A framework for mapping design for additive manufacturing knowledge for industrial and product design

Patrick Pradel,Zicheng Zhu,Richard Bibb,James Moultrie

doi:10.1080/09544828.2018.1483011

Patrick Pradel, Zicheng Zhu + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2018.1483011

Copy DOI

Abstract

Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) is a growing field of enquiry. Over the past few years, the scientific community has begun to explore this topic to provide a basis for supporting professional design practice. However, current knowledge is still largely fragmented, difficult to access and inconsistent in language and presentation. This paper seeks to collate and organise this dispersed but growing body of knowledge, using a single and coherent conceptual framework. The framework is based on a generic design process model and consists of five parts: Conceptual design, Embodiment design, Detail design and Process planning and Process selection. 81 articles on DfAM are mapped onto the framework to provide, for the first time, a clear summary of the state of the art across the whole design process. Nine directions for the future of DfAM research are then proposed.

Highlights

Additive Manufacturing (AM), referred to as 3D printing, is enabling a revolution in the way products are designed and produced (Hague, Mansour, and Saleh 2004; Junk and Tränkle 2011; Ahuja, Karg, and Schmidt 2015; Gao et al 2015)
With industrial and product designers in mind, this paper provides a framework for the growing body of knowledge on Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) and seeks to offer a coherent and consistent overview of the current research landscape
This paper proposes an original and critical analysis of the state-of-the-art in DfAM based on a systematic literature review

Summary

Introduction

Additive Manufacturing (AM), referred to as 3D printing, is enabling a revolution in the way products are designed and produced (Hague, Mansour, and Saleh 2004; Junk and Tränkle 2011; Ahuja, Karg, and Schmidt 2015; Gao et al 2015). Our approach builds upon these studies by expanding the breath of the resources considered and by integrating an additional dimension concerning the typology of design guidance (i.e. principles, heuristics, guidelines and rules) This provides another layer for classifying and understanding the knowledge developed around this topic. As we have uncovered in a previous study, whilst there is a good deal of structural or mechanical engineering-based litertature available (Pradel, Zhu, et al 2018), practising product and industrial designers still have very little awareness or understanding of DfAM knowledge This has profound implications on the identification of when AM is suitable manufacturing route, how to exploit AM opportunities and mitigate its limitations through good design.

Method

Validation methods

Conclusions

Findings

Summary of all literature