Development of a Design Feature Database to

support Design for Additive Manufacturing

Shajahan Bin Maidin and Dr R. I. Campbell

Department of Design & Technology, Loughborough University,
Loughborough, United Kingdom

Abstract
This paper introduces a method to aid the conceptual design of additive
manufactured product or part particularly for the Selective Laser Sintering (SLS)
system to enable the achievement of improved design concepts by implementing
the tool in the form of additive manufactured design feature database. A taxonomy
has been developed as a guide for the development of the tool that comprises four
taxons of reasons for additive manufacturing (AM) utilisations. These are user fit
requirements, improved product functionality, parts consolidation and improvement
of aesthetics (or form). Each of these requirements has been expanded into thirteen
sub categories of application that contains various examples of design features that
are only possible to manufacture using AM technology. The collected and grouped
design features will be presented in a form of a database as a method to aid
designing for AM by enabling industrial designers to visualise and gather design
feature information that could be incorporated into their own design work. Finally,
the results from the user trial and the validation of the tool are presented.

Keywords
Additive Manufacturing, Laser Sintering, Design Support Tool, Design Feature
Taxonomy & Design Feature Database

Correspondence Details
Corresponding Author: Shajahan Bin Maidin
Email address: s.maidin@lboro.ac.uk
Postal address: Department of Design & Technology
Loughborough University
Leicestershire
LE11 3TU
United Kingdom
1. Introduction

AM is a process and technology that currently has the potential and promise for
great flexibility in supporting customization of products via creative design, less
tooling cost and fast product development cycle time that enable companies to be
competitive in the market. One of the most important factors that enable this time
compression technique is the process of fast development of design ideas. At
present, industrial designers design additive manufactured part or product without a
proper design support tool, thus would sometimes reach wrong perceptions of the
value and advantage of designing for AM.

Use of current AM technology is developing a large amount of design information

such as the innovative design features and complex geometry that is generated
during designing a product or part for AM. This information often does not get
recorded, resulting in a potential loss of important design knowledge. This paper
introduces a method to aid the conceptual design of AM product or part particularly
for the Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) system to enable the achievement of
improved design concepts by implementing a tool in the form of additive
manufactured design feature database. This is expected to contribute new
knowledge to the development of the design support tool useful to industrial
designers.
1.1 Previous Work

The subject of design for AM is relatively new and thus not much information on how
to best exploit the advantages that it offers from the perspective of design. Most of
the AM support tools developed to date have been focusing on AM material and
system selection (Campbell and Bernie 1996){Campbell, 1996 #39}, (Bibb, Taha et
al. 1999){Bibb, 1999 #27}, (Phillipson 1997){Phillipson, 1997 #275}, (Jones and
Campbell 1997){Jones, 1997 #156}, (Masood and Soo 2002){Masood, 2002 #220},
(Byun and Lee 2005){Byun, 2005 #38}, (Rao and Padmanabhan 2007){Rao, 2007
#290}, (Munguia 2008){Munguia, 2008 #241}. Another area of AM support that have
been focused is AM part deposition orientation studies (Cheng, Fuh et al. 1995)
{Cheng, 1995 #52}, (Xu, Wong et al. 1997){Xu, 1997 #388}, (Lan, Chou et al. 1997)
{Lan, 1997 #261}, (Pandey, Thrimurtullu et al. 2004){Pandey, 2004 #260}, (Pandey,
Venkata Reddy et al. 2007){Pandey, 2007 #267}.

At present there are few established design support tools to aid industrial designers
to design products specifically for AM processes such as laser sintering. Previous
work, undertaken by Burton (2005) hypothesises that he can manipulate existing
Design for Manufacture (DFM) concept into his design for additive manufacturing
(DfAM) strategy. Providing a questionnaire feedback to five areas of concern to AM
such as production volume, part or product form, its function, its construction and
logistics issue confirms that a part or product is suitable for additive manufacture
and provide the concepts profile statements ADDIN EN.CITE
<EndNote><Cite><Author>Burton</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>506</R
ecNum><record><rec-number>506</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-
id="02tv0ased5v226erxxip550n2fxav5pda925">506</key></foreign-keys><ref-type
name="Thesis">32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Mike J
Burton</author></authors><tertiary-authors><author>Dr Robert Ian
Campbell</author></tertiary-authors></contributors><titles><title>Phd Thesis:
Design for rapid manufacture: Developing an appropriate knowledge transfer tool for
industrial designers</title><secondary-title>Faculty of Social Sciences &amp;
Humanities, Department of Design &amp; Technology</secondary-
title></titles><pages>229</pages><dates><year>2005</year></dates><pub-
location>Loughborough</pub-location><publisher>Loughborough
University</publisher><work-type>Open</work-
type><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Burton 2005). The statements
serve as guidelines and advice as to how to best exploit the design benefits of AM.
However, this method is time consuming because it was done manually. Moreover,
there are limited concepts profile statements and design features examples. Other
authors have made statements of what should constitute AM design methodology.
Adding aesthetic quality and consolidating parts are seen as techniques that AM
design methodology should adopt ADDIN EN.CITE
<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hague</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>512</R
ecNum><record><rec-number>512</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-
id="02tv0ased5v226erxxip550n2fxav5pda925">512</key></foreign-keys><ref-type
name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Hague,
R.</author><author>Mansour, S.</author><author>Saleh,
N.</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Material and design
considerations for rapid manufacturing</title><secondary-title>International Journal
of Production Research</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>International
Journal of Production Research</full-title></periodical><pages>4691 -
4708</pages><volume>42</volume><number>22</number><dates><year>2004</
year></dates><isbn>0020-7543</isbn><urls><related-
urls><url>http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/00207840410001733940</url></rel
ated-urls></urls><access-date>November 25, 2010</access-
date></record></Cite></EndNote>(Hague, Mansour et al. 2004).

