Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Design and development of a low-cost open-source 3D printer and its

single response optimization using polylactic acid (PLA) material
Rishabh Sood, Sharad K. Pradhan ⇑
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technical Teachers’ Training and Research, Bhopal 462002, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Fused deposition modelling fabricates a 3D model from CAD data using a heated tip to extrude thermo-
Received 6 August 2019 plastic material onto a surface layer-by-layer. At present, there are number of commercial 3D printers
Received in revised form 21 January 2020 available. Owing to the high cost, material restrictions and difficulty to study process parameters of com-
Accepted 30 April 2020
mercial 3D printers, an open source 3D printer is designed and developed taking into consideration the
Available online 4 June 2020
cost analysis as well. Design of experiments (DOE) is used with an orthogonal array using three process
parameters layer thickness, orientation Infill Orientation and temperature of extruder, to get tensile
Keywords:
strength of the specimen. A standard specimen of ASTM D638 made up of PLA material is selected for
3D printing
PLA
analysis in 27 experiments where tensile testing is performed to calculate the tensile strength of each
Process parameters specimen. A probability distribution curve is drawn to ascertain the validity of the experiments where
FDM the results fall close to the mean value. Using the ANOVA approach and regression model a full quadratic
Optimization equation is obtained and a graph is obtained which corroborates with the fact that although anisotropic
Plastics deposition of material results in disparity of tensile strength, but the values fall within permissible limits.
The results highlight that in case of PLA material as the layer thickness decreases, the tensile strength
tends to increase. It is also to be noted that although layer thickness and orientation angle have been
analysed extensively as process parameters compared to temperature the later within the selected range
has shown certain inclination towards a typical value. The future scope is to analyse various other process
parameters like raster width, raster angle, object orientation, feed rate, infill density, space filling, etc. to
give a comprehensible outlook to the study of the process parameters in open source 3D printers using
other polymers.
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference
on Materials and Manufacturing Methods.

1. Introduction
Owing to the high cost, material restrictions and difficulty to
study process parameters of commercial 3D printers [1] an open
community by the name of RepRap.org, since the expiry of the
FDM patent in 2009 (S. Scott Crump June, 9th 1992), have
developed and shared the tools and processes to build low cost
3D printers and drastically reducing cost under open source license
(the GNU General Public License) [2]. As FDM being a complex
mechanism there are various parameters that affect the product
quality and material properties [3,6] and RepRap [5] offers to study
the effects of number of process parameters viz. layer thickness,
orientation angle of deposition, infill density, air gap, raster angle,
raster width, feed rate, temperature, etc. on the product quality
and mechanical properties. More importantly analysis of the
effects of FDM process parameters on mechanical performance
are of special interest for the fabrication of continuous reinforced
fiber 3D printed structure [4,7] and since the literature on the
mechanical properties of parts fabricated by open source 3D print-
ers is scarce [2]. Therefore, based on the inputs on the webpage an
open source 3D printer is designed and developed taking into con-
sideration the cost analysis as well. A comparison of similar attri-
butes of commercial and open source 3D printers is done to
study and shortlist the specifications in general.
1.1. Literature review

⇑ Corresponding author. Literature has been surveyed to gather information about the
E-mail address: spradhan@nitttrbpl.ac.in (S.K. Pradhan). latest trends in manufacturing, role played by RP in domains like

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.905
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Materials and Manufacturing Methods.
2982 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

Fig. 1. Flowchart of design, development and calibration of open-source 3D printer.

Fig. 2. Structure of a RepRap.

 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991
education and research, medical devices, apparels, domestic use,
sociocultural environment and industrial applications. Berman
[9] compared the characteristics and applications of 3D printing
with mass customization and other manufacturing processes and
concluded that with low inventory and manufacturing cost cus-
tomized products would proliferate with this technology in use.
Ciurana et al. [1] determined the mechanical properties of PLA
(Poly-L-lactic acid) scaffold produced from an open-source 3D
printer and deduced that the machine is efficient to produce PLA
scaffold. Tymrak et al. [10] studied the mechanical properties of
components fabricated using open-source 3D printers under realis-
tic environmental conditions and verified that the properties are at
par with component fabricated with commercial 3D printing
systems.
The quality of parts fabricated through FDM mainly depends
upon selected input process variables or parameters. Identification
of process parameters that significantly affect the quality of FDM
processed parts is important. The literatures were studied for the
purpose of determining the process parameters for optimization
of resulting tensile strength values for the open source 3D printers.
The reason to select tensile strength is to ascertain the print qual-
ity, since anisotropy plays an important role in manufacturing
through RP techniques and since thermoplastic PLA is used ASTM
D638 is the standard test specimen used specifically for tensile
properties of plastics. Kotlinski [11] in his study on mechanical
properties of commercial rapid prototyping materials has empha-
sized that for functional prototypes the FDM is the most useful
method. His study through various scientific publications e.g.
Kim and Oh (2008), Ahn et al. (2003), Bellini and Guceri (2003),
Lee et al. (2007), Ajoku et al. (2006), Kesy and Kotlinski [11], Rodri-
gues et al. (2003) has also pointed out that anisotropy, that affects
strength parameters of manufactured materials, for FDM shows
40% difference between the raw material and manufactured part.
Three process parameters were studied to determine their influ-
ence on morphological and mechanical performance of the scaf-
folds. Results demonstrated that RepRap machines were able to
efficiently fabricate scaffolds of PLA material. Martorelli et al [12]
evaluated UTS with nominal strain at break with FDM process
according to variation of three input variables. With fact known
that fabricated parts with FDM show anisotropy behavior and are
sensitive to process parameters
1.2. Comparison of commercial and open-source 3D printers
Going through the literature survey and taking into considera-
tion the comparison of commercial and open-source 3D printers
the following observation has been made:

