Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Optimization of FDM 3-D printer process parameters for surface

roughness and mechanical properties using PLA material
M. Mani a, A.G. Karthikeyan a,⇑, K. Kalaiselvan a, P. Muthusamy b, P. Muruganandhan c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dr. N.G.P. Institute of Technology, Coimbatore 641048, Tamil Nadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pollachi Institute of Engineering and Technology, Pollachi 642205, Tamil Nadu, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mahendra Institute of Technology, Namakkal 637503, Tamil Nadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: 3D printing and Rapid prototypic has a greater impact in modern manufacturing practices. The demands
Available online 10 June 2022 from industries have created a need to research and develop new techniques for 3D printing with afford-
able cost. In recent time’s variety of 3D printers are available in the market which are affordable by an
Keywords: individual and can be used to prototype functional parts. Hence, increasing the number of outsourcing
PLA platforms for Rapid Prototyping and 3D printing, it is important to recognize specific process parameters
3-D Printer and optimize them when parts are produced in masses as it is not feasible to alter the parameters for
Orthogonal Array
every batch with same application. In this present work, the process parameters such as layer thickness
Fused Deposition Modeling
(0.15 mm, 0.25 mm and 0.35 mm), nozzle temperature (210 °C, 215 °C, 220 °C) and infill density (55%,
60% and 65%) are manipulated to print specimens made of PLA (Polylactic Acid). These specimens are
designed as per ASTM standards and printed using Fused Deposition Modeling technique. Taguchi
Design is used to design an Orthogonal Array for the manipulated parameters according to which the
specimens are printed. Finally, Surfaces Roughness test, tensile test and Hardness test are conducted;
the data from these tests is used to optimize the manipulated parameters.
Copyright Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of 2022 International Confer-
ence on Recent Advances in Engineering Materials.