Page at el. (2005), demonstrated the generation of 3D CAD data using coded
pattern projection and laser triangulation systems. The research demonstrated the
generation of 3D models using these two systems and claimed that imaging-based
scanners offer faster and more automated methods of generating CAD models
(Page, Koschan et al. 2005){Page, 2005 #263}.

Kruf et al. (2006) published an ongoing research on design for AM of functional LS

parts that focus on materials properties and reproducibility, AM texturing software,
coatings for LS parts and design rules for LS. This research is about the use of
Computer Aided Optimization (CAO) software that has been used to remove non-
efficient material from an initial 3D CAD model to create a new design optimised for
laser sintering (Kruf, Van de Vorst et al. 2006){Kruf, 2006 #179}.

Gerber (2008) proposed a design for manufacture guideline specifically for laser
sintering parts by selecting and analysing a range of available design for injection
moulding guidelines. However the accuracy of the design guideline for laser
sintering that have been proposed have to be verified by experimental work to
ensure it is reliable and relevant (Gerber and Barnard 2008){Gerber, 2008 #514}.

Yuadi paperAriadi (2008) proposed a design template which a simple program

containing a database of product family architecture which allows consumers
to customise the features or aspects of a products design which is expected to
be easy-to-operate for instead of conventional Computer Aided Design. However,
the interface between design template, customisation features (uploading
photo/image/logo, texting) and pre-manufacturing process (creating STL file) still
needs to be developed further (Ariadi and Rennie 2008).
2. Development of the AM design feature taxonomy

A decision was made to apply a “software rapid prototyping” approach to develop

the design aid tool for AM. The starting point for this was the categorisation of 113
additive manufactured design features that have been gathered and grouped into a
taxonomy that would form the basis to assist the development of the design support
tool. Some examples of these design features are shown in Table 1. Taxonomy is
normally developed by analysing various sources of literatures and various domains
and grouping similar information until all the sub groups are included in a particular
group. However, there were not much published material existed to support and
form a comprehensive and organised AM design feature taxonomy. Therefore,
several iterations of the taxonomy were proposed before a satisfactory classification
was achieved.

A total of 113 design features have been collected progressively and a decision was
made to group and categorise them accordingly to form a taxonomy. Figure 1 to
Figure 4 shows four versions of the taxonomy. Finally, a decision was made to
select and developed further the taxonomy base on AM reasons of utilisations
because from an inital study conducted, it was noticed that one of the most
important issue related to designing for AM is it’s reasons of utilisation.

Figure 1 shows taxonomy of design features that have been divided into internal and
external design features. This taxonomy has been developed to group the design
features according to features that could be visualise externally and features that
was included internally in a part or product. As AM supports freedom of design, this
taxonomy was developed to group the design features by external and internal
geometries. Figure 2 shows another variation of the taxonomy. It is a taxonomy of
additive manufactured design features that has been grouped under functionality
and form. The justification behind the development of this features is, as AM
improve product functionality and also capable to manufacture complex design
features, the design features that has been collected has been grouped under these
two taxons.

