Optimization of FDM based 3D printing

process parameters using Taguchi Method

and ANOVA

PRESENTED BY:
DEEPTI VAIRAGI (164224)
PARIDHI TIWARI (164237)
POOJA KUMARI (164240)
SCANDITA (164253)
SHIVANGI SRIVASTAVA (164256)
 Introduction

Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) is one of the most

used Additive Manufacturing (AM) techniques today due
to its ability to manufacture very complex geometries.
FDM technology has challenges; such as producing parts
with anisotropic mechanical properties, staircase effect at
curves, coarse surface finish, the need for supports for
overhanging regions and more
To overcome these challenges techniques are to be used
to improve the quality of AM or FDM parts, in particular,
vary between chemical treatment, machining, heat
treatment, and optimization of processing parameters
 3d printing as the
name suggests is
printing which is done
in 3 dimensions and
convert the digital
model of the object in
its physical form by
layer by layer printing
and hence also called
as Additive
Manufacturing. In our
project Fused
Deposition Modelling
(FDM) process is used
which is a type of
Material Extrusion.
The 3D printer FDM
3D printer Ultimaker in DEI FOE
based used for printing 3D printing lab
the part is shown in fig
 Introduction

The optimization of processing parameters can be

divided into experimental investigation and
simulation modelling.
 We had used experiments to optimize the
processing parameters such as Taguchi method and
ANOVA
Because it is very challenging to use all the
optimization techniques to investigate the influences
since FDM process take very long time to print parts
Need for
Optimization:
To reduce errors
To make good quality
print in first attempt
To have better control
over printed part’s
mechanical as well as
physical properties
such as dimensional
accuracy, peak stress,
surface roughness,
total energy etc. Optimization improves quality
makes processes efficient and
reduces cost and time
 Flow Chart

Optimization of FDM
process parameters

Study of all Optimization

techniques

Literature review on FDM

and Optimization
Selection of parameters
and experimental design

Application of Taguchi
and ANOVA

Result and discussion

Scope for future work

 What is Optimization

 The term Optimization is defined as “to make perfect”.

 It is the process of finding the best way of using existing
resources while taking in to account of all the factors that
influences the decisions in any experiment.
 The main goal of process optimization is to reduce or
eliminate time and resource wastage, unnecessary costs,
bottlenecks, and mistakes while achieving the process
objective.
 Optimization Techniques

Build-Test- One Factor Design of Full Factorial Taguchi

Fix Method At A Time Experiment Method Method
 Taguchi Method for Optimization

 Taguchi Method is a process of optimization steps of planning,

conducting and evaluating results of matrix experiments to determine
the best levels of control factors.
 Control factors are the parameters that can be controlled but Noise
factors cannot be controlled during production, but can be controlled
during experimentation. Basically S/N (Signal to noise ratio) ratio
measures how the output varies relative to the target value under
different noise conditions ( disturbing parameters). Higher values of
the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) recognized control factor settings that
lowers the effects of the noise factors.
 There are various types of Orthogonal Arrays which are used on the
basis of number of parameters and their levels of variation like L4, L8,
L9, L12 etc.
 8-Steps involved in Taguchi Method

1. Identify the main function and its side effects.

2. Identify the noise factors, testing condition and quality
characteristics.
3. Identify the objective function to be optimized.
4. Identify the control factors and their levels.
5. Select a suitable Orthogonal Array and construct the
Matrix.
6. Conduct the Matrix experiment.
7. Examine the data; predict the optimum control factor
levels and its performance.
8. Conduct the verification experiment.
 Taguchi approach using S/N ratio

1. Larger is better:
S/N = −10*log(Σ(1/Y2)/n)
2. Smaller is better:
S/N = −10*log(Σ(Y2)/n)
3. Nominal is the best:

Where: Y = responses for the given factor level combination

N = number of responses in the factor level combination
S/N ratio using base 10 logarithmic.
 Statistical Tests

 We use the statistical analysis for finding out the

contribution of different parameters in the mechanical
properties.
 There is a wide range of statistical tests. The decision of
which statistical test to use depends on the research design,
the distribution of the data, and the type of variable.
 In our project for the analysis of parameters interference on
the mechanical properties we used the Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) test.
 Types of ANOVA

