scholarly journals Increasing the functionalities of 3D printed microchemical devices by single material, multimaterial, and print-pause-print 3D printing

Lab on a Chip ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Li ◽  
Niall P. Macdonald ◽  
Rosanne M. Guijt ◽  
Michael C. Breadmore
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Soft Lithography ◽  
Fluidic Devices ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Single Material

3D printing has emerged as a valuable approach for the fabrication of fluidic devices and may replace soft-lithography as the method of choice for rapid prototyping.

scholarly journals Novel 3D-Printed MEMS Magnetometer with Optical Detection

Proceedings ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (13) ◽  
pp. 783 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Kahr ◽  
Wilfried Hortschitz ◽  
Harald Steiner ◽  
Michael Stifter ◽  
Andreas Kainz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Product Development ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
High Accuracy ◽  
Structural Performance ◽  
Sensitivity Measurement ◽  
Optical Readout ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Working Principle

This paper reports a novel 3D printed MEMS magnetometer with optical readout, which demonstrates the advantages of 3D printing technology in terms of rapid prototyping. Low-cost and fast product development cycles favour 3D printing as an effective tool. Sensitivity measurement with such devices indicate high accuracy and good structural performance, considering material and technological uncertainties. This paper is focusing on the novelty of the rapid, 3D-printing prototyping approach and verification of the working principle for printed MEMS magnetometers.

scholarly journals 3D Printed Microfluidics

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna V. Nielsen ◽  
Michael J. Beauchamp ◽  
Gregory P. Nordin ◽  
Adam T. Woolley
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Microfluidic Devices ◽  
Fabrication Method ◽  
Size Scale ◽  
Additional Work ◽  
Fluidic Devices ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Microfabrication Techniques

Traditional microfabrication techniques suffer from several disadvantages, including the inability to create truly three-dimensional (3D) architectures, expensive and time-consuming processes when changing device designs, and difficulty in transitioning from prototyping fabrication to bulk manufacturing. 3D printing is an emerging technique that could overcome these disadvantages. While most 3D printed fluidic devices and features to date have been on the millifluidic size scale, some truly microfluidic devices have been shown. Currently, stereolithography is the most promising approach for routine creation of microfluidic structures, but several approaches under development also have potential. Microfluidic 3D printing is still in an early stage, similar to where polydimethylsiloxane was two decades ago. With additional work to advance printer hardware and software control, expand and improve resin and printing material selections, and realize additional applications for 3D printed devices, we foresee 3D printing becoming the dominant microfluidic fabrication method.

scholarly journals The Use of Composite Materials in 3D Printing

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignazio Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Composite Materials ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Polymer Matrix ◽  
Chemical Properties ◽  
Modified Polymer ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Physico Chemical ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Limited Spectrum

Nowadays, all production, from the smallest ones to large companies, and research activities are affected by the use of 3D printing technology. The major limitation, in order to cover as many fields of application as possible, is represented by the set of 3D printable materials and their limited spectrum of physico-chemical properties. To expand this spectrum and employ the 3D-printed objects in areas such as biomedical, mechanical, electronical and so on, the introduction of fibers or particles in a polymer matrix has been widely studied and applied. In this review, all those studies that proposed modified polymer presenting advantages associated with rapid prototyping are reported.

Scalable 3D printing method for the manufacture of single-material fluidic devices with integrated filter for point of collection colourimetric analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sepideh Keshan Balavandy ◽  
Feng Li ◽  
Niall P. Macdonald ◽  
Fernando Maya ◽  
Ashley T. Townsend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Fluidic Devices ◽  
Single Material ◽  
Printing Method

scholarly journals AN INVESTIGATION OF THE STRUCTURAL STRENGTH OF TRANSTIBIAL SOCKETS FABRICATED USING CONVENTIONAL METHODS AND RAPID PROTOTYPING TECHNIQUES

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Pousett ◽  
Aimee Lizcano ◽  
Silvia Ursula Raschke
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Ultimate Strength ◽  
Stance Phase ◽  
Structural Strength ◽  
Static Strength ◽  
Strength Test ◽  
Manufacturing Method ◽  
Strength Tests ◽  
3D Printed

