Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure from:A lightweight methodology of 3D printed objects utilizing multi-scale porous structures

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figure 10 Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Related Figures (11)

Fig. 1 Illustration of the proposed lightweight framework. a Kitty model with initial stress field. b Stress-field-guided volume partition. ¢, d Optimum iterative procedure. e Optimized interior porous structures. f Stress analysis before and after optimization, respectively
Fig. 1 Illustration of the proposed lightweight framework. a Kitty model with initial stress field. b Stress-field-guided volume partition. ¢, d Optimum iterative procedure. e Optimized interior porous structures. f Stress analysis before and after optimization, respectively
Fig.2 Four kinds of common TPMS surfaces 3.1 The description of TPMS
Fig.2 Four kinds of common TPMS surfaces 3.1 The description of TPMS
Fig. 3 Effect of different parameters (a shape parameter C, b period parameter T (+), and c offset parameter O) on the porous structures (P surface), and the corresponding parameter curves (under the same exter- nal force conditions, max stress means the max stress of the structures, and volume ratio is the volume ratio of the structures to the bound- ing box). The period parameter T (+), and the offset parameter O have similar monotonic effects on the max stress and volume ratio
Fig. 3 Effect of different parameters (a shape parameter C, b period parameter T (+), and c offset parameter O) on the porous structures (P surface), and the corresponding parameter curves (under the same exter- nal force conditions, max stress means the max stress of the structures, and volume ratio is the volume ratio of the structures to the bound- ing box). The period parameter T (+), and the offset parameter O have similar monotonic effects on the max stress and volume ratio
Fig. 4 Multi-scale porous structures in a cube. a Cube model with a partition. b Two types of control points with different 7; are randomly selected in the two regions, respectively. c The multi-scale porous struc- tures
Fig. 4 Multi-scale porous structures in a cube. a Cube model with a partition. b Two types of control points with different 7; are randomly selected in the two regions, respectively. c The multi-scale porous struc- tures
Fig.5 Angles between faces and the printing direction. a, b P surface and G surface with 19.1% and 23.1% of the angles are larger than 45°, and only 5.2% and 8.4% of the angles are larger than 60°, respectively
Fig.5 Angles between faces and the printing direction. a, b P surface and G surface with 19.1% and 23.1% of the angles are larger than 45°, and only 5.2% and 8.4% of the angles are larger than 60°, respectively
Fig.6 Comparing with the most related methods. a Stava’s method [1]. b Lu’s method [2]. e Zhang’s method [4]. d Our method provides comparable results with lighter, fully connected and quasi-self-supported porous structures
Fig.6 Comparing with the most related methods. a Stava’s method [1]. b Lu’s method [2]. e Zhang’s method [4]. d Our method provides comparable results with lighter, fully connected and quasi-self-supported porous structures
Fig. 7 In comparison with the skin-frame structure [3] (a), and the MA Tree structure [4] (b), the honeycomb-like structure [2] (¢), our structur (d) is lighter than (a) and (b) and comparable to (c)
Fig. 7 In comparison with the skin-frame structure [3] (a), and the MA Tree structure [4] (b), the honeycomb-like structure [2] (¢), our structur (d) is lighter than (a) and (b) and comparable to (c)
Fig.8 More lightweight models filled with multi-scale porous structures. From left to right, original models with stress-field-guided partition, the optimal strength-to-weight results and the corresponding 3D multi-scale porous structures Table 1 Optimization results for various models
Fig.8 More lightweight models filled with multi-scale porous structures. From left to right, original models with stress-field-guided partition, the optimal strength-to-weight results and the corresponding 3D multi-scale porous structures Table 1 Optimization results for various models
Fig.9 Some printed lightweight models and the corresponding cross profiles
Fig.9 Some printed lightweight models and the corresponding cross profiles
computer-aided geometric design.
computer-aided geometric design.