Fused deposition modeling (FDM) has become widely used for personal/ desktop cost-effective printers. This work presents an investigational platform, which is used to study the surface roughness quality, and dimensional accuracy of 100% infill density printed parts fabricated by a personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D printer using different types of thermoplastic filament materials namely, PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+. Varieties of experiments were conducted after the fabricated parts were naturally cooled down for at least three hours to room temperature. During printing work, the nozzle diameter, layer height, nozzle temperature and printing speed were set at 0.3 mm, 0.1 mm, 220 °C and 30 mm/s, respectively. According to the experimentally obtained data results over 10 mm scanned profile and 90 ° measuring direction (perpendicular to building direction), PLA+ thermoplastic filament material shows an excellent surface behaviour and is found to be more accurate while ABS does exhibit high surface roughness, waviness and primary behaviour. Both PLA and ABS+ show good surface performance.
After almost 25 years of research in the field of rapid prototyping (RP) [
Fundamentally, FDM 3D technology is mainly based on the layer manufacturing process [
control system code to generate a prescribed pattern, and transferred into a molten paste (semi-liquid state and above its melting point) to be extruded from the circular nozzle die results in a cylindrical coiled morphology of each layer or path. The extruded thermoplastic filament material is squeezed on the print bed (usually a glass platform) line by line (x-y directions) based on the pre-designed tool paths to form a surface and finally the FDM 3D part from bottom to the top as with other RP technologies. After one layer has been completed, the extruder is lifted by a distance of layer thickness to deposit another layer and the process repeats for the next cross-sectioned layer until the 3D printed part is completed. Then, the thermoplastic filament material cools, solidifies within a tight time of roughly a few seconds (depending on the filament material) and then sticks to the surrounding material [
Commercially, a variety of traditional feedstock thermoplastic filament materials are supported by FDM based 3D printers, which make them ideal for the consumer market, including acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) [
The FDM method is perhaps the ultimate common 3D printing technique due to the number of FDM-based 3D printers available in the marketplace and indeed their low price (a cost of below $2000). Clearly, the unique method of printing 3D structures could have enormous potential and competitive advantages over the traditional fabrication or manufacturing processes.
Surface finish quality on RP is becoming more and more vital with more printed parts being used for end-user purposes. Surface finish quality is critical not only for better functionality and appearance but also for cost reduction regarding reduced post-processing of 3D printed parts and overall prototyping time reduction also.
So, in this paper, the surface roughness amplitude parameters, which are independent parameters of each other, were quantitatively measured off-line in micro-meter level from the filtered profiles at 90˚ measuring direction across building direction. These amplitude parameters are average surface roughness, Ra, root mean square, Rq, skewness, Rsk, and kurtosis, Rku. Other parameters such as height characterization (Rk, Rpk, Rvk, Mr1 and Mr2) using the linear material ratio curve ISO13565-21996 standard were also considered and measured quantitatively off-line at micro-meter level. Bear in mind that the surface roughness amplitude parameters were selected according to the recommendations in the literature review and under consideration of the data processing facilities available with differing levels of information [
There are various methods obtainable for measuring the surface roughness profile and they can be further divided into two main groups of 1) contact method and 2) non-contact method [
Details of an engineering surface roughness measurement procedure have been already reported elsewhere [
From the extensive literature survey, it can be revealed that several types of research have been investigated to reduce the surface roughness and warping deformation of industrial/professional FDM 3D printed parts by optimizing fabrication process parameters without a specific focus on personal/desktop cost-ef- fective FDM 3D printers (cost below $2000) [
So, to overcome this gap, in this research paper, the authors have studied the variation of surface roughness and dimensional accuracy of printed parts produced by a personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D printer including different
Symbol Parameter Name Unit | Definition Comments | Illustrations |
---|---|---|
Ra average roughness µm | R a = 1 l ∫ 0 l | z ( x ) | d x | |
It is the average surface roughness of the scanned profile around the mean line (the least squares mean line or that generated by a standard filter). It represents the average absolute deviation of the scanned profile points from a mean line. | ||
Rq root mean squared µm | R q = 1 l ∫ 0 l | z 2 ( x ) | d x | |