Three types of ANOVA

1. One Way ANOVA
2. Two way ANOVA
3. Multivariate ANOVA

The hypothesis being tested in ANOVA is:

Ho: All pairs of samples are same i.e. all sample means are equal
Ha: At least one pair of samples is significantly different
In ANOVA test we calculate F value and compare it with critical value
F= ((SSE1 — SSE2)/m)/ SSE2/n-k,
Where:
SSE = residual sum of squares
m = number of restrictions
k = number of independent variables
 Application of ANOVA

 In the next slide a table is given on which the ANOVA is

applied.
 the ANOVA is used to determine the % contribution of all
three 3D printing parameters i.e. Layer thickness, Feed rate
and Raster orientation on Peak load, Peak stress and Total
energy.
 The tables are shown after the application of ANOVA in the
further slides.
 Input parameters of FDM along with the observations
for mechanical properties.

Specimen Layer Feed Raster Peak Flexural Total

No. Thickness mm Rate Orientation Load (N) Peak Stress Energy
mm/s (Mpa) (N-mm)

             

1 0.1 20 0 95 76.184 468

2 0.1 40 45 75 60.004 253
3 0.1 60 90 141 113.189 579
4 0.15 20 45 146 116.419 553
5 0.15 40 90 129 103.087 686
6 0.15 60 0 122 97.686 643
7 0.2 20 90 120 95.947 422
8 0.2 40 0 127 101.53 800
9 0.2 60 45 126 100.61 736
 ANOVA for Peak load
ANOVA  
%
Source of Contributio
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit n
Layer 0.799
Thickness 437.6296296 2 218.8148148 0.229339 0.797347 3.554557
Feed Rate 36253.40741 2 18126.7037 18.99852 3.66E-05 3.554557 66.228
Raster 1.599
Orientation 875.2592593 4 218.8148148 0.229339 0.918321 2.927744
Error 17174 18 954.1111111  
 
Total 54740.2963 26  

It can be observed from the Table , Feed Rate contributes the most toward the
Peak load at 66.228% compared to raster orientation where the contribution value
is 1.599%. Layer thickness gives the lowest contribution value of 0.799%.
 ANOVA for Flexural Peak Stress
ANOVA  
%
Source of Contributio
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit n
Layer 271.723679 135.861839 0.15058144 0.86128001 3.55455714 0.790
Thickness 6 2 8 1 3 6
17332.8265 8666.41327 9.60535350 0.00145024 3.55455714 50.403
Feed Rate 4 2 2 7 5 6
Raster 543.447359 135.861839 0.15058144 2.92774417 1.580
Orientation 3 4 8 1 0.960311191 3
16240.4682 902.248237  
Error 7 18 4
 
34388.4658  
Total 6 26

It can be observed from the table, Feed Rate contributes the most toward the
Flexural Peak Stress at 50.403% compared to raster orientation where the
contribution value is 1.580%. Layer thickness gives the lowest contribution value
of 0.790%.
 ANOVA for Total Energy

ANOVA  
%
Source of Contributio
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit n
Layer 28794.9629 1.497
Thickness 6 2 14397.48 1.614047 0.22659661 3.554557
Feed Rate 1676690.741 2 838345.4 93.98374 2.97348E-10 3.554557 87.163
Raster 57589.9259 2.994
Orientation 3 4 14397.48 1.614047 0.213965777 2.927744
Error 160562 18 8920.111  
 
Total 1923637.63 26  

It can be observed from Table, Feed Rate contributes the most toward the Total
energy at 87.163% compared to raster orientation where the contribution value is
2.994%. Layer thickness gives the lowest contribution value of 1.497%.
 Application of Taguchi and ANOVA on Case 1:

Selected factors and their levels:

