Accuracy and Powder Removal Limits in Multi Jet Fusion 3D Printing

dc.contributor.authorRáž, Karel
dc.contributor.authorChval, Zdeněk
dc.contributor.authorHofrichterová, Petra
dc.date.accessioned2026-02-27T19:06:03Z
dc.date.available2026-02-27T19:06:03Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.date.updated2026-02-27T19:06:03Z
dc.description.abstractMulti Jet Fusion (MJF) is a leading technology for producing functional polymer parts. However, it still faces challenges with dimensional accuracy and removing unfused powder from complex internal geometries. First, dimensional accuracy was mapped by producing 45 identical PA12 specimens on an HP MJF 4200 printer in a 5 × 9 layout across five vertical layers. The analysis revealed a consistent pattern: parts located in the central positions of the build volume exhibited the poorest accuracy, while those near the perimeter were the most precise, regardless of their vertical height. This spatial variation is attributed to non-uniform thermal control from the printer’s adaptive lamp–thermal camera system. Second, the limits of powder removal from closed body-centered cubic (BCC) lattice structures were quantified. Using sandblasting and X-ray inspection, a strong inverse relationship was found between a lattice’s relative density and the maximum thickness that could be thoroughly cleaned of powder. For example, low-density structures (ρ = 0.07) could be cleaned up to five layers deep, whereas high-density structures (ρ = 0.39–0.47) were limited to only 1.5–1.7 layers. These findings offer actionable guidelines for optimizing part placement and designing internal lattice structures for MJF technology. The key findings are the spatial variation in dimensional accuracy in MJF printing, where the central parts are the least accurate and perimeter parts are the most precise, and the inverse relationship between a lattice’s relative density (ρ) and cleanable thickness. Specifically, low-density structures (ρ = 0.07) could be thoroughly cleaned up to five layers, while high-density ones (ρ = 0.39–0.47) were limited to approximately 1.5–1.7 layers. The layer thickness was a pre-designed parameter (2, 3, 4, and 5 layers), and powder removal was supported by using automated sandblasting followed by verification via industrial X-ray imaging.en
dc.format13
dc.identifier.document-number001601512100001
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/polym17202804
dc.identifier.issn2073-4360
dc.identifier.obd43947632
dc.identifier.orcidRáž, Karel 0000-0001-8768-0317
dc.identifier.orcidChval, Zdeněk 0000-0002-6751-559X
dc.identifier.orcidHofrichterová, Petra 0000-0003-2389-1830
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11025/67150
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPolymers
dc.rights.accessA
dc.subjectMJFen
dc.subjectnylonen
dc.subjectlatticeen
dc.subjectaccuracyen
dc.subject3D printingen
dc.subjectMJFcz
dc.subjectnyloncz
dc.subjectlatticecz
dc.subjectpřesnostcz
dc.subject3D tiskcz
dc.titleAccuracy and Powder Removal Limits in Multi Jet Fusion 3D Printingen
dc.titlePřesnost a limity odstraňování prášku při 3D tisku Multi Jet Fusioncz
dc.typeČlánek v databázi WoS (Jimp)
dc.typeČLÁNEK
dc.type.statusPublished Version
local.files.count1*
local.files.size4412434*
local.has.filesyes*
local.identifier.eid2-s2.0-105020158042

Files

Original bundle
Showing 1 - 1 out of 1 results
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
polymers-17-02804.pdf
Size:
4.21 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Showing 1 - 1 out of 1 results
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections