Cost optimization of 3D printed assembly
3 Blade Mixer assembly
3 Blade Mixer assembly
Objective
–The purpose of this project is to optimize the use and revenue of 3D printers.
–Will rely on printing parts on specific printers according to what each part’s specification is.
–Different parameters and constraints will be considered to maximize the revenue while still maintaining a desired print specification
Nowadays 3d printing plays a crucial part in rapid prototyping. They are used in engineering, tech startups, food industries and more. The optimization of the printers will be designed around maximizing the revenue a printing company would get. This type of optimization will rely on printing parts optimize a cost reduction. Different parameters and constraints will be considered to maximize the revenue while still maintaining the part’s specific requirements. For example, layer thickness, infill percentage, overall time of print, type of material used, and wattage used while printing. By comparing each part, we will be able to assign it to the correct printer in order to reduce the cost of printing. To ensure that printed part will be printed properly, maximum and minimum print specification such as LH and IF of each printer will be considered as upper bound and lower bound. The optimization in our project is carried out using MATLAB functions such as solving for linear systems and fmincon. It should be noted that there are no exact equations for the relationship of layer height, infill percentage, and cost. Hence, they will be developed by finding out the equation through two-point function approximation.
Abstract
Results and Discussion
As the results are obtained the optimal solution for printing a cost efficient assembly is by printing using multiple 3D printers. This type of optimization is very beneficial for companies or people who can print using multiple printers. Many 3D printing service companies probably already implement an optimization to their printers allowing them to minimize the cost of printing and maximize their revenue return. With the results obtained, this optimization solution would have saved the user 45.45% compared to printing fully on makerbot printer, 73.76% compared to printing on lulzbot printer, and 102.29% compared to printing on the formlab printer. Taking the bigger picture in hand if the assembly part was much larger in size or quantity the user or company could save hundreds of dollars on their assembly printing.