3D printing is the most versatile and disruptive field for
research in education, medical application, consumer durables
(owing to customization), aerospace and industrial application.

RepRap community through collective research has made it
possible to make open-source 3D printers using standard
mechanical components.

Poly-lactic acid (PLA), a bio-degradable material, is one of the
most extensively researched material for various properties in
different domains.

It is through open-source 3D printers that researchers are
studying various process parameters to optimize them for a
particular response variable unlike commercial ones where it
is quite difficult to do so.

Layer thickness and deposition angle are one of the foremost
process parameters selected extensively for various thermo-
plastic apart from raster angle, raster width, air gap, feed rate,
build orientation, etc.
2983

FDM for any thermoplastic shows anisotropic behavior and
specifically affects the tensile strength of fabricated component
up to 40%.

On comparing the commercial and open-source 3D printers the
cost plays an important role. Although a number of features are
similar in both cases the cost varies drastically.

Research shows that the results for a number of mechanical
properties of fabricated parts through both commercial and
open-source 3D printers are similar.

For almost in all research in FDM either a commercial 3D printer
or a pre-fabricated open-source 3D printer was used i.e. no one
has developed a low-cost open-source 3D printer and per-
formed optimization technique for mechanical property using
tools such as Taguchi, ANOVA and RSM

Extruder temperature had never been considered a process
parameter for optimization before.

Due to surface roughness and the manufacturing process the
tensile behavior is likely to be more critical than any other
mechanical property and moreover, the key factor in the design
process of any component is the identification of the Ultimate
Tensile Strength (UTS) by which the admissible stress is derived
when a material shows a brittle behavior.
2. Design, development and calibration of open-source 3D
printer
The methodology depicted through Fig. 1 breaks down the
research work into two components where the first component
i.e. Design, Development and Calibration of 3D printer is discussed
in this section and the second part - Optimization of related pro-
cess parameters which will be dealt in next section. The structure
of RepRap is represented in Fig. 2 and it comprises of Mechanics,
Electronics, Software and Extruder. In this case, the extruder trav-
els along the X-axis carriage, supported by two smooth SS rods and
the extruder with a single stepper motor that controls the move-
ment through GT 2 belt, the heat bed along the Y-axis with a single
stepper motor through GT 2 belt and since the vertical Z-axis
requires forceful movement owing to X-carriage and extruder it
is supported by a threaded rod, a smooth rod and two stepper
motors. The threaded rods are used for vertical Z-axis where the
movement is one-tenth of an mm. The movement along z-axis is
not fast but quick and forceful because it carries the weight of both
the extruder and X-axis carriage. To prevent premature failure
stainless steel rods are used. During change of direction both
Fig. 3. Final assembly of the printer.
2984 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

Table 1 restricts the build area for this research work in design and devel-
Specification of machine and associated tools including software. opment section. The extruded material has tendency to warp the
Machine Element Specification prints and detach it from the surface (plastic shrinks on cooling)
CONTROLLER Arduino ATMEGA + RAMPS 1.4 Shield for which heated bed is used. The temperature of heat bed is kept
EXTRUDER J-HEAD V2 from 60 to 75 °C.
STEPPER MOTOR NEMA 17, (TORQUE: 5 Kg-cm, CURRENT: The extruder is where the filament is fed through the stepper
2A, STEP ANGLE: 1.80) motor in a controlled manner. It consists of three parts:
HEATED BED MK2
FIRMWARE MARLIN
HOST SOFTWARE REPETIER HOST 1. The Cold End – the cylindrical barrel shaped in J-hot end extru-
SLICING SOFTWARE SLIC3R der that carries filament to the hot end. The feeding element
STEPPER DRIVER A4988 POLULO STEPPER DRIVER (gear) is also considered as a part of the cold end;
2. The Hot End – it consists of a resistor or heater cartridge that
heats up the filament and a thermistor that senses temperature
for closed loop control with the controller;
3. The nozzle with an orifice of 0.4 mm is made of brass and
attached to the heater.

