IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS
Recent citations
Comparative Analysis of Additive Manufacturing - L. Barrenetxea et al
over Conventional Manufacturing
To cite this article: B. Subramanyam et al 2018 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 455 012102
View the article online for updates and enhancements.
This content was downloaded from IP address 94.249.45.140 on 20/04/2020 at 15:27
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Comparative Analysis of Additive Manufacturing over
Conventional Manufacturing
B. Subramanyam 1, T.V.Vineeta 2, Parthasarathy Garre 3, V.V.S.Nikhil
Bharadwaj4, P. Shiva Shashank5
1
Assist. Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MLR Institute of
Technology.
2
M.Tech Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MLR Institute of
Technology.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Aeronautical Engineering, MLR Institute of
Technology.
4
Design and Prototype Engineer, TRITLED 3D Printing Company, Hyderabad.
5
Design Engineer, Cyient India Limited.
[email protected],
[email protected] Abstract. Over several years additive manufacturing has grown and displaced traditional
methods. Present market was occupied by 3D printers in rapid prototyping field. Numerous
e xa mples are indicated where additive manufacturing has entered new markets and picked up
larger part advertise. In this task we investigate the use of additive manufacturing over
customary assembling and the possibility of the disturbance of conventional techniques like
injection molding. The possibility is dictated by a similar e xa mination of the cost to influence
parts according to bunch premise. We at that point decided the make back the init ial investment
point and the relationship to the general cost structure.
Keywords: Injection Molding, Additive Manufacturing, Anova, Minitab.
1. Introduction:
Conventional Manufacturing – Injection Molding
In 1920, Injection Molding is the primary utilized a modern creation innovation. From that point
numerous organizations began utilizing this innovation for generation of parts in different businesses
like car to regular usable things. A standout amongst the most vital creation technique is Plastic
Injection Molding (PIM). Despite the fact that numerous individuals see this procedure as
straightforward and normal assembling process yet PIM is one of the mind boggling process because
of numerous sensitive changes required. Material choice, Mold plan and process parameter settings
chooses the nature of item. The infusion shaping procedure incorporates four stages: plasticization,
infusion, pressing and cooling. Additive Manufacturing.
2. Literature
IM is critical process in the assembling of plastic parts which is finished by compelling softened
plastic in to a form pit until the point when it cools and structures a particular plastic shape [1].IM is a
procedure in the assembling of plastic parts is finished by constraining liquefied plastic in to a shape
depression until the point that it cools and structures a particular plastic shape [2]. This paper portrays
segment of stream reducer where decided for far reaching configuration audit and shape stream
analysis[3].Development of little infusion forming machine for framing little plastic articles in little
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
scale ventures was considered [4].Injection shaping is a standout amongst the most conspicuous
procedures for large scale manufacturing of plastic segments [5]. The Rapid Product Development
Association of South Africa (RAPDASA) communicated the requirement for a national Additive
Manufacturing Roadmap. Considerably, the South African Department of Science and Technology
charged the advancement of a South African Additive Manufacturing Technology Roadmap [6].His
paper explores how Additive Manufacturing (AM) advances, as a procedure development, may add to
work creation. Further, the different instruments in which AM may add to an expansion in work
creation and in addition the sorts of employments are analysed[7].Conventional auto fabricating is
amazingly capital and vitality escalated [8].There are three essential viewpoints to the financial matters
of added substance producing: estimating the estimation of merchandise delivered, estimating the
expenses and advantages of utilizing the innovation, and assessing the reception and dissemination of
the innovation [9].The utilization of AM has expanded altogether in earlier years. Added substance
fabricating is utilized by different industry subsectors, including aviation, hardware, engine vehicles,
apparatus and therapeutic items [10].
3. Scope of Project Work:
So in this project we are designing a bottle cap which is cap with all the design specifications
mentioned and modelled in Solid works, which is then saved in .STL format for the 3D printing the
model, by this we will get the exposure to the trending technology i.e. conventional and additive
manufacturing by which we identified various industries related to AM processes and measurement
techniques to reduce cost and time from design to manufacture. This technology enabled the
prototyping as easy as print words on the paper. By designing and manufacturing the bottle cap we
will compare temperature parameters, cost and production criteria, time based analysis and advantages
in comparison.
