iphH{J1[1

1. A
Dissertation Phase-I/Industrial Project
On
Comparative Analysis of Part Developed
By Injection Molding & 3D Printing
Submitted by-
Prashuk Jain
50221008
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE
OF
MASTER OF TECHONOLOGY
in
TOOL ENGINEERING
(2021 – 2023)
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
DELHI SKILL & ENTREPRENEURSHIP UNIVERSITY
(Formerly known as Delhi Institute of Tool Engineering)
DSEU OKHLA-II CAMPUS
Maa Anandmayi Marg, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2
New Delhi –110020
Dr. Kanwarjeet Singh
(Co-Supervisor)
Dr. Gaurav Arora
(Supervisor)

2. i
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
I hereby certify that the work which is being prepared in the M. Tech Dissertation Phase-I
report entitled “Comparative Analysis of Part Developed by Injection Molding & 3D
Printing” in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the completion of 3rd
semester of M. Tech
and submitted to the department of Tool Engineering is an authentic record of my own work
carried out during the period of Oct 2022 to Feb 2023, under the guidance of Dr. Gaurav Arora
& Dr. Kanwarjeet Singh, Department of Tool Engineering, DSEU OKHLA – II Campus, Delhi
110020.
Prashuk Jain
M. Tech (TOOL ENGINEERNG)
Roll No. 50221008

3. ii
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Dissertation Phase-1/ Industrial Project entitled “Comparative
Analysis of Part Developed by Injection Molding & 3D Printing” Submitted by
PRASHUK JAIN (50221008) in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of
Master of Technology in Tool Engineering at Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University
Okhla-II Campus (Formerly known as Delhi Institute of Tool Engineering) Okhla Industrial
Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110020 is an authentic work carried out by him under our guidance.
The matter embodied in this project work has not been submitted earlier for the award of any
degree or diploma, to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Prashuk Jain
M. Tech (Tool Engineering)
50221008
Dr. Gaurav Arora
Asst. Professor
DSEU Okhla–II Campus,
New Delhi
(Supervisor)
Dr. Kanwarjeet Singh
Asst. Professor
DSEU Okhla–II Campus,
New Delhi
(Co-Supervisor)
The M. Tech Dissertation Phase-I/ Industrial Project Examination of this student has been held
on 21-02-2023
(Name and Signature of DRC)

4. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to convey my deep sense of gratitude and sincere thanks to
Dr. Gaurav Arora & Dr. Kanwarjeet Singh, for giving me an opportunity to pursue this research
work under their guidance. I have learnt a lot from their remarkable acumen, dedication,
leadership, focus and perseverance while carrying out this work without which timely
completion of the report would have been nearly impossible. Words are really short to suffice
his favor and cooperation. I am grateful to him in all respects.
I would also like to thank our HOD Dr. Narayan Aggarwal & Dr. Praveen Kumar, M.Tech
Coordinator of Tool Engineering department & Prof. M.A. Khan, Campus Director, DSEU
Okhla-II Campus for his constant support during my study. Also, I would like to thank all the
teaching and non-teaching staff members of the department who have contributed directly or
indirectly in successful completion of my project work.
I would also like to thank Mr. Rahul Katna for providing the necessary information & guidance
in successful completion of my project work.
Date - 21-Feb-2023
Place - New Delhi
Prashuk Jain
M. Tech (Tool Engineering)
50221008
DSEU Okhla-II Campus

5. iv
ABSTRACT
3D printing and injection moulding are both techniques for producing plastic parts and
components, but each manufacturing process has its own advantages and can be used together
as complementary manufacturing methods. 3D printing technology is an additive printing
process that creates objects by building up layers of material, while plastic injection moulding
uses a mold that is filled with molten material that cools and hardens to produce parts and
components. 3D printing is better for small batch, complex parts that may require frequent
design changes or customisation. Injection moulding, on the other hand, is better for large
volume production of less complex parts that have successfully completed the design stage.
In this we are focusing on comparing results obtained for polymer elements manufactured with
injection molding and additive manufacturing techniques. The analysis will be performed for
fused deposition modeling (FDM) and injection molding with regards to the standards used in
thermoplastics processing technology. The cross-section structure of the sample obtained via
FDM will be the key factor in the fabrication of high-strength components and that the
dimensions of the samples have a strong influence on the mechanical properties which is taken
according to the ASTM standard as we must perform impact, tensile & hardness test on the
specimen along with the variation in 3D printing parameters such as infill density, flow rate &
infill pattern.
Featured Application: The presented parameters can be introduced in the design stage of the
polymer and composite elements for additive manufacturing to achieve the highest mechanical
strength, comparable with corresponding parts fabricated with the injection molding
technique.

6. v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE.....................................................................................................................................................II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.....................................................................................................................................III
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................................ VII
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1
1.1 TYPES OF MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUES: .............................................................................................................1
1.2 INJECTION MOLDING .........................................................................................................................................4
1.2.1 How does injection molding work.....................................................................................................5
1.2.2 Process Flowchart of Injection Molding: .........................................................................................7
1.3 3D PRINTING ...................................................................................................................................................9
1.3.1 Selecting the right 3D printing processes.........................................................................................9
1.3.2 3D Printing Technology...................................................................................................................10
1.3.3 Working of 3D Printing ...................................................................................................................10
1.3.4 3D Printing Applications .................................................................................................................11
1.3.5 Different types of 3D printing .........................................................................................................17
1.4 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 3D PRINTING VS INJECTION MOLDING .................................................................29
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................................32
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH GAPS .........................................................................................................................35
CHAPTER 4: OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................36

7. vi
CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................37
5.1 Material Selection................................................................................................................................37
5.2 Plastic material to be used:.................................................................................................................37
5.4 Advantages of PLA .............................................................................................................................38
5.5 Disadvantages of PLA.........................................................................................................................38
5.6 Parameter Settings for PLA 3D Printing filament...........................................................................39
5.7 Parameter Settings for PLA in Injection Molding ...........................................................................41
5.8 Grading of FDM 3D Printing filament materials in Comparison to PLA .....................................41
5.9 Part Development................................................................................................................................45
5.10 Tensile Test Methods for Plastics: ASTM D638.............................................................................45
5.11 Impact Test Methods for Plastics: ASTM D256.............................................................................47
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................48
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................49

8. vii
LIST OF FIGURES
S.NO DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
Figure 1 Additive manufacturing 1
Figure 2 Subtractive manufacturing 2
Figure 3 Formative manufacturing 2
Figure 4 Cost per part Graph 3
Figure 5 Basic structure of injection
molding machine
4
Figure 6 Step by step injection molding
process
5
Figure 7 Process flowchart 7
Figure 8 Parameters 8
Figure 9 3D Printing 9
Figure 10-17 3D Printing Applications like
automotive, aerospace etc.
11-16
Figure 18 Fused Deposition Modelling 17
Figure 19 Stereolithography 19
Figure 20 Digital Light Processing 20
Figure 21 Electron Beam Melting 22
Figure 22 Laser sintering 23
Figure 23 Material Jetting 24
Figure 24 Binder Jetting 25
Figure 25 Selective Deposition
Lamination
26
Figure 26 Selective Deposition
Lamination closer look
27
Figure 27 3D Printing vs Injection
moulding
31
Figure 28 PLA Material in filament &
pellet forms
37
Figure 29 PLA Applications 38
Figure 30 Parameter settings in 3D 39
Figure 31 Infill density model 39
Figure 32 Infill patterns 40
Figure 33 Parameter settings in Injection
Molding
41
Figure 34 Spider web Graph 41
Figure 35 Polymer Rank Graph 42
Figure 36 Part Drawing 45
Figure 37 ASTM D638 Specimen
Dimensions
46
Figure 38 Specimen Example 46

9. 1 | P a g e
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Types of Manufacturing techniques:
i. Additive manufacturing
Additive manufacturing builds up 3D objects by depositing and fusing 2D layers of material.
This method has almost no startup time or costs, making it ideal for prototyping. Parts can be
made rapidly and discarded after use. Parts can also be produced in almost any geometry, which
is one of the core strengths of 3D printing.
Figure 1 Additive Manufacturing [1]
One of the biggest limitations of 3D printing is that most parts are inherently anisotropic or not
fully dense, meaning they usually lack the material and mechanical properties of parts made
via subtractive or formative techniques. Due to fluctuations in cooling or curing conditions,
different prints of the same part are also prone to slight variations, which puts limitations on
consistency and repeatability.
ii. Subtractive manufacturing
Subtractive manufacturing, such as milling and turning, creates objects by removing
(machining) material from a block of solid material that's also often referred to as a 'blank'.
Almost any material can be machined in some way, making it a widely used technique. Because
of the amount of control over every aspect of the process this method can produce incredibly
accurate parts with high repeatability. Most designs require Computer Aided Manufacturing
(CAM) to plot customized tool paths and efficient material removal, which adds setup time and
costs, but for the majority of designs, it’s the most cost-effective method of production.