Feature 1: Integrated ball and socket

Functionality Keywords:

i. Ball joint
ii. Encapsulation
iii. Spherical movement
iv. Self-levelling
v. Ready assembled

Application: Consumer product

Material: SLS
Originating Designer: Ian Campbell,
Loughborough University, UK

Feature 2 : Snap fit hook

Functionality Keywords:
i. fastening
ii. holding
Application: Avionic Enclosure
Material: SLS
Originating Designer: Du Plessis, Saab
Aviatronics, South Africa
Feature 3 : Internally Hinged Button

Functionality Keywords:

i. Integral button
ii. Internal access
iii. Hinge
iv. Orthogonal operation

Application: Automotive
Material: SLS
Originating Designer : Mike Burton,
RMIT Australia

Table 1: Examples of Additive Manufactured Design Features

One of the methods to provide design aid for conceptual design of AM part or
product is having visual examples of design features by areas of application. Figure
3 shows a taxonomy of AM design features that has been grouped under areas of
applications. The areas of applications are medical, sport, consumer product,
automotive, military and marine, aerospace, motorsport and fabrics. These areas of
applications has been grouped under three taxons namely customised features,
consolidated features, complex geometrical features.

Figure 4 shows AM design feature taxonomy of functionality & complex geometrical

features which is similar to Figure 3. However, under the functionality taxon, the
design features that has been collected was grouped under eight different sub
categories namely fastening or holding features, weight reduction features,
embbosed features, size variations features, personalised parts or product,
consolidated parts, dual functionality product and dual material product. Under the
complex geometry taxon, the design features was grouped under instant assembly,
internal structuring, shape optimisation and profile features.

Following a pilot study with the MSc Industrial Design Postgraduate students from
the department during the first year of the research, it was noticed that one of the
most important issue related to designing for AM is its reasons of utilisation.
Designers have to understand the advantages and limitations of AM and its reasons
of utilisation prior to design and producing parts or product with AM systems. Figure
5 shows the design feature taxonomy base on AM reasons of utilisation. The second
level of taxons shows five groups of AM reason of applications that are user fit
requirement, improve functionality requirement, parts consolidation requirement,
aesthetics or form requirement and dual material requirement. There are fifteen sub

Figure 1: Taxonomy of Internal and External AM Design Features

categories of applications that have been further expanded from the second level of
taxons. There are various design features that have been grouped under this

Figure 2: Taxonomy of Functionality and Form of AM design features

second level of taxons. Figure 6 shows a second version and Figure 7 shows the
simplified version of the final taxonomy that consist of four reasons of AM utilisation
and its thirteen sub categories of applications.

Figure 3: AM application design features

Figure 4: AM design feature taxonomy of functionality & complex geometrical features
Figure 5: AM reason of utilisation design feature taxonomy version 1

Figure 6: AM reason of utilisation design feature taxonomy version 2

 Figure 7: AM design feature taxonomy version 3 (simplified layout)

The taxonomy in Figure 7 categorises various AM enabled features under four

groups of AM reason of utilisations namely user fit requirements, product
functionality improvement, consolidation, aesthetic and form requirements. These
four groups of AM reason of utilisations forms the top level taxons of the proposed
taxonomy and were further expanded to include thirteen sub categorise of
application on the second level of the taxons. User fit requirements can be defined
as parts or product that has been customised to accommodate user requirements
with the application of AM. From the perspective of AM, the user fit requirements
were applied into three groups of application namely sport, medical and consumer
product that forms the customised profile features.

Product functionality improvement can be defined as methods that can be used to

improve parts or product functionality from the perspective of AM. The product
functionality improvement comes from four approaches such as weight reduction
features, increase surface friction features, internal structuring features and multiple
versions features.

Consolidation requirement can be defined as to combine parts, its functions or its

material from the perspective of AM. The consolidation technique comes from four
approaches such as instant assembly features, fasteners removal features, multiple
functional parts and over moulding.

The aesthetic and form requirement can be defined as methods that could be
applied to improve product appearance from the perspective of AM. It includes
approaches such as embossed features, surface features, visual features and
customised form. The contents of the thirteen sub-categories that form the second
level taxons will be described in the next section.
2.1 User Fit Requirement

Based on the four reasons of AM utilisation and findings from published literature
and various websites, a total of 113 DfAM features (Table 2) have been identified
and clustered into thirteen sub-categories of applications. For instance, for the
weight reduction application there are seven design features have been collected.
Most of these design features were designed and manufactured with the laser
sintering process.

From the perspective of AM the user fit requirement were applied into three groups
of application namely sport, medical and consumer product. There are four types of
design features that have been found and grouped under the sport application.
There are nine types of design features under the medical application. There are
three types of design features under the consumer product application.

2.2 Improve Functionality Requirement

The improve functionality requirement were further expanded to include weight

reduction feature, increase surface friction features and multiple version features.
Table 6 shows the total number of design features grouped for each of this category.

2.3 Consolidation Requirement

The consolidation requirement were further expanded to include fasteners removal

features, instant assembly features, multiple functional parts and over moulding.
Table 6 shows the total number of design features grouped for each of this category.

2.4 Aesthetics and Form Requirement

The aesthetics and form requirement were further expanded to include embossed
feature, surface features, visual feature and customised form. In some cases there
are features that appear to be applicable to more than one category. In this case,
the author has to decide the appropriateness and relevancy of the application group
that the feature has to be included. Table 6 shows the total number of design
features grouped for each of this category.