The software is broken into three categories for this open-

source 3D printers as follows:

a) CAD Software – Open source CAD software like OpenSCAD,

Fig. 4. Specification of ASTM D638 specimen. FreeCAD, HeeksCAD, etc. can be used apart from the com-
mercially available ones. The CAD tools are used to draw
the geometry of the component. The file can be saved in IGES
belts/pulleys and threaded rods do experience sloppiness which
or STEP format. However, the most widely used mesh file
could affect print quality- technically called ‘backlash’. In case of
format. STL is preferred when working with 3D printers.
belts/pulley the use of either GT 2 or Spectra belts this factor is
One can download .STL files as per requirement from
minimized as GT 2 has round tooth profile and has full flank con-
www.thingiverse.com, www.grabcad.com, www.sketchfab.-
tact with the pulley. In case of threaded rods, it is advisable to
com, www.autodesk123d.com, www.dremelideabuilder.-
use couplers having slots that work as spring action. So, whenever
com, www.youmagine.com, www.newmatter.com, etc.
there is change of direction the spring action compensates for
These are free repositories for STL files (Fig. 5).
backlash.
b) CAM Software – Computer-aided manufacturing software
Controller is considered as the brain of the RepRap, almost all
converts a CAD file into a machine friendly format. It con-
open-source 3D printers are based on Arduino microcontroller.
sists of three parts - slicing, G-code interpreter and G-code
Although there are standalone versions of Arduino available but
sender. The machine friendly format is the G-code where
an add-on board called ‘Shield” helps in providing extra features
namely double extruder, display panel, PID like functionality for
sensors (thermistors, end stops) etc. NEMA (National Electrical
Manufacturers Association) five Stepper Motors with drivers are Table 2
used. One each for X-, Y-, axis and extruder and two for Z-axis. Process parameters and design levels.
The stepper motors provide controlled motion through stepper dri- FACTORS LEVELS
vers on controller board. End Stops, also called as limit switches is
Level-I Level-II Level-III
a small circuit board with a switch that signals the controller about
the limits of axis. Heated Bed is a giant resistor with temperature Layer Thickness (mm) 0.2 0.3 0.4
Infill Orientation (Degree) 0 45 90
sensor (thermistor/thermocouple) upon which thermoplastic is Extruder Temperature (°C) 205 210 215
extruded. The default size of 210  210 (mm2) is used which

Fig. 5. (a) PLA D638 CAD model; (b) Sliced .STL file of ASTM D638 through SLIC3R software.
 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991 2985

Fig. 6. (a) PLA specimens from 3D printer; (b) INSTRON 3382 universal tensile testing machine; (c) Tensile testing of D638 PLA specimen.

Table 3
Experimental data for input process parameters and response variable.

L9(32) ORTHOGONAL ARRAY MATERIAL: PLA

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES RESPONSE VARIABLE AVERAGE (MEAN)
m
Layer Thickness (mm) Orientation (deg) Temperature (°C) ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH
(N/mm2)
0.2 0 205 13.9 12.4 15.9 14.0667
0.2 45 210 15.2 9.2 14.1 12.8333
0.2 90 215 15.7 14.7 18.7 16.3667
0.3 0 205 11.6 12.4 11.3 11.7667
0.3 45 210 7.1 6.6 6.9 6.8667
0.3 90 215 10.3 11.1 12.5 11.3000
0.4 0 205 13.7 15.7 13.3 14.2333
0.4 45 210 7.8 9.3 8.8 8.6333
0.4 90 215 11.9 9.6 12.7 11.4000

Fig. 7. (a) Probability plot for tensile strength; (b) Histogram for tensile strength.

motion paths and extruder paths are generated by means of c) FIRMWARE (e.g. Marlin, Sprinter, Teacup, Makerbot, etc.)
a slicing program (Slic3r, skeinforge, etc.). Once the G-codes that decides how the controller reacts to G-code (Interpreta-
are generated a host software program is required to send tion). ATMEL AVR Processors which are used by ARDUINO.
the G-codes to the printer firmware (Repetier-host). These processors can run the RepRap software called
2986 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

Table 4
The S/N ratio of experimental measured responses.