10. 2 | P a g e
Figure 2 Subtractive Manufacturing [2]
The major limitation of subtractive manufacturing is that the cutting tool must be able to reach
all surfaces to remove material, which limits design complexity quite a lot. While machines
like 5-axis machines eliminate some of these restrictions, complex parts still need to be
re-orientated during the machining process, adding time and cost. Subtractive manufacturing
is also a wasteful process due to the large amounts of material removed to produce the final
part geometry.
iii. Formative manufacturing
Formative manufacturing, such as injection molding and stamping, creates objects by forming
or molding materials into shape with heat and/or pressure.
Figure 3 Formative Manufacturing [3]
Formative techniques are designed to reduce the marginal cost of producing individual parts,
but the creation of unique molds or machines used in the production process means setup costs
are very, very high. Regardless, these techniques can produce parts in a large range of materials
(both metals and plastics) with close to flawless repeatability, so for high volume production,
they are almost always the most cost-efficient.

11. 3 | P a g e
How these methods compare
Manufacturing is complex, and there are too many dimensions for comprehensively comparing
each method against all others. It is near impossible to optimize all at once for cost, speed,
geometric complexity, materials, mechanical properties, surface finish, tolerances, and
repeatability. In such complex situations heuristics and rules of thumb are more valuable:
• Additive manufacturing is best for low volumes, complex designs, and when speed is
essential.
• Subtractive manufacturing is best for medium volumes, simple geometries, tight
tolerances, and hard materials
• Formative manufacturing is best for the high-volume production of identical parts.
• Exact cost of injection moulding can be done with the following formula:
Mould Price = material costs + design + process and profit + VAT + try out costs +
packing and shipping costs. Cost per part is usually the governing factor determining
which manufacturing process is best. As a rough approximation the unit costs per
method can be visualized like this:
Fig 4 : Cost per part Graph [4]

12. 4 | P a g e
1.2 Injection Molding
Injection molding is a manufacturing process which is commonly used to create plastic
components. Its ability to produce thousands of complex parts quickly makes it the perfect
process for the mass production of plastic components. Essentially, the process involves the
injection of plastic at high speed and pressure into a mold, which is clamped under pressure
and cooled to form the final part.
Figure 5 Basic Structure of Injection Moulding Machines[5]
By melting thermoplastic and injecting it into an aluminum mold at high speed and pressure,
manufacturers can create multiple complex parts at once. When the parameters of the process
are controlled correctly, there’s also little need for finishing and processing the manufactured
part, making it more cost effective and efficient. After the plastic material is heated and
plasticized in the injection barrel, the molten plastic flow will be injected into the mold cavity
through the sprue and runner system, and finally, take shape after being cooled. This
manufacturing process is defined as plastic injection molding. An injection molding
machine (also spelled as injection moulding machine ), also known as an injection press, is a
machine for manufacturing plastic products by the injection molding process. It consists of two
main parts, an injection unit, and a clamping unit. Injection machines consist of the following
basic parts:

13. 5 | P a g e
1. Feeding Hoper
2. Extruder Screw and Barrel
3. Injection Chamber
4. Mould Clamping Mechanism – An arrangement for applying pressure to the moulds.
5. Fixed and Moving Plates
6. Control Panel – NC or CNC
Moulding machines are used to manufacture plastic products in mass volume. There are lots of
fields where plastic components are useful. As we can say this list is countless. Of course, From
our daily life products like crockery, cutlery, cookware, furniture etc. It is used in various
industries, like Automotive, Aerospace, Marine, Machinery, Medical and so on.
1.2.1 How does injection molding work
Step 1: Feeding and heating the plastic
To start, a thermoplastic or combination of thermoplastics are fed into an injection molding
machine. The plastics, which turn to liquid when heated, are fed into the hopper at the top of
the machine in solid pellet form. The pellets pass through the machine and into a temperature-
controlled cylinder called the machine barrel. Here, the plastic pellets are heated until the
thermoplastic is molten. The temperature of the barrel and the plastic needs to be carefully
monitored to make sure the thermoplastic does not overheat and burn or scorch the final part.
Figure6 Step by Step IM process [6]

14. 6 | P a g e
Step 2: Pre-injection process
Before the molten plastic is injected, the tool, which is usually made up of a fixed half called
the cavity and a moving half called the core, closes. When closed, a clamp applies pressure to
the tool, ready for the injection of the plastic. The screw within the barrel of the machine screws
back to its set point so the plastic can enter the barrel, ready to be injected.
Step 3: Plastic injection
Once the clamp pressure is at an optimum level, the plastic is injected by the screw at high
speed and pressure into the cavity. A gate inside the tool helps to control the flow of the plastic.
To make sure no damage is done to the final components, it is important that the manufacturer
monitors the injection pressure of the plastic and that they have the expertise to maintain and
use the mold tools correctly. This ensures they are creating high-quality and consistent parts
from their injection molding process.
Step 4: Forming the part
When the tool cavity is mostly full of liquid, a holding phase begins. This is where the part in
held under high pressure so it can start to take its final form. After a set holding time, the screw
will screw back to its set point. This happens at the same time as the cooling phase of the cycle,
which allows the thermoplastic to set in its final form. Once the set cooling time has passed,
the mold opens and ejector pins or plates push the new part out of the tool. These fall on to a
conveyor belt ready to be finished and packed.
Step 5: Part finishing
Depending on the final application of the part, the molded component may require some
finishing, including dyeing, polishing, or removing of excess material.

15. 7 | P a g e
1.2.2 Process Flowchart of Injection Molding:
Figure 7 Process Flowchart [7]
Feeding
Pellets or powders are fed into the hopper.
Plasticization
The plastic is heated in the barrel and turned from solid pellets into a molten flow, which
possesses great plasticity.
Injection
The plasticized molten flow will be pushed to the forepart of the barrel by the plunger or the
screw, and then injected to fill the mold cavity through the injection nozzle and sprue & runner
system of the mold. This step is called an injection.
Pressure Holding
When the molten material is shrinking inside the mold due to cooling, the plunger or the screw
will continuously force the molten material in the barrel into the mold for replenishment, to
ensure that a complete structured and the densely textured product is produced. This step is
known as pressure holding.