1. Introduction
The research works made in RP technology in the 1990 s plays a
vital role in additive manufacturing processes. The progress of an
additive manufacturing process those were available at the period
based on the state of material used; liquid, powder, solid and gas.
The proper selection of process parameters such as orientation,
layer thickness, orientation, patterns infill, raster angle, densities,
raster width, air gap etc., in FDM 3D printer gives better output
responses results such as mechanical properties, surface rough-
ness, dimensional accuracy and microstructural characteristics
etc., than the subtractive, forming and casting processes [1–3].
The relevant software such as NX, Matlab and Cura were used for
slicing the 3D models to print in 3D printing technology. The poly
lactic acid material was taken to check the compatibility of a
machine in printing the models. Taguchi method was used to opti-
mize the process parameters of the 3D printing machining process.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: karthikeyanyasi@gmail.com (A.G. Karthikeyan).
The optimized value was check and validated the output responses
mechanical properties and its surface quality which gave better
results [4–8]. Galantucci et al. [9] compared two FDM printers:
an industrial system and an open-source one. This paper proved
that optimization of process parameters improved the dimensional
accuracy using the factorial analysis design of experiments. It also
stated that lower printing speed result in better dimensional accu-
racy, but increased production time. By the result, industrial sys-
tem gave better result than the open source. Kovan et al. [10]
reported that the layer thickness has greater influence on surface
texture and resolution. Also, maximum layer thickness and nozzle
temperature of printed PLA part were evaluated for surface proper-
ties. Observation showed that nozzle temperature didn’t impact
the production time as much as layer thickness. With respect to
the printing temperatures, surface roughness values increased
with layer thickness. Finally, it is concluded that lower printing
temperatures gave better surface quality. Dan et al. [11] performed
tensile testing on PLA and Tough PLA specimens that were printed
with 20 percent infill intervals from 0 to 90 percent and 45°in rela-
tion to the longitudinal axis. The ABS material was printed in the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.05.422
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of 2022 International Conference on Recent Advances in Engineering Materials.
M. Mani, A.G. Karthikeyan, K. Kalaiselvan et al.
same manner. The black resin specimens were printed using a
consumer-grade SLA printer into two groups. The ABS material,
on the other hand, was unaffected by the orientation. The increase
in resolution resulted that the higher ultimate stress for resins
whereas the increase in resolution resulted that the lower ultimate
stress for polymers. Griffiths et al. [12] studied the influence of
printing parameters on performance and efficiency outputs using
design of experiments approach. It is resulted that the altered
printing orientation (front and side), Infill (60 and 100), number
of shells (1 and 4) and layer height (0.15 and 0.4) advises the read-
ers to set infill and shell thickness to maximum for optimized ten-
sile properties. Also, the maximum layer height and lowest of infill
height and number of shells were used to improve the efficiency of
the built models. Fernandez-Vicente et al. [13] assessed the impact
of two controllable variables such as the infill pattern and density.
An open-source 3D printer was used to create a series of prototype
parts with various density characteristics and infill patterns. The
findings reveal that the presence of different printing styles
induces a difference in maximal tensile strength of less than 5%,
though the behavior is identical. The tensile strength is primarily
determined by changes in infill density. The combination of a rec-
tilinear pattern and a 100% infill indicates the higher tensile
strength for ABS material used printed model. Dey et al. [14] con-
ducted the thorough analysis of the various literatures on the
effects of parameters on component quality as well as ongoing
work on process parameter optimization. In addition, flaws in pre-
vious works established, obstacles and opportunities to work in
this field are assessed and potential research directions in this field
are suggested. PLA and ABS are the most commonly used materials,
according to the findings; process parameters such as infill pattern,
print speed, shell distance, or extrusion temperature are less stud-
ied than layer thickness, build orientation, raster width, or raster
orientation; and there is minimal research that optimizes multiple
parts characteristics at the same time. Dev et al. [15] used the
multi-objective optimization of process parameters in FDM to cre-
ate strong and lightweight parts for intelligent application. This
study also talks about the bio-inspired infill patterns they are