It is the root mean square deviation of a scanned profile on a mean line. This is a statistically meaningful parameter that is only recently gaining acceptance for industrial surface measurement but is widely used within the optical surface community. This value is typically 11% higher than Ra. It is further sensitive to peaks and valleys than Ra as the amplitudes are squared. Profile roughness (2D): Rq/Ra = 1.22 Profile roughness (3D): Rq/Ra = 1.25 | ||
Rsk skewness | R sk = 1 R q 3 [ 1 l ∫ 0 l z 3 ( x ) d x ] | |
It is the roughness amplitude distribution and is a measure of the (a) symmetry processes produce near-Gaussian distributions, with a skewness value close to 0.0. For asymmetric height distribution, the skewness can be negative or positive values. +ve for steep peaks and flat valleys. −ve for flat peaks and steep valleys. | ||
Rku kurtosis | R ku = 1 R q 4 [ 1 l ∫ 0 l z 4 ( x ) d x ] | |
It is the roughness amplitude distribution and is a measure of the “peakedness” of the surface asperity heights about the profile mean line. A surface with a high kurtosis value tends to be peaky (large numbers of high asperities, and deep valleys) and produces a narrow asperity distribution. True Gaussian distribution has a kurtosis = 3 | ||
Rk core roughness depth µm | The depth of the roughness core profile. | |
Rpk reduced peak height µm | The average height of protruding peaks above roughness core profile. | |
Rvk reduced valley depth µm | The average depth of valleys is projecting through roughness core profile. | |
Mr1 material portion 1 % | The level in %, determined for the intersection line which separates the protruding peaks from the roughness core profile. |
Mr2 material portion 2 % | The level in %, determined for the intersection line which separates the deep valleys from the roughness core profile. |
---|---|
thermoplastic filament material as it is vital for determining the quality of the final product, and provides users with essential information on the tolerance of the personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D technology in additive manufacturing (AM) by commercial 3D printers. Besides, the acquired data will be assessed in such a way that they can be further employed in the design of the personal/desktop cost-effectives FDM 3D printed parts and thermoplastic filament materials development.
In this section, the personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D printer, filament materials, conditions used in the production and 3D geometry of the printed parts are described in detail in the following sub-sections.
The personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D printing machine used in this work is the BEAST from Cultivate3D, Australia (see previously published work for essential technical details, e.g., [
Polylactic acid (PLA) is bio-degradable thermoplastic aliphatic polyester with molecular formula (C3H4O2)n derived from renewable resources and manufactured out of plant-based materials, whereas reinforced polylactic acid (PLA+) is advanced and optimized thermoplastic filament material with toughness which is ten times more than the PLA on the market. On the other hand, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) is also a thermoplastic material with molecular formula (C8H8・C4H6・C3H3N)n and its proportions may vary from 15% to 35% (acrylonitrile, “A”) 5% to 30% (butadiene, “B”) and 40% to 60% (styrene, “S”) and it is manufactured out of oil-based materials, whereas reinforced acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS+) is advanced and optimized thermoplastic filament material with high toughness, hardness and rigidity, excellent scratch resistance, excellent oil resistance and excellent heat resistance. All four types of thermoplastic filament materials with 1.75 mm diameter have a ranging accuracy of 1.7 to 1.8 mm [
Many fabrication parameters have impacts on the surface quality of FDM 3D printed parts, for example, layer height, nozzle diameter, printing speed, raster angle, shell thickness and infill density and so on. Moreover, different factors make diverse influences on the surface quality and dimensional accuracy of the printed parts. The major ones are layer height and nozzle diameter. The thin
Parameters | Sample Group | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Material | PLA | PLA+ | ABS | ABS+ |
Colour | Glass Blue | Silver | Brown | White |
Print temperature (˚C) | 190 - 210 | 205 - 225 | 220 - 260 | 220 - 260 |
Bed temperature (˚C) | No heat (60 - 80) | No heat (60 - 80) | 110 | 110 |
Density (g/cm3) | 1.24 | 1.24 | 1.04 | 1.06 |
Distortion temperature (˚C, 0.45 MPa) | 56 | 52 | 78 | 73 |
Melt flow index (g/10mln) | 5 (190˚C/2.16 Kg) | 2 (190˚C/2.16 Kg) | 12 (220˚C/10 Kg) | 15 (220˚C/10 Kg) |
Tensile strength (MPa) | 65 | 60 | 43 | 40 |
Elongation at break (%) | 8 | 29 | 22 | 30 |
Bending strength (MPa) | 97 | 87 | 66 | 68 |
Flexural modulus (MPa) | 3600 | 3642 | 2348 | 2443 |
IZOD impact strength (KJ/m2) | 4 | 7 | 19 | 42 |
layer produces a smoother surface than the thick layer, whether it is measured diagonally across building direction, perpendicular to building direction or parallel to building direction. Surface roughness and part deposition time seem always to contradict each other. It is the same with nozzle diameter.