16. 8 | P a g e
Cooling
The in-mold cooling process usually refers to the entire process from the moment the molten
material at the gate is fully solidified to the plastic part is ejected from the mold cavity; but
actually the cooling step starts the minute the molten plastic flows into the cavity, covering the
time period from completion of the injection, pressure holding to the moment before mold
release starts.
Mold Release / Ejection
Mold release is allowed when is cooled to a certain temperature, through which the plastic part
is pushed out of the mold by the ejectors.During the molding process, the plastic pellets will
be first delivered into the high-temperature injection barrel through the hopper, where they are
heated, melted and plasticized into a sticky molten flow, which will then be injected into a
lower temperature closed mold through the injection nozzle at a high speed under the great
pushing pressure exerted by the plunger or the screw. Under the great pressure, the molten
plastic will fill the entire cavity and will also be compacted. After that, the plunger or the screw
will return after a period of pressure holding. At this point, it is possible to flow back from the
cavity into the sprue and runner system. When the mold opens after cooling and forming, the
product will be released from the mold cavity.
The Key Parameters That Need to be controlled when using Injection molding:
• Thermoplastic
• Tooling
• Temperature
• Injection
Figure 8 Parameters [8]

17. 9 | P a g e
1.3 3D Printing
3D Printing is a process for making a physical object from a three-dimensional digital model,
typically by laying down many successive thin layers of a material. It brings a digital object
(its CAD representation) into its physical form by adding layer by layer of materials.
Fig 9: 3D Printing [9]
3D printing is an additive technology used to manufacture parts. It is ‘additive’ in that it does
not require a block of material or a mold to manufacture physical objects, it simply stacks and
fuses layers of material. It is typically fast, with low fixed setup costs, and can create more
complex geometries than ‘traditional’ technologies, with an ever-expanding list of materials. It
is used extensively in the engineering industry, particularly for prototyping and creating
lightweight geometries.
1.3.1 Selecting the right 3D printing processes
Selecting the optimal 3D printing process for a particular part can be difficult as there’s often
more than one suitable process but each one will produce subtle variations in cost and output.
Generally, there are three key aspects to consider:
• The required material properties: strength, hardness, impact strength, etc.
• The functional & visual design requirements: smooth surface, strength, heat
resistance, etc.

18. 10 | P a g e
• The capabilities of the 3D printing process: accuracy, build size, etc.
These correspond to the three most common methods for selecting the right process:
• By required material/ By required accuracy or build size
• By required functionality or visual appearance
1.3.2 3D Printing Technology
The starting point for any 3D printing process is a 3D digital model, which can be created using
a variety of 3D software programmes — in industry this is 3D CAD, for Makers and Consumers
there are simpler, more accessible programmes available — or scanned with a 3D scanner. The
model is then ‘sliced’ into layers, thereby converting the design into a file readable by the 3D
printer. The material processed by the 3D printer is then layered according to the design and
the process. As stated, there are a number of different types of 3D printing technologies, which
process different materials in different ways to create the final object. Functional plastics,
metals, ceramics and sand are, now, all routinely used for industrial prototyping and production
applications. Research is also being conducted for 3D printing bio materials and different types
of food. Generally speaking though, at the entry level of the market, materials are much more
limited. Plastic is currently the only widely used material — usually ABS or PLA, but there
are a growing number of alternatives, including Nylon. There is also a growing number of entry
level machines that have been adapted for foodstuffs, such as sugar and chocolate.
1.3.3 Working of 3D Printing
The different types of 3D printers each employ a different technology that processes different
materials in different ways. It is important to understand that one of the most basic limitations
of 3D printing — in terms of materials and applications — is that there is no ‘one solution fits
all’. For example, some 3D printers process powdered materials (nylon, plastic, ceramic,
metal), which utilize a light/heat source to sinter/melt/fuse layers of the powder together in the
defined shape. Others process polymer resin materials and again utilize a light/laser to solidify
the resin in ultra-thin layers. Jetting of fine droplets is another 3D printing process, reminiscent
of 2D inkjet printing, but with superior materials to ink and a binder to fix the layers. Perhaps
the most common and easily recognized process is deposition, and this is the process employed

19. 11 | P a g e
by most entry-level 3D printers. This process extrudes plastics, commonly PLA or ABS, in
filament form through a heated extruder to form layers and create the predetermined shape.
Because parts can be printed directly, it is possible to produce very detailed and intricate
objects, often with functionality built in and negating the need for assembly.
1.3.4 3D Printing Applications
The origins of 3D printing in ‘Rapid Prototyping’ were founded on the principles of industrial
prototyping as a means of speeding up the earliest stages of product development with a quick
and straightforward way of producing prototypes that allows for multiple iterations of a product
to arrive more quickly and efficiently at an optimum solution. This saves time and money at
the outset of the entire product development process and ensures confidence ahead of
production tooling. Prototyping is still probably the largest, even though sometimes
overlooked, application of 3D printing today. The developments and improvements of the
process and the materials, since the emergence of 3D printing for prototyping, saw the
processes being taken up for applications further down the product development process chain.
Tooling and casting applications were developed utilizing the advantages of the different
processes. Again, these applications are increasingly being used and adopted across industrial
sectors. Similarly for final manufacturing operations, the improvements are continuing to
facilitate uptake. In terms of the industrial vertical markets that are benefitting greatly from
industrial 3D printing across all of these broad-spectrum applications, the following is a basic
breakdown:
I. Medical & Dental
Fig 10: Medical & Dental [10]
The medical sector is viewed as being one that was an early adopter of 3D printing, but also a
sector with huge potential for growth, due to the customization and personalization capabilities

20. 12 | P a g e
of the technologies and the ability to improve people’s lives as the processes improve and
materials are developed that meet medical grade standards.
3D printing technologies are being used for a host of different applications. In addition to
making prototypes to support new product development for the medical and dental industries,
the technologies are also utilized to make patterns for the downstream metal casting of dental
crowns and in the manufacture of tools over which plastic is being vacuum formed to make
dental aligners. The technology is also taken advantage of directly to manufacture both stock
items, such as hip and knee implants, and bespoke patient-specific products, such as hearing
aids, orthotic insoles for shoes, personalized prosthetics and one-off implants for patients
suffering from diseases such as osteoarthritis, osteoporosis and cancer, along with accident and
trauma victims. 3D printed surgical guides for specific operations are also an emerging
application that is aiding surgeons in their work and patients in their recovery. Technology is
also being developed for the 3D printing of skin, bone, tissue, pharmaceuticals and even human
organs. However, these technologies remain largely decades away from commercialization.
II. Aerospace
Fig 11: Aerospace [11]
Like the medical sector, the aerospace sector was an early adopter of 3D printing technologies
in their earliest forms for product development and prototyping. These companies, typically
working in partnership with academic and research institutes, have been at the sharp end in
terms or pushing the boundaries of the technologies for manufacturing applications.
Because of the critical nature of aircraft development, the R&D is demanding and strenuous,
standards are critical and industrial grade 3D printing systems are put through their paces.
Process and materials development have seen a number of key applications developed for the
aerospace sector — and some non-critical parts are all-ready flying on aircraft.

21. 13 | P a g e
High profile users include GE / Morris Technologies, Airbus / EADS, Rolls-Royce, BAE
Systems and Boeing. While most of these companies do take a realistic approach in terms of
what they are doing now with the technologies, and most of it is R&D, some do get quite bullish
about the future.
III. Automotive
Fig 12:Automotive [12]
Another general early adopter of Rapid Prototyping technologies — the earliest incarnation of
3D printing — was the automotive sector. Many automotive companies — particularly at the
cutting edge of motor sport and F1 — have followed a similar trajectory to the aerospace
companies. First (and still) using the technologies for prototyping applications, but developing
and adapting their manufacturing processes to incorporate the benefits of improved materials
and end results for automotive parts. Many automotive companies are now also looking at the
potential of 3D printing to fulfill after sales functions in terms of production of
spare/replacement parts, on demand, rather than holding huge inventories.
IV. Jewellery
Fig 13: Jewellery [13]
Traditionally, the design and manufacturing process for jewellery has always required high
levels of expertise and knowledge involving specific disciplines that include fabrication,

22. 14 | P a g e
mould-making, casting, electroplating, forging, silver/gold smithing, stone-cutting, engraving
and polishing. Each of these disciplines has evolved over many years and each requires
technical knowledge when applied to jewellery manufacture. Just one example is investment
casting — the origins of which can be traced back more than 4000 years.
For the jewellery sector, 3D printing has proved to be particularly disruptive. There is a great
deal of interest — and uptake — based on how 3D printing can, and will, contribute to the
further development of this industry. From new design freedoms enabled by 3D CAD and 3D
printing, through improving traditional processes for jewellery production all the way to direct
3D printed production eliminating many of the traditional steps, 3D printing has had — and
continues to have — a tremendous impact in this sector.
V. Art / Design / Sculpture
Fig 14: Art/Design/Sculpture [14]
Artists and Sculptors are engaging with 3D printing in myriad of different ways to explore form
and function in ways previously impossible. Whether purely to find new original expression or
to learn from old masters this is a highly charged sector that is increasingly finding new ways
of working with 3D printing and introducing the results to the world.
The discipline of 3D scanning in conjunction with 3D printing also brings a new dimension to
the art world, however, in that artists and students now have a proven methodology of
reproducing the work of past masters and creating exact replicas of ancient (and more recent)
sculptures for close study – works of art that they would otherwise never have been able to
interact with in person. The work of Cosmo Wenman is particularly enlightening in this field.

