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

net/publication/328192167

Computer-Aided Optimization in Additive Manufacturing: Processing

Parameters and 3D Scaffold Reconstruction

Presentation · September 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 63

5 authors, including:

Nuno Alves Paula Pascoal-Faria

Instituto Politécnico de Leiria Instituto Politécnico de Leiria
166 PUBLICATIONS   423 CITATIONS    80 PUBLICATIONS   418 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sara Biscaia Tânia Viana

Instituto Politécnico de Leiria Instituto Politécnico de Leiria
30 PUBLICATIONS   59 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   94 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

2bio4cartilage: Integrated intervention program for prevention and treatment of cartilage lesions View project

Electrospun structures as a key tool to mimic the native ECM View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Miguel Belbut Gaspar on 05 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Computer-Aided Optimization in
Additive Manufacturing:
Processing Parameters and 3D Scaffold Reconstruction

Miguel Belbut Gaspar

Nuno Alves

Paula Faria

CDRsp / Polythecnic Institute of Leiria

Introduction: Introduction:

Introduction:
Actual development of polymeric scaffolds require human supervision procedures during its
manufacturing and later on. Measurements such as Fiber Distance (FD), Fiber Gap (FG) and Fiber
Diameter (RW) are usually done with help of CT-Scan and Microscopy. This require some
preparation of the scaffold, namely an isolation of the center part, therefore used to cellular
growth and proliferation.

Image acquisition of several scaffold’s layers and its computational processing take advantage
of a real-time procedure to infer the referred scaffold’s characteristics. Procedures, such as
sample illumination, choose of camera used for image acquisition, MATLAB processing and
results acceptance through theoretical and imaging methods comparison are necessary to
validate this supervision method.
Introduction: Subject:

Subject:

Computer algorithms for the characterization of filaments produced with different fabrication
parameters in a FDM machine

Results of the analysis of filaments produced with a wide range of fabrication parameters.
Introduction: Motivation:

Motivation:

Human inspection of filament morphology by means of optical microscopy is time consuming

This restricts the range of fabrication parameters to explore
Thus, it is difficult to model the behaviour

Furthermore, the development of an efficient computer-vision filament monitorization would

allow for online monitoring of the fabrication

• possibility for early warnings for fabrication errors, increasing time and material efficiency

• enable quality control/assurance

• enable near real-time control of parameters, adjusting them as needed, based on a

model
Methods: Methods:

Methods:

1. Preparation of scaffolds

2. Image acquisition

3. Region of interest (ROI) detection

4. Layer and filament segmentation

5. Filament characterization

All image processing algorithms where implemented in Matlab (release 2013a) by Mathworks.
Methods: Scaffold preparation:

Scaffold preparation:
Printer
BioSitu printer (CDRSP)

Material
The material used was poly-caprolactone (PCL),
with molecular weight 50000 D, ref. Capa 6500,
supplied by Perstorp
Methods: Scaffold preparation:

For the study of the optimal deposition velocity, a simple two-layer scaffold was designed with
varying feed rates. Two layers are the minimum required, since the first layer is not
representative of the behaviour of the material in the bulk of a fabricated multi-layer scaffold.

The feed rate changes occur only on the second layer, and always at the end of a scan line, to
allow for some time for flow regularization before the next scan line.

The toolpath is in a normal zig-zag pattern, with the second layer at right angle to the bottom
one, forming a square structure with side length of 28 mm. The perpendicular distance between
adjacent filament's centers is 2 mm.

The feed rates used in the top layer go from 200 mm/sec up to 900 mm/sec, in 50 mm/sec
increments, so that we have a total of 15 filaments produced at 15 different deposition speeds.
Methods: Scaffold preparation:

Toolpath for bottom and top layers ( z -axis scaled 4x for clarity). Green and red markers indicate
the start and stop of each layer. Thicker line is the top layer.
Methods: Image acquisition:

Image acquisition:
Smartphone camera (Huawei P9 Lite front camera)

Camera details

Resolution 13 MP
Aperture f/2.0
Sensor diagonal 1/3''
Pixel size 1.12 μm
Resolution 4160x3120
Color depth 24 bit, sRGB
Exposure 1/60 s
Focal distance 4 mm (eq. 27 mm)
Methods: Image acquisition:

Lighting setup

Background and platform:

The back of the transparent acrylic fabrication platform was covered with a medium blue
cardboard with a matte finish. This increases the contrast and reduces spurious light reflections
and diffusion from the bottom of the scaffold.

The illumination is used to discriminate between the top and the underlying layers.

Grazing illumination perpendicular to the top layer's scan direction.

A linear light source was used to ensure a uniform lighting over the whole field of view.

Light source details

Linear LED light source, EFFI-LINE-v2-100-000-S-2, by Effilux. (100 mm optical length, 5500+/-
500 K white light)
Methods: Image acquisition:

Illumination setup and the Effilux linear light source.