Reasons for
Application Number of design features
AM
Sport = 4 design features, Medical =
User fit Customised Profiles
9 design features & Consumer
requirement Features
Product = 7 design features
Weight Reduction
7 design features
Features
Increase surface friction
Improve 3 design features
features
functionality Internal structural
8 design features
features
Multiple version features 2 design features

Instant assembly
20 design features
features
Fasteners removal
Parts 7 design features
features
consolidation
Multiple functional parts 3 design features

Over moulding 1 design features

Embossed features 3 design features

Surface features 13 design features

Aesthetics
Visual features 3 design features
Customised form
13 design features
features
Total 113 design features

Table 6: Number of design feature for a specific AM reasons and application

2.5 Validation of the AM design taxonomy

The final iteration of the taxonomy (Figure 7) that base on reason of AM utilisation
has to be validated before implementing and incorporating into a first “rough cut”
tool. To validate the final taxonomy, a questionnaire was send to a second group of
thirteen MSc postgraduate students on the Industrial Design Masters Programme at
Loughborough Design School. They were given a project to re-design a user-
interaction product so that it could be produced by any commercially available AM
system. They were given the paper version of the taxonomy and all the design
feature images to aid the designing task to search for applicable and innovative
features that could be included in their design work. In addition, a design diary kept
by each student also enabled further study and improvement of the DfAM system.
On completion, they were given a survey form to gain feedback on the effectiveness
and applicability of the AM taxonomy and the design feature list.

The validation of the taxonomy shows that differences between the top four levels of
taxons are reasonably clear and there is no overlap between them. Results from the
students’ questionnaires feedback can be summarised that the taxonomy is relevant
and usable. To improve the design feature list, one student suggested to include
more design feature examples. However, there are also suggestion to include the
explanation for all AM systems available and all other types of suitable materials
data into the list that is beyond the scope of this research at this stage. The
development of the AM taxonomy has been an aid in the identification and
organisation of AM design features for easy retrieval and assistance in conceptual
design. The design features taxonomy is by no means exhaustive and will be
expanded by adding more design features in the various sub-categories.
3.0 Implementation of the Design for Additive Manufacturing
(DfAM) Feature Database

The DfAM feature database was developed based on four AM reasons of utilisation.
These are user fit requirements, improved product functionality, parts consolidation
and aesthetics or form requirement. These four top levels of the taxonomy were
further expanded into thirteen sub categories of application features namely
customised profile features, weight reduction features, increase surface friction
features, multiple version features, instant assembly features, fasteners removal
features, multiple functional parts, over moulding, embossed features, surface
features, visual features and customised form.

A “rapid prototyping” software approach has been utilised where a “quick and dirty”
version of the tool has been developed to enable rapid user testing and
improvement of the system. The tool have been implemented within a Ms Access
database known as the DfAM design feature database. A series of forms have been
created to enable designers to interact, guide, search or browse through the feature
categories. The database enables industrial designers to visualise and gather
design feature information from examples in the database that could be incorporated
into their own design work. Figure 8 shows the welcome screen and Figure 9 shows
the general information screen where the user is requested to provide the users
general information.
 Figure 8: Screen shot of the welcome page of the DfAM feature database

Figure 9: General Information Screen

Before a user proceeds to the concept profile generation stage the feasibility for
additive manufacture of a certain part has to be evaluated. As shown in Figure 10
there are four AM feasibility evaluation criteria. The first question is regarding the
number of targeted production unit. If the given answer to this question is more than
100,000 units, then a message informing that AM is not suitable will appear (Figure
11). If the production unit is less than 10,000 units the user may proceed to provide
answer to the next three general questions which evaluate the overall surface finish,
overall mechanical property and the importance of the tolerance and accuracy of the
part or the product.
 Figure 1: AM feasibility validation screen

Figure 21: Message showing AM is not suitable for production volume more than
100,000 units

For question about the overall surface finish, overall mechanical property and the
importance of the tolerance and accuracy of a part or product, a scoring technique is
used to evaluate the feasibility of AM. Figure 12 showing AM is not suitable if the
general mechanical property, surface finish and tolerance are very important for a
certain application.
 Figure 3: Message showing that AM is not suitable if the general mechanical
property, surface finish and tolerance is very important

Figure 13 shows the concept profile generation screen. There are 11 options that
can be selected individually. These questions have been grouped under the four AM
reasons of utilisation and its sub categories of application as shown in Table 7. For
example if a user select the first option (need custom fitting for individual user), then
by clicking the generate concept profile button, the customised profile feature button
and the customised form button will be enabled (Figure 14). This will assist the user
in selecting the appropriate features to be applied in their concept design.
 Figure 13: AM Concept Profile Generation Screen