BACKGROUND: Rapid Prototyping is becoming an accessible manufacturing method but before clinical adoption can occur, the safety of treatments needs to be established. Previous studies have evaluated the static strength of traditional sockets using ultimate strength testing protocols outlined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). OBJECTIVE: To carry out a pilot test in which 3D printed sockets will be compared to traditionally fabricated sockets, by applying a static ultimate strength test. METHODOLOGY: 36 sockets were made from a mold of a transtibial socket shape,18 for cushion liners with a distal socket attachment block and 18 for locking liners with a distal 4-hole pattern. Of the 18 sockets, 6 were thermoplastic, 6 laminated composites & 6 3D printed Polylactic Acid. Sockets were aligned in standard bench alignment and placed in a testing jig that applied forces simulating individuals of different weight putting force through the socket both early and late in the stance phase. Ultimate strength tests were conducted in these conditions. If a setup passed the ultimate strength test, load was applied until failure. FINDINGS: All sockets made for cushion liners passed the strength tests, however failure levels and methods varied. For early stance, thermoplastic sockets yielded, laminated sockets cracked posteriorly, and 3D printed socket broke circumferen-tially. For late stance, 2/3 of the sockets failed at the pylon. Sockets made for locking liners passed the ultimate strength tests early in stance phase, however, none of the sockets passed for forces late in stance phase, all broke around the lock mechanism.  CONCLUSION: Thermoplastic, laminated and 3D printed sockets made for cushion liners passed the ultimate strength test protocol outlined by the ISO for forces applied statically in gait. This provides initial evidence that 3D printed sockets are statically safe to use on patients and quantifies the static strength of laminated and thermoplastic sockets. However, all set-ups of sockets made for locking liners failed at terminal stance. While further work is needed, this suggests that the distal reinforcement for thermoplastic, laminated and 3D printed sockets with distal cylindrical locks may need to be reconsidered. LAYMAN’S ABSTRACT 3D printing is a new manufacturing method that could be used to make prosthetic sockets (the part of the prosthesis connected to the individual). However, very little is known about the strength of 3D printed sockets and if they are safe to use. As Prosthetists are responsible for providing patients with safe treatments, the strength of 3D printed sockets needs to be established before they can be used in clinical practice. The strength of sockets made using current manufacturing methods was compared to those made using 3D printing. Strength was tested using the static portion of the ISO standard most applicable for this situation which outlines the forces a socket must take at 2 points in walking–when the foot is placed on the ground (early stance) and when the foot pushed off the ground (late stance). Sockets made for two prosthetic designs (cushion and locking) were tested to determine if one is safer than the other. All sockets made for cushion liners passed the standard for forces applied statically. However, different materials failed in different ways. At early stance, thermoplastic sockets yielded, laminated composite sockets cracked and 3D printed sockets broke circumferentially. At late stance other components failed 2/3 of the time before the sockets were affected. This provides initial evidence that sockets made for cushion liners are statically safe to use on patients. Sockets made for locking liners failed around the end, showing that 3D printing should not be used to create sockets with the design tested in this study. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/31008/24937 How to Cite: Pousett B, Lizcano A, Raschke S.U. An investigation of the structural strength of transtibial sockets fabricated using conventional methods and rapid prototyping techniques. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2019; Volume2, Issue1, No.2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v2i1.31008 CORRESPONDING AUTHORBrittany Pousett, BSc, MSc, Certified Prosthetist,Head of Research at Barber Prosthetics Clinic,540 SE Marine Dr, Vancouver, British Colombia V5X 2T4, Canada.Email: [email protected]

3D printing of metallic micro-gears for micro-fluidic applications

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Wang ◽  
S. Chandra ◽  
X. P. Tan ◽  
S. B. Tor
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Stainless Steel 316L ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Powder Bed ◽  
Micro Scale ◽  
Direct Fabrication ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Fluidic Devices ◽  
3D Printed

Micro-fluidic devices are essential to handle fluids on the micro-meter scale (micro-scale), making them crucial to biomedical applications, where micro-gear is the key component for active fluid mixing. Rapid and direct fabrication of micro-gears is preferred because they are usually custom-made to specific applications and iterative design is needed. However, conventional manufacturing (CM) techniques for micro-fluidic devices are labor-intensive and time-consuming as multiple steps are required. Three-dimensional (3D) printing, or formally known as additive manufacturing (AM) offers a promising alternative over CM techniques in producing near-net shape complex geometries, given the micro-scale fabrication process. In this work, two types of powder-bed fusion (PBF) AM techniques, namely laser-PBF (L-PBF) and electron beam-PBF (EB-PBF) are used to benchmark 3D-printed micro-gears from stainless steel 316L micro-granular powders. Results showcase the preeminence of L-PBF over EB-PBF in generating distinguishable micro-scale features on gear profiles and superior micro-hardness in mechanical property. Overall, PBF metal AM shows significant promise in advancing the otherwise tedious state of CM for micro-gears.

