Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:17:01.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leakage-proof nozzle design for RepRap community 3D printer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2014

Adam Kłodowski ,
Harri Eskelinen  and
Scott Semken
Adam Kłodowski*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Design, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Skinnarilankatu 34, 53850 Lappeenranta, Finland
Harri Eskelinen
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Design, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Skinnarilankatu 34, 53850 Lappeenranta, Finland
Scott Semken
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Design, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Skinnarilankatu 34, 53850 Lappeenranta, Finland
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The RepRap 3D printer development project is a fast growing, open-hardware initiative relying on the input of hobbyist designers. One of its key components is the printer nozzle. The performance and reliability deficiencies of currently available nozzle designs are common topics in the RepRap community, and our own experience with a RepRap 3D printer has identified a need for improvement in a few particular areas. We set out to eliminate melt leakage, improve thermal isolation, and develop a more effective method of nozzle assembly attachment. Here, we review the issues, describe design efforts, and report results.

Keywords

Finite element analysisOpen hardwareThermoplastics
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , May 2015 , pp. 721 - 746
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Pham, D. T. and Gault, R. S., “A comparison of rapid prototyping technologies,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 38 (10–11), 1257–1287 (1998).Google Scholar
2. Hopkinson, N. and Dickens, P., “Rapid prototyping for direct manufacture,” Rapid Prototyping J. 7 (4), 197–202 (2001).Google Scholar
3. Soković, M. and Mijanović, K., “Ecological aspects of the cutting fluids and its influence on quantifiable parameters of the cutting processes,” J. Mater. Process. Technol. 109 (1), 181–189 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Jacobs, P. F., Rapid Prototyping & Manufacturing, Fundamentals of Stereolitography, 1st edn. (Society of Manufacturing Engineers, MI, 1992).Google Scholar
5. Jones, R., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V., Palmer, C. and Bowyer, A., “RepRap - the replicating rapid prototyper,” Robotica 29, 177–191 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Bruijn, E. d., On the Viability of the Open Source Development Model for the Design of Physical Objects: Lessons Learned from the RepRap Project. Master thesis (University of Tilburg, The Netherlands, 2010).Google Scholar
7. Cowie, J. M. G. and Arrighi, V., Polymers: Chemistry and Physics of Modern Materials, 3rd edn. (CRC Press, FL, 2008).Google Scholar
8. Davis, J. R., ASM Specialty Handbook: Copper and Copper Alloys (ASM International, OH, 2001).Google Scholar
9. Michael, E. Y., Jijun, H., Agathe, R., Gareth, H. M. and Paula, T. H., “Synthesis, mechanical properties and chemical/solvent resistance of crosslinked poly(aryl-ether–ether–ketones) at high temperatures,” Polymer 51 (9), 1914–1920 (2010).Google Scholar
10. Strong, B. A., Plastics, Materials and Processing, 2nd edn (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2000), http://www.getcited.org/pub/100431562.Google Scholar
11. Miyano, Y., Nakada, M. and Muki, R., “Applicability of fatigue life prediction method to polymer composites,” Mech. Time-Dependent Mater. 3 (2), 141–157 (1999).Google Scholar
12. Harsha, A. and Tewari, U., “Tribo performance of polyaryletherketone composites,” Wear 254, 680–692 (2003).Google Scholar
13. Tanga, Y., Karlsson, A., Santarea, M., Gilberta, M., Cleghornb, S. and Johnson, W., “An experimental investigation of humidity and temperature effects on the mechanical properties of perfluorosulfonic acid membrane,” Mater. Sci. Eng. 425 (1–2), 297–304 (2006).Google Scholar
14. Converse, G., Conrad, T. and Roeder, R., “Mechanical properties of hydroxyapatite whisker reinforced polyetherketoneketone composite scaffolds,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2 (6), 627–635 (2010).Google Scholar
15. Schroeder, R., Torres, F. W., Binder, C., Klein, A. N. and de Mello, J. D. B., “Failure mode in sliding wear of PEEK based composites,” Wear 301 (1–2), 717–726 (2012).Google Scholar
16. Díez-Pascual, A. M., Guan, J., Simard, B. and Gómez-Fatou, M. A., “Polyphenylene sulphide and polyetheretherketone composites reinforced with single-walled carbon nanotube buckypaper: II - Mechanical properties, electrical and thermal conductivity,” Appl. Sci. Manuf. 43 (6), 1007–1015 (2012).Google Scholar
17. Babrauskas, V., “Ignition of Wood: A Review of the State of the Art,” Fire Science & Engineering Conference, Edinburgh (2001) pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
18. Sun, J., “Pulse-Width Modulation,” In: Dynamics and Control of Switched Electronic Systems (Vasca, F. a. I. L., ed.) (Springer, London, 2012) pp. 25–61.Google Scholar