Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36207348›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Multi-objective optimization and prediction of surface roughness and printing time in FFF printed ABS polymer.

Arivazhagan Selvam, Suresh Mayilswamy, Ruban Whenish, K Naresh, Vigneshwaran Shanmugam, Oisik Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Arivazhagan SelvamDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, KPR Institute of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India. arivuazhagan001@gmail.com.
Suresh MayilswamyDepartment of Robotics and Automation Engineering, PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Ruban WhenishCentre for Bio Materials, Cellular and Molecular Theranostics, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
K NareshDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 90089, USA.
Vigneshwaran ShanmugamDepartment of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, 97187, Luleå, Sweden. s.vigneshwaren@gmail.com.
Oisik DasDepartment of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, 97187, Luleå, Sweden. oisik.das@ltu.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, fused filament fabrication (FFF) printing parameters were optimized to improve the surface quality and reduce the printing time of Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) polymer using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), it is a statistical analysis tool. A multi-objective optimization technique was employed to predict the optimum process parameter values using particle swarm optimization (PSO) and response surface methodology (RSM) techniques. Printing time and surface roughness were analyzed as a function of layer thickness, printing speed and nozzle temperature. A central composite design was preferred by employing the RSM method, and experiments were carried out as per the design of experiments (DoE). To understand the relationship between the identified input parameters and the output responses, several mathematical models were developed. After validating the accuracy of the developed regression model, these models were then coupled with PSO and RSM to predict the optimum parameter values. Moreover, the weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) ranking method was employed to compare the RSM and PSO to identify the best optimization technique. WASPAS ranking method shows PSO has finer optimal values [printing speed of 125.6 mm/sec, nozzle temperature of 221 °C and layer thickness of 0.29 mm] than the RSM method. The optimum values were compared with the experimental results. Predicted parameter values through the PSO method showed high surface quality for the type of the surfaces, i.e., the surface roughness value of flat upper and down surfaces is approximately 3.92 µm, and this value for the other surfaces is lower, which is approximately 1.78 µm, at a minimum printing time of 24 min.

Identifiers

PMID36207348
PMCPMC9546872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.