In this paper, based on the previous research [
Several FDM 3D printed parts were manufactured with different thermoplastic filament materials (e.g., PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+) in order to measure the surface roughness quality and warping deformation. The chosen materials are the most relevant for each additive manufacturing (AM) process. All thermoplastic filament materials are provided by the manufacture of AM machines used. The dimensions of the very simple rectangular shape test specimen are 40 mm × 40 mm × 15 mm (length, width and height, respectively).
Parameters | Sample Group | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | |
No. of samples | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Material | PLA | PLA+ | ABS | ABS+ |
Colour | Glass Blue | Silver | Brown | White |
Average weight (g) | 19.2013 | 20.5155 | 10.2642 | 16.1946 |
AM process | FDM (Fused Deposition Modeling) | |||
Layer height (mm) | 0.1 | |||
Infill density (%) | 100 | |||
Nozzle diameter (mm) | 0.3 | |||
Nozzle temperature (˚C) | 220 | |||
Printing speed (mm/s) | 30 | |||
Extrude of material (layer width) (mm) | 0.36 | |||
Speed for non-print moves (mm) | 60 | |||
Vertical shells | 1 | |||
Cooling rate | Built-in | |||
Bed temperature (˚C) | Room temperature | |||
Room temperature (˚C) | 25 ± 1 | |||
Relative humidity (% RH) | 40 ± 5 |
A personal/desktop cost-effective FDM 3D printer (cost below $2000) was used to fabricate the parts using four different thermoplastic filament materials namely PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+. All thermoplastic filament materials are 1.70 mm in diameter and enter into the extruder in which it is fused at 220˚C. The pressure of the feeding system causes the extrusion, changing in the filament material diameter from 1.70 mm to 0.48 mm (layer width). The thermoplastic filament material is ejected through the circular nozzle (0.3 mm), and finally deposited in layers onto a glass platform that underneath has no heated bed. Four different FDM 3D printed parts were chosen for the final assessment as shown in
of different filament materials were printed with a raster road of +45/−45 (diamond), 0/90 flat build orientation and 100% infill density pattern shape. The build time was recorded from the printing screen status on the machine itself. Besides, all the FDM 3D specimens were weighed by using a precision weighing balance named Sartorius 1702, model CP224S in a temperature and humidity controlled metrology laboratory, generally at 20˚C ± 1˚C and 40% ± 5% relative humidity. The surface roughness and dimensional accuracy of the FDM 3D printed parts were obtained by using a contact-type surface profilometer test-rig and electronic digital Vernier caliper gauge, respectively.
The surface roughness was measured in an angular position of 90˚ (perpendicular to the building direction) at 4-identical faces and it was measured in an angular position of ±45˚ (perpendicular to ±45˚ raster angle flat orientation) at the top face. To measure the surface roughness of the test specimen, at least three readings were taken at a different location from each side (C1-C2, C2-C3, C3-C4, C4-C1) along with top side as shown in
Geometrical accuracy can be measured using an electronic digital Vernier caliper gauge and calculation of the deviation relative to the original STL file format.
of 13.78 ± 0.74 mm (8.14% ± 4.92%, shape error) especially at corner 3 (C3) by almost 12.51 mm with 16.60% shape error. It can be seen clearly that the error was reduced by almost 50% from ABS to ABS+ with that same manufacturing process parameters including 220˚C nozzle temperature. On the other hand, for both PLA and PLA+ thermoplastic filament materials which were used to print two rectangular 100% infill density, represent the lowest warping deformation of mean and standard deviation by almost 14.78 ± 0.26 mm (1.47% ± 1.71%, shape error) and 14.80 ± 0.22 mm (1.33% ± 1.50%, shape error), respectively.