Experiment No. Layer Thickness (mm) Orientation Angle (degree) Temperature (deg C) UTS (N/mm2) Ƞ = S/N Ratio
Ƞ for UTS
 2
g ¼ 10log 10 1y
1 0.2 0 205 14.0667 Ƞ1 22.9638
2 0.2 45 201 12.8333 Ƞ2 22.1668
3 0.2 90 215 16.3667 Ƞ3 24.2792
4 0.3 0 205 11.7667 Ƞ4 21.4131
5 0.3 45 210 6.8667 Ƞ5 16.7350
6 0.3 90 215 11.3000 Ƞ6 21.0616
7 0.4 0 205 14.2333 Ƞ7 23.0661
8 0.4 45 210 8.6333 Ƞ8 18.7325
9 0.4 90 215 11.4000 Ƞ9 21.1381
Ƞmean 21.2830

Table 5
Response of independent variables for tensile strength.

LEVEL INDEPENDENT VARIABLE

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Orientation (Angle in deg) Extruder Temperature (°C)
1. 23.1366 22.4810 20.9163
2. 19.7365 19.2084 21.5727
3. 20.9759 22.1596 21.3601
d (Delta) 3.4001 3.2726 0.6563
% Contribution 41.232 45.312 1.562
RANK 1 2 3

compilation of firmware in Arduino IDE, the controller is

connected to PC and finally the modified firmware is
uploaded to controller’s CPU. The selection of components
is based on requirement and cost Taking into consideration
the framework of an open source 3D printerthe assembly
is done and the final step involves calibration of Z-axis
where the tip of the nozzle of the extruder is just 0.4 mm
above the heated bed. This is done for precise adhesion of
the extruded material with the bed.

Fig. 8. Main effects plot ƞ = S/N ratio (UTS).
firmware or cross compiling software. Arduino IDE is
installed on PC, a firmware source code is downloaded to
which changes are made according to the hardware used,
As the first deposited layer adheres firmly to the bed the follow-
ing extrusion of thermoplastic does not warp. The calibration of the
tip of the nozzle with the bed should be such that at any fixed co-
ordinates of Z- and X-axis the difference remains the same. To
achieve this objective a 2 mm glass with the help of binder clips
is affixed to the heated bed with the same build area of
210  210 (mm2). It should be noted that since the limit switch
(end stops) in Y-axis is fixed to the acrylic sheet the Z- and X- axis
limit switches are fixed on the SS rods. The limit switches can be
manually adjusted as per the print requirement and zero coordi-
nate selection. However, it should be noted that these switches
should be tightly fixed to prevent their shifting on the rod as the
stepper motors while movement may apply considerable force
when coming in contact. Fig. 3 shows the final assembled 3D prin-
ter enclosed here in a glass casing while Table 1 enlists major spec-
ifications of the 3D printer designed and developed.

Table 6
ANOVA for UTS (N/mm2).

Source DoF Adjusted SS Adjusted M F-Value P-Value

Layer Thickness (mm) 2 17.7651 8.8826 3.47 0.224
Infill Orientation (Deg) 2 19.5228 9.7614 3.81 0.208
Extruder Temperature (oC) 2 0.6729 0.3364 0.13 0.884
ERROR 2 5.1248 2.5624
TOTAL 8 43.0856 9.7614

S = 1.60074 R-SQUARE = 88.11% R-SQUARE (ADJUSTED) = 52.42%

 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991 2987

Table 7
ANOVA for UTS (N/mm2) - RSM.

Source DoF Adjusted SS Adjusted M F-Value P-Value

Model 5 65.6359 13.1272 20.26 0.016
Layer Thickness (mm) 1 13.5003 13.5003 20.84 0.020
Infill Orientation (Deg) 1 0.1667 0.1667 0.26 0.647
2 1 17.3392 17.3392 26.76 0.014
2
Layer Thickness (Lt )
Infill Orientation (D2a ) 1 28.0421 28.0421 43.28 0.007
ERROR 3 1.9437 0.6479
TOTAL 8 67.5796

S = 0.804923 R-SQUARE = 97.12% R-SQUARE (ADJUSTED) = 92.33% R-SQUARE (PREDICTED) = 70.92%.

Fig. 9. (a) Contour plots for UTS (N/mm2)-RSM; (b) 3-D surface plot for UTS (N/mm2) – RSM.

Table 8
Comparison of actual (Experimental) and predicted values of UTS (N/mm2).

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Orientation (Degrees) Extruder Temperature (deg C) UTS (N/mm2) measured m (Average) UTS (N/mm2)
RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD
(RSM)
PREDICTED PERCENTAGE ERROR
0.2 0 205 14.0667 14.76 4.92
0.2 45 210 12.8333 12.13 (-)5.48
0.2 90 215 16.3667 16.94 3.50
0.3 0 205 11.7667 11.85 0.71
0.3 45 210 6.86670 7.93 15.48
0.3 90 215 11.3000 11.51 1.80
0.4 0 205 14.2333 14.92 4.82
0.4 45 210 8.63330 9.75 12.94
0.4 90 215 11.4000 12.02 5.43

Average Percentage Error 6.12.

