2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2017.05.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characterization and dynamic mechanical analysis of PC-ABS material processed by fused deposition modelling: An investigation through I-optimal response surface methodology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The finite element simulation was carried out and results were compared with four-point bending and impact hammer test. Mohamed et al [24] performed DMA for PC-ABS material and considered parameters similar to reference [6] along with the number of shells and a total of six variables with six levels were used while designing experiments and suggested air gap, extrusion thickness and contours were the influencing parameters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The finite element simulation was carried out and results were compared with four-point bending and impact hammer test. Mohamed et al [24] performed DMA for PC-ABS material and considered parameters similar to reference [6] along with the number of shells and a total of six variables with six levels were used while designing experiments and suggested air gap, extrusion thickness and contours were the influencing parameters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Altan et al [11] studied the effect of printing processes on surface roughness and tensile strength, with layer thickness and deposition head velocity being the most influential parameters on roughness. Mohamed et al [12] investigated the effect of printing parameters on the dynamic mechanical properties of polycarbonate–acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (PC-ABS) printed parts. The main factors were layer height, air gap, and the number of contours.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…O. A. Mohamed et al [8] worked with same input and response parameters [7] by using I-optimal response surface methodology. However, the difference between them was the use of optimization method and different levels of process parameters (4 levels of layer thickness and 6 levels of air gap, number of contours, raster angle, part build orientation and road width) were selected.…”
Section: Literature Surveymentioning
confidence: 99%