Comparison on Dimensional Accuracy Using a Newly Developed Nozzle for Open-Source 3D Printer


Article Preview

Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) or also known as RepRap (Replicating Rapid Prototyper) is a technology that is synonym with 3D printing. This technology has entered a new era with an increasing demand among the community. It has grown commercially in the market of open-source system and it is relatively low cost. Many efforts have been put towards the development of the system in both hardware and software to increase the quality and the performance. The research highlights the development of a new nozzle to evaluate the performance on dimensional accuracy in comparison to the original nozzle. The nozzle emphasizes the die angle for the polylactic acid (PLA) material, the liquefier design which provide constant heat in the liquefier chamber, as well as insulator for the liquefier using highly insulated material. The dimensional accuracies of both nozzles were compared where the result showed that the new nozzle provided better accuracy and stability on the extruding PLA material.



Edited by:

Prof. Adrian Olaru




N. A. Sukindar et al., "Comparison on Dimensional Accuracy Using a Newly Developed Nozzle for Open-Source 3D Printer", Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 859, pp. 15-19, 2017

Online since:

December 2016




* - Corresponding Author

[1] Jones, R., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V., Palmer, C., and Bowyer, A. 2011. RepRap – the replicating rapid prototyper. Robotica. 29: 177–191.


[2] Wohlers, T. 2011. Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing State of the Industry Annual Worldwide Progress Report. Fort Collins, USA: Wohlers Associates.

[3] Turner, B.N., Strong, R., and Gold, S.A. 2014. A review of melt extrusion additive manufacturing processes: I. Process design and modeling. Rapid Prototype Journal. 20(3): 192–204.


[4] Melenka, G.W., Schofield, J.S., Dawson, M.R. and Carey, J.P. 2015. Evaluation of dimensional accuracy and material properties of the MakerBot 3D desktop printer. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 21(5): 618–627.


[5] Roberson, D.A., Espalin, D. and Wicker, R.B. 2013. 3D printer selection: A decision-making evaluation and ranking model. Virtual and Physical Prototyping. 8(3): 201–212.


[6] Sukindar, N.A., Khairol, M., and Mohd, A. 2016. An Analysis on Finding the Optimum Die Angle of Polylactic Acid in Fused Deposition Modelling. 835: 254–259.


[7] Liang, J.Z. 1995. Effect of the die angle on the extrusion swell of rubber compound. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 52(2–4): 207–212.


[8] Liang, J.Z. and Ness, J.N. 1997. Effect of die angle on flow behaviour for high impact polystyrene melt. Polymer Testing. 16(4): 403–412.


[9] Bellini, A., Güçeri, S., and Bertoldi, M. 2004. Liquefier Dynamics in Fused Deposition. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. 126(2): 237.


[10] Bakar, N.S. A, Alkahari, M.R., and Boejang, H. 2010. Analysis on fused deposition modelling performance. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A. 11(12): 972–977.


[11] Mahesh, M., Wong, Y.S., Fuh, J.Y.H., and Loh, H.T. 2004. Benchmarking for comparative evaluation of RP systems and processes. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 10(2): 123–135.