Content uploaded by Nandkishor Dhawale
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nandkishor Dhawale on Feb 10, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022
Impact Factor: 7.569
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1178
An Application of 3D Printing Technology for
Rapid Prototyping of an IoT Enabled Sensor
Enclosure
Nandkishor M. Dhawale 1, Dinkar V. Ghewade 2, Sanket S. Patil 3, Rajiv S. Gangatirkar 3,
Neeraj A. Inamdar 3
HoD, Department of Instrumentation Engineering, P.V.P. Institute of Technology Budhgaon, Sangli, India1
Principal, P.V.P. Institute of Technology Budhgaon, Sangli, India2
U.G. Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, P.V.P. Institute of Technology Budhgaon, Sangli, India3
ABSTRACT: IoT and embedded electronics is getting popular due to its versatile applications in various fields for
domestic, commercial and industrial usage. However electronics or electrical systems that are primarily built using
electronics, needs enclosures to protect it from the environment as well as for maintaining its privacy concerns. 3D
printers are valuable to rapidly prototype/fabricate/build enclosures for custom applications. The steps, involved in
rapid prototyping using 3D printers start from understanding the specification and measurement requirements e.g.
colour, look, dimensions, and tolerances. Followed by designing the model using a specialized computer-aided
designing (CAD) software application. After modelling and designing in CAD, the file is converted and saved with a
different file extension called the Standard Tessellation Language (.stl). Design files with the .stl extension can be fed
to the most widely used 3D printers on the market today. Finally, printer parameters must be optimally set to print
insert jobs automatically with minimal human intervention. The purpose of this document is to demonstrate a project
and document all steps related to rapid prototyping of packages/enclosures for custom IoT-enabled sensors. It also
summarizes the experience and strengths and weaknesses of using this technology in general.
KEYWORDS: 3D printing, FDM, IoT, Sensors, agriculture, rapid prototyping, design thinking, product, design,
engineering.
I. INTRODUCTION
The term IoT (Internet of Things) has recently become more relevant to the real world, mainly due to the
improvement of mobile devices, integrated and ubiquitous communication devices, cloud computing services, and data
analysis algorithms [1]. Through the IoT, communication extends to all things that surround us through the Internet. It
is not only machine-to-machine communication, wireless sensor network, sensor network, 2G / 3G / 4G, GSM, GPRS,
RFID, WIFI, GPS, microcontroller, microprocessor, etc. [2]. These are considered as the assistive technologies that
make the IoT possible applications [3]. However, most systems based on the IoT consist of integrated hardware using
electronic or electrical systems, and therefore require an enclosure to protect it from environmental influences and
maintain its privacy concerns. This involves using various materials, such as metal plates or plastics, and turning them
into products by applying different manufacturing processes (such as metal plate processing or plastic moulding). One
of the main shortcomings of traditional manufacturing technology is its limitations, and a large amount of capital
investment is required to establish the industry [4]. Unlike traditional subtractive manufacturing technology, additive
manufacturing technology has unlimited possibilities. In additive manufacturing, you can start with a basic printer and
then expand to more advanced industrial-grade 3D printers as needed. This is also supported by many researchers,
because their reports can always find the idea of using 3D printing technology to develop habitats on other planets
[5,6,7]. The first 3D printing process was based on stereolithography technology invented by Japanese researcher Dr.
Hideo Kodama in the 1970s. Fused deposition modelling 3D printing technology was developed by Scott Crump in the
1980s, who later founded Stratasys Ltd., a leading 3D printer manufacturer [8].
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1179
II. RELATED WORK
Now, one of the most widely used manufacturing techniques in plastic products is injection moulding. However,
it requires a huge machine and it requires a high-quality, accurate moulds. Therefore, a large capital investment is
required [9]. And the idea of using fused deposition modelling 3D printing technology to make commercial-grade
products can help save the huge capital investment required for the injection moulding process. 3D printers are
built using electromechanical hardware components. From a structural point of view, the basic 3D printer consists
of a printing bed, extruder, filament, which are integrated together in a three -axis motion table, where everything is
controlled by a specially designed controller, also known as the motherboard [10]. From an application perspective,
3D printing products involve following the procedures for designi ng 3D parts in any 3D modelling software (such
as AutoCAD, Fusion 360, FreeCAD, etc.). Then convert the 3D parts into the standard tessellation language
abbreviated as STL, and then provide it to the cutting software, which cuts the 3D parts into small uni ts, and allows
the cutting machine to output G code information acceptable to the 3D printer motherboard. All these steps have
been outlined in a previously published article [10 ,11]. The objective of this article is to discuss a study conducted
by the authors that used a low-cost 3D printer to quickly prototype an enclosure for a customized IoT enabled
sensor system. This article also summarizes the experiences as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using
this technology in general. This article is an attempt to help readers to find answers to some questions such as:
Selection of 3D printers based on power and materials used to meet the specifications as well as the time, cost and
quality analysis.