3. Experimental design and setup
The ASTM D638 Type IV specimen is downloaded [12] with
specifications of length 115 mm, width 12.7 mm and thickness
5.2 mm as shown in Fig. 4. Unlike ABS material which has been
studied extensively for process parameters [8,13,14] PLA for open
source 3D printers is not extensively analyzed [15]. The samples
are fabricated at the room temperature of 25 °C and relative
humidity of 55%. The material is PLA which is bio-degradable
and can be used in medical applications for fabricating
scaffolds [1].
Full factorial matrix experiments methods were applied with
total nine experiments consisting of 27 ASTM D638 standard
specimens, three input process parameters (factors) each having
three levels with the low-cost open-source 3D printer using PLA
as raw material. Optimization was performed using three conven-
tional methods viz. Taguchi, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and
Response Surface Methodology (RSM).
3.1. Taguchi
Orthogonal arrays (L9), used for design of experiments, under
the Taguchi method approach is applied to conduct fractional fac-
torial experiment composed of 3 columns and 9 rows that is 9
experiments are carried out. The selected printing parameters
Table 2 for the study are: a) Layer thickness (mm), b) Infill Orien-
2988 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

tation (angle in degree) and c) Temperature of extruder (deg C).
After selecting the input process parameters and their levels 27
specimen were fabricated with the open-source 3D printer using
PLA. These 27 specimens Fig. 6 (a) were subjected to tensile loading
on INSTRON 3382 Universal Testing Machine Fig. 6 (b,c) and
respective stress–strain graphs were generated from where the
individual response variables (tensile strength) were collected
and presented in Table 3. The probability plot for tensile strength
Fig. 7 (a) and the process capability report Fig. 7 (b) ascertain that
we can go forward with DOE. Here the design of experiments
(DOE) is selected based on three process parameters of 3D printing
with three levels each.
Table 5 depicts the optimum behaviour of the input process
variables on the tensile strength of the fabricated specimens.
Delta (Max-Min) values show the difference of maximum and
minimum values of input parameters level, while the rank indi-
cates the level of dominating behaviour of selected input vari-
ables and the percentage contribution indicates the degree of
dominance of the factors.
3.2. Signal-to-Noise ratio (S/N) ratio for output
The S/N equation depends on the criterion for the quality char-
acteristics to be optimized. The three standard S/N ratios are –

Larger-is-better quality characteristic

Smaller-is-better quality characteristic

Nominal-is-better quality characteristic
The expression for S/N ratio (ƞ) for the larger-the-better target
response (tensile strength UTS) is:
 2
1
g ¼ 10log 10
y
The signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio for output response i.e. Ultimate
Tensile Strength (UTS) is given in Table 4.
The relation between signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) ratio (ƞ) of UTS
versus each level of input factors i.e. layer thickness (mm), infill
orientation (degree) and extruder temperature (deg C) as shown
in Fig. 8.
3.3. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
ANOVA is used to investigate which process parameter in 3D
printing of PLA significantly affects the quality characteristic. This
is accomplished by separating the total variability of the S/N ratios,
which is measured by the sum of the squared deviations from the
total mean of the S/N ratio, into contributions by each 3D printing
process parameter and the error. The test for significance of the
regression model, the test for significance on individual model

Appendix A
UTS (N/mm2) as a function of Layer thickness (mm) and Infill Orientation (degrees).

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Orientation (x-, y- Plane) in Degrees