Figure 14: Buttons that has been enabled base on the concept profile selection

Table 7 shows which feature buttons will be enabled base on the concept profile
button that has been selected. Figure 15 shows a quick search function that enable
a user to find a specific features or information from the database.
 Selected Options Enabled Button Reasons for AM
Does the product need custom fitting Customised Profiles
User fit requirement
that conform to individual user? Features

Does the product need to be light Weight Reduction

lightweight? Features

Does the product subjected to hand Increase surface friction

held? features
Improve
Does the product have internal Internal structural functionality
structures? features

Does the product benefit from being

made available in a range of sizes or Multiple version features
shapes to fit different users?

Does the product benefit from number Instant assembly

of parts reduction? features

Does the product need to attach to Fasteners removal

other components? features Parts consolidation

Does the product benefit from having

Multiple functions parts
several other functions?
Does the product require over
Over moulding
moulding?
Embossed features
Does the product need to be
Surface features
aesthetically pleasing?
Aesthetics
Visual features
Does creative and innovative shape or
Customised form
geometry an important factor for the
features
product?

Table 1: Result of concept profile selection

 Figure 45: Quick search screen

The images currently used in the database have been sourced from various
websites, literatures and personal contact with the designers. Therefore, permission
would need to be sought from the owners of the images before the system be made
available online. The feature database contains macros and visual basic scripts that
could not be made available online at the time of writing.

4. DfAM Feature Database Appraisal and Validation

The implementation of the DfAM tool into the Ms Access as a prototype software
took place over a period of several months, during which time a number of revisions
and improvements were made. Prior to the user trial a series of pilot trials were
performed to establish a suitable format and test procedure before testing a finalized
system. The pilot trial was conducted with two groups of participants which are the
final year undergraduate student designers and the professional industrial
designers.

An exercise was devised for the trials in which both groups of participants were
asked to sketch a redesign of a familiar product of their choice for AM using the
DfAM tool. The students’ pilot trial was conducted in a room at the Design School.
Due to work commitment and travel distances the professional designers trials was
done by sending the database in a CD format accompanied with the design brief
and feedback questionnaire. Although the number of participant in this trial is small,
it provides an initial feedback of the usefulness of the tool prior to a more formal
validation.

4.1 Student Designer Pilot Trial

To ascertain user perceptions and verify its overall feasibility and to gather
suggestions for the improvement of the DfAM feature database, six final year
undergraduate students on the Industrial Design programme at Loughborough
University and two postgraduate students were recruited for the design trial. These
students were regarded as being competent industrial designers. In general, most of
these students have had some exposure to product design and had used AM
technology in their project due to the nature of the engineering and design courses
they were undertaking.

The basic idea behind the trial was that the students should develop sketches of
redesign concepts of a product of their choice with and without the use of the DfAM
tool and the results of doing so could be compared. Therefore, the trial was divided
into two concept sketching exercise sessions for each student, one using the
repository, one not. As shown in Table 8, students 1 to 4 were given access to the
DfAM feature database for their first sketching exercise, students 5 to 8 were given
access for their second sketching exercise. The students were given access to the
websites to get ideas and to help them in the conceptual sketch when they were not
using the repository. Table 8 shows the products that were sketched for the trial by
the students.
 Product Sketched
Student Product Sketched Using
Without DfAM feature
Designer DfAM feature database
database (Website Access)
1 Table Lamp Toy
2 Toy Table Lamp
3 Chair Computer mouse
4 Computer mouse Chair
5 Salt Shaker Kettle
6 USB Stick Salt Shaker
7 Kettle Ice-cream scoop
8 Ice-cream scoop USB Stick

Table 8: Products that has been sketched by student designers

4.2 Student Designer Pilot Trial Discussion

Each student has produced six sketches in total, three concept sketches using the
website and three concept sketches using the feature database as an aid. In total
there are forty eight sketches that have been collected. A decision has been made
to evaluate the concept sketches and choose each best concept from each group
and compare them. There were eight criteria that have been evaluated: safety,
usability, manufacturability, functionality, ergonomics, durability and aesthetics.
Using pair wise comparison, the weight for each criteria has been assigned. Table 9
and Table 10 shows two examples of the selected concept sketches of products
with some text annotation developed by the student designers without using and
with using the DfAM features database.
 Salt Shaker design without using DfAM feature database Salt Shaker design using DfAM feature database

Design Feature: Design Feature:

1. Embossed Feature 1. Weave Surface Feature
2. Snap fit feature 2. Hock Clip Feature
3. Spiral Element
4. Over moulding feature
5. Hand grip contour
Table 9: Comparison of salt shaker sketched using and without using the DfAM feature database