gyroid, honeycomb and concentric. Totally three parameters
namely layer thickness (0.2, 0.3, 0.4), orientation angle (0, 45, 90)
and infill pattern with varying density (20%, 50%, 80%) at 3 levels:
low, medium and high were selected. Totally 10 ABS parts were
printed, 9 parts based on Taguchi’s approach, and the 10th one
had infill of 100%. Weight of each part was measured accurately
before performing a compression test. It is resulted from the test-
ing was used to develop a polynomial function used for optimiza-
tion of process parameters using Minitab software. Optimization
results showed that the gyroid pattern with 80% infill density,
0.2 mm of layer thickness and 45-degree orientation angle pro-
vided highest compression strength. Pooja et al. [16] evaluated
the repeatability of an open ware desktop 3D printer based on
the standard deviation obtained from the samples. Initially a set
of parameters, namely speed of deposition (15, 30, 45), layer thick-
ness (0.15, 0.25, 0.35), and Infill density (50, 75, 100) was arranged
in L9 orthogonal array resulting in 9 experiments. Three basic geo-
metric shapes: cuboid, cone and hemi-sphere were printed based
on the L9 orthogonal array. The dimensional deviations were
checked using CMM for each shape and signal – noise ratio was
Table 1
Properties of PLA material.
Melting Glass Transition Nozzle Heat Deflection
Temperature Temperature Temperature Temperature
130– 180 °C 60– 65 °C 185 °C 49– 52 °C
1927
Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931
compared to obtain the optimum parameters for each geometric
shape. Furthermore, using these optimized parameters, 35 cuboid
parts were printed to examine the repeatability of that printer.
The standard deviation calculated gives the distribution of dimen-
sional deviation in all three axes. Therefore, the repeatability of
FDM printer is estimated as 0.0388 mm in X – axis, 0.0613 mm
in Y – axis and 0.0653 mm in Z – axis.
From the previous literature, there are very few research work
has been carried out on the Flashforge 3D printer machine process
parameters optimization. In this present work, the process param-
eters such as layer thickness, infill density and temperature were
selected to develop the 3D model to find the Surface roughness,
hardness and tensile strength. Hence, these combinations of pro-
cess parameters and three levels for Surface roughness, hardness
and tensile strength were not yet chosen yet and considered as
novelty of the present work. The optimization of the process
parameters is done using the Taguchi analysis.
2. MATERIALS AND methods
Polylactic Acid (PLA) is thermoplastic polymer which is com-
monly used in fused deposition modelling technique. PLA is fully
biodegradable thermoplastic polymer made up of renewable raw
materials. PLA is produced by fermentation of corn starch. PLA is
cheap and available in different shades. The properties of PLA are
shown in Table 1 (Dan et al. [11]).
Process parameters influencing the print quality in FDM are
layer thickness, print speed, infill density, nozzle temperature,
shell thickness, print orientation, printing pattern. Therefore,
parameters which directly impact the surface roughness and
mechanical properties such as layer thickness, infill density and
nozzle temperature are selected. Process parameters and its levels
of FDM based Flashforge 3D printer with 0.6 mm nozzle diameter
are selected by trial and error models developed. The selected pro-
cess parameters are tabulated in Table 2. All other parameters area
set to a constant value: Printing speed is 60 mm/s, travelling speed
is 120 mm/s, printing pattern is hexagonal and Shell thickness is
2 mm with top and bottom layer 3 each. No supports are required
to print the CAD models hence it is disabled.
Based on the selected parameters, an Orthogonal Array (OA) is
created using the software MINITAB 19. To create the array 3-
level Taguchi Design with 3 factors is used. Then we have to choose
the type of design from the provided list of designs. Here L9 i.e., 3
rows  3 columns are selected. The L9 orthogonal array is used to
develop the 3D models and it is presented in Table 3.
The Dimensions of the specimens for tensile testing and Hard-
ness testing are based on the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) standards for plastic materials. The Dog-Bone
was designed based on ASTM D638 – 14 section 6 clause 1 subdi-
vision 2: 6.1.2 non rigid Plastic. The test specimen shall conform to
the dimensions shown in Fig. 1. The Type IV specimen shall be used
for testing non rigid plastics with a thickness of 4 mm (0.16 in.) or
less. The Type III specimen must be used for all materials with a
thickness greater than 7 mm (0.28 in.) but not more than 14 mm
(0.55 in.). Type IV is selected because the maximum build length
of the printer is constrained to 120 mm. The dimensions of the
Density Shrink Tensile Hardness,
Rate Strength Shore-D
1.24 – 1.26 g/ 0.37 – 61 – 66 MPa 59 Sh D
cc 0.41%
M. Mani, A.G. Karthikeyan, K. Kalaiselvan et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931