23. 15 | P a g e
VI. Architecture
Fig 15: Architecture [15]
Architectural models have long been a staple application of 3D printing processes, for
producing accurate demonstration models of an architect’s vision. 3D printing offers a
relatively fast, easy and economically viable method of producing detailed models directly
from 3D CAD, BIM or other digital data that architects use. Many successful architectural
firms, now commonly use 3D printing (in house or as a service) as a critical part of their
workflow for increased innovation and improved communication. More recently some
visionary architects are looking to 3D printing as a direct construction method. Research is
being conducted at a number of organizations on this front, most notably Loughborough
University, Contour Crafting and Universe Architecture.
VII. Fashion
Fig 16: Fashion [16]
3D printed accessories including shoes, head-pieces, hats and bags have all made their way on
to global catwalks. And some even more visionary fashion designers have demonstrated the
capabilities of the tech for haute couture — dresses, capes, full-length gowns and even some
under wear have debuted at different fashion venues around the world.

24. 16 | P a g e
VIII. Food
Fig 17: Food [17]
Although a late-comer to the 3D printing party, food is one emerging application (and/or 3D
printing material) that is getting people very excited and has the potential to truly take the
technology into the mainstream. After all, we will all, always, need to eat! 3D printing is
emerging as a new way of preparing and presenting food.
Initial forays into 3D printing food were with chocolate and sugar, and these developments
have continued apace with specific 3D printers hitting the market. Some other early
experiments with food including the 3D printing of “meat” at the cellular protein level. More
recently pasta is another food group that is being researched for 3D printing food.
IX. Consumers
The holy grail for 3D printing vendors is consumer 3D printing. There is a widespread debate
as to whether this is a feasible future. Currently, consumer uptake is low due to the accessibility
issues that exist with entry level (consumer machines). There is headway being made in this
direction by the larger 3D printing companies such as 3D Systems and Makerbot, as a
subsidiary of Stratasys as they try to make the 3D printing process and the ancillary components
(software, digital content etc) more accessible and user-friendly. There are currently three main
ways that the person on the street can interact with 3D printing tech for consumer products:
design + print / choose + print / choose + 3D printing service fulfillment.

25. 17 | P a g e
1.3.5 Different types of 3D printing
3D printers can be categorized into one of several types of processes:
1. Material Extrusion: molten thermoplastic is deposited through a heated nozzle1.
2. Vat Polymerization: liquid photopolymer is cured by light
3. Powder Bed Fusion: powder particles are fused by a high-energy source
4. Material Jetting: droplets of liquid photosensitive fusing agent are deposited on a
powder bed and cured by light
5. Binder Jetting: droplets of liquid binding agent are deposited on a bed of granulated
materials, which are later sintered together
6. Direct Energy Deposition: molten metal simultaneously deposited and fused
7. Sheet Lamination: individual sheets of material are cut to shape and laminated
together
1. Material extrusion
Material extrusion technologies squeeze a material through a nozzle and onto a build plate,
layer by layer. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) falls under this category and is the most
widely used 3D printing technology.
Extrusion / FDM / FFF
Fig 18: Fused Deposition Modelling [18]

26. 18 | P a g e
3D printing utilizing the extrusion of thermoplastic material is easily the most common — and
recognizable — 3DP process. The most popular name for the process is Fused Deposition
Modelling (FDM), due to its longevity, however this is a trade name, registered by Stratasys,
the company that originally developed it.
The process works by melting plastic filament that is deposited, via a heated extruder, a layer
at a time, onto a build platform according to the 3D data supplied to the printer. Each layer
hardens as it is deposited and bonds to the previous layer.
Stratasys has developed a range of proprietary industrial grade materials for its FDM process
that are suitable for some production applications. At the entry-level end of the market,
materials are more limited, but the range is growing. The most common materials for entry-
level FFF 3D printers are ABS and PLA.
The FDM/FFF processes require support structures for any applications with overhanging
geometries. For FDM, this entails a second, water-soluble material, which allows support
structures to be relatively easily washed away, once the print is complete. Alternatively,
breakaway support materials are also possible, which can be removed by manually snapping
them off the part. Support structures, or lack thereof, have generally been a limitation of the
entry level FFF 3D printers. However, as the systems have evolved and improved to
incorporate dual extrusion heads, it has become less of an issue.
In terms of models produced, the FDM process from Stratasys is an accurate and reliable
process that is relatively office/studio-friendly, although extensive post-processing can be
required. At the entry-level, as would be expected, the FFF process produces much less
accurate models, but things are constantly improving.
The process can be slow for some part geometries and layer-to-layer adhesion can be a
problem, resulting in parts that are not watertight. Again, post-processing using Acetone can
resolve these issues.
Benefits
• Fast & common thermoplastics.
• Low cost

27. 19 | P a g e
Limitations
• Rough surface finish
• Anisotropic
• Usually requires supports
• Not scalable
• Limited accuracy
2. Vat photopolymerization
Photopolymerization is the process of a photopolymer resin being exposed to certain
wavelengths of light and becoming solid.
Stereolithography (SLA), direct light processing (DLP) and continuous direct light processing
(CDLP) are additive manufacturing processes that fall under the category of vat
photopolymerization. In SLA, an object is created by selectively curing a polymer resin layer-
by-layer using an ultraviolet (UV) laser beam. DLP is similar to SLA but uses a digital light
projector screen to flash a single image of each layer all at once. CDLP is a lot like DLP but
relies on the continuous upward motion of the build plate. All vat photopolymerization
processes are good for producing fine details and smooth surface finishes, making them ideal
for jewelry and medical applications.
Fig 19: Stereolithography [19]
Stereolithography (SL) is widely recognized as the first 3D printing process; it was certainly
the first to be commercialised. SL is a laser-based process that works with photopolymer resins,

28. 20 | P a g e
that react with the laser and cure to form a solid in a very precise way to produce very accurate
parts. It is a complex process, but simply put, the photopolymer resin is held in a vat with a
movable platform inside. A laser beam is directed in the X-Y axes across the surface of the
resin according to the 3D data supplied to the machine (the .stl file), whereby the resin hardens
precisely where the laser hits the surface. Once the layer is completed, the platform within the
vat drops down by a fraction (in the Z axis) and the subsequent layer is traced out by the laser.
This continues until the entire object is completed and the platform can be raised out of the vat
for removal. Because of the nature of the SL process, it requires support structures for some
parts, specifically those with overhangs or undercuts. These structures need to be manually
removed. In terms of other post processing steps, many objects 3D printed using SL need to be
cleaned and cured. Curing involves subjecting the part to intense light in an oven-like machine
to fully harden the resin. Stereolithography is generally accepted as being one of the most
accurate 3D printing processes with excellent surface finish. However, limiting factors include
the post processing steps required and the stability of the materials over time, which can
become more brittle.
DLP
Fig 20: Digital Light Processing [20]
DLP — or digital light processing — is a similar process to stereolithography in that it is a 3D
printing process that works with photopolymers. The major difference is the light source. DLP
uses a more conventional light source, such as an arc lamp, with a liquid crystal display panel