Table 9 shows the comparison of the salt shaker sketched using and without using the DfAM feature database. Salt shaker sketched
without using the DfAM feature database shows only two features such as embossed feature for its aesthetics and snap fit feature to
open and close the lid. However, the salt shaker sketched using the DfAM feature database shows various features from the library
such as weave surface feature, spiral element for enhanced aesthesis. The hand grip contour and over moulding feature for
better ergonomics and the hook clip feature for improved functionality.
 Ice-cream scoop design without using DfAM feature database Ice-cream scoop design using DfAM feature database

Design Feature: Design Feature:

1. Press in mechanism load and unload the ice cream 1. Over moulding feature
2. Transparent feature
3. Hollow structure on the scoop
 4. Embossed pattern on the scoop
Table 20: Comparison of ice-cream scoop sketched using and without using the DfAM feature database

Table 10 shows the comparison of the ice-cream scoop sketched using and without using the DfAM feature database. Ice-
cream scoop sketched without using the DfAM feature database shows just the press in mechanism load and unload the ice
cream. However, the ice-cream scoop sketched using the DfAM feature database shows transparent feature that enhance its
aesthetics, over moulding feature for better ergonomic and hollow structure for reduced weight and embossed pattern for
better functionality elements.
 4.3 Student Designer Pilot Trial Results

The trial found that there are two factors that influence the results. Firstly, the skills
and creativity of the students designers and secondly, the number of features used
from the feature database. However, by analysing and comparing the sketches
produced by the student designers with using the DfAM feature database, it is found
that the tool provide ideas on how to incorporate various features to enhance and
improve aesthetics, ergonomics and functionality of a product or parts. The sketches
produced indicates that with using the DfAM tool, the student designer was able to
apply creative and innovative design features such as the variable wall thickness,
living hinge, over moulding, transparency and various surface features into the
concept sketches.

Table 11 shows the list of the features used from the repository extracted from all the
concept sketches using the DfAM feature database. An overall observation of the list
shows that the students had made used of the feature database and applied features
from twelve categories of applications with the exception of the multiple function
parts feature under the consolidation requirement. The weight reduction feature,
instant assembly features, embossed features, visual features, customised form
features has been applied in most of the conceptual sketches. The feature that was
mostly used from the feature database is the over moulding feature. As most of the
product is being hand held this is an important feature to be applied to the
conceptual sketches. However, only the hand grip contour feature has been applied
from the customised profile feature. As most of the design features in the user fit
requirement are collected from specific application areas such as medical, sport and
consumer product, this does not relevant to the student sketching exercise.
However, this is also depends to the students creativity to use the idea of the
features from the user fit requirements and apply it on other product. In summary,
Table 11 shows that the feature database is useful, relevant and helpful to support
conceptual design of parts and product for AM. The number of feature used from the
library would likely increase if the number of participants in the trial is increased.

Student Designers
AM Reason Application Design Features 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
 User Fit Customised
Hand Grip Contour x x x x 4
Requirement Profiles Features
Undercut Feature x x 2
Thin Wall Feature x x 2
Weight Reduction
Variable Wall Thickness Feature x x x x 4
Features
Hollow Feature x x 2
External Ribbing Feature x 1
Textured Surface Feature x 1
Improve
functionality Increase Surface Circular Array Feature x 1
requirement Friction Features Honey Comb Feature x 1
Internal Shelving x 1
Internal
structuring feature Internal cable support x 1

Multiple Version
Customised Thread Feature x 1
Features
Living Joint Feature x x 2
Torus Feature x 1
Interconnected Feature x 1
Encapsulated Track & Ball x 1
Living Feature
Hinge Feature x x 2
Instant Integrated ball and socket
Assemblies x 1
feature
Multiple link feature
Features x 1
Encapsulated bearing x x 2
Consolidation
Ball and socket feature x 1
Requirement
Hook clip feature x x 2
Slide opening & closing x 1
Snap fit hook x 1
Hook clip x x 2
Fasteners Slide opening & closing x 1
Removal Features Internal cable support x 1
Snap fit hook x 1
Over Moulding Over Moulding x x x x x x x 7
Embossed Embossed Alphabets x x x x x 5
Features Logo x x 2
Weave Element x 1
Alphabet Element x 1
Surface Features
Spiral Element x 1
Overlapping Element x x 2
Aesthetics or Net Shadow Effect x 1
Visual Features
Form Transparent Feature x x x x x 5
Requirement Curve Feature x 1
Swept Feature x x 2
Alphabet Feature x 1
Customised Form
Freeform geometry x x 2
Features
Floating Elements x 1
Replicated Element x 1
Bio- mimic feature x 1

Table 3: Range of features used from the DfAM feature database

5. Professional Designer Pilot Trial
In addition to the student designer’s trial, a second trial was conducted with
professional designers. Seven professional industrial designers who had
experienced in designing products for AM and variety of market sectors were invited
to take part in the user trial to generate feedback on the proposed DfAM feature
database. Generally these designers had at least three years of working experience
and involve in product design and development activities.

