Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269

26th CIRP Design Conference

Design Guidelines for Additive Manufactured Snap-Fit Joints

Christoph Klahna,* , Daniel Singerb , Mirko Meboldtb
a Inspire AG, Leonhardstrasse 21, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland
b ETH Zürich, Leonhardstrasse 21, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +41-44-6327487. E-mail address: klahn@inspire.ethz.ch

Abstract

Snap-fit joints are one of the cheapest and fastest connectors available. However, due to geometrical complexity of the joints and the limitations of
injection molding, they are used almost exclusively in large-scale manufactured products. Additive manufacturing offers the possibility to create
end-user products in small and medium numbers with almost unlimited design complexity. This clears the way for new solutions using snap-fit
joints to be explored. In this contribution, the existing design guidelines for snap-fit joints are challenged with the design potentials of additive
manufacturing. The general working principles of snap-fit joints prove to be simple, clear, and safe independent of the manufacturing process.
While the principles remain unchanged, the advantages of additive manufacturing are utilized to improve the integration in the product and the user
handling. By applying the design restrictions of the additive manufacturing processes Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) and Selective Laser
Sintering (SLS) the existing guidelines are extended for new manufacturing processes. To demonstrate the new concepts and the capabilities
of additive manufactured snap-fit joints a showcase is conceptualized, designed in detail and produced using Fused Deposition Modeling and
Selective Laser Sintering. A lid of a container, similar to a jar, is designed as an integrated single component. Aspects of haptics and usability are
integrated, resulting in a lid that can easily be assembled and disassembled using one hand only. The design features springs and snap-fit joints
adapted to the advantages and limitations of additive manufacturing.

©c 2016
2016TheThe Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V.
B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Professor Lihui Wang.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 26th CIRP Design Conference
Keywords: Additive Manufacturing; Selective Laser Sintering; Fused Deposition Modeling; Design Guideline; Snap-Fit Joints

1. Snap-Fit Joint common features to prevent this. [2,8]

Snap-fit joints are used in a large variety of applications. A
Snap-fit joints are an efficient and easy way to assemble parts few basic types of connectors can be freely adapted and com-
without the need for tools or fasteners. The two parts are pushed bined to meet the requirements and circumstances of a given
together and snap-fits lock their position. The user doesn’t nec- design situation. This results in a large diversity of design ex-
essarily have to have access to the snap-fit joint in order to as- amples. The three most common types are presented in the
semble it. Because of this simple procedure, snap-fit assembly following subsections.
can be automatized easily [1]. Depending on the design of the
snap-fit the connection is either permanent or can be released
by a force or tools. 1.1. Cantilever Snap-Fit Joints
The key criterion of snap-fits is the displacement of flexible
features during assembly and disassembly. Snap-fit joints are Cantilever snap-fit joints are the most common form of snap-
often used in plastic parts. The elasticity and permitted strain fit joints. They are easy to implement in a design because they
of plastic materials allow large deflections without damage to have a simple geometric shape and the strain during joining is
the part. Other, less flexible materials require additional ele- easy to calculate. The basic design is depicted in figure 1 and
ments like metal springs [2–4]. In the joined state the snap-fits consists of a cantilever beam with a tapered hook at its tip and
are usually load free or have only small displacement. This is a matching recess in the joining partner. The tapered surface
especially important for plastic snap-fits, because stressed plas- slides along the surface of the joining partner and bends the
tics tend to creep and will lose any pretension over time [3,5–7]. cantilever. In the final position the hook reaches the recess and
Due to the flexibility of snap-fits additional, stiff locator el- snaps back into the undeformed state. Depending on the surface
ements are needed to align the joining partners. Without this angles of the hook and the recess the joint is either permanent or
alignment a force on the partners can displace the snap-fit and releases at a separation force against the engagement direction.
release the form fit of the joint. Lugs, catches or recesses are The cantilever doesn’t necessarily have to be a straight bar.
Other designs with L- or U-shaped cantilevers are also common
in plastic parts. Those shapes have two main advantages: (i) the
2212-8271  c 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. cantilever is longer compared to a straight bar without using
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Professor Lihui Wang.
more space, thus allowing lower deflection forces in compact

2212-8271 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 26th CIRP Design Conference
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.04.130
 Christoph Klahn et al. / Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269 265

a) seperated b) during joining c) assembled

Fig. 1. Displacement of cantilever during joining
Fig. 3. Examples of jars with annular snap-fit joints [5]

situations, and (ii) L- and U-shaped cantilevers on the edge of a

part don’t require sliders in an injection molding tool. 1.4. Conventional Manufacturing of Snap-Fit Joints and De-
sign Restrictions

