The past few decades have seen substantial growth in Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies. However, this growth has mainly been process-driven. The evolution of engineering design to take advantage of the possibilities afforded by AM and to manage the constraints associated with the technology has lagged behind. This paper presents the major opportunities, constraints, and economic considerations for Design for Additive Manufacturing. It explores issues related to design and redesign for direct and indirect AM production. It also highlights key industrial applications, outlines future challenges, and identifies promising directions for research and the exploitation of AM's full potential in industry.Design, Manufacturing, Additive Manufacturing

We investigated the relative effectiveness of empirical usabitit y testing and individual and team walkthrough methods in identifying usability problems in two graphical user interface office systems.The findings were replicated across the two systems and show that the empirical testing condition identified the largest number of problems, and identified a significant number of relatively severe problems that were missed by the walkthrough conditions. Team walkthroughs achieved better results than individual walkthroughs in some areas. About a third of the significant usability problems identfled were common across all methods. Cost-effectiveness data show that empirical testing required the same or less time to identify each problem when compared to walkthroughs.

No abstract

Citation: PATERSON, A. ... et al., 2015 Comparison of Additive Manufacturing Systems for the Design and Fabrication of Customised Wrist SplintsPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to compare four different additive manufacturing (AM) processes in order to assess their suitability in the context of upper extremity splinting. Design/methodology/approach -This paper describes the design characteristics and subsequent fabrication of six different wrist splints using four different AM processes: Laser Sintering (LS), Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA) and PolyJet material jetting via Objet Connex. The suitability of each process was then compared against competing designs and processes from traditional splinting. The splints were created using a digital design workflow that combined recognised clinical best practice with design for AM principles. Findings -Research concluded that, based on currently available technology, FDM was considered the least suitable AM process for upper extremity splinting. LS, SLA and material jetting show promise for future applications but further research and development into AM processes, materials and splint design optimisation are required if the full potential is to be realised. Originality/value -Unlike previous work that has applied AM processes to replicating traditional splint designs, the splints described are based on a digital design for AM workflow, incorporating novel features and physical properties not previously possible in clinical splinting. The benefits of AM for customised splint fabrication have been summarised. A range of AM processes have also been evaluated for splinting, exposing the limitations of existing technology, demonstrating novel and advantageous design features and opportunities for future research.

No abstract