Table 2
Selection of process parameters with its level.

Process parameters Levels Unit

1 2 3
Layer Thickness 0.15 0.25 0.35 mm
Infill Density 55 60 65 %
o
Nozzle Temperature 210 215 220 C

Table 3
Surface roughness values for specimen models.

Specimen Process Parameters Surface

Models Roughness
Layer Infill Nozzle
Ra (lm)
Thickness Density (%) Temperature
(mm) (oC)
Fig. 2. Part diagram of Dog – Bone shaped specimen.
1 0.15 55 210 9.15
2 0.15 60 215 9.975
3 0.15 65 220 9.843
4 0.25 55 215 14.348
5 0.25 60 220 16.416
6 0.25 65 210 16.807
7 0.35 55 220 23.713
8 0.35 60 210 24.437
9 0.35 65 215 23.555

Fig. 3. Part diagram of Cuboid shaped specimen.

Fig. 1. Dog bone shape of stadard ASTM model.

dog-bone are shown above and the thickness is less than 4 mm i.e.,
3.5 mm. The Cuboid shape was also designed in accordance with
ASTM D2240 – 15 standard section 6 clause 1: 6.1 The test speci-
men, herein referred to as ‘‘specimen” or ‘‘test specimen” inter-
changeably, shall be at least 6.0 mm (0.24 in.) in thickness unless
it is known that results equivalent to the 6.0 mm (0.24 in.) values
are obtained with a thinner specimen. Therefore, the dimensions of
Cuboid with thickness greater than 6 mm are 50  20  8 mm. Fig. 4. The sliced 3D models are shown with slice information.
Based on the ASTM standards D638 – 14 and D2240 – 03 speci-
mens are designed using SOLIDWORKS2018. The part drawing of
dog-bone shown in Fig. 2 and cuboids is shown in Fig. 3. ing is done by Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) using PLA. For
The 3D CAD model is converted to STL file format which is PLA Flash forge Finder 2.0 is used. FDM printed parts cool down
imported to the printing software like CURA. Initially, the imported naturally, hence the requirement of separate cooling system is
3D CAD model is placed within the build space. Parameters can be not necessary. The 3D models are designed and sliced to fit inside
altered to desired value and slicing model is shown in Fig. 4. the build space of the printer. After completion of a set the filament
The G codes required to control the drive system is automati- spool is checked to make sure there is enough material present to
cally generated by the software which can be directly transferred print the next set. Flashforge Finder 2.0 3D printer is a consumer
to the printer for printing by wired and wireless communication grade printer not meant for professional 3D printing. It is designed
or by using a storage device like USB to transfer the G codes. Print- and manufactured by Zhenjiang Flashforge3D technology,
1928
M. Mani, A.G. Karthikeyan, K. Kalaiselvan et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931

available at Dr. N.G.P. Institute of Technology. This printer is cap-
able of extruding only PLA filament. The nozzle was preheated to
a temperature of 240°c and the extrude command was executed
to remove residual material, inside the nozzle, from the previous
printing set. The printing took place for about 12 h for all 18 mod-
els (9  dog-bone + 9  cuboid) including the resting time and
41.59 m of 1.75 mm thick PLA filament. The bed is detachable
and cannot be heated, therefore adhesive was applied in between
every print job to confirm warping. Dog-bone and cuboid PLA
printed model of sample 1 is shown in Fig. 5. Post Processing in
FDM usually involves making a good finish using sand blasting,
polishing etc., but here post processing is not required.

3. Results and discussions

The specimens prepared by FDM Flashforge 3D printer were

tested for Mechanical properties such as Hardness and tensile
strength. Also, surface roughness tests were carried out on the
specimens. The 3D printer process parameters and its levels were
optimized to minimize the surface roughness and maximize the
hardness and tensile strength using Taguchi analysis.

3.1. Surface roughness test

The specimen models developed using 3D printer were tested

Fig. 5. Dog-bone and cuboid PLA printed model of sample 1.
using the Mitutoyo SJ-210, Surface roughness tester which is avail-
able at Dr. N.G.P. Institute of Technology, Coimbatore. The Table 3
shows that the roughness values for all the 3D printed FDM spec-
imen models and the Fig. 6 shows that the sample model devel-
oped by first parameter sets out of nine sample sets.

3.2. Testing of mechanical properties

After the printing of specimen model, specimens were sub-

jected to various Mechanical Tests as per ASTM standards. The
mechanical tests carried out were tensile test and hardness test.
The tensile test was conducted by COMMANDO LABS, a private
Fig. 6. Roughness graph for Sample model 1. NBAL accredited material testing lab, using the TUE – CN – 400.

Table 4
Tensile Strength Results for PLA Specimen.

Specimen Models Process Parameters Tensile Strength (N/mm2) Shore – D Hardness

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Density (%) Nozzle Temperature(oC)
1 0.15 55 210 27.63 54
2 0.15 60 215 32.876 59
3 0.15 65 220 33.476 62
4 0.25 55 215 35.249 63
5 0.25 60 220 37.071 63
6 0.25 65 210 40.016 63
7 0.35 55 220 43.564 60
8 0.35 60 210 45.328 62
9 0.35 65 215 44.572 65

Fig. 7. Tensile test specimen models of before and after test.

1929
M. Mani, A.G. Karthikeyan, K. Kalaiselvan et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931

Fig. 8. Hardness sample test specimen models of before and after test.

Table 5
Taguchi SN ratio for Tensile, Hardness and Surface Roughness.