1.2. Torsion Snap-Fit Joints As mentioned before most snap-fit joints are found in plastic
parts, because of the elasticity of this material. Snap-fits are
While cantilever beams are deflected by bending of a beam also found in parts made from other materials like wood [10] or
the torsion snap-fit primarily deflects by twisting of a bar. Fig- metal [4] but are less common. Therefore this section will focus
ure 2 depicts examples of torsion snap-fits. Torsion snap-fits on manufacturing and design restrictions of thermoplastic snap-
like the one depicted in figure 2(b) are a simple method to cre- fit joints.
ate separable connections. Extending the beam of the hook be- The majority of thermoplastics are processed by extrusion,
yond the axis of the torsion bar creates a seesaw mechanism. A which is a continuous process to manufacture simple, elongated
push on the free end of the beam lifts the hook and releases the shapes like tubes, sheets and films [11]. The design of snap-fit
joint. joints is limited in this process to simple cantilevers. An ex-
ample for extruded snap-fit joints is found in cable ducts. Sec-
ond in terms of processed mass comes plastic injection molding
[11]. Injection molding is capable to mass produce complex
parts at high quality and low costs [12,13]. The process allows
a) torsion snap-fit b) separable torsion snap-fit the integration of different mechanical functions like guides,
snap-fit joints and other features into a single part.
Fig. 2. Permanent (a) and separable (b) torsion snap-fits A key element in the injection molding process is the tool-
ing. Molten plastic is injected into the mold, cooled down until
it solidifies and the finished part is ejected. The tooling is a so-
phisticated, high-tech product with many mechanical and ther-
1.3. Annular Snap-Fit Joints mal functions that determine the productivity of process and the
quality of the produced parts [12–14]. This makes the tooling
Annular snap-fit joints are often used to connect circular or a significant upfront investment. The complexity and cost of a
elliptic parts, like containers/lids or pens/caps. In this type of tool can be reduced by proper design the plastic part. One cost
snap-fit joint a ridge around the circumference of one part locks driver in injection molding tools are sliders. Sliders are needed
into a groove in the second part. During the assembly tensile or to form and demold undercuts on a plastic part. Undercuts and
compressive hoop stresses occur together with bending. These the need for sliders should be avoided by designing plastic parts
multiaxial stresses can be a challenge in designing the joint accordingly. Figure 4 shows three different designs of a can-
properly [2,5]. For simple circular geometries with constant tilever snap-fit. The undercut in figure 4 (a) requires special
wall thickness the strain can be estimated based on the different provision in the injection molding tool for demolding the part.
diameters of the joining partners [9]. If the hook is designed with an angle so that the snap-fit joint
The key property of annular snap-fits is the stretching and can be disassembled by a separation force and the cantilever
compression of the circumference. A circular arrangement of can deflect in the open mold, then it is possible to demold the
hooks is not an annular snap-fit, because the deflection is bend- part by force. More common and applicable to all types of un-
ing dominated [2]. dercuts are sliders, which are pulled back during demolding. In
Figure 3 depicts two examples of annular snap-fit joints be- some cases it is possible to integrate the snap-fit into the design
tween a cylindrical jar and its lid. The difference between both of the ejector pins of the injection molding tool [14]. In gen-
designs is that in figure 3 (a) the jar is stretched while the lid eral it is better choice to avoid undercuts during the design of
is compressed and in figure 3 (b) the deformation is vice-versa. a plastic part and reducing the effort to design and manufacture
[2] the tooling. The examples in figure 4 (b) and (c) do not need
Depending on the design of the joining partners annular any special provisions for demolding, because the hooks of the
snap-fit joints exhibit very different properties. They are easy snap-fits are accessible from the other halve of injection mold-
to lock and release like in pen caps or provide a permanent, ing tool. In figure 4(b) a slot in the part allows a slender element
non-releasing, connection depending on the angles and diame- to reach across the cavity and form the hook. The tooling for the
ters of the joining elements. In both cases a free rotation may design in 4(c) is even simpler, because the designer can place
be permitted [2]. the separation line of the tool along the edge of snap-fit.
266 Christoph Klahn et al. / Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269