Levels
Factors
1 2 3 4

Infill Design pattern Hilbert Chord Honey Comb Rectilinear Line

Infill Density 20 40 60 80

Input Parameters: Infill Design pattern and Infill Density

Output parameters: Peak Stress and Peak load
 Measured values of Peak stress and Peak load
Control Factors Desired output
Experiment No. Infill Design Peak Load
Pattern Infill Density % Peak Stress (MPa) (kN)
1 Hilbert Chord 20 38.97 6.09
2 Hilbert Chord 40 52.88 8.26
3 Hilbert Chord 60 81.79 12.78
4 Hilbert Chord 80 121.35 18.96
5 Honey Comb 20 17.55 2.74
6 Honey Comb 40 26.01 4.06
7 Honey Comb 60 35.06 5.47
8 Honey Comb 80 62.55 9.77
9 Rectilinear 20 21.42 3.34
10 Rectilinear 40 37.23 5.81
11 Rectilinear 60 66.28 10.35
12 Rectilinear 80 78.87 12.32
13 Line 20 15.05 2.35
14 Line 40 35 5.46
15 Line 60 60.72 9.48
16 Line 80 73.84 11.53
 Calculation of S/N ratios
S/N Ratio S/N Ratio  the Desired functions
Experiment No. (dB) for (dB) for
Peak Stress Peak Load (Peak stress and Peak
1 31.815 15.692 load) are Larger-the-better
2 34.466 18.340
3 38.254 22.131 type of control function
4 41.681 25.557 Formula for Larger the
5 24.886 8.755
6 28.303 12.171
best criteria for SN ratio
7 30.896 14.760 is-
8 35.925 19.798
ƞ = -10 log (1/n (∑ 1/y2)
9 26.616 10.475
10 31.418 15.284 The S/N ratios of all the
11 36.428 20.299
12 37.938 21.812
experiments were
13 23.551 7.421 calculated and tabulated
14 30.881 14.744 as shown in Table .
15 35.667 19.536
16 37.366 21.237
 Experimental Details

The S/N ratio for the individual control factors are

calculated for peak stress and peak load
From the values of S/N ratios, graphs can be plotted
showing the main effects of S/N ratio for mechanical
properties
The factor levels corresponding to the highest S/N
ratio were chosen to optimize the condition.
The corresponding graphs and optimized values are
shown in next slides.
 Graphs between S/N ratios and level of control
factors for Peak load

25.00 Infill Pattern Infill Density

20.43 25.00
22.10
20.00
16.97 19.18
15.73 20.00
S/N ratio (db)

13.87 15.13

S/N ratio (db)

15.00
15.00
10.59
10.00
10.00

5.00 5.00

0.00 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
levels
Levels
 Graphs between S/N ratios and level of control
factors for Peak stress

Infill Pattern Infill Density

40.00 36.55 50
33.10 31.87
30.00 38.23
40 35.31
S/N ratio (db)

30.00

S/N ratio (db)

31.27
30 26.72
20.00
20
10.00
10
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Levels
levels
 Optimum values of parameters and predicted values of peak
stress and peak load

Optimum Peak stress (MPa) Peak Load (KN)

Optimum value value for peak
15.61 2.43
Parameter for peak stress Load
Predicted values of peak stress and
Infill Design
pattern Hilbert Chord Hilbert Chord peak load after the test
Infill
Density 80 80
The formula used for the prediction of
Optimum values of factors and their
the peak stress is given by:
levels for both mechanical properties
 
βopt= ӯ + (ӯ-id) +(ӯ-ip) ……………. (1)

Xopt2= (10)βopt/10 ……………………. (2)

 
 
 ANOVA and its significance

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to evaluate the response magnitude in (%) of

each parameter in the orthogonal experiment. It is used to identify and quantify the
sources of different trial results from different trial runs.
%
Source of P-
SS df MS F F crit Contrib
Variation value
ution
25425. 1105.47 10.2147 1.48E- 1.9932
Infill Density 23 90.73%
88 3 1 07 39
2597.3 108.22
Error 24  
67 36      
               
28023.
Total 47  
25        

ANOVA for Peak Stress

 ANOVA for Peak Load

%
Source of P-
SS df MS F F crit Contribu
Variation value
tion
7984.4 0.318 0.99612 1.9932
Infill Density 23 347.15 23.37%
51 24 9 39
26180. 1090.8
Error 24  
27 44      

               
34164.7
Total 47  
2        
Case 2:Optimization of Build Orientation and Infill Density to
find out predicted value of peak stress ,yield stress and
percentage elongation

 Similar to Case 1 the Taguchi method and ANOVA is

applied for case 2 and further results are shown in
following slides.