III. MATERIALS AND METHODS
III a1 MEETING WITH P OTENTIAL CUSTOMER
The details of the potential first prototype of the pre -commercial grade product is summarized in table 1. This was
when and where the lead author approached the founder of Smart Food Safe Solutions Inc. Canada, Mr. Prasant
Prusty sir and gave him information on IoT enabled sensor development [3] and enclosure design with 3D printing
and prototyping option. Also, all technical information was shared in regards to the potential prototyping of pre -
commercial grade product and the cost associated with the rapid prototyping techniques and what advantages this
technique gives over the traditional manufacturing techniques. Later the customer was convinced and he shared the
details of the requirements of his potential product that could be tried manufacturing using 3D Printing Technology.
Considering the requirements an initial sketch was drawn and then a details 3D Design/Model was created using Catia
P3 V5-6 R2017; (a proprietary application software tool by by Dassault Système, to create 3D computer-aided
designs). The details of the design is shown in figure 2. From design it was clear that product to be printed was a
machine and it consisted of two parts. 1) Main body of enclosure, 2) Cover lid with text label (as a sticker).
Considering the requirements and the designs the next step was to assess the cost associated with the rapid
prototyping techniques and what advantages this technique gives us over the traditional manufacturing techniques.
The details are specified in the next sections.
Table 1. Information of the first prototype commercial grade product to be created using 3D Printing.
Name of Invention
3d Printed Enclosure Design for IoT Enabled Sensor Based on RF & WiFi
(Coordinator Node).
Idea Patent Applicants Name
PVPIT Budhgaon and Smart Food Safe Solutions Inc.
Company Name/Company
Product and Services
Founder of Smart Food Solutions Inc. Canada.
Designed by and helping credits
during managing the 3D printing
Mr. Sanket S. Patil, Mr. Rajiv S. Gangatirkar, and Mr. Neeraj A. Inamdar, UG
Students -Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, P.V.P. Institute of Technology
Budhgaon, Sangli, Maharashtra, India
Credits on Mentorship
Dr. Dinkar V. Ghewade, President Innovation Cell, Dr. Nandkishor M.
Dhawale, Vice President Innovation Cell, P.V.P. Institute of Technology
Budhgaon, Sangli, Maharashtra, India
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1180
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. The designed parts of the to be 3d Printed Enclosure Design for IoT Enabled Sensor Based on RF & WiFi
(Coordinator Node), (a) Main body of enclosure; (b) Cover lid with text label.
III a2 COST CALCULATIONS FOR MASS PRODUCTION USING INJECTION MOULDING PROCESS
The cost considerations of the injection moulding process are the initial cost of making the mould, the cost of the
material, the cost of machining, the cost of labour, etc. In addition, when we choose the injection moulding process, the
minimum number of parts that we must carry has certain standards to order according to the processing and economic
factors of in the injection moulding industry. According to the results of the survey, the minimum number of parts to be
injected during the injection moulding process is 1000, so we calculate the unit cost according to the following formula.
Total Cost = Mould Making + Material + Labour + Machining Maintenance and other (EQ.1)
Table 2. Information summarizing the total cost of product using injection moulding.
Mould Making Cost (a)
Material cost (b)
Labour cost (c)
Machining, Maintenance
and other (d)
1,50,000, (Local mould
maker)
1000 units * 200 gram =
200000 grams = 200 kg.
(Average cost of
commonly used plastic
moulding Materials like
ABS, Polyethylene. )
Overall Material cost 200*
80 =16,000
Rs. 600 per day.
(Local market labour cost.)
Rs. 8000 per hour.
Total hours = 6
Total cost = 6* 8000 =
48000 (Local industry
information.)