Methods: ROI (scaffold) detection and scale factor:

ROI (scaffold) detection and scale factor:

1. Automatic threshold determination for separation of

specular highlights, top filaments and bottom filaments

2. Run Hough Transform on sub-sampled binary image of

top filaments (detects lines, parameterized by slope and
distance to origin)

3. Determine a loose bounding box and approximate

rotation

4. Fine determination of bounds and scale factor on the

straigthened and cropped full resolution grayscale image
Methods: ROI (scaffold) detection and scale factor:

Detection of filament centers. Top line is the intensity profile of the binarized image, bottom is
the intensity profile for the grayscale image.
Methods: Filament characterization:

Filament characterization:
Four methods were successively developed for extracting the filament diameter:

1. Pixel count: compute the mean number of pixels in each sub-image of the binarized
image;

2. Idem, but considering only the central region between intersections with bottom
filaments;

3. Contour-based: obtain a polygonal contour of each filament from the grayscale image,
sort the points by y-coordinate, and compute the mean difference between the x-
coordinates;

4. Gradient-based: the horizontal component of the intensity gradient is separated in

positive and negative values, corresponding to the left and right boundaries of the
filament. Each is averaged over the vertical direction, then filtered and interpolated. The
Methods: Filament characterization:

peaks of the resulting curves are used to determine the bounds of each filament with
sub-pixel resolution.

The positive (red) and negative (blue) values of the horizontal intensity gradient, averaged over
each column. The curves where interpolated in 1/20 pixel.
Results: Results:

Results:
Several sets of scaffolds where produced, using slightly different setup and different fabrication
parameters:

1. Fixed nozzle of 300 μm. Feedrates in each scaffold cover the range 200 to 900 in 50
increments. Six scaffolds produced with extruder rotation speed between 550 and 1300 in
150 increments (arbitrary units)

2. Two sets produced like above, with nozzle diameters 300, 400 and 500 μm.

Since the focus as well as the exposure where not always consistent, in all sets, two or three
images where acquired of each finished scaffold.

A total of 825 filaments where characterized.

Results: Comparison of the four methods:

Comparison of the four methods:

The pixel-count methods (top row in left image) are too sensitive to small variations, giving
good results only whitin a small range of fabrication parameters. The contour-based methods
are more reliable, but still produces many wrong results. The gradient-based method (right
image) correctly handles the whole range of fabrication parameters.
Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

In what follows we discuss only the results obtained by the gradient-based method

Consistency of the results obtained by CV.

Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

Correlation with visual analysis.

A coarse but exhaustive comparison between the values obtained by the gradient-based
method and the visual relative diameter assessment from the images showed no obvious
inconsistencies, except for a very few (6) cases.

Correlation with expected theoretical variation.

Assuming constant density and circular cross-section, the radius r should be

- inversely proportional to square root of feedrate (d)

- proportional to square root of flowrate:

√
1 ϕ
r=
2π d

Note: the relation between filament diameter and extruder rotation speed is difficult to infer,
since the dependency of flow rate on the extruder rotation was not fully characterized.
Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:
Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

Dependence on the nozzle diameter is not clear, but is usually expected that the diameter of the
filament increases with the diameter of the nozzle.

This trend was observed for the

500 μm and the 400 μm nozzles,
with the latter producing
consistently smaller filament
diameters.

However, in both sets of

scaffolds produced with
different nozzle diameters,
filaments produced with 300 μm
nozzle had overall larger
diameters than those produced
with the 400 μm nozzle.
Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

Correlation with measurements made by optical microscopy (OM).

The scaffolds where analyzed using a Daffodil MCX100 optical microscope (Micros Austria)

Magnification: 40x

The samples analyzed where produced with

- nozzle diameter 300 μm

- extruder rotation speeds of 550, 700 and 850

Three measurements in the central zone plus three measurements in each extremity, for each
filament.
Results: Analysis of diameter dependency on fabrication parameters:

Values obtained by CV are

generally larger than those
obtained by OM

Note that:

- OM characterization is based on a
small number of pontual
measurements, generally in the
thinner part of the filament;

- CV characterization provides an
average over the whole length,
including intersections where
filament is wider.

This effect is more pronounced as the deposition speed increases and extruder speed decreases.
Conclusions: Conclusions:

Conclusions:

The concept of using computer vision to determine the filament width was validated.

The gradient-based method provides a reliable way of obtaining the filament diameter over a
wide range of processing conditions, and gives meaningful results, although a systematic
deviation relative to the ground-truth still needs to be accounted for.

This method allowed for an expedite exploration of a large range of fabrication parameters,
uncovering behavior not previously detected.

This method could be used to automatically determine optimal fabrication parameters for new
materials, or even on-the-fly, adapting to environmental conditions or material batch variations.
Conclusions: Future work:

Future work:

• A new setup with a dedicated camera, permanently mounted, is being assembled. This
will allow to perform a one-time camera calibration step, increasing the precision and
accuracy of the method.

• More extensive characterization of the morphology of the filaments.

• Characterization of geometric deviations from the specified toolpath.

Conclusions: Future work:

Thank you!

This work is supported by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) and Centro2020
through the Project references: UID/Multi/04044/2013 and PAMI - ROTEIRO/0328/2013 (Nº
022158)

Project insitu.Biomas, POCI 01-0247-FEDER-017771

View publication stats