Specimen Tensile Strength (N/mm2) SNR for tensile strength Hardness (SHORE-D) SNR for hardness Surface Roughness (lm) SNR for Surface Roughness
1 27.63 28.8276 54 30.2891 9.15 19.2284
2 32.876 30.3376 59 30.3640 9.975 19.9783
3 33.476 30.4947 62 32.7061 9.843 19.8625
4 35.249 30.9429 63 30.4335 14.348 23.1358
5 37.071 31.3807 63 31.2084 16.416 24.3053
6 40.016 32.0447 63 31.1171 16.807 24.5098
7 43.564 32.7826 60 27.2504 23.713 27.4997
8 45.328 33.1273 62 30.8356 24.437 27.7610
9 44.572 32.9812 65 31.3466 23.555 27.4417

One end of the dog-bone is fixed and load was applied on the other
end to determine the tensile strength of PLA. The initial clearance
length is 25 mm and final clearance varies between 26 and
27 mm. Hardness test on Cuboid PLA specimens were performed
as per ASTM D2240 – 15 standards. Shore – D hardness test was
done by COMMANDO LABS, a NBAL accredited material testing
lab, using CL/ME/SHRD40. An average of three trails was taken as
final hardness value for all the specimens. The tensile and hardness
values for specimen models are mentioned in Table 4. The tensile
and hardness test images of specimens (before and after) are
shown in Fig. 7. and Fig. 8.
It is observed from the results shown in tensile and hardness
tests Table 4 that the improvement in tensile and hardness values
obtained when Layer thickness as 0.35 mm, infill density as 60%
and nozzle temperature as 210 °C for tensile and Layer thickness
as 0.35 mm, infill density as 65% and nozzle temperature as
215 °C for hardness. Also, increase in layer thickness and nozzle
temperature values influences more on hardness and tensile values

Fig. 9. SNR Main effect plot for Tensile strength (N/mm2). Fig. 10. SNR Main effect plot for Shore – D Hardness.

Table 6 Table 7
SNR response table for Tensile Strength (N/mm2). SNR response table for Shore – D Hardness.

Levels Process Parameters Levels Process Parameters

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Density (%) Temperature (0C) Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Density (%) Temperature (0C)
1 29.89 30.85 31.33 1 35.30 35.40 35.49
2 31.46 31.62 31.42 2 35.99 35.75 35.89
3 32.96 31.84 31.55 3 35.89 36.03 35.80
Delta 3.08 0.99 0.22 Delta 0.68 0.63 0.39
Rank 1 2 3 Rank 1 2 3

1930
M. Mani, A.G. Karthikeyan, K. Kalaiselvan et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 66 (2022) 1926–1931

Fig. 11. SNR Main effect plot for Shore – D Hardness.
ues for Hardness. The SNR main effect plots of input process
parameters levels for Surface Roughness shows the optimized pro-
cess parameters levels correlation with the response table values.
The Fig. 11 and Table 8 showed the SNR main effect plots and
response table values for Surface Roughness. Hence, from the
SNR main effects plots of the surface roughness, hardness and ten-
sile strength the optimized process parameters levels have been
found using Taguchi analysis. The optimized process parameters
levels such as Layer height as 0.35 mm, Infill density as 65% and
Nozzle temperature as 220°c found for Tensile strength. The opti-
mized process parameters levels such as Layer height as
0.25 mm, Infill density as 65% and Nozzle temperature as 215°c
found for Hardness. The optimized process parameters levels such
as Layer height as 0.15 mm, Infill density as 55% and Nozzle tem-
perature as 215°c found for Surface Roughness.(See Table 9.).

Table 8 4. Conclusions
SNR response table for Surface Roughness.

