create equations to predict the results at optimal levels. An ANOVA tablewas used to determine the relative importance of each parameter with 95% confidence,showing the percentage contribution of each one. We validated the results using residualplots for each critical dimension. In present study, the percentage deviation in dimensionshas been considered as a response so as to minimize the error during calculation of SNratios. It is calculated as:
 
 PercentageDeviation
=
original
(
CAD
)
dimension
actualdimensionoriginal
(
CAD
)
dimension
Figure 6.1
Location and dimensions of three critical part featuresWe obtained the original CAD dimensions of each part feature from "Solidworks 2014"and compared them with the actual dimensions. We calculated the percentage deviationtwice: before and after the vapor smoothing process.To handle uncontrolled noise factors, we used the Signal to Noise (SN) ratio to select arobust experimental design. The SN ratio measures how sensitive the response is tocontrolled conditions compared to uncontrolled external noise factors. In this case, wecalculated the SN ratio using the "smaller is better" quality characteristic because our goalis to reduce dimensional variability (percentage deviation). The formula for calculating theSN ratio was applied accordingly.
Locaton 1 (Head Diameer)Locaton 3 (Sem Thickness)6.620All dimensions in mm7.7458Locaton 2 (Neck Thickness)74 1.512.0524
5
 
S N 
 =
101
n
(
∑ y
2
)
 ….. (6.1)
Where y is output response and n is number of observations.The IT Grades for these three critical dimensions were calculated for all eighteen experimentsaccording to the UNI EN 20286-1 standards. The standard tolerance unit \( n \) for the nominaldimension TJN was calculated as follows:
= 1000 (T
JN
 – T
JM
) /
Where T
JM
 is a measured dimension and
is standard tolerance factor Thestandard tolerance factor
was calculated using formula:
= (0.45 x T
1/3
) + (0.001 x T)Where T is the geometric mean of the nominal dimension in mmTherefore, the IT grade for each experiment can be determined from the IT grade chart(Appendix II) based on the standard tolerance unit. A higher IT grade value indicates a largertolerance according to industrial standards. For the measurements of the three critical features ofcomposite replicas, the IT grades are listed in the last column of the observation tables, rangingfrom IT grade 4 to 13.In this experiment, the percentage deviation was calculated both before and after smoothing. However, for statistical analysis, we focused on the percentage deviation after smoothing to understand the impact of the vapor smoothing (VS) process on dimensions. The percentage deviation before smoothing (%ΔDb) was calculated as follows%
 D
b
=
originalCADdimension
actualdimensioriginalCADdimensio
5
 
Similarly, the percentage deviation after smoothing (%ΔD
a
) has been calculated as:
%
∆ D
=
originalCADdimension
actualdimensoriginalCADdimensi
6.1.1DIAMETER MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS
The table 6.1 lists nine objects along with their initial and final diameters, as well as thepercentage change in diameter.
S.No.Initial DiameterFinal DiameterPercentage Change1
 9.31
9.34
 -0.32223
2
 9.2
9.24
 -0.43478
3
 8.94
9
 -0.67114
4
 9.44
9.14
 3.177966
598.58
 4.666667
69.519.34
 1.787592
79.79.42
 2.886598
89.549.62
 -0.83857
99.519.3
 2.208202
Table 6.1
Measurements of diameter before and after smoothingFor each object, the percentage change column indicates how much the diameter changedbetween the initial and final measurements. A negative percentage change means the diameterdecreased, while a positive percentage change means it increased. For example, object 1'sdiameter decreased by 0.32% from the initial measurement to the final measurement. It'simportant to note that the table doesn't specify the units of measurement for the diameters, nordoes it explain what caused the changes in diameter.
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Reward Your Curiosity

Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.
No Commitment. Cancel anytime.
576648e32a3d8b82ca71961b7a986505