So total cost per product using EQ.1 will be, 1,50,000 + 16,000 + 600 + 48000 = 2,14,600
Therefore, the unit cost per product shall be 2,14,600/1000 = Rs. 214.6
III a3 COST CALCULATIONS FOR BATCH PRODUCTION USING FDM 3D PRINTING
The cost considerations for mass production using FDM 3D printing process include product design cost, material
cost, processing cost, labour cost, etc. Order. Therefore, we can manufacture products with minimal capital investment
according to customer orders, which will be an advantage of the plastic moulding process. The formula used to
calculate the costs associated with using FDM 3D printing is listed as EQ.2, as shown in
:
Total cost = Product Design + Material + Machining + Labour (EQ.2)
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1181
Table 3. Information summarizing the total cost of product using 3D Printing.
Product design cost (a)
Material cost (b)
Machining, Maintenance and
other (c)
Labour cost (d)
It took 1.5 hours for the
student authors to design
the product in Catia.
Taking arbitrary average
hourly rates charged by
designers as RS. 700 per
hour. Therefore, 700*1.5
= Rs. 1050. (The product
design cost is one time
cost.)
Thus, is easily
calculated by the slicer
tool. As per the tool the
total material
consumption per
product was ~ 200
grams.
Generally, 3d printer
PLA filament cost is
around Rs. 950 per
1000 gram. So, the
material cost per
product was supposed
to be 200*0.95=
Rs.190
Machining cost is considered
keeping in mind electricity
consumption expenses and
maintenance cost. 360-watt
machines consumption 1 kW in
roughly 2.8 hours. As per slicer tool
information. The time required for
whole machine for printing = 8
hours.
Therefore, total kW consumption =
4.11
electricity consumption expenses.
4.11* 8 = Rs. 33
Maintenance cost was considered to
be RS. 10 per hour.
8*10 = Rs. 80.
As per the slicer tool
the printing time was
supposed to be 8 hrs.
Considering an average
hourly labour rate as 50
Rs
there for the associated
labour cost was to be 8
*50 = 400.
(Labour cost is
minimum as machines
are automatic only
requires human
intervention during start
of print and at end of
print to remove part.)
So total cost per product using EQ.2 will be, 1050 + 190 + 113 + 400 = Rs. 1753 Per Product Prototype
However, considering the designing cost as to be charged only once the unit product cost could be Rs. 703.
As shown in Tables 2 and 3 and in Figure 3, it is clear that the cost of 3D printing for each product is almost 3.5
times the cost of each product related to the injection moulding process. However, customers learned of its benefits by
continuing to use 3D printing. One of the main reasons is that your products can enter the market very early. At the
same time, it avoided a large capital investment and helped you reduce the burden of product sales during the injection
moulding process. After simply putting these thoughts in front of Mr. Prasant Prusty, he was impressed and sent an
amber signal to move on. However, this also brings another challenge to the production of cubes with good
compressive strength. This was achieved by redesigning the product and 3D printing while maintaining a high fill
percentage, so the product passed the test and helped confirm the transaction.
III b MORE CHALLENGES
Once the customer is satisfied. Afterwards, he briefly presented the general idea and general aesthetics of the
Enclosure Design for IoT Enabled Sensor Based on RF & WiFi (Coordinator Node) and insisted on whether it can be
manufactured at the lowest cost through 3D printing technology. The client already has experience with his products,
and all the necessary knowledge is obtained from him through a small meeting to discuss the characteristics of the
product, the parameters, the aesthetics of the product and the general shapes and dimensions of the product. Taking into
account all the points discussed at meeting a design was created using Catia and sent to the customer for review. The
customer was impressed by the design and aesthetics of the product and, based on his experience in machine building
in recent years, made some suggestions for improvement. After re-adjusting the design requirements, the first prototype
was printed using the FDM 3D printing process and tested under real conditions. Then it was now time to select the
printer, printing parameters, hardware changes, etc. For usability reasons, a choice was made between the Geeetech
A10 3D printer and the Creality ender 3D printer.
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1182
Figure 2. Comparison of cost involved in injection Moulding and 3D printing.
III b1 COMPARISON BETWEEN PRINTERS
Table 4. Comparison between low cost readily available 3D Printers
Aspects
Category
Aspects
Creality’s Ender 3
Geeetech A10
Mechanical
Drive system
Stepper motor, Belt driven
Stepper motor, Belt driven
Build volume.
230*230*250
230*230*260
Extruder system
Bowdon system
Bowdon system
Material compatibility.
PLA, ABS, PETG
PLA, ABS, TPU, PETG,
Dimensional accuracy
0.1 mm
0.1 mm
Electronics
Motherboard
V3.1.7 32 bits motherboard
V4.2.7 32 bits motherboard
End stops
Limit switch
Limit switch
Temperature control
Thermistor based PID control
Thermistor based PID control
Power supply
24 volt, 10 ampere Standard
PSU.
24 volt, 15 ampere Standard
PSU.
Power rating
260 w
360 w
Motors’s
NEMA 17 stepper motors
NEMA 17 stepper motors
General
Max. Temperature Nozzle,
Heat bed
250, 110
260, 110
Automatic Bed Levelling
No
No
Input type
LCD with Knob
LCD with Knob
Figure 3 illustrates the two low-cost 3D printer options available. It can be seen from Table 4 that there is not much
difference between the printers, so both printers are suitable for printing this product. The only difference between
printers is power consumption. The rated power of Geeetech A10 is 360 W, and the rated power of ender 3 is 260 W,
so Geeetech A10 will consume more power.
III b2 MATERIAL SELECTION
According to customer requirements for cost reduction. The design is based on minimum material requirements.
This means keeping enough material in the specific dimensions of the part to withstand the load applied to it. The
printed PLA material has a strength of approximately 42 N/mm2 (may vary depending on temperature and printing
parameters), which is sufficient to withstand pressure when normal human operations are considered. Compared with
other materials, PLA materials are also easy to print. In addition, when we consider the use of the product, it will be
used indoors, so it does not involve any major degradation problems. One of the other strong competitors in the
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1183
selection of materials is ABS material, but compared to PLA, it is a bit expensive and difficult to print. Therefore, the
production of some products was selected based on mechanical principles and compatibility with PLA 3D printing
materials.
(a)
(b)
Figure 3. Images of the low cost readily available 3D Printers, (a) Creality Ender 3; (b) Geeetech A10.
Figure 4. Comparison of various machining aspects of different nozzles in terms of cost.
III b3 SELECTION OF MACHINING PARAMETERS
The selection of processing parameters is entirely based on learning and experience from printing and prototyping
earlier. For this product, a 0.6mm nozzle was selected for the fastest printing without affecting the strength and surface
finish characteristics. Figure 4 below summarizes the comparison of time and material co nsumption for 0.4 mm nozzles
and 0.6 mm nozzles while maintaining other printing parameters of the same. It can be seen from Figure 3 that the
0.6mm nozzle increases material consumption by 5 grams, but time consumption is reduced by 1.5 hours. In terms of
cost, the 0.6mm nozzle increases the cost of the material by Rs. 6. And reduce the cost of electricity (based on time
consumption) to Rs. 4. Also, if we consider the production quantity (in the future), the 0.6mm nozzle works fine so
they opt for the 0.6mm nozzle for printing.
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1184
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 4. Comparison of real product assembled after 3 printing all its parts, (a) The main body of the enclosure; (b) the
cover lid with text label (sticker); (c) the partially assembled IoT product [3]; (d) the partially assembled IoT product
without customised enclosure [3].
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Figure 5 shows an example of a real product. It was formed by assembling all printed parts using the procedure
described in the previous section. Various IoT sensor package designs are available on the market, but these are
industrial grade and require a little more capital investment and some skill to operate. In contrast, the enclosures
described in this article are designed and prototyped primarily with home needs in mind. The housing was kept as small
as possible to meet all functional requirements. After a bit of marketing, customers started increasing their case orders.
As a result, we were able to print and assemble the enclosure on an order basis. At the request of our customers, we
were able to print and ship about 20 cases to various parts of India. By carrying out this project from the development
stage to the production stage, we gained a lot of experience, especially marketing knowledge.