29. 21 | P a g e
or a deformable mirror device (DMD), which is applied to the entire surface of the vat of
photopolymer resin in a single pass, generally making it faster than SL.
Also, like SL, DLP produces highly accurate parts with excellent resolution, but its similarities
also include the same requirements for support structures and post-curing. However, one
advantage of DLP over SL is that only a shallow vat of resin is required to facilitate the process,
which generally results in less waste and lower running costs.
Benefits
• Smooth surface
• Fine details
• Good for prototyping of IM
Limitations
• Brittle
• Usually requires supports
• UV sensitive
• Extensive post processing required
3. Powder bed fusion
Powder bed fusion (PBF) technologies use a heat source to induce fusion (sintering or melting)
between the particles of a plastic or metal powder one layer at a time. Selective Laser Sintering
(SLS), electron beam melting (EBM) and multi jet fusion (MJF) all fall within this technology.
The metal 3D printing processes selective laser melting (SLM) and direct metal laser sintering
(DMLS) also use powder bed fusion to selectively bind metal powder particles.

30. 22 | P a g e
Fig 21: Electron Beam Melting [21]
The Electron Beam Melting 3D printing technique is a proprietary process developed by
Swedish company Arcam. This metal printing method is very similar to the Direct Metal Laser
Sintering (DMLS) process in terms of the formation of parts from metal powder. The key
difference is the heat source, which, as the name suggests is an electron beam, rather than a
laser, which necessitates that the procedure is carried out under vacuum conditions.
EBM has the capability of creating fully-dense parts in a variety of metal alloys, even to
medical grade, and as a result the technique has been particularly successful for a range of
production applications in the medical industry, particularly for implants. However, other hi-
tech sectors such as aerospace and automotive have also looked to EBM technology for
manufacturing fulfillment.

31. 23 | P a g e
Laser Sintering / Laser Melting
Fig 22: Laser sintering/ Laser melting [22]
Laser sintering and laser melting are interchangeable terms that refer to a laser-based 3D
printing process that works with powdered materials. The laser is traced across a powder bed
of tightly compacted powdered material, according to the 3D data fed to the machine, in the X-
Y axes. As the laser interacts with the surface of the powdered material it sinters, or fuses, the
particles to each other forming a solid. As each layer is completed the powder bed drops
incrementally and a roller smoothes the powder over the surface of the bed prior to the next
pass of the laser for the subsequent layer to be formed and fused with the previous layer.
The build chamber is completely sealed as it is necessary to maintain a precise temperature
during the process specific to the melting point of the powdered material of choice. Once
finished, the entire powder bed is removed from the machine and the excess powder can be
removed to leave the ‘printed’ parts. One of the key advantages of this process is that the
powder bed serves as an in-process support structure for overhangs and undercuts, and
therefore complex shapes that could not be manufactured in any other way are possible with
this process.
However, on the downside, because of the high temperatures required for laser sintering,
cooling times can be considerable. Furthermore, porosity has been an historical issue with this
process, and while there have been significant improvements towards fully dense parts, some
applications still necessitate infiltration with another material to improve mechanical
characteristics.

32. 24 | P a g e
Laser sintering can process plastic and metal materials, although metal sintering does require
a much higher-powered laser and higher in-process temperatures. Parts produced with this
process are much stronger than with SL or DLP, although generally the surface finish and
accuracy is not as good.
Benefits
• Strong parts (nylon)
• Complex geometry
• Scalable (fits size)
• No support
Limitations
• Longer production time
• Higher cost (machines, material, operation)
4 Material jetting
Material jetting technologies use UV light or heat to harden photopolymers, metals or wax,
building parts one layer at a time. Nano particle jetting (NPJ) and Drop-on-demand (DOD)
are two other types of material jetting.
Fig 23: Material Jetting [23]
Material jetting: a 3D printing process whereby the actual build materials (in liquid or molten
state) are selectively jetted through multiple jet heads (with others simultaneously jetting

33. 25 | P a g e
support materials). However, the materials tend to be liquid photopolymers, which are cured
with a pass of UV light as each layer is deposited. The nature of this product allows for the
simultaneous deposition of a range of materials, which means that a single part can be produced
from multiple materials with different characteristics and properties. Material jetting is a very
precise 3D printing method, producing accurate parts with a very smooth finish.
Benefits
• Realistic prototypes
• Excellent details
• High accuracy
• Smooth surface finish
Limitations
• High cost
• Brittle mechanical properties
5.Binder jetting
The material being jetted is a binder, and is selectively sprayed into a powder bed of the part
material to fuse it a layer at a time to create/print the required part. As is the case with other
powder bed systems, once a layer is completed, the powder bed drops incrementally and a
roller or blade smoothes the powder over the surface of the bed, prior to the next pass of the jet
heads, with the binder for the subsequent layer to be formed and fused with the previous layer.
Fig 24: Binder Jetting [24]

34. 26 | P a g e
Advantages of this process, like with SLS, include the fact that the need for supports is negated
because the powder bed itself provides this functionality. Furthermore, a range of different
materials can be used, including ceramics and food. A further distinctive advantage of the
process is the ability to easily add a full colour palette which can be added to the binder. The
parts resulting directly from the machine, however, are not as strong as with the sintering
process and require post-processing to ensure durability. Binder jetting uses an industrial
printhead to deposit a binding adhesive agent onto thin layers of powder material. Unlike the
other 3D printing technologies, binder jetting does not require heat.
Benefits
• Full-colour options
• Range of materials
• No support
• No warping or shrinking
Limitations
• Low part strength
• Less accurate than material jetting
6. Sheet lamination
This technology stacks and laminates thin sheets of material to make parts. There are a few
different types of lamination to choose from: bonding, ultrasonic welding or brazing.
Selective Deposition Lamination (SDL)
Fig 25: Selective Deposition Lamination [25]

35. 27 | P a g e
SDL is a proprietary 3D printing process developed and manufactured by Mcor Technologies.
There is a temptation to compare this process with the Laminated Object Manufacturing (LOM)
process developed by Helisys in the 1990’s due to similarities in layering and shaping paper to
form the final part. However, that is where any similarity ends.
The SDL 3D printing process builds parts layer by layer using standard copier paper. Each new
layer is fixed to the previous layer using an adhesive, which is applied selectively according to
the 3D data supplied to the machine. This means that a much higher density of adhesive is
deposited in the area that will become the part, and a much lower density of adhesive is applied
in the surrounding area that will serve as the support, ensuring relatively easy “weeding,” or
support removal.
After a new sheet of paper is fed into the 3D printer from the paper feed mechanism and placed
on top of the selectively applied adhesive on the previous layer, the build plate is moved up to
a heat plate and pressure is applied. This pressure ensures a positive bond between the two
sheets of paper. The build plate then returns to the build height where an adjustable Tungsten
carbide blade cuts one sheet of paper at a time, tracing the object outline to create the edges of
the part. When this cutting sequence is complete, the 3D printer deposits the next layer of
adhesive and so on until the part is complete.
Fig 26: Selective Deposition Lamination closer look [26]
SDL is one of the very few 3D printing processes that can produce full colour 3D printed parts,
using a CYMK colour palette. And because the parts are standard paper, which require no post-
processing, they are wholly safe and eco-friendly. Where the process is not able to compete