4. Design Specifications:
4.1 Bottle Cap Specifications
Table 4.1: Bottle cap Specifications
1. Outer Diameter 2.5cm
2. Inner Diameter 2cm
3. Height 1.1cm
4.2 Modelling in Solid works
All the geometric parameters including dimensions are mentioned in design specifications. Based on
all the assumptions and calculations bottle cap profile is modelled as shown in the figure below
Figure 4.1: Bottle Cap Design
5. Conventional Manufacturing – Injection Moulding Manufacturing Process
2
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
5.1 Material Used for Manufacturing of Injection moulding Bottle Cap
High-thickness polyethylene (HDPE) or polyethylene high-thickness (PEHD) is polyethylene
thermoplastic produced using oil. It is once in a while called "alkathene" or "polythene" when utilized
for funnels. HDPE is commonly recycled, and has the number “2” as its resin identification code.
Because of high strength-to-density ratio, HDPE is utilized as a part of creation of plastic container
tops, erosion safe channelling, geomembranes, and plastic wood.
Figure 5.1: Hydraulic Plastic Injection Moulding Machine
5.1.1 Manufacturing Working Process:
Injection molding makes use of heat softening characteristics of thermos plastic materials. When
heated, these materials get soften and re harden when cooled. No chemical change takes place when
the material is heated (or) cooled. For this reason the softening and re hardening cycle can be repeated
any no. of types.
x The granular trim material is stacked container where it is metered out in a warming chamber by a
bolstering gadget.
x The correct measure of material is conveyed to a barrel, which is require to fill the form totally.
x Set the die in position provide spacing plates if necessary. Clamping the die using hydraulic
operate ram.
x The injection pressure is set by rotating (clockwise) regulator knob to suit the requirement of
moulding the container.
x Switch on the heater. Timers is set for required timings, for top and middle heater. The
temperature is set by adjusting automatic temperature controller to control the bottom heater.
Allow sufficient time to stabilizer. When required temperature is reached, operate the handle lever
valve to inject the material.
x Apply injection pressure on the heated material using plunger rod.
x The injection ram pushes the material in to the warming barrel and in doing as such drives a little
measure of warmed material out of the opposite end of the chamber through the spout and screw
bushing and into the depression of shut form.
x The material is cooled in an inflexible state in the shape.
x Release the injection pressure. In clamp the die using hydraulic operated ram.
3
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
x The mould is then opened and I ejected the piece out
Figure 5.1.1: Injection Molded Manufactured Bottle Cap
5.2 3D Printing Manufacturing Process
To make for all intents and purposes design a question which can be made in a CAD document
utilizing a 3D demonstrating program or with the utilization of a 3D scanner (to duplicate a current
protest). A 3D scanner makes a 3D advanced duplicate of a question utilizing diverse advances to
create a 3D model, for example, organized/balanced light, time-of-flight, volumetric checking and
some more.
Figure 5.2: 3D Printing Software Bottle Cap Design
5.2.1 Material Used for manufacturing of Bottle cap in 3D Printing Software:
PLA Material:
Polylactic corrosive or polylactide (PLA) is a biodegradable thermoplastic aliphatic polyester got from
sustainable assets, for example, corn starch (in USA and Canada), chips custard roots, or starch (in
Asia), or sugarcane (in whatever is left of the world).
Figure 5.2.1: PLA Material Filament
5.2.2 Bottle Manufacturing Process:
4
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
The principal popularized 3D printing process is Stereo lithography (SL). It is a laser-based process
that works with photopolymer gums that respond with the laser and cure to shape a strong in an
extremely exact manner to deliver exceptionally precise parts.
The modelled bottle cap CAT part is converted into Stereo lithography file by saving the part file in
the .STL format. This STL format file is imported into the CURA software for slicing the model into
several number of layers and G code is generated for 3 D printing.
Figure 5.2.2: 3D Printed Manufactured Bottle Cap
6. Cost Analysis in Injection Molding and Additive manufacturing
Injection Molded Parts Cost Calculation
Product Unit Price = material cost + processing costs
Material cost = (weight of material) * Material Unit Price
Processing cost = (weight of the material per unit * mold cycle) + (volume per piece * cavity number).
For special packaging requirements, add packaging costs.