0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
UTS (N/mm2)
0.010 36.78 36.09 35.89 35.77 35.75 35.82 35.99 36.24 36.59
0.020 35.08 34.37 34.15 34.02 33.98 34.04 34.19 34.43 34.76
0.030 33.45 32.70 32.46 32.32 32.27 32.31 32.45 32.68 33.00
0.040 31.87 31.09 30.84 30.69 30.62 30.65 30.77 30.99 31.29
0.050 30.35 29.54 29.28 29.11 29.03 29.05 29.15 29.35 29.64
0.060 28.89 28.06 27.78 27.60 27.50 27.50 27.59 27.78 28.06
0.070 27.49 26.63 26.34 26.14 26.03 26.02 26.10 26.27 26.53
0.080 26.15 25.26 24.96 24.74 24.62 24.59 24.66 24.81 25.06
0.090 24.87 23.96 23.64 23.41 23.27 23.23 23.28 23.42 23.66
0.100 23.65 22.71 22.37 22.13 21.98 21.92 21.96 22.09 22.31
0.110 22.49 21.52 21.17 20.91 20.75 20.68 20.70 20.81 21.02
0.120 21.40 20.39 20.03 19.76 19.58 19.49 19.50 19.60 19.79
0.130 20.36 19.32 18.95 18.66 18.47 18.37 18.36 18.45 18.62
0.140 19.38 18.32 17.92 17.63 17.42 17.30 17.28 17.35 17.52
0.150 18.46 17.37 16.96 16.65 16.43 16.30 16.26 16.32 16.47
0.160 17.60 16.48 16.06 15.73 15.50 15.35 15.30 15.35 15.48
0.170 16.80 15.65 15.22 14.87 14.63 14.47 14.40 14.43 14.55
0.180 16.06 14.88 14.43 14.08 13.81 13.64 13.56 13.58 13.68
0.190 15.38 14.17 13.71 13.34 13.06 12.88 12.78 12.78 12.88
0.200 14.76 13.52 13.05 12.66 12.37 12.17 12.06 12.05 12.13
0.210 14.20 12.94 12.44 12.05 11.74 11.52 11.40 11.37 11.44
0.220 13.69 12.41 11.90 11.49 11.17 10.94 10.80 10.76 10.81
0.230 13.25 11.94 11.42 10.99 10.65 10.41 10.26 10.20 10.24
0.240 12.87 11.53 10.99 10.55 10.20 9.95 9.78 9.71 9.73
0.250 12.55 11.18 10.63 10.17 9.81 9.54 9.36 9.27 9.28
0.260 12.29 10.89 10.33 9.86 9.48 9.19 9.00 8.90 8.89
0.270 12.09 10.66 10.08 9.60 9.21 8.91 8.70 8.58 8.56
0.280 11.95 10.49 9.90 9.40 8.99 8.68 8.46 8.33 8.29
0.290 11.87 10.38 9.77 9.26 8.84 8.51 8.28 8.13 8.08
0.300 11.85 10.33 9.71 9.18 8.75 8.41 8.16 8.00 7.93
0.310 11.88 10.34 9.71 9.16 8.71 8.36 8.09 7.92 7.84
0.320 11.98 10.41 9.76 9.20 8.74 8.37 8.09 7.91 7.81
0.330 12.14 10.54 9.88 9.31 8.83 8.44 8.15 7.95 7.84
0.340 12.36 10.73 10.05 9.47 8.98 8.58 8.27 8.05 7.93
0.350 12.64 10.98 10.29 9.69 9.18 8.77 8.45 8.22 8.08
0.360 12.97 11.29 10.58 9.97 9.45 9.02 8.68 8.44 8.29
0.370 13.37 11.66 10.94 10.31 9.77 9.33 8.98 8.73 8.56
0.380 13.83 12.08 11.35 10.71 10.16 9.70 9.34 9.07 8.89
0.390 14.35 12.57 11.83 11.17 10.61 10.14 9.76 9.47 9.28
0.400 14.92 13.12 12.36 11.69 11.11 10.63 10.24 9.94 9.73
 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991
co-efficient and the lack-of-fit test were performed using
MINITABsoftware v.17. With ANOVA approach Taguchi based opti-
mum results have been validated and the information is presented
in Table 6
3.4. Response surface method (RSM)
The number of experiments is as per L9 orthogonal array there-
fore custom response surface method (RSM) is applied for analysis
of data and determination of governing equations. The final gov-
erning mathematical equations in terms of factors and responses
that predict the results with reasonable accuracy have been
obtained through MINITAB software v.17. Step-wise regression
method; which eliminates the insignificant model terms automat-
ically was applied and exhibited in ANOVA Table 7 for the reduced
quadratic model. ANOVA table summarize the analysis of three
variances of the responses and show the significant models.
Though combination of various equations [(Linear), (Linear
+ Interaction), (Linear + Squares) and (Full Quadratic)] have been
tried out to validate the effectiveness of these mathematical mod-
els so as to select the model which closely depicts the behaviour of
the process parameters on performance response variable. The
study concludes that it’s the ‘Full Quadratic’ mathematical model
equation in terms of actual factors that gives the best fit.
UTS = 38.54–178.8Lt 0.0846 Da + 299.4L2t + 0.001849 D2a
0.2852.Lt..Da
4. Effect of the process parameters on response
This section highlights the range of output parameter with
respect to a combination of input parameters for different cases.
Fig. 9, the contour plot shows the effect of Layer Thickness (mm)
Fig. 10. 2-D Plot UTS (N/mm2) – RSM.
2989
and Infill Orientation (Degree) on UTS (N/mm2). Table 8 gives the
comparison of Actual and predicted values (Fig. 10).
5. Conclusion
Open-source 3D printers offers flexibility in modifying large
number of process parameters unlike commercial ones and sec-
ondly with the availability of standard resources to design and
develop a low-cost open-source 3D printer with shared resources
on RepRap website and other DIY portals it is possible to make it
a research model for various domains. In this research work a
low-cost open-source 3D printer was designed, developed and cal-
ibrated using standard mechanical and electronic components.
Once assembled, raw material viz. bio-degradable PLA was selected
to study the effects of selected process parameters on tensile
strength of the fabricated components using statistical analysis.
Optimization tools were employed to optimize the selected pro-
cess parameter values for maximum tensile strength. The follow-
ing points enumerates the