For the length and width variation compared to the true value of 40 mm in both axis in the original STL file, PLA+ shows a very small variation of almost 39.98 ± 0.16 mm (0.05% ± 0.40%, shape error) and 39.84 ± 0.12 mm (0.40% ± 0.30%, shape error), respectively, followed by PLA, ABS and ABS+. For PLA, the length variation was 40.05 ± 0.14 mm with total shape error of −0.13% ± 0.36% and the width variation was 39.85 ± 0.11 mm with total shape error of 0.38% ± 0.28%. For ABS, the length variation was 39.90 ± 0.09 mm with total shape error of 0.25% ± 0.23% and the width variation was 39.87 ± 0.04 mm with total shape error of 0.31% ± 0.10%. Surprisingly, reinforced ABS+ shows more variation in length and width than standard ABS by almost 39.89 ± 0.28 mm with total shape error of 0.28% ± 0.22% and by almost 39.835 ± 0.11 mm with total shape error of 0.42% ± 0.27%, respectively. This variation in length, width and height might be due to the nozzle temperature of 220˚C which is constant for all thermoplastic filament materials. For the group of PLA and PLA+, the selected nozzle temperature parameter of 220˚C represented the maximum print temperature whereas for the group of ABS and ABS+ it represented the minimum print temperature as recommended by the supplier (see
with 16.60% shape error to 14.92 mm with 0.53% shape error, respectively. Indeed, with ABS engineering thermoplastic material, deviation from the true value (15 mm) reached the maximum shape error by almost 33.53% which is equal to 9.97 mm. This is the fact that the solidification process which is more likely to be related to nozzle temperature needs more time to heal and also needs high nozzle temperature to stabilize and cool down slowly. It is also noticeable that the shape error variation on each corner and each face for specimens fabricated with the open-source system using PLA and PLA+ thermoplastic materials have not exceeded 3.00% indicating that less warping deformation and dimensional variation might occur, whereas ABS and ABS+ thermoplastic materials reached almost 34.53% indicating that high warping deformation and dimensional variation might occur in these filament materials as the volumetric shrinkage is quite visible.
variation was 14.8 ± 0.3 mm. While, in
FDM 3D printed faces (top, C1-C2, C2-C3, C3-C4, C4-C1) and considered surface roughness, Ra, waviness, Wa, and primary, Pa, values were calculated by considering 90˚ measuring direction (perpendicular to building direction). According to the experimentally obtained data, variations were observed in the surface profile distribution curves caused by different engineering thermoplastic filament materials. Several irregular steps and micro-sized burrs were observed. Consequently, the actual surface profile distribution was influenced by several factors and conditions such as the build style and material property. Each surface profile distribution of PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+ has its characteristics.
In general, PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+ follows the same patterns at the top faces which represents the highest surface roughness, Ra, compared to other four identical faces despite the low nozzle diameter which indicates a minor influence of the nozzle diameter on the surface roughness. The obtained values were roughly ~65.19 µm (for PLA), ~39.39 µm (for PLA+), ~72.22 µm (for ABS) and ~54.62 µm (for ABS+). Roughly speaking, PLA, PLA+ and ABS+ shows the same surface roughness, waviness and primary behaviour where the top faces reach the high value of Ra, Wa and Pa and then drop dramatically by almost 80% at other faces, whereas ABS shows irregularity distribution in the surface roughness, waviness and primary for all faces including the top face (middle) and there is no distinctive pattern to observe.
For PLA engineering plastic as shown in
For PLA+ engineering plastic as shown in
For ABS engineering plastic as shown in
For ABS+ engineering plastic, as shown in
Generally, the drop in the mean and standard deviation values when excluding the top face indicates that the measuring direction plays a substantial role in determining the surface roughness, waviness and primary behaviour of all printed parts. Besides, there is a low interaction between raster angle (±45˚) and
slice height for the top face (middle), whereas for the four-identical side faces this interaction in the only significant one. Based on this finding for all FDM 3D printed parts, the performance of the surface roughness, waviness and primary in the range from an excellent performance to worth performance were as flows PLA+ < PLA < ABS < ABS+.
means square (Rq, Wq and Pq) to average surface roughness, waviness and primary (Ra, Wa and Pa) for Rq/Ra, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa was found to be randomly varying with almost constant deviation of around 1.22 ± 0.02, 1.25 ± 0.03 and 1.26 ± 0.03, respectively. For ABS thermoplastic filament material, the ratio of the average root means square (Rq, Wq and Pq) to average surface roughness, waviness and primary (Ra, Wa and Pa) for Rq/Ra, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa was found to be randomly varying in both mean and standard deviation of around 1.40 ± 0.36, 1.28 ± 0.03 and 1.31 ± 0.07, respectively. For ABS+ thermoplastic filament material, the ratio of the average root means square (Rq, Wq and Pq) to average surface roughness, waviness and primary (Ra, Wa and Pa) for Rq/Ra, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa was found to be randomly varying with almost constant deviation of around 1.50 ± 0.20, 1.45 ± 0.13 and 1.45 ± 0.15, respectively.