Additive manufacturing Parts Cost Calculation
Product Unit Price = material cost + processing costs
Material cost = (actual weight + loss weight) * Material Unit Price
Processing cost = (weight of the material per unit * volume) + (machine cost * build time).
For special packaging requirements, add packaging costs.
Material Cost:
Material determination is an imperative factor to some degree cost. In everything except the most
minimal volume parts the cost of the tar straightforwardly represents a set bit of the per-part cost.
Since your parts stay consistent in volume paying little respect to the quantity of depressions, the main
approaches to lessen this segment of the part cost is to pick a temperate material or plan the part to
limit volume.
Table 6.1: Parameters
Density o PLA Material 1.25 gm/cm3
Volume of Material Per unit 7.77 cm3
Total weight of Material 9.7025gms
Material Cost per unit 33.633 INR
7. Comparative Analysis of Additive Manufacturing over Conventional Manufacturing
5
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Software Used for Analysis: Minitab (Version: 18)
Minitab is an insights bundle created at the Pennsylvania State University by scientists Barbara F.
Ryan, Thomas A. Ryan, Jr., and Brian L. Joiner in 1972. It started as a light form of OMNITAB, a
factual examination program by NIST. It works with other Minitab, Inc. programming.
7.1 One-way ANOVA: MeltingTemp_IM (degC), MeltingTemp_AM (degC)
Method
Null hypothesis - All means are equal
Alternative hypothesis - Not all means are equal
Significance level (α) = 0.05
Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.
Factor Information
Factor Levels Values
Factor 2 MeltingTemp_IM (degC), MeltingTemp_AM (degC)
Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Factor 1 3920 3920.0 9.93 0.002
Error 78 30800 394.9
Total 79 34720
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
19.8714 11.29% 10.15% 6.68%
Means
Factor N Mean StDev 95% CI
MeltingTemp_IM (degC) 40 248.00 19.51 (241.74, 254.26)
MeltingTemp_AM (degC) 40 234.00 20.23 (227.74, 240.26)
Pooled StDev = 19.8714
6
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Figure 7.1: Interval Plot of Melting Temperature IM & AM
7.2 One-way ANOVA: Time_IM, Time_AM Method
Null hypothesis - All means are equal
Alternative hypothesis - Not all means are equal
Significance level (α) = 0.05
Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.
Factor Information
Factor Levels Values
Factor 2 Time_IM, Time_AM
Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Factor 1 4307 4307.1 12.75 0.001
Error 78 26343 337.7
Total 79 30650
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
18.3773 14.05% 12.95% 9.59%
Means
Factor N Mean StDev 95% CI
Time_IM 40 51.10 21.04 (45.32, 56.88)
Time_AM 40 65.78 15.26 (59.99, 71.56)
Pooled StDev = 18.3773
7
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Figure 7.2: Interval Plot of Time IM & AM
7.3 One-way ANOVA: Production Cost_IM, Production Cost_AM
Method
Null hypothesis - All means are equal
Alternative hypothesis - Not all means are equal
Significance level (α) = 0.05
Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.
Factor Information
Factor Levels Values
Factor 2 Production Cost_IM, Production Cost_AM
Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Factor 1 74420 74420 5.03 0.028
Error 78 1153119 14784
Total 79 1227539
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
121.588 6.06% 4.86% 1.18%
Means
Factor N Mean StDev 95% CI
Production Cost_IM 40 537.4 122.8 (499.1, 575.6)
Production Cost_AM 40 598.4 120.4 (560.1, 636.6)
Pooled StDev = 121.588
8
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Figure 7.3: Interval Plot of Production Cost IM & AM
8. Results
Regression Analysis: Production Cost_AM versus Time_IM, Time_AM
Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Regression 2 459992 229996 81.10 0.000
Time_IM 1 265 265 0.09 0.762
Time_AM 1 99198 99198 34.98 0.000
Error 37 104927 2836
Lack-of-Fit 33 102739 3113 5.69 0.051
Pure Error 4 2188 547
Total 39 564919
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
53.2528 81.43% 80.42% 74.24%
Coefficients
Term Coef SE Coef T-Value P-Value VIF
Constant 137.5 44.5 3.09 0.004
Time_IM 0.255 0.835 0.31 0.762 4.24
Time_AM 6.81 1.15 5.91 0.000 4.24
9
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
Regression Equation
Production Cost_AM = 137.5 + 0.255 Time_IM + 6.81 Time_AM
Fits and Diagnostics for Unusual Observations
Production
Obs Cost_AM Fit Resid Std Resid
1 1000.0 841.3 158.7 3.24 R
5 740.0 904.6 -164.6 -3.54 R X
R Large residual
X Unusual X
9. Conclusion