V. CONCLUSION
New technologies appear every day, making existing technologies obsolete. Traditional manufacturing technology
is efficient and effective for a specific manufacturing department. However, additive manufacturing technology can be
easily adapted to the requirements of the product without major changes to its structure. Additive manufacturing
technology is becoming more and more common and people see it as a hobby or a small business. When considering
design and prototyping of IoT based hardware, it is important to protect the electronic components as well as to add
aesthetics to the prototype (product). Therefore, using modelling and FDM techniques such as 3D printing techniques,
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)
| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2347-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.569|
|| Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2022 ||
| DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102038 |
IJIRSET © 2022 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 1185
you can quickly design and print the case according to the selected assembly or placement of all components. In this
article, we were able to show you a simple approach to implementing an IoT project in an inexpensive way. It was also
possible to document a complete and structured set of instructions to rapidly prototype the enclosure. It was also
possible to find the answers to some questions such as: Selection of 3D printers based on power and materials used to
meet the specifications as well as the time and cost analysis. Finally, the long print times compared to the low cost of
capital of 3D printers generally determine the benefits of choosing this technology for mass production. However, this
technology is ideal for rapid prototyping of custom packages and is described in this article.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Authors would like to thank Mr. Prasant Prusty, Founder of Smart Food Safe Solutions Inc. Montreal, Quebec,
Canada for partly sponsoring this project. Also would like to extend their thanks to Mr. Nitesh Raju Chavan,
Co-Founder, Autosustaintive 3D printing and prototyping services, Vishrambagh, Sangli, Maharashtra, India, for his
valuable guidance with 3D printing technology. Also would like to thanks to the internship students (Mr. Kiran A.
Shinde, Mr. Rohan S. Kulkarni, Mr. Yash V. Arbole, Mr. Pratik S. Patil, Mr. Divesh N. Shaha, Mr. Akshay P. Landage,
and Mr. Swapnil C. Kadav) for their hard working contributions in various activities starting form research, to design,
prototyping and testing it.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Gokhale, O. Bhat, S. Bhat. Introduction to IOT. International Advanced Research Journal in Science,
Engineering and Technology (IARJSET). 5 (2018) 41-44. ISSN (Online) 2393-8021. https://iarjset.com/
10.17148/IARJSET.2018.517
[2] K.K. Patel, S.M. Patel. Internet of Things-IOT: Definition, Characteristics, Architecture, Enabling Technologies,
Application & Future Challenges. International Journal of Engineering Science and Computing (IJESC). 6 (2016):
6122-6131. ISSN 2321 3361. https://ijesc.org/ 10.4010/2016.
[3] N. M. Dhawale, S.A. Patil, A.R. Rajput, K.A. Shinde, R. S. Kulkarni, N.R. Chavan. On Design Rapid Prototyping
and Testing of IoT Enabled Sensors using Open Source Tools. International Journal of Advances in Engineering
and Management (IJAEM). 3(2021): 168-173. ISSN (Online): 2395-5252. www.ijaem.net
[4] Anastasiou, A., Tsirmpas, C., Rompas, A., Giokas, K., & Koutsouris, D. 3D printing: Basic concepts mathematics
and technologies. 13th IEEE International Conference on BioInformatics and BioEngineering (2013):1-4.
[5] Thabiso Peter Mpofu, Cephas Mawere, Macdonald Mukosera. The Impact and Application of 3D Printing
Technology, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 3(2014): 2148-2152. ISSN (Online): 2319-
7064. www.ijsr.net
[6] N. Shahrubudin, T.C. Lee, R. Ramlan. An overview of 3D Printing Technology: Technological, Materials, and
Applications. In: second international conference on sustainable materials processing and manufacturing,
proceeding manufacturing. 35(2019): 1286-1296. 10.1016/j.promfg.2019.06.089
[7] A. Ramya, S.L. Vanapalli. 3D Printing Technologies in Various Applications. International Journal of
Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET). 7 (2016): 396-409. ISSN (Online): 0976-6359.
www.iaeme.com.
[8] F. Thewihsen. If 3D printing has changed the industries of tomorrow, how can you get ready today.
www.ey.com/3D printing, EYG NO.02180-163GBL
[9] Perez, K Blake & Wood, Kristin. 2019. Additive Manufacturing (AM) Design Principle Cards.
10.13140/RG.2.2.12342.55365.
[10] A. A. Shinde, R.D. Patil, A.R. Dandekar, N.M. Dhawale. 3D Printing Technology, Material Used For Printing
and its Applications. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research (IJSER). 11(2020): 105-108.
ISSN: 2229-5518. https://www.ijser.org/
[11] N.M. Dhawale, N.R. Chavan, D.A. Patil, S.M. Kumbhar. 3D Printing Technology and its Applications in Real-
World Scenario. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET).
11(2022): 1167 - 1174. e-ISSN: 2319-8753. www.ijirset.com. 10.15680/IJIRSET.2022.1102036