Noticeably, PLA and PLA+ show an excellent surface profile ratio with almost constant deviation in surface roughness, waviness and primary. Whereas ABS and ABS+ show unacceptable surface profile ratio with random variation in deviation in surface roughness, waviness and primary. Ideally, Rq/Ra, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa are equal to 1.22 (for 2D) with minimum deviation is an excellent surface profile ratio, as the Rq is very sensitive to peaks and valleys than Ra because of the fact that the amplitudes are squared.
In
In
distribution with high and low degree of peakedness as Rku, Wku and Pku represent both less and greater than 3.
In
In
The values of skewness (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) 3rd moment and the kurtosis (Rku, Wku and Pku) are strongly influenced by different thermoplastic filament materials. Most of the surface texture of the printed parts by PLA, PLA+ and ABS is characterized by small values of (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) and (Rku, Wku and Pku), on the other hand, ABS is characterized by large values of (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) and (Rku, Wku and Pku). PLA+ and ABS+ plots display a negative skewness distribution, (Rsk, Wsk and Psk < 0), close to zero in magnitude, which will be valuable for a great many applications, whereas values of (Rsk, Wsk and Psk < 0) mean deeper-larger amplitude profile valleys in the whole printed parts of almost all examined target thermoplastic filament materials.
The Rk group parameter (core roughness depth, Rk, reduced peak height, Rpk, reduced valley depth, Rvk, material portion 1, Mr1, and material portion 2, Mr2) is derived from the bearing ratio curve based on the ISO 13565-2:1996 standard (Abbott curve, which represents mathematically the cumulative probability density function of the profile height of a surface and can be calculated by integrating the profile trace). Bear in minds that Rpk (in µm) and Mr1 (in %) represents the peaks of the FDM 3D printed parts of all thermoplastic filament materials. Whereas Rvk (in µm) and Mr2 (in %) represents the valleys of the FDM 3D printed parts of all thermoplastic filament materials, and Rk (in µm) represents the core/kernel of printed parts. These parameters were precisely designed for the control of the potential wear in cylinder bores in the automotive industry. They attempt to find and describe in numeric terms the wear characteristics of the bore by use of a material ratio curve.
Here, Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) were examined for all FDM 3D printed parts by considering different thermoplastic filament materials namely PLA, PLA+, ABS and BAS+. The bearing area curve tells us how much of the surface behaviour is above a certain height. More significant bearing area sample after FDM 3D technology is equivalent to most of the surface is close to the peak of the surface. The Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) parameters can have an influence on friction. Large Rk parameter in FDM surface value implies a surface composed of high peaks providing small initial contact area (point or line) and thus high contact stress areas when the surface is contacted.
Generally, based on the data obtained from
When excluding the top face, the Rk (core) increased by almost 3%, Rpk (peaks) remains almost the same and Rvk (valleys) decreased by almost 77%. The mean and standard deviation (mean ± SD) of Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) for PLA+ including the top face was 31.93 ± 9.46 µm, 3.71 ± 1.69 µm and 33.79 ± 47.45 µm. When excluding the top face, the Rk (core) increased by almost 11%, Rpk (peaks) increased by almost 13% and Rvk (valleys) decreased by almost 70%. The mean and standard deviation (mean ± SD) of Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) for ABS including the top face was 123.20 ± 34.42 µm, 72.12 ± 28.37 µm and 134.72 ± 65.60 µm. When excluding the top face, the Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) increased by almost 7%. The mean and standard deviation (mean ± SD) of Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys) for ABS+ including the top face was 42.41 ± 7.82 µm, 11.36 ± 6.22 µm and 101.98 ± 60.62 µm. When excluding the top face, the Rk (core) increased by almost 8%, Rpk (peaks) increased by almost 18% and Rvk (valleys) decreased by almost 24%.