Levels Process Parameters The 3D model has been developed using flash forge 3D printer
successfully. The influence of the process parameters in 3D printer
Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Density (%) Temperature (0C)
for the tensile strength, hardness and surface roughness had fol-
1 19.69 23.29 23.83 lowing conclusions.
2 23.98 24.01 23.52
3 27.57 23.94 23.89
Delta 7.88 0.73 0.37  The optimum process parameters with its level for the tensile
Rank 1 2 3 strength of the developed 3D printed model were layer
thickness  0.35 mm, infill density  65% and nozzle
temperature  220 °C.
 The optimum process parameters with its level for the Hardness
Table 9
of the developed 3D printed model were layer thickness  0.2
Optimized Parameters for PLA Material. 5 mm, infill density  65% and nozzle temperature  215 °C.
 The optimum process parameters with its level for the Surface
Parameters Tensile Strength Hardness Surface Roughness
Roughness of the developed 3D printed model were layer
Layer Height, mm 0.35 0.25 0.15 thickness  0.15 mm, infill density  55% and nozzle
Infill Density, % 65 65 55
temperature  210 °C.
Nozzle Temperature, ◦c 220 215 215

Declaration of Competing Interest

whereas lower the layer thickness and nozzle temperature the
hardness and tensile values gets lower. Minimum infill density The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
gave minimum hardness and tensile where maximum infill density cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
gave better tensile and hardness values. to influence the work reported in this paper.

3.3. Optimization of process parameters of 3D printer machine References

The optimization of process parameters with its levels in FDM [1] J.P. Kruth, M.C. Leu, T. Nakagawa, CIRP Ann. 47 (1998) 525–540.
[2] E.E. Cho, E.E. Hein, Lynn, S.J. Hla, T.Tran, J. Eng. Sci. 3(2019) 27-37.
3D printer for hardness, tensile strength and surface roughness [3] I. Rojek, D. Mikołajewski, E. Dostatni, M. Macko, Materials 13 (2020) 5437.
has been done using Taguchi analysis.Minitab19 software is used [4] B. Juraj, H. Michal, K. Peter, M. Miloš, Transp. Res. Procedia 40 (2019) 144–149.
for Taguchi analysis. Signal to Noise (SNR) ratio for tensile strength, [5] S. Deshwal, A. Kumar, D. Chhabra, CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 31 (2020) 189–
199.
hardness and surface roughness were analyzed using Minitab19 [6] P. Meena, M.S. Ranganath, A. Pawan Kumar, M. Girija, H. Kumar, Mater. Res.
software. The larger the better for Tensile strength and hardness Express 7 (2020) 115307.
and Lower the better for surface roughness were found. The signal [7] M. Ramesh, K. Panneerselvam, Mater. Today: Proc 46 (2021) 9303–9307.
[8] M. Nabipour, B. Akhoundi, J. Elastomers Plast. 53 (2021) 146–164.
to noise ratio values for tensile strength, hardness and surface [9] L.M. Galantucci,Bodi.I, J. Kacani, F.Lavecchia, Procedia CIRP. 28(2015) 82-87.
roughness has mentioned in Table 5. [10] V.Kovan,T. Tezel, E.S.Topal, H.E. Camurlu, Machines. Technologies. Materials.
The SNR main effect plots of input process parameters levels for 12(2018) 266-269
[11] B.T. Dan, D.R. Khodos, O. Khairallah, R. Ramlal, Y. Budhoo, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. 9
tensile strength shows the optimized process parameters levels
(2018) 91–99.
correlation with the response table values. The Fig. 9 and Table 6 [12] C.A. Griffiths, J. Howarth, G.D.A. Rowbotham, A. Rees, Procedia CIRP 49 (2016)
showed the SNR main effect plots and response table values for 28–32.
[13] M. Fernandez-Vicente,W. Calle, S.Ferrandiz, A.Conejero 2016. 3D Print Addit
Tensile strength. The SNR main effect plots of input process param-
Manuf .3(2016)183-192.
eters levels for Hardness shows the optimized process parameters [14] A. Dey, N. Yodo, J. Manuf. Mater. 3 (2019) 64.
levels correlation with the response table values. The Fig. 10 and [15] S. Dev, R. Srivastava, Mater. Today: Proc. 26 (2020) 1995–1999.
Table 7 showed the SNR main effect plots and response table val- [16] P. Pooja, A. Mulay, M.R. Dhanvijay, Int. J. Eng. Technol. 7 (2020) 1352–1357.

1931