5.1 Professional Designer Trial Discussion

The focus of the trial with the professional designers is to design three conceptual
designs for a product of their choice, possibly a product that they have previously
worked on or one that has already been identified for potential manufacture using
AM that they think has a potential to have its functionality, aesthetics, ergonomics or
parts consolidation improved through the use of AM. Comparison of using and not
using the DfAM feature database was not conducted with the professional designer.
The aim of the trial is to test the DfAM feature database to see if it is relevant,
effective and applicable to aid the conceptual design of part or product that are to be
produced using AM processes from the professional designer’s point of view.

Twenty one conceptual sketches were produced by the professional designer for the
trial. The best conceptual sketches have been selected to show the range of the
features that have been selected and applied in their sketches. Table 12 shows the
product sketched by the professional designers and the concepts that have been
selected for each product.
 Professional
Product Sketched
Designer
1 Computer mouse
2 Sensor
3 Thermometer
4 Watch Bracket
5 Electric Fan
6 Chair
7 Flashlight, Mini fan & USB
Table 42: Concept Sketches by Professional Designer

5.2 Professional Designer Trial Analysis of Results

Figure 16 and Figure 17 shows the concepts that have been selected for each
product sketched by the professional designers. These figures illustrate the features
that the designers have selected and applied in their concept sketches. Figure 16
shows the concept of a computer mouse sketched by professional designer number
1. The features that can be seen from the sketch are transparent feature that shows
the internal element of the computer mouse. The blue light from the transparent
feature will enhance the aesthetics aspect of the computer mouse. Other features
that have been used are circular array and honey comb surface features that will
improve the ergonomic aspect and the surface friction for better gripping of the
computer mouse.
 Figure 56: Concept of computer mouse sketched by professional designer number 1

Figure 17 shows the concept sketch that has been selected for the thermometer. In
this sketch the designer used the integrated ball and socket feature from the instant
assembly category. From the user fit requirement category the designer applied the
hand grip contour feature. From the customised form category the designer applied
the bio mimic feature (concept of a “humming bird”). From the weight reduction
category the non uniform wall thickness feature has been applied.

Figure 17: Concept of thermometer sketched by professional designer number 3

Range of features that have been used by the professional designers for each sub
category of applications for all three conceptual designs of the product are
summarised in Table 13. An overall observation of the list shows that the designers
had applied features from all the thirteen categories of applications from the feature
database. The weight reduction feature, instant assembly features, visual features,
customised form features, increase surface friction features, aesthetic requirement
surface feature, customise form feature and the fasteners removal features has been
applied in most of the conceptual sketches. Three specific features that was mostly
used from the feature database is the Internal selective reinforce feature under the
weight reduction application, mounting boss feature under the fasteners removal
application and the transparent feature under the aesthetics or form requirement
visual feature application. In summary, Table 13 shows that the feature database is
useful, relevant and helpful to support conceptual design of parts and product for AM
from the professional designers’ perspective.

5.3 Summary

The user trial conducted to see the usability and relevancy as a means of improving
the DfAM feature database developed in this research. The user trial was conducted
twice which involve the first trial with a group of student designers and the second
trial with a group of professional designers. Both trial shows that the DfAM feature
database provides ideas on how to incorporate various features to enhance and
improve part or products aesthetics, ergonomics and functionality.
 Professional Designers
AM Reason Application Design Features 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total
Customise
User Fit
Profiles Hand Grip Contour x x 2
Requirement
Features
Thin Wall Feature x 1
Variable Wall Thickness
Weight x x 2
Feature
Reduction
Internal selective reinforce
Features x x x 3
feature
Hollow Feature x 1
Increase Textured Surface Feature x 1
Improve Surface Circular Array Feature x x 2
functionality Friction
requirement Honey Comb Feature x 1
Features
Internal Internal cable support x 1
structuring
Internal shelving x x 2
feature
Multiple
version Size variations x 1
feature
Living Hinge Feature x x 2
Integrated ball and socket
Instant x 1
feature
Assemblies
Internal Hinge Button
Features x x 2
Feature
Enclosed Volume Feature x 1
Consolidation Fasteners Internal cable support x x 2
Requirement Removal Mounting Boss Feature x x x 3
Features Snap fit cap x 1
Multiple
Functional Multiple Elements x 1
Part
Over
Over Moulding x x 2
Moulding
Embossed
Embossed Alphabets x x 2
Features
Double Mesh Feature x 1
Surface
Aesthetics or Fingerprint Feature x 1
feature
Form Perforated Feature x x 2
Requirement Visual
Transparent Feature x x x 3
Features
Customise Replicated Element x 1
form feature Bio- mimic feature x 1