36. 28 | P a g e
favourably with other 3D printing processes is in the production of complex geometries and
the build size is limited to the size of the feedstock.
Benefits
• Fast
• Low cost & multi-material layers
• No support structures necessary
Limitations
• Post processing is required
• Limited materials
• Finishing may vary
7. Direct energy deposition
Direct energy deposition (DED) creates 3D objects by melting powder material as it is
deposited. It is mostly used with metal powders or wire and is often referred to as metal
deposition. Laser engineered net shape (LENS) and Electron Beam Additive Manufacture
(EBAM) also fall within this category.
Benefits
• Strong parts
• Range of materials
• Larger parts
Limitations
• High cost
• Poor surface finish

37. 29 | P a g e
1.4 Difference between 3D Printing VS Injection Molding
The following are the factors which need to be considered while selecting 3D Printing &
injection molding techniques:
1.Batch size
The number of parts required is a key factor in deciding the process. Injection moulding is
known for its effectiveness in high volume production runs (1000+ parts per run). For low
volumes (below 10), 3D printing is more appropriate and cheaper. For simple 3D printing
processes like FDM or SLS used with affordable plastics like ABS, PC, Nylon, single parts or
small quantities (identical and non-identical), 3D printing is undoubtedly the option to go
for. MJF is also another viable option for midsized quantities (10-1000) and is very common.
Conclusion: Injection moulding is a perfect option for bulk production whereas, for small
batches of units, go with 3D printing.
2.Design complexity
An injection moulding process requires a mould to be built (inverse to the part) according to
the required part design. Designing a CAD model for injection moulding is not easy as there
are many considerations. For example, right angles in the part design make it tough to remove
from the mould and delicate areas have to be treated with utmost care. Whereas, attaining
complex designs is where 3D printing excels. No matter how complex the design is, 3D printing
makes it possible with minimum effort.
Conclusion: Check if your design is manufacturable with injection moulding, if not – it should
be adjusted, otherwise go with 3D printing.
3.Turnaround time
Injection moulding requires longer turnaround times as it involves the analysis of the design
and building of the perfect mould according to the design (10-20 days). The turnaround times
for 3D printing are very less compared to injection moulding.
Conclusion: If you need the part immediately, go with 3D printing.

38. 30 | P a g e
4.Customization
Once the mould is built for injection moulding, it involves a lot of money and time to modify
the re-design of it. When coming to customization of parts or modifications to the existing
design, injection moulding is not recommended. Whatever you get from the mould is the final
part and it’s very complex to modify it. On the other hand, 3D printing offers a lot of scope for
customization and all it takes is a modified or customized CAD file. Hence, it is good for
prototypes, test pieces.
Conclusion: 3D printing is advised for prototyping and customization.
5.Material strength
Parts manufactured through injection moulding consist of a single poured layer, which adds
strength to the shape because there are no fissures or points of weakness. Whereas in 3D
printing, the part is made layer by layer which impacts its overall strength. 3D printing can
create visible ridges and structural faults during manufacturing that typically don’t occur with
plastic injection moulding.
Strength tests for 3D printing parts
Conclusion: If the material strength is a priority, go with injection moulding.
6.Surface finish
Even though 3D printing’s layers are small and close together, they are still noticeable. This
creates a ridged surface on finished objects no matter how fine the layer detail is. This presents
a problem if you want to manufacture objects that will rub against other objects, like machine
parts in contact and moving. In such cases, post-processing for smoothening is required and it
is an extra step.
Comparatively, in injection moulding, there is no fuss about ridges and layers as the material
is poured into a single layer and almost has a uniform and smooth surface finish.
Additionally, injection moulded parts can be effectively post-processed.
Conclusion: Injection moulding is preferred in terms of a good surface finish.

39. 31 | P a g e
7.Material wastage
Since injection moulding pours material as many fits into the mould, it uses exactly as much
as is needed for each design. That makes it a very efficient way to mass-produce objects without
worrying about waste. On the other hand, some 3D printing technologies lose some materials
in building the support structures and even though the material powder can be reused, it can
only be done a few times without the material properties changing.
Conclusion: 3D printing produces little waste like support structures, failed prints that have to
be removed during post-production, but when using it to produce a single unit or a small batch,
the wastage is not so important, whereas, for large batches, the wastage is significant. Hence,
if you want to have a large batch, it’s good to go with injection moulding as there is no material
wastage.
Fig 27 : 3D Printing vs Injection Molding[27]

40. 32 | P a g e
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
RESEARCH
GROUP &
REFERENCE
AUTHOR &
YEAR
PROCESS
MATERIAL
USED
OUTCOMES
[1]
Ujendra Kumar
Komal et al.-2020
3D
PRINTING,
FDM &
INJECTION
MOLDING
PLA
The impact strength of
the injection-moulded
specimen was superior to
the 3D-printed
specimens. However,
there is no significant
influence on the
crystallinity of the PLA.
[2]
Bartłomiej
Podsiadły et al.-
2021
3D
PRINTING
ABS
Basically, increasing the
infill density improves
the strength.
[3]
A. El Moumen et
al.--2019
FDM
ASTM D638
polymer
composite
specimen
High von mises stresses
were predicted within the
1st
& 2nd
layers caused by
the difference of the
temperature between the
platform plate & the part
layers.
[4]
Makara Lay et al.-
2019
FDM &
INJECTION
MOLDING
PLA, ABS &
nylon 6
In this it is found that the
tensile strength, young’s
modulus, elongation at
break & impact strength
for the sample fabricated
using FDM are lower
compared with injection
molded samples.
[5]
Andrew T. Miller
et al.-2016
FDM & IM
Thermoplastic
polycarbonate
urethanes
(PCUs)
FDM samples matched
or exceeded injection
molding controls in terms
of tensile stress & strain,
compressive properties

41. 33 | P a g e
RESEARCH
GROUP &
REFERENCE
AUTHOR &
YEAR
PROCESS
MATERIAL
USED
OUTCOMES
[6]
Xiaoyong Tian-
2017
IM
Continuous
carbon fiber
reinforced
thermoplastic
composites
(CFRTPCs)
Even though aging of
thermoplastic PLA
matrix was observed, the
performance of
remanufactured
composites still
maintained a high
quality due to the
compensation of pure
PLA in the
remanufacturing process.
[7]
R. Boros-2019
3D
PRINTING
PLA
An injection mold that
facilitates overmolding a
rib onto an injection
molded or 3D printed
preform inserted in the
mold.
[8]
Ameya-2022
3D Printing &
FDM
R-HDPE
Mechanical
performance between
injection molded and
3D printed samples
was observed
indicating production
methodology might
influence final material
performance.
[9]
Arnaldo
D. Valino-2019
3D Printing Thermoplastic
Basically, the Higher
temperature improves
printing of thermoplastic
composites
[10]
Cameron Hohimer-
2017
FDM
Thermoplastic
polyurethane
The mechanical properties
of 3D printed TPU parts
created by a typical low
cost desk-top FDM
machine.

42. 34 | P a g e
RESEARCH
GROUP &
REFERENCE
AUTHOR &
YEAR
PROCESS
MATERIAL
USED
OUTCOMES
[11]
Erik Oelsch-2021
FDM & 3D
Printing
Thermoplastic
polyurethane
Two different
manufacturing
methods. In particular,
the SEAM technology
(screw extrusion
additive
manufacturing) is
compared to a
conventional injection
molding process.
Uniaxial tension test
specimens from both
manufacturing
methods are analysed
in two testing
sequences (multi-
hysteresis tests to
analyse inelastic
properties and uniaxial
tension until rupture).
[12]
Behnam Akhoundi-
2018
FDM FRC
This research is to bolster
mechanical properties of
the parts, produced by an
extrusion-based 3D
printer, or fused
deposition modeling
machine, via increasing
the content of continuous
fiber yarn to its practical
limit

43. 35 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH GAPS
• The less research is done on the following tests such as tensile strength, impact strength
& Hardness are simultaneously not performed to check the overall strength of
components.
• There is less work done on PLA material in comparison to other materials.
• The influence of different geometries of cross sections on the FDM printed parts is less
explored.
• Study on Infill density variation on 3D printed parts is less explored.