Preliminary Analysis has done in order to find out the Material cost. In the comparison of injection
molding to additive manufacturing the material that is considered is PLA (poly lactic acid) which has a
density of 1.25 gm/cu.cm, as per the design dimensions. The volume of the material per unit piece is
calculated to be 7.77 cu.cm. Total Weight of material per unit is 9.0725 gms. Material cost is
calculated to be Rs.33.633.Statistical Analysis is performed for the parameters that has a crucial role in
both additive manufacturing and injection molding. For the Analysis Melting temperature(degC) of the
material, time taken for the Molding the part in injection molding, time taken to print the part by
adding it layer by layer and total production cost. See in chapter 6, Using Minitab One way Anova test
is performed on Melting Temperature of material the result showed the P-value of 0.002 which is less
than significance level of 0.05 which represents we can reject Null hypothesis representing that all
means in the data are not equal, Which clearly represents the Melting temperature required is
significantly less in additive manufacturing compared to injection molding. The P-test result for time
taken in additive manufacturing and injection molding is P-value is 0.001 this p value represents both
the processes are different. Even though it is Proven Physically that the Printing Rate of the 3-d
Printers is less in order to get better efficient products. Test for the Production Cost shows p-value of
0.028, as production cost includes Material cost, Processing Cost, Labour Charges, Secondary
Machining Process in Case of Injection molding, cost of power used for printing the Product in 3-d
Printing. Clearly P-value defines both the Processes are different though the cost of the product
Produced is more in additive Manufacturing but it saves secondary machining processes costs and
time. In Chapter 7 Regression Model is performed on the data set in order to find the relations between
the parameters, the relation resulted as production cost is dependent on time factor. By this Statistical
model we can clearly define that both the injection molding and additive manufacturing are different
from one another and also shown that additive manufacturing is more efficient than injection molding
in order to manufacture complex shapes and designs with a lot of flexibility.
10
ICAAMM IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 455 (2018) 012102 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/455/1/012102
References:
[1] Design and Analysis of Injection Mould for Mineral Water Bottle Cap. G. Rajendra Prasad.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 6(8):1031-1040 · January 2011.
[2] Design and analysis of injection molding of mineral water bottle cap. Ravinder Reddy Pinninti.
Anveshana’s International Journal of Research in Engineering and Applied Sciences.Volume 1, Issue
5.
[3] Injection Molding Methods Design, Optimization, Simulation of Plastic flow Reducer Part by
Mold Flow Analysis. Vijaykumar Vilas Andhalkar.International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology (IRJET). Volume: 04 Issue: 06.
[4] Development of small injection moulding machine for forming small plastic articles in small-scale
industries was studied. Oyetunji, A.Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Vol. 5, No. 1
(2010).
[5] Design and Fabrication of Mini Injection Molding Machine. Pratibha V Patil. Babu
Reddy.International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET).
Volume 5 Issue 4.
[6] Review of Optimization Aspects for Plastic Injection Molding Process. Aditya M. Darekar. Prof.
T. S. Venkatesh.IRACST – Engineering Science and Technology: An International Journal (ESTIJ).
Vol.5, No.1.
[7] Implementing the South African additive manufacturing technology roadmap – The role of an
additive manufacturing centre of competence. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering.
Willie Bouwer Du Preez · Deon J De Beer
[8] The Role of Additive Manufacturing Technology in Job Creation: An Exploratory Case Study of
Suppliers of Additive Manufacturing in Sweden. 12th Global Conference on Sustainable
Manufacturing. Babak Kianian · Sam Tavassoli ·
Tobias C. Larsson
[9] Barriers to entry in automotive production and opportunities with emerging additive manufacturing
techniques. SAE 2016 World Congress and Exhibition.
Piyush Bubna
[10] Costs, benefits, and adoption of additive manufacturing: a supply chain perspective. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. Volume 85, Issue 5–8.
Douglas Thomas
11