It is precisely observed that PLA+ filament material exhibits an excellent surface behaviour compared to other filament materials due to its lower printing temperature, PLA+, when properly cooled, is less likely to deform or layer breaking problems (making it easier to print with) and can print sharper corners and features. It also shows that the top face for all filament materials exhibits irregularity surface distribution with high valleys compared to other faces (C1-C2, C2-C3, C3-C4, C4-C1).
In general, Mr1 shows tiny material portion by less than 10% for all printed parts whereas Mr2 shows large material portion by more than 90% for all printed parts. These results indicate that all FDM 3D printed parts with different thermoplastic filament materials exhibit approximately ~10% flat peaks over roughly ~90% steep valleys, which is consistent with the results obtained from skewness (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) 3rd moment and the kurtosis (Rku, Wku and Pku) 4th moment of all FDM 3D printed parts. The ~10% flat peaks are varied with different thermoplastic filament materials starting from low to high material portion as follows PLA+ < PLA < ABS+ < ABS. These findings include top and four identical side faces. The ~90% steep valleys are varied with different thermoplastic filament materials starting from low to high material portion as follows ABS < PLA < PLA+ < ABS+. Another finding is that the top face of PLA, PLA+ and ABS exhibits the same pattern of Rvk (steep valleys) and then dropped dramatically at the other four faces (C1-C2, C2-C3, C3-C4, C4-C1), whereas ABS shows
irregularity surface behaviour distribution among the group of Rk (core), Rpk (peaks) and Rvk (valleys). It also shows that Rk (core) and Rpk (flat peaks) remain unchanged over four faces including the top face for PLA, PLA+ and ABS+.
This paper presents an experimental platform which is used to study the surface roughness quality of FDM 3D printed parts using different filament materials namely PLA, PLA+, ABS and ABS+ along with the dimensional accuracy in length, height and width of all printed parts. The surface roughness quality and dimensional accuracy of FDM 3D printed parts were analyzed, and the following conclusions were arrived at:
• Undesirable warping deformation and shape errors occur in the final rectangular printed parts due to heat shrinkage compared to the true value of 40 mm (L) × 40 mm (W) × 15 mm (H) ranging from less than 3% (for PLA and PLA+) to 34.53% (for ABS and ABS+).
• PLA, PLA+ and ABS+ show the same surface roughness, waviness and primary behaviour in the four faces (C1-C2, C2-C3, C3-C4, C4-C1) where the top faces (middle) reach the high value of Ra, Wa and Pa, whereas ABS shows irregularity distribution in the surface roughness, waviness and primary for all four faces including the top face (middle) and there is no distinctive pattern to observe.
• PLA and PLA+ show an excellent surface profile ratio with almost constant deviation in Rq/Rq, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa. Whereas ABS and ABS+ show unacceptable surface profile ratio with random variation in deviation in Rq/Rq, Wq/Wa and Pq/Pa.
• The surface texture of the FDM 3D printed parts by PLA, PLA+ and ABS is characterized by small values of skewness (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) and kurtosis (Rku, Wku and Pku). However, ABS is characterized by large values of skewness (Rsk, Wsk and Psk) and kurtosis (Rku, Wku and Pku).
• The distribution of ABS printed sample is characterized by a significant fluctuation of changes in the value of Rk, Rpk (flat peaks) and Rvk (steep valleys) parameters.
• At the top face (middle), the Rvk (steep valleys) for PLA, PLA+ and ABS+ exhibits very high values, while the Rvk (steep valleys) for ABS exhibits slightly less value.
• Mr1 (material portion 1) shows tiny material portion by less than 10% whereas Mr2 (material portion 2) shows considerable material portion by more than 90% for all printed parts.
To sum up, the authors believe the acquired data generated from this investigation will be helpful in such a way that they can be further employed in the development of the thermoplastic filament materials which can be used in the personal/desktop cost-effectives FDM 3D printers.
The authors have no conflicts of interest.
The authors received no financial support for the research and/or for the publication of this article.
Alsoufi, M.S. and Elsayed, A.E. (2018) Surface Roughness Quality and Dimensional Accuracy―A Comprehensive Analysis of 100% Infill Printed Parts Fabricated by a Personal/Desktop Cost- Effective FDM 3D Printer. Materials Sciences and Applications, 9, 11-40. https://doi.org/10.4236/msa.2018.91002