44. 36 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4: OBJECTIVES
• To select the base material for the development of part in both techniques i.e. Injection
molding & 3D Printing.
• To identify the 3D Printing Technique to generate the part in comparison to injection
moulding
• To determine the testing parameters which will highlight the difference between the
parts developed by injection molding & 3D printing.
• To determine the comparative analysis of part based on tests such as tensile, impact &
hardness.

45. 37 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5.1 Material Selection
The main difference between feedstocks for the two technologies is “material form.”3D
Printing uses filament i.e., long strands of plastic wrapped around a spool, whereas injection
molding uses pellets i.e., small lumps of raw material .
Fig 28 : PLA Material in filament & pellet forms[28]
5.2 Plastic material to be used:
PLA
PLA, short for Polylactic acid, is a common material for FDM 3D printing, injection
molding and one of the most used bioplastics in the world. Unlike petrochemical-based
plastics, PLA is considered to be biodegradable and eco-friendly thanks to being derived from
renewable materials. This plastic is extremely affordable and, thanks to its properties, is the
easiest to 3D print with.
PLA is a polyester, produced from renewable resources including the sugar in maize and
sugarcane. The sugar is fermented and turned into lactic acid, which is then turned into

46. 38 | P a g e
polylactic acid. For a long time, the prime fields of use for this material were in biomedical due
to bioabsorbable characteristics. Within the last ten years, though, new polymerization methods
came along. This made it possible to produce polylactic acid with higher molecular weight
more economically. Additionally, environmental concerns also played a role in the growing
popularity of PLA, which can be composed and degraded. As a result, nowadays you can find
it in consumer goods, packaging, and agriculture.
5.3 Characteristics of PLA
• Easy formability
• Wide range of applications
• Shiny surface
• Relatively low cost
• Lightweight
• Environmentally friendly
• Biodegradable
• Food safe
• Smooth surface
• Recyclable
5.4 Advantages of PLA
• Can be solvent welded using dichloromethane;
• Environmentally friendly;
• Can be used for food containers;
• Easy to 3D print with;
• Wide range of colour and composite options.
5.5 Disadvantages of PLA
• Machine processing is difficult;
• Low heat resistance;
• Relatively low strength.
Fig 29 : PLA Applications[29]

47. 39 | P a g e
5.6 Parameter Settings for PLA 3D Printing filament
Filament blends may wary in their properties and have a slightly different requirement. Below
is the general range for simple PLA material.
Fig 30 : PLA parameter settings in 3D[30]
5.6.1 Infill Parameter Settings
i. Infill density
The infill density defines the amount of plastic used on the inside of the print. A higher infill
density means that there is more plastic on the inside of your print, leading to a stronger object.
An infill density around 20% is used for models with a visual purpose, higher densities can be
used for end-use parts.
Fig 31 : Infill Density model [31]
The model on the right has a higher infill density than the model on the left

48. 40 | P a g e
ii. Infill pattern “Infill” in 3D printing refers to the internal patterns found inside most 3D
printed parts. For example:
• Strong 2D infills are used for everyday prints
• Quick 2D infills are used for quick, but weak models
• 3D infills are used to make the object equally strong in all directions
• 3D concentric infills are used for flexible materials
The following pattern options are available:
• Grid: Strong 2D infill
• Lines: Quick 2D infill
• Triangles: Strong 2D infill
• Tri-hexagon: Strong 2D infill
• Cubic: Strong 3D infill
• Cubic (subdivision): Strong 3D infill (this saves material compared to Cubic)
• Octet: Strong 3D infill
• Quarter cubic: Strong 3D infill
• Concentric: Flexible 3D infill
• Zig-zag: A grid shaped infill, printing continuously in one diagonal direction
• Cross: Flexible 3D infill
• Cross 3D: Flexible 3D infill
• Gyroid infill: Infill with increased strength for the lowest weight
• Lightning: Infill that is extremely fast to print and only supports top surfaces
Fig 32 : Infill Patterns [32]
The infill patterns are displayed in the order of the list above, from left to right.

49. 41 | P a g e
5.7 Parameter Settings for PLA in Injection Molding
Recommended processing conditions are given on the product data sheet for each grade.
Fig 33 : PLA parameter settings in Injection Molding[33]
5.8 Grading of FDM 3D Printing filament materials in Comparison to PLA
Materials are usually graded along 3 categories: mechanical performance, visual quality, and
process. In this case, we further break down these categories to paint a clearer picture of the
polymer’s properties. The choice of material really depends on what the user wants to print,
so we listed the key decision criteria needed to choose a material (other than cost and
speed):A spider web graph showing the material properties that will be compared
Fig 34 : Spider Web Graph[34]

50. 42 | P a g e
• Ease of printing: This is how easy it is to print in a material, with factors including
bed adhesion, max printing speed, frequency of failed parts, flow accuracy and ease of
feeding into the printer.
• Max stress: The maximum stress an object can withstand when slowly pulling on it.
• Elongation at break: The ratio between the initial length and the changed length after
an object breaks. It’s also called fracture strain.
• Impact resistance: The energy required to break an object with a sudden impact.
• Layer adhesion (isotropy): This is how well the layers of material adhere to one
another. It is linked to isotropy (uniformity in all directions). The better the layer
adhesion, the more isotropic your part will be.
• Heat resistance: The max temperature an object can withstand before softening or
deforming.
We have ranked each material with the following criteria on a simple scale (low to high). These
are relative grades for the FDM process—they would look quite different if other
manufacturing technologies were considered. Using data from Optimeter, the polymers have
been ranked among the different criteria considered.
Fig 35 :Polymer ranking Graph[35]

51. 43 | P a g e
i. What is PLA?
PLA is the easiest polymer to print and provides good visual quality. It is very rigid and actually
quite strong, but is very brittle. PLA is bio-sourced and biodegradable, has good UV resistance
and can be post-processed with sanding paper and painted with acrylics. It's also distinctly
odorless. On the flip side, PLA does have low humidity resistance and can't be glued easily
ii. What is ABS?
ABS is usually picked over PLA when higher temperature resistance and higher toughness are
required. It has good abrasion resistance, can be post-processed with acetone vapors for a
glossy finish and can be post-processed with sanding paper and painted with acrylics. ABS is
sensitive to UV and potentially comes with high fume emissions. It develops an odor during
the printing process.
iii. What is PET?
PET is a slightly softer polymer that is well rounded and possesses interesting additional
properties with few major drawbacks. Aside from its high resistance to humidity and chemicals,
PET is also safe to come into contact with foods, is recyclable and has noteworthy abrasion
resistance. Like the materials listed previously, it can be post-processed with sanding paper and
painted with acrylics.
The only notable drawback is that it is heavier than PLA and ABS.

52. 44 | P a g e
iv. What is Nylon?
Nylon possesses great mechanical properties, and in particular, the best impact resistance for a
non-flexible filament. It has excellent chemical resistance and is very strong. For Nylon, layer
adhesion can be an issue. The material absorbs moisture and printing with it has the potential
to release emissions.
v. What is TPU?
TPU is mostly used for applications where material flexibility is required, though it also sports
very high impact resistance. It is quite abrasion-resistant and isn't affected significantly by
coming in contact with oil and grease. However, TPU is difficult when it comes to post-
processing and cannot be glued easily.
vi. What is PC?
PC (polycarbonate) is one of the strongest materials of all for FDM 3D printing and can be an
interesting alternative to ABS as the properties are quite similar. The material can be sterilized
and is easy to post-process, though it is UV sensitive.