 Input Parameters: Build Orientation -XY,XZ,YZ and Infill

Density-60,80 and 100%.
 Output Parameters :Peak Stress, Yield Stress,% Elongation.
 Selected factors and their levels with output mechanical
properties

Build Infill Density Peak Stress Yield Stress % Elongation

Orientation (%) (MPa) (MPa)

XY 60 24.518 19.754 4.4

80 35.203 28.476 3.1
100 45.089 34.428 14.678
XZ 60 32.382 24.896 5.586
80 33.496 28.028 3.25
100 39.256 31.330 4.818
YZ 60 22.366 13.366 2.1
80 23.367 22.301 2.385
100 27.055 22.622 1
 Graphs between mean of S/N Ratio vs each input
parameter
Mean of S/N ratio

Figure : For Peak Stress

Figure : For Peak Stress
31.5 31.2 32
31 30.86
30.6
31

Mean of S/N ratio

30.5
30 29.59 30
29.5
29 29
28.33
28.5
28 27.67
28
27.5 27
27
26.5 26
60 80 100 XY XZ YZ

Infill density (%) Build Orientation

 Graphs between mean of S/N Ratio vs each
input parameter

Figure : For Yield Stress Figure : For Yield Stress

30 29.25
29 28.34 30
28.93
Mean of S/N ratio

28 28.58
29

Mean of S/N ratio

28
27
27
26
25.45
26 25.53
25
25
24 24
23 23
60 80 100 XY XZ YZ
Infill Density (%) Build Orientation
 Graphs between mean of S/N Ratio vs each
input parameter

Figure : For Percentage Figure : For Percentage

Elongation Elongation
14 12.33
11.42
12 20
Mean of S/N ratio

Mean of S/N ratio

10 9.2 15.34
15 12.95
8
6 10
4 4.66
5
2
0 0
60 80 100 XY XZ YZ
Infill Density (%) Build Orientation
 Optimum values of parameters and predicted
values of output

Optimum Values of output parameters

Parameter Peak Stress Yield Stress Percentage
Elongation
Infill Density 100 100 100
Build Orientation XZ XZ XY

Predicted Values of output parameters

Peak Stress (MPa) Yield Stress (MPa) % Elongation (MPa)

39.17 26.85 8.99

 Annova

Sources Peak stress Yield Stress % Elongation

(MPa) (Mpa)

Build 50.2583 43.9022 5.83926

orientation

Infill density 57.2129 29.94116 12.8427

Percentage contribution of build orientation and infill density

 Case 3: Optimization of Layer Thickness, Infill Density and Annealing
Temperature to find out the predicted value of Peak Stress, Peak Load and
Total Stress

No. of Infill Layer Tempera Peak Peak Total

trials density thicknes ture load(KN stress(M energy(
(%) s(mm) (degree ) Pa) KJ)
C)

1 60 0.2 80 1.967 38.796 3.192

2 60 0.3 120 1.96 38.666 2.299
3 90 0.2 120 2.341 46.171 3.779
4 90 0.3 80 2.653 52.327 4.428
 Graphs between means of S/N ratio Vs Each input
parameters
8.5
8
8
8 7.93

Mean of S/N ratios

7.5 7.5
Mans of S/N ratios

Mean of S/N ratios

7.5
7 7.18
7.16
6.5 7

7
5.86
6 6.62

6.5 6.63
5.5 80 120
Annealing Temperature 6.5
0.2 0.3
5
60 90 Layer Thickness
Infill Density

Graphs for Peak Load

 Graphs between means of S/N ratio Vs Each input
parameters

33.5 34.5
34 33.83

33.5 33.06 34
33

Mean of S/N ratios

Mean of S/N ratios
Mean of S/N ratios

33 33.5
32.53 33.07
32.5 32.5 33
32 32.52
31.77 32.5
31.5 32
32
31
31.5 31.5
30.5 0.2 0.3 80 120
60 90
Layer Thichness Annelaing Temperature
Infill Density