Table 53: Range of features used by the professional designers

6. Conclusions

The objective of the DfAM design feature database is to enable industrial designers
to access and reuse design knowledge accumulated over the years, specifically the
features designed for laser sintered additive manufactured parts or products. It
allows designers to visualize and retrieve AM design feature information and
knowledge at the conceptual design stage. By providing four reasons for utilization of
AM with various design feature examples that fall under thirteen sub-categories of
applications, the DfAM feature database provides an innovative way to approach AM
part or product conceptual design. The tool enables fast conceptual idea generation
and to demonstrate AM design freedom to novice designers.

The AM design features taxonomy is seen as a useful aid for industrial designers to
understand the design freedom associated with AM. The classification of four taxons
that were further expanded into sub-categories of various design features is
anticipated to help designers to visualize and extract design feature information to
assist the AM design process.

This research has shown that the DfAM method of providing designers with
examples of design features from the database is a suitable strategy to aiding the
conceptual design of additive manufactured part or product. The next stages of the
research are to improve and validate the repository with responses from professional
industrial designers and to create a web based system to gather, present and to
exploit the prominence of design for AM.
References

Ariadi, Y. and A. E. W. Rennie (2008). Template for consumer use in designing customised
products. 9th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Sympsosium, The
University of Texas at Austin.
Bibb, R., Z. Taha, et al. (1999). "Development of a rapid prototyping design advice system."
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 10(3): 331-339.
Burton, M. J. (2005). Phd Thesis: Design for rapid manufacture: Developing an appropriate
knowledge transfer tool for industrial designers. Faculty of Social Sciences &
Humanities, Department of Design & Technology. Loughborough, Loughborough
University: 229.
Byun, H. S. and K. H. Lee (2005). "A decision support system for the selection of a rapid
prototyping process using the modified TOPSIS method." The International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 26(11): 1338-1347.
Campbell, R. I. and M. R. N. Bernie (1996). "Creating a database of rapid prototyping
system capabilities." 12th International Conference on Computer Aided Production
Engineering 61(1-2): 163-167.
Cheng, W., J. Y. H. Fuh, et al. (1995). "Multi-objective optimization of part- building
orientation in stereolithography." Rapid Prototyping Journal 1(4): 12-23.
Gerber, G. F. and L. J. Barnard (2008). "Designing for Laser Sintering." Journal for New
Generation Sciences 6(2): 12.
Hague, R., S. Mansour, et al. (2004). "Material and design considerations for rapid
manufacturing." International Journal of Production Research 42(22): 4691 - 4708.
Jones, K. G. and R. I. Campbell (1997). Rapid Prototyping Decision Support System.
Proceedings Fast Freeform Fabrication Symposium, University of Texas at Austin.
Kruf, W., B. Van de Vorst, et al. (2006). Design for Rapid Manufacturing functional SLS
parts. Intelligent Production Machines and Systems. Oxford, Elsevier Science Ltd:
389-394.
Lan, P. T., S. Y. Chou, et al. (1997). "Determining fabrication orientation for rapid prototyping
with stereolithography apparatus." Computer Aided Design 29(1): 53-62.
Masood, S. H. and A. Soo (2002). "A rule based expert system for rapid prototyping system
selection." Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 18(3-4): 267-274.
Munguia, J. (2008). A soft computing based model for RM selection and cost estimation. 2nd
International Conference on Additive Technologies, DAAAM Specialized Conference.
Page, D., A. Koschan, et al. (2005). "3D CAD model generation of mechanical parts using
coded-pattern projection and laser triangulation systems." Assembly Automation
25(3): 230-238.
Pandey, P. M., K. Thrimurtullu, et al. (2004). "Optimal part deposition orientation in FDM
using a multi-criterion genetic algorithm." Int. J. Prod. Res. 42(19): 4069-4089.
Pandey, P. M., N. Venkata Reddy, et al. (2007). "Part deposition orientation studies in
layered manufacturing." ICAMT 2004 (Malaysia) & CCAMT 2004 (India) Special
Issue 185(1-3): 125-131.
Phillipson, D. (1997). Rapid Prototyping Machine Selection Programme. Proceedings of the
6th European Conference on Rapid Prototyping and Tooling.
Rao, R. V. and K. K. Padmanabhan (2007). "Rapid prototyping process selection using
graph theory and matrix approach." Journal of Materials Processing Technology
194(1-3): 81-88.
Xu, F., Y. S. Wong, et al. (1997). "Optimal orientation with variable slicing in
stereolithography." Rapid Prototyping Journal 3(3): 76-88.