53. 45 | P a g e
5.9 Part Development
Using Siemens NX-CAD Component model is developed & it is in the process stage the
dimensions can vary according to the industrial application as this one shown is a rough concept
for part development.
Fig 36 :Part Drawing[36]
5.10 Tensile Test Methods for Plastics: ASTM D638
Resin materials (plastics) are found in a wide variety of items used daily. Recently, plastics
have started to be used as structural materials in transportation equipment, such as automobiles
and aircraft, due to their strength and light-weight nature.
ASTM D638 specifies methods for testing the tensile strength of plastics and other resin
materials and for calculating their mechanical properties, and outlines accuracy requirements
for the test frames and accessories used.

54. 46 | P a g e
Fig 37: ASTM D638 Specimen Dimensions[37]
Fig 38: Specimen Example[38]
•Five types of specimens
•Type I is recommended
•Type II is used if break does not occur within the parallel section of Type I
•Type V is used for special circumstances, such as testing in a thermostatic
chamber
(In addition, other shapes are specified, such as tube and rod shapes.)

55. 47 | P a g e
5.11 Impact Test Methods for Plastics: ASTM D256
The Izod notched impact test to ASTM D256 generates characteristic values for the impact
resistance and notch sensitivity at high strain rates in the form of a thickness-related energy
value. Notched Izod Impact is a single point test that measures a materials resistance to
impact from a swinging pendulum. Izod impact is defined as the kinetic energy needed to
initiate fracture and continue the fracture until the specimen is broken. Izod specimens are
notched to prevent deformation of the specimen upon impact. This test can be used as a quick
and easy quality control check to determine if a material meets specific impact properties or
to compare materials for general toughness.
Specimen size:
The standard specimen for ASTM is 64 x 12.7 x 3.2 mm (2½ x ½ x 1/8 inch). The most
common specimen thickness is 3.2 mm (0.125 inch), but the preferred thickness is 6.4 mm
(0.25 inch) because it is not as likely to bend or crush. The depth under the notch of the
specimen is 10.2 mm (0.4 inches).
Data:
ASTM impact energy is expressed in J/m or ft-lb/in. Impact strength is calculated by dividing
impact energy in J (or ft-lb) by the thickness of the specimen. The test result is typically the
average of 5 specimens.
The higher the resulting numbers the tougher the material.
Application includes:
• The comparison of different molding materials
• Tolerance monitoring within the scope of goods inwards checks and quality assurance
• Testing of finished parts based on machined specimens
• Creation of material cards
• Measurement of aging effects

56. 48 | P a g e
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS
In this the investigation is done about the types of manufacturing techniques, Difference
between 3d printing & Injection molding through observation, collection of data from literature
reviews. This study has discussed the parameter settings to be done on injection molding as
well as on 3D Printing. The material selected is PLA which is differentiated on the basis of
material form of feedstocks from two technologies i.e., to run in filament form in 3D printing
& pellets form in injection molding. The exploration of PLA material & the difference with
other material is also studied on the basis of Ease of printing, Max stress, Elongation at break,
Impact resistance, Layer adhesion (isotropy), Heat resistance. Apart from that the ASTM
standards required for tensile & impact testing are also discussed.

57. 49 | P a g e
REFERENCES
[1] Afrose, M.F.; Masood, S.H.; Iovenitti, P.; Nikzad, M.; Sbarski, I. Effects of part build
orientations on fatigue behaviour of FDM-processed PLA material. Prog. Addit. Manuf. 2016.
[2] Dawoud, M.; Taha, I.; Ebeid, S.J. Mechanical behaviour of ABS: An experimental study
using FDM and injection moulding techniques. J. Manuf. Process. 2016.
[3] hossain, M.S.; Ramos, J.; Espalin, D.; Perez, M.; Wicker, R. Improving tensile mechanical
properties of FDM-manufactured specimens via modifying build parameters. In
Proceedings of the International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium: An Additive
Manufacturing Conference, Austin, TX, USA, 12 August 2013; Volume 2013.
[4] Tanoto, Y.Y.; Anggono, J.; Budiman, W.; Philbert, K.V. Strength and Dimension Accuracy
in Fused Deposition Modeling: A Comparative Study on Parts Making Using ABS and
PLA Polymers. Rekayasa Mesin 2020.
[5] Upadhyay, K.; Dwivedi, R.; Singh, A.K. Determination and comparison of the anisotropic
strengths of fused deposition modeling P400 ABS. In Advances in 3D Printing & Additive
Manufacturing Technologies; Wimpenny, D.I., Pandey, P.M., Kumar, L.J., Eds.; Springer:
Singapore, 2017.
[6] Kinski, W.; Pietkiewicz, P.; Nalepa, K.; Miaskowski, W. Tensile strength comparison of
composite specimens printed in FDM technology with specimens printed from PLA.
Mechanik 2017.
[7] Uddin, M.S.; Sidek, M.F.R.; Faizal, M.A.; Ghomashchi, R.; Pramanik, A. Evaluating
mechanical properties and failure mechanisms of fused deposition modeling acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene parts. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 2017
[8] Syamsuzzaman, M.; Mardi, N.A.; Fadzil, M.; Farazila, Y. Investigation of layer thickness
effect on the performance of low-cost and commercial fused deposition modelling printers.
Mater. Res. Innov. 2014

58. 50 | P a g e
[9] Johansson, F. Optimizing Fused Filament Fabrication 3D Printing for Durability: Tensile
Properties and Layer Bonding; Blekinge Institute of Technology: Karskruna, Sweden,
2016.
[10]Asmatulu, E., Twomey, J., Overcash, M., 2014. Recycling of fiber-reinforced
compositesand direct structural composite recycling concept. J. Compos. Mater. 48, 593-
608.
[11]Castro-Aguirre, E., Iniguez-Franco, F., Samsudin, H., Fang, X., Auras, R., 2016. Pol- ~
y(lactic acid)dmass production, processing, industrial applications, and end of life. Adv.
Drug Deliv. Rev. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.03.010.
[12]Colucci, G., Ostrovskaya, O., Frache, A., Martorana, B., Badini, C., 2015. The effect of
mechanical recycling on the microstructure and properties of PA66 composites reinforced
with carbon fibers. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 132.
[13]Goodridge, R.D., Shofner, M.L., Hague, R.J.M., McClelland, M., Schlea, M.R., Johnson,
R.B., Tuck, C.J., 2011. Processing of a Polyamide-12/carbon nanofibre composite by laser
sintering. Polym.
[14]Kemmochi, K., Takayanagi, H., Nagasawa, C., Takahashi, J., Hayashi, R., 1995.
Possibility of closed loop material recycling for fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites.
Adv. Perform. Mater.
[15]Kim, B.C., Weaver, P.M., Potter, K., 2014. Manufacturing characteristics of the
continuous tow shearing method for manufacturing of variable angle tow composites.
Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 61
[16]Leal, A.A., Veeramachaneni, J.C., Reifler, F.A., Amberg, M., Stapf, D., Barandun, G.A.,
Hegemann, D., Hufenus, R., 2016. Novel approach for the development of ultralight, fully-
thermoplastic composites. Mater. Des. 93
[17]Luo, H., Xiong, G., Ma, C., Li, D., Wan, Y., 2014. Preparation and performance of long
carbon fiber reinforced polyamide 6 composites injection-molded from core/ shell
structured pellets. Mater. Des.

59. 51 | P a g e
[18]Murariu, M., Dubois, P., 2016. PLA composites: From production to properties. Adv. Drug
Deliv. Rev. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.04.003.
[19]Ning, F., Cong, W., Qiu, J., Wei, J., Wang, S., 2015. Additive manufacturing of carbon
fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites using fused deposition modeling. Compos.Part
B .
[20]Oliveux, G., Dandy, L.O., Leeke, G.A., 2015. Current status of recycling of fibre
reinforced polymers: Review of technologies, reuse and resulting properties. Prog. Mater.
Sci. 72. Qureshi, Z., Swait, T., Scaife, R., El-Dessouky, H.M., 2014.