Rapid prototyping eddy current sensors using 3D printing

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Li ◽  
Lifan Meng ◽  
Hongyu Wang ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Chunmei Liu
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Eddy Current ◽  
Fused Deposition Modeling ◽  
Current Sensor ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fused Deposition ◽  
Eddy Current Sensor ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Current Sensors

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the process of rapid prototyping eddy current sensors using 3D printing technology. Making full use of the advantages of 3D printing, the authors study on a new method for fabrication of an eddy current sensor. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors establish a 3D model using SolidWorks. And the eddy current sensor is printed by the fused deposition modeling method. Findings Measurement results show that the 3D printing eddy current sensor has a wider linear measurement range and better linearity than the traditional manufacturing sensor. Compared to traditional eddy current sensor fabrication method, this 3D printed sensor can be fabricated at a lower cost, and the fabrication process is more convenient and faster. Practical implications This demonstrated 3D printing process can be applied to the 3D printing of sensors of more sophisticated structures that are difficult to fabricate using conventional techniques. Originality/value In this work, the process of rapid prototyping eddy current sensors using 3D printing is presented. Sensors fabricated with the 3D printing possess lots of merits than traditional manufactures. 3D printed sensors can be customized according to the configuration of the overall system, thus reducing the demand of sensor's rigid mounting interfaces. The 3D printing also reduce design costs as well as shortens the development cycle. This allows for quick translation of a design from concept to a useful device.

Voxel-Based CAD Framework for Planning Functionally Graded and Multi-Step Rapid Fabrication Processes

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cole Brauer ◽  
Daniel M. Aukes
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Functionally Graded ◽  
Manufacturing Processes ◽  
Printing Process ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Rapid Fabrication ◽  
Graded Material ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
New Framework

Abstract In this paper we describe a new framework for planning functionally graded and multi-step fabrication processes for use in rapid prototyping applications. This framework is contributing to software tools that will simplify planning multi-material manufacturing processes and thereby make this type of manufacturing more accessible. We introduce the material description itself, low-level operations which can be used to combine one or more geometries together, and algorithms which assist the designer in computing manufacturing-compatible sequences. We then apply these tools to several example scenarios. First, we demonstrate the use of a Gaussian blur to add graded material transitions to a model which can then be produced using a multimaterial 3D printing process. Our second example highlights our solution to the problem of inserting a discrete, off-the-shelf part into a 3D printed model during the printing sequence. Finally, we implement this second example and manufacture two example components. The results show that the framework can be used to effectively generate the files needed to produce specific classes of parts.

The effects of 3D printing in design thinking and design education

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 752-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Greenhalgh
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Interior Design ◽  
Medium Effect ◽  
Design Technology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Design Students

Purpose Rapid prototyping and three-dimensional (3D) printing allows the direct creation of objects from 3D computer-aided design files. To identify the effects 3D printing may have on student experiences and the learning of the design process, students were asked to create a design and create a prototype of that design. Design/methodology/approach This study follows an experimental design involving four total courses of interior design students. After conceptualizing a design, students were randomly selected to either create the prototype by hand or given access to 3D printing equipment. The models were graded by three subject experts using a rubric that focused on three key aspects of the model project, namely, craftsmanship, design quality and scale (proportion). Findings All three measures produced significant mean differences with a medium effect size when comparing the 3D printed models to the traditionally built models. Additional observations provided insights into the design processes approached by students using hand-constructed and 3D printed modeling. The most notable difference was the propensity for curved and rectilinear shapes by available design technologies. Research limitations/implications The experiment showed that the design technology (3D printing) did have an impact on the designs students conceptualized. This suggests that students do connect ideation to implementation, and the availability of enabling technology impacts the design process. This research was conducted in an interior design environment and consists of primarily female students. The experimental research may be limited to design programs with similar student populations and levels of exposure to various design technologies. Practical implications This research is designed to provide instructors and programs valuable information when looking at implementing new design technologies into the curriculum. Instructors are made aware that new design technologies do impact student design strategies. Additionally, although certain design technologies allow for revisions, it was apparent that students continued to be resistant to revise their initial models suggesting instructors prepare to address this issue in instruction. Social implications There is a strong body of research indicating inequality in education where students have differing access to technologies in schools. This research shows that 3D printing, similar to many technologies in education, can impact the cognitive processes of content being learned. Originality/value There is limited research on how design technologies impact design cognition and the experiences of design students. This paper looked specifically at one design technology (3D printing/rapid prototyping) and how it impacts the processes and quality of design, in addition to the quality of design products (prototypes or models). Research such as this provides instructors and faculty members an insight into how design technologies impact their curriculum.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document