No abstract

No abstract

Highlights In this article, we present an extensive review on the utilization of 3D printing technology in the days of pandamic. We observe that 3D printing together with smart CAD design show promise to overcome the disruption caused by the lockdown of classical manufacturing units specially for medical and testing equipment, and protective gears. We observe that there are several short communications, commentaries, correspondences, editorials and mini reviews compiled and published; however, a systematic state-of-the-art review is required to identify the significance of 3D printing, design for additive manufacturing (AM), and digital supply chain for handling emergency situations and in the post-COVID era. We present a review of various benefits of 3DP particularly in emergency situations such as a pandemic. Furthermore, some relevant iterative design and 3DP case studies are discussed systematically. Finally, this article highlights the areas that can help to control the emergency situation such as a pandemic, and critically discusses the research gaps that need further research in order to exploit the full potential of 3DP in pandemic and post-pandemic future era.

The primary concern of the Industry 4.0 is the direct digital manufacturing of customized products on demand at high production speed, high accuracy with functional material property. Although the unique capabilities of existing additive manufacturing technologies make it suitable for direct digital manufacturing, there are numerous limitations which include low printing speed, less accuracy and repeatability, and a limited selection of materials for a particular application. Therefore, a high-speed additive manufacturing approach is proposed in this paper, that is capable of achieving high speed of production, high accuracy, and surface finish, and functional material property. For better understanding, authors describe those additive manufacturing technologies that are capable of achieving the aforementioned characteristics. For validation, samples of various dimensions were 3D printed on a selective laser sintering and a high-speed multijet fusion 3D printer. The results were compared in the context of printing speed, surface roughness (Ra), and hardness of printed parts. Results revealed that the multijet fusion process is significantly faster than its counterpart while sacrificing Ra to some extent but the hardness of printed parts is not changed significantly. The selective laser sintering-printed samples had a 15% lower Ra compared with multijet fusion samples. The results also revealed that the multijet fusion process might be able to print composite/multi-materials; however, more research needs to be done.

No abstract