Numerical and experimental investigation of effective parameters on separation force in bottom-up stereolithography process

Document Type : Research Article


1 New Technologies Research Center, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran - Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 New Technologies Research Center, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

3 Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran


Bottom-up stereolithography is included among the additive manufacturing methods, which gives many advantages over top-down stereolithography. The major advantages are related to better fabrication resolution, higher material feed-rate, shorter production time and less material waste. During this process, a separation force is generated as a solidified layer separates from the base of resin container. This force leads to product delamination which in turn stimulates the product failure. An efficient solution to this problem is achieved by studying the interaction force on the specimen contact zone. The approach proposed in this study is based on experimental measurements of the force exerted during the process. Different parameters regarding process characteristics are varied in several tests and a comprehensive analysis is conducted to correspond test condition to the resulting separation force. The significant parameters are process speed, cross-section area, the complexity of geometry and orientation of solidification. For some different cases, the separation force varies between 3 and 36N, and the highest difference between the simulated and experimental results remains beyond 5%. It is observed that higher velocity, larger cross-section area or more part geometry complexity increase the separation force. Another novelty concerns the study of the producing orientation on the separation force. Related experimentation is performed to determine the effect of cross-sectional and geometrical complexity. This article finally gives some preliminary propositions for the part design.


Main Subjects

[1]           Technology Print me a Stradivarius How a new manufacturing technology will change the world. Retrieved March 18, 2020, from
[2]           B. Redwood, F. Schoffer, B. Garret, The 3D Printing Handbook, in: 3D Hubs B.V.
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, (2017).
[3]           W.E.R. Krieger, Cohesive zone modeling for predicting interfacial delamination in microelectronic packaging, Thesis, Master of Science in the Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, (2014).
[4]           P.J. Bartolo, Stereolithography: Materials, Processes and Applications, Springer Pub, (2011).
[5]           H. Ye, A. Venketeswaran, S. Das, C. Zhou, Investigation of separation force for constrained surface stereolithography process from mechanics perspective, Rapid Prototyping Journal (2017).
[6]           J. Wang, S. Das, R. Rai, C. Zhou, Data-driven simulation for fast prediction of pull-up process in
bottom-up stereo-lithography, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University at Buffalo (UB)-SUNY, United States, (2018).
[7]           SLA/DLP Basics By bad-zima in Workshop > 3D Printing. Retrieved December 03, 2019, from
[8]           Digital Light Synthesis™. Retrieved March 17, 2020, from
[9]           X. Wu, Q. Lian, D. Li, Z. Jin, Tilting separation analysis of bottom-up mask projection
stereolithography based on cohesive zone model, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 243 (2017) 184–196.
[10]         F. Liravi, S. Das, C. Zhou, Separation force analysis and prediction based on cohesive element model for constrained-surface Stereolithography processes, Computer-Aided Design, 69 (2015) 134-142.
[11]         Y. Pan, H. He, J. Xu, A. Feinerman, Study of separation force in constrained surface projection stereolithography, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicgo, Chicago, Illinois, USA, (2017).
[12]         Effects of print window material on separation force of 3d printed objects in dlp sla printing processes, NewPro3D – Forcast Research & Development Corp., University of British Colombia, Laboratory Report, (2018).
[13]         J.R. Tumbleston, D. Shirvanyants,Nikita Ermoshkin, Continuous liquid interface production of 3D objects, Carbon3D Inc., Redwood City, CA 94063, USA. Department of Chemistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, (2015).
[14]         H. Ye, S. Das, C. Zhou, Investigation of separation force for bottom-up stereolithography process from mechanics perspective, Proceedings of the ASME (2015), International Design Engineering Technical Conferences &, Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, IDETC/CIE 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
[15]         Y.M. Huang, C.P. Jiang, On-line force monitoring of platform ascending rapid prototyping system, in: Journal of Materials Processing Technology 159 (2005) 257–264.
[16]         Q. Liana, F. Yanga, H. Xina, D. Li, Oxygen-controlled bottom-up mask-projection stereolithography for ceramic 3D printing, in:  Ceramics International, 43 (2017) 14956–14961.
[17]         N. Guo, M.C. Leu, Additive manufacturing: technology, applications and research needs, in: Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 8 (2013) 215–243.
[18]         Formlabs, SLA vs. DLP: Guide to Resin 3D Printers. Retrieved March 17, 2020, from
[19]         J.Y. Lee, W.S. Tan, J. An, C.K. Chua, C.Y. Tang, A.G. Fane, T.H. Chong, The potential to enhance membrane module design with 3D printing technology, in: Journal of Membrane Science, 499 (2016) 480-490.
[20].          R. Krueger, Virtual crack closure technique: History, approach and applications, in: Applied Mechanics Reviews, 57(2) (2004) 109-143.
[21].          A. Tn, C.G. Dávila, P.P. Camanho, J. Costa, An engineering solution for mesh size effects in the simulation of delamination using cohesive zone models, in: Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 74 (2007) 1665-1682.
[22].         D. Xie, A. Wass, Discrete cohesive zone model for mixed-mode fracture using finite element analysis, in: Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 73(13) (2006) 1783-1769.