Taguchi method of DOE and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) are
powerful techniques for evaluation of influence of selected pro-
cess parameters on the out response in 3D printing of PLA.

From Table 5 it is concluded that both Layer Thickness Lt and
– Infill Orientation Da (Degree) have a significant effect on UTS
(N/mm2). Although extruder temperature shows minimal effect
but within the selected range 210 °C is the optimum value.

Results from the governing Equation have been optimized
through MICROSOFT EXCEL to get predicted values for UTS
using Layer Thickness from 0.01 to 0.4 mm and Infill Orienta-
tion from 00 to 900 to get optimized values of process parame-
ters for optimal Tensile Strength (UTS)
2990 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991

Appendix B
UTS (N/mm2) as a function of Layer Thickness (mm) and Infill Orientation (degree).

Layer Thickness (mm) Infill Orientation (X-, Y- Plane) in Degrees

50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
UTS (N/mm2)
0.010 37.03 37.57 38.19 38.91 39.72 40.62 41.62 42.71 43.89
0.020 35.19 35.71 36.32 37.03 37.82 38.71 39.69 40.77 41.93
0.030 33.41 33.92 34.51 35.20 35.98 36.86 37.83 38.89 40.04
0.040 31.69 32.18 32.76 33.44 34.21 35.07 36.02 37.07 38.20
0.050 30.03 30.50 31.07 31.73 32.49 33.33 34.27 35.30 36.43
0.060 28.43 28.89 29.44 30.09 30.83 31.66 32.59 33.60 34.71
0.070 26.89 27.33 27.87 28.51 29.23 30.05 30.96 31.96 33.06
0.080 25.40 25.84 26.36 26.98 27.69 28.50 29.39 30.38 31.46
0.090 23.98 24.40 24.91 25.52 26.21 27.00 27.89 28.86 29.93
0.100 22.62 23.03 23.52 24.11 24.80 25.57 26.44 27.40 28.45
0.110 21.32 21.71 22.19 22.77 23.44 24.20 25.05 26.00 27.03
0.120 20.08 20.45 20.92 21.48 22.14 22.88 23.72 24.65 25.68
0.130 18.89 19.26 19.71 20.26 20.90 21.63 22.46 23.37 24.38
0.140 17.77 18.12 18.56 19.09 19.72 20.44 21.25 22.15 23.15
0.150 16.71 17.04 17.47 17.99 18.60 19.30 20.10 20.99 21.97
0.160 15.71 16.03 16.44 16.94 17.54 18.23 19.01 19.89 20.85
0.170 14.76 15.07 15.47 15.96 16.54 17.22 17.98 18.84 19.80
0.180 13.88 14.17 14.56 15.03 15.60 16.26 17.02 17.86 18.80
0.190 13.06 13.34 13.71 14.17 14.72 15.37 16.11 16.94 17.86
0.200 12.30 12.56 12.91 13.36 13.90 14.53 15.26 16.08 16.99
0.210 11.59 11.84 12.18 12.62 13.14 13.76 14.47 15.27 16.17
0.220 10.95 11.18 11.51 11.93 12.44 13.04 13.74 14.53 15.41
0.230 10.37 10.59 10.90 11.30 11.80 12.39 13.07 13.85 14.71
0.240 9.84 10.05 10.35 10.74 11.22 11.80 12.46 13.22 14.08
0.250 9.38 9.57 9.85 10.23 10.70 11.26 11.91 12.66 13.50
0.260 8.98 9.15 9.42 9.78 10.24 10.79 11.42 12.16 12.98
0.270 8.63 8.80 9.05 9.40 9.84 10.37 11.00 11.71 12.52
0.280 8.35 8.50 8.74 9.07 9.50 10.02 10.63 11.33 12.12
0.290 8.12 8.26 8.49 8.80 9.22 9.72 10.32 11.01 11.79
0.300 7.96 8.08 8.29 8.60 8.99 9.48 10.07 10.74 11.51
0.310 7.86 7.96 8.16 8.45 8.83 9.31 9.88 10.54 11.29
0.320 7.81 7.90 8.09 8.36 8.73 9.19 9.75 10.39 11.13
0.330 7.83 7.90 8.07 8.34 8.69 9.14 9.68 10.31 11.03
0.340 7.90 7.97 8.12 8.37 8.71 9.14 9.67 10.28 10.99
0.350 8.04 8.09 8.23 8.46 8.79 9.21 9.72 10.32 11.02
0.360 8.23 8.27 8.39 8.61 8.93 9.33 9.83 10.42 11.10
0.370 8.49 8.51 8.62 8.83 9.12 9.51 10.00 10.57 11.24
0.380 8.80 8.81 8.91 9.10 9.38 9.76 10.22 10.79 11.44
0.390 9.18 9.17 9.25 9.43 9.70 10.06 10.51 11.06 11.70
0.400 9.61 9.59 9.66 9.82 10.08 10.42 10.86 11.40 12.02

From Table 8 the comparison of experimental value v/s pre- Appendix

dicted values through the governing equation from Response
Surface Method (RSM) it is observed and concluded that the
predicted values are close to experimental values.

The results presented graphically in Fig. 8 allows quick selection
of required settings for selection of process parameters for this
particular open-source 3D printer.

The conventional techniques adopted and the developed mod-
els are adequate for the prediction of the response variables
for the selected process parameters.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Rishabh Sood: Software, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Resources, Data curation, Writing - original draft. Sharad K.
Pradhan: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing - review & edit-
ing, Project administration.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] J. de Ciurana, L. Sereno, E. Valles, Selecting process parameters in RepRap
additive manufacturing systems for PLA scaffolds manufacture, Procedia CIRP
5 (2013) 152–157.
[2] J.M. Chacon, M.A. Caminero, E. Garcia-Plaza, P.J. Nunez, Additive
manufacturing of PLA structures using fused deposition modeling: effect of
process parameters on mechanical properties and their optimal selection,
Mater. Des. 124 (2017) 143–157.
[3] C. Casavola, A. Cazzato, V. Moramarco, C. Pappalettere, Orthotropic mechanical
properties of fused deposition modeling parts described by classical laminate
theory, Mater. Des. 90 (2016) 453–458.
[4] M. Sugavaneswaran, G. Arumaikkannu, Analytical and experimental
investigation on elastic modulus or reinforced additive manufactured
structure, Mater. Des. 66 (2015) 29–36.
[5] R. Jones, P. Haufe, E. Sells, P. Iravani, V. Olliver, C. Palmer, A. Bowyer, Robotica:
The replicating rapid prototyper 29 (2011) 177–191.
[6] O.A. Mohamed, S.H. Masood, J.L. Bhowmik, Optimization of fused deposition
modeling process parameters: a review of current research and future
prospect, Ad. Manuf. 3 (2015) 42–53.
[7] F. Ning, W. Cong, Y. Hu, H. Wang, Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber-
reinforced plastic composite using fused deposition modeling effects of
process parameters on tensile properties, J. Compos. Mater. 51 (4) (2016)
451–462.
[8] J.F. Rodriguez, J.P. Thomas, J.E. Renaud, Mechanical behavior of acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene ABS fused deposition material. Experimental investigations,
Rapid Prototyping J. 7 (2011) 148–158.
 R. Sood, S.K. Pradhan / Materials Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2981–2991
[9] B. Berman, 3-D Printing: the new industrial revolution, Bus. Horiz. 55 (2012)
155–162.
[10] B.M. Tymrak, M. Kreiger, J.M. Pearce, Mechanical properties of components
fabricated with open-source 3D printers under realistic environmental
conditions, Mater. Des. 58 (2015) 242–246.
[11] J. Kotlinski, Mechanical properties of commercial rapid prototyping materials,
Rapid Prototyping J.l 20 (2014) 499–510.
[12] A.L. Marzio, G.G. Staiano, M. Martorelli, The impact of process parameters on
mechanical properties of parts fabricated in PLA with an open source 3D
printer, Rapid Prototyping J. 21 (5) (2015).
2991
[13] B.H. Lee, J. Abdullah, Z.A. Khan, Optimization of rapid prototyping parameters
for production of flexible ABS object, J. Materials Processing Techno. 169
(2005) 54–61.
[14] S.H. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell, S. Roundy, P.K. Wright, Anisotropic material
properties of fused deposition modeling ABS, Rapid Prototyping J. 8 (2000)
248–257.
[15] R. Matsuzaki, M. Ueda, M. Namiki, K. Jeong, H. Asahara, K. Horiguchi, T.
Nakamura, A. Todoroki, Y. Hirano, Three dimensional printing of continuous
fibre composites by in-nozzle impregnation, Scientific Report 6 (2016) 23–58.