Graphs for Peak Stress

 Graphs between means of S/N ratio Vs Each input parameters

11 14
14
10.8
12 12
10.6
10

Mean of S/N ratios

Mean of S/N ratios

10
Mean of S/N ratios

10.4
8 8
10.2
6
6 10
4
4 9.8

9.6 2
2
9.4 0
0 0.2 0.3 80 120
60 90
Layer Thickness Annealing Temperature
Infill Density

Graphs for Total Energy

Optimum values of parameters and predicted values
of output

Optimal Values if the Factors and their levels for the

mechanical properties
Parameter Optimal value for Optimal value for Optimal value for
Peak Load Peak Stress Total Energy
Infill Density(%) 90% 90% 90%
Layer O.3 mm 0.3 mm 0.2 mm
Thickness(mm)
Annealing 80℃ 80℃ 80℃
Temperature℃

Predicted values of output parameters

Peak load Peak stress Total energy

1.8 KN 32.4246 MPa 2.2292 KJ

 ANOVA

ANOVA for Peak Stress

Source of %
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation Contribution
Infill Density 726.48 1 726.48 142.4 2.00E-06 5.3177 36.91794
Annealing
503.5739 5 100.7148 12.47154 0.007516 5.050329 25.59039
temperature
Layer
737.77 5 147.55 26.704 2.00E-05 3.3258 37.49167
thickness
Total 1967.824 11          

ANOVA for Peak Load

Source of %
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation Contribution
Infill Density 1.868245 1 1.868245 96.67626 9.63E-06 5.317655 32.72465
Annealing
1.943491 5 0.388698 32.17206 7.47E-06 3.325835 34.04268
temperature
Layer
1.897248 5 0.37945 26.73024 1.75E-05 3.325835 33.23267
thickness
Total 5.708984 11          
 ANOVA

Table-3: ANOVA for Total Energy

Source of %
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation Contribution
Infill Density 7.646657 1 7.646657 14.49853 0.00518 5.317655 24.45807
Annealing
12.80199 5 2.560399 10.4605 0.001008 3.325835 40.94756
temperature
Layer
10.81571 5 2.163142 4.480892 0.021047 3.325835 34.59438
thickness
Total 31.26436 11          
 Results and discussion

 In this presentation we have discussed about different

methods of optimizing the parameters while varying them
all together rather than one by one which is much more
time consuming and then calculated the effect of FDM
process parameters on the mechanical properties through
various cases.
 Results and discussion

 In the first case we found:

 Hilbert Chord infill pattern gives the highest peak load and
peak stress values also for the honey comb infill pattern the
properties were lowest.
 As we increase the infill density the values of peak load and
peak stress increases.
 The infill density has great contribution in the peak stress
of the 3D printed parts (i.e. 90.73%) but for peak load the
contribution is 23.37%
 Results and discussion

Similar, in the second case :

The build orientation should be XZ for better peak stress and
yield stress and also for % elongation the elongation is highest in
XY build orientation and lowest in YZ build orientation.
As we increase the % infill for the specimen the peak stress and
yield stress increases but for elongation first it starts to decrease
and then increases.
Build orientation has not much contribution in percentage
elongation but for yield stress and peak stress it is almost equally
contributing.
The infill density has 57.2129 % contribution for peak stress,
29.94116% contribution on yield stress and 12.8427% for
percentage elongation. From this it is clear that infill density has
much effect on peak stresses and very less effect on % elongation.
 Results and discussion

In the final case:

The optimum value of layer thickness for better peak load
and peak stress is 0.3mm and for total the layer thickness
should kept 0.2mm.
The annealing temperature should keep 80℃ for good
mechanical properties of the printed parts.
As we increase the value of infill density, we get improved
mechanical properties.
Infill density, annealing temperature and layer thickness
all have equal amount of effect on all three mechanical
properties (i.e. Peak load, peak stress and total energy).
 Scope for the future work

In the existing research, dimensional accuracy, surface

roughness, and several mechanical properties could be
improved by optimizing the process parameters.
Optimizing thermal properties, environmental properties,
other mechanical properties is also important for producing
higher-quality FDM parts.
The study needs to be extended to other types of quality
characteristics such as hardness, production time, creep,
vibration, product and process cost, porosity and stress strain
behaviour at high-strain-rate loading conditions.
Future work should also focus on the application of new
statistical designs, modelling and optimization techniques.