Search for: All records

Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) can produce designs in a manner that greatly differs from the methods used in the older, more familiar technologies of traditional manufacturing (TM). As an example, AM's layer-by-layer approach to manufacturing designs can lead to the production of intricate geometries and make use of multiple materials, made possible without added manufacturing cost and time due to AM's “free complexity.” Despite this contrasting method for manufacturing designs, designers often forgo the new design considerations for AM (AM design heuristics). Instead, they rely on their familiarity with the design considerations for TM (TM design heuristics) regardless of the intended manufacturing process. For designs that are intended to be manufactured using AM, this usage of TM design considerations is wasteful as it leads to unnecessary material usage, increased manufacturing time, and can result in designs that are poorly manufactured. To remedy this problem, there is a need to intervene early in the design process to help address any concerns regarding the use of AM design heuristics. This work aims to address this opportunity through a preliminary exploration of the design heuristics that students naturally leverage when creating designs in the context of TM and AM. In this study, 117 students in an upper-level engineering design course were given an open-ended design challenge and later tasked with self-evaluating their designs for their manufacturability with TM and AM. This evaluation of the students' designs was later repeated by relevant experts, who would identify the common design heuristics that students are most likely to use in their designs. Future studies will build on these findings by cementing early-stage design support tools that emphasize the significant heuristics found herein. For example, this work found that the design heuristic “incorporating complexity” was the most significant indicator of designs most suited for AM and should therefore be highly encouraged/emphasized when guiding designers in the use of AM. In doing so, it will be possible for early-stage design support tools to maximally improve designs that are intended to be manufactured for AM. 

Abstract As additive manufacturing (AM) usage increases, designers who wish to maximize AM’s potential must reconsider the traditional manufacturing (TM) axioms they may be more familiar with. While research has previously investigated the potential influences that can affect the designs produced in concept generation, little research has been done explicitly targeting the manufacturability of early-stage concepts and how previous experience and the presenting of priming content in manufacturing affect these concepts. The research in this paper addresses this gap in knowledge, specifically targeting differences in concept generation due to designer experience and presenting design for traditional manufacturing (DFTM) and design for additive manufacturing (DFAM) axioms. To understand how designers approach design creation early in the design process and investigate potential influential factors, participants in this study were asked to complete a design challenge centered on concept generation. Before this design challenge, a randomized subset of these participants received priming content on DFTM and DFAM considerations. These participants’ final designs were evaluated for both traditional manufacturability and additive manufacturability and compared against the final designs produced by participants who did not receive the priming content. Results show that students with low manufacturing experience levels create designs that are more naturally suited for TM. Additionally, as designers’ manufacturing experience levels increase, there is an increase in the number of designs more naturally suited for AM. This correlates with a higher self-reported use of DFAM axioms in the evaluation of these designs. These results suggest that students with high manufacturing experience levels rely on their previous experience when it comes to creating a design for either manufacturing process. Lastly, while the manufacturing priming content significantly influenced the traditional manufacturability of the designs, the priming content did not increase the number of self-reported design for manufacturing (DFM) axioms in the designs. 

Abstract Additive Manufacturing (AM) is a technology capable of producing designs that challenge those from traditional manufacturing methods. AM is of high interest for advanced capabilities such as leveraging free complexity and having the ability to manufacture multi-part products that are manufactured as a single assembled. By leveraging design heuristics for AM, the final design can be manufactured in a shorter timeframe with less material consumption while still maintaining the initial engineering goals of the design. Despite the promising potential of AM, there is a growing concern that designers are not utilizing the design heuristics that embody successful AM. When designers resort to using design heuristics for Traditional Manufacturing (TM) with the unintentional purpose of translating these heuristics to AM, they are not creating efficient designs for AM and are unable to reap the benefits of using AM. To remedy this problem, intervening early in the design process can help address any concerns regarding the use of AM design heuristics. This work explores the design heuristics that students use in creating designs in the context of TM and AM. Once the common design heuristics students use in their designs are identified, future studies will further investigate the specific features that these students are using to address them through early interventions. This work found that incorporating complex shapes and geometries and considering the minimum feature size are significant axioms for influencing the manufacturability of a design for both TM and AM. 

Abstract As additive manufacturing (AM) becomes more mainstream in industry, the newer design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) considerations must be distinguished from the older design for traditional manufacturing (DfTM) considerations. Designers who wish to maximize additive manufacturing’s potential must reconsider the traditional manufacturing axioms they may be more familiar with. While research has previously investigated the potential influences that can affect the designs produced in concept generation, little research has been done explicitly targeting the manufacturability of early-stage concepts and how previous experience in manufacturing affects this. The research in this paper addresses this gap in knowledge, specifically targeting differences in concept generation due to designer experience with additive manufacturing and traditional manufacturing. In this study, participants were given priming content on DfTM and DfAM considerations and then asked to complete a design challenge centered on concept generation. The participants’ final designs were evaluated for manufacturability as suited for traditional and additive manufacturing. Results show that students with low manufacturing experience levels create designs that are more naturally suited for traditional manufacturing. Additionally, as designers’ manufacturing experience levels increase, there is an increase in the number of designs suited for additive manufacturing. This correlates with a higher self-reported use of DfAM axioms in the evaluation of these designs. These results suggests that students with high manufacturing experience levels make a subconscious decision for which manufacturing process to design for.