part end product [25]. For a designer this is challenge and op-
slot portunity at the same time, because he is required to leave the
undercut
ground of familiar and proven designs to come up with innova-
tive new solutions. The first step in this process is to identify
parts and assemblies where additive manufacturing offers a ben-
efit [26]. After deciding for a suitable design strategy [24] he
a) Tooling with b) Slot to avoid c) Snap-fit develops a design concept and proceeds to detailed part design.
slider required undercut placed on edge Today there is little (but growing) support for the last two
Fig. 4. Design measures to avoid undercuts at injection molded snap-fit joints
steps of concept development and detailed design. A few de-
[6] sign guidelines were published in the last years that provide
information on the design limits for certain elements e.g. min-
imum wall thickness in different processes [27–29]. This kind
Similar design principle can also be applied to other types of of information is of high value during detailed design. In the
snap-fit joints. concept phase it is of little use, because the guidelines don’t
show ways to implement certain function. For guidance on this
feature level a designer has to find inspiration from examples of
2. Additive Manufacturing good AM designs. The following guidelines and example are
intended to show new possibilities for snap-fit joints and how
The term additive manufacturing refers to a group of to overcome restrictions of additive manufacturing by design.
manufacturing processes capable of manufacturing three-
dimensional objects by adding material in a layer-by-layer pro-
cess based on a 3D-CAD-model and without any tooling [15]. 3. New Designs for Additive Manufactured Snap-Fit Joints
The additive manufacturing processes cover a wide range of
process mechanisms and materials. The mechanical proper- Based on the previously described properties of snap-fit
ties and long term stability of the produced parts depend on joints the user interacts during two operations with a snap-fit
the applied process. Some processes for polymers, like stere- joint. He closes the connection by pushing the two parts of a
olithography and binder jetting, are primarily used for proto- joint together. If the joint is designed to be separable he also
typing while others, like fused deposition modeling (FDM) and operates the release mechanism to open the joint. In between
selective laser sintering (SLS) provide sufficient stability and those interactions the joint has to remain securely closed.
robustness for end-user parts. [16–18]
In the process of fused deposition modeling a thermoplastic 3.1. Connection
wire is extruded through a heated nozzle that is moving over a
building platform. After one layer of plastic strains is deposited Within the current design restrictions of injection molding
according to the geometry of the part the building platform is good designs of the mating process of snap-fit joints are known
lowered by the thickness of a layer and the next slice of the part and feasible. Locators help the user to align the parts and guide
is deposited. The mechanical properties of FDM-parts exhibit a the movement until a snapping sound indicates that the connec-
distinct anisotropy. The material is significantly stronger along tion is made. Process and design fulfill the criterion of being
the plastic strains and show inferior properties perpendicular to simple, clear and safe [30]. The authors therefore see little room
the strains. This is due to the poor connections between the for major improvements to the connection of snap-fit joints al-
molten plastic and the already placed strains. Improving this though the freedom of design allows an improved handling by
connection and thus reducing the anisotropy is a topic of ongo- a better placement snap-fits and locators and a longer lifetime
ing research. [19–21] due to less stress peaks. Nevertheless the general design needs
Selected laser sintering is an AM process where a laser beam to be adapted to the restrictions of the different manufacturing
scans a powder bed and selectively solidifies a thermoplastic process. Instead of keeping the tooling simple and avoiding ma-
powder. Once a layer is processed the powder bed is lowered by terial accumulations the designer has to incorporate the charac-
a layer thickness and a coater applies another layer of powder teristics of additive manufacturing like anisotropic mechanical
to the bed. The laser beam melts the powder and part of the properties into the design.
surrounding solid part and ensures a good connection between The topic of anisotropy has been addressed in the past from a
the melt tracks and across layers. In this welding process only process point of view. Various authors pointed out that it would
a minor anisotropy is observed. [22,23] be beneficial to incorporate geometry and load cases into the
Plastics additive manufacturing technologies have a strong filling strategy of AM processes with anisotropic material prop-
economic advantage over conventional manufacturing pro- erties. Figure 5 depicts two different toolpaths in a cantilever
cesses like injection molding, because additive manufacturing snap-fit produced by FDM. The cantilever is oriented in the
doesn’t require any tooling and produces parts directly from a x,y-plane of filament placement. The example in figure 5(a)
CAD-file. Therefor no upfront investment in expensive tooling exhibits a poor orientation with principal stresses perpendicular
is needed which allows small lot sizes and even highly individ- to the filaments. The orientation in figure 5(b) is more favorable
ualized plastic products at reasonable costs. [24] because the strong direction of anisotropic is aligned along the
Another advantage of additive manufacturing common to all direction of principal stresses [19].
processes is the freedom of design. The layer-by-layer process This proposed solution of load adapted filament placement is
allows new designs previously impossible to manufacture be of limited use to engineers. First of all a load adapted strategy
conventional processes and thus improving the functionality of is not implemented in commercial software yet. The machine
 Christoph Klahn et al. / Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269 267

pulling on the snap-fit joint the hook slides along the sloped
contour surface and is deflected until it becomes free of the recess in the
of part F F joining partner. Additive manufactured separable snap-fit joints
behave similar to conventional ones and the same dimensioning
deposited rules are applicable [32].
filament A different mechanism is needed for snap-fit joints that must
y not separate under a separation force, but should be separable
by other means. The torsion snap-fit in figure 2(b) is such a
x a) poor b) good simple mechanism.
Additive manufacturing’s ability to produce multiple, al-
Fig. 5. Poor (a) and good (b) toolpaths to place filaments in a snap-fit according ready assembled parts in one build job allows creating more
to [19] sophisticated kinematics to release the snap-fit joint. The user
interaction is no longer directly translated into a movement of
operator has a limited set of general options for the path plan- the snap-fit, but can be altered to perform complex operations
ning and can’t choose individual strategies for different sections of multiple components. The integration of control guides and
[31]. Second it is applicable to only a few types and orientations cams to convert a simple translational user input into different
of snap-fit joints. No filament placement strategy will solve the stages of a release process does not necessarily lead to higher
problem of poor mechanical properties if the cantilever beam is manufacturing costs since the production costs of additive man-
oriented in build direction. ufacturing are primarily driven by volume and not by complex-
Figure 6(a) depicts a classic cantilever snap-fit design with ity.
the beam oriented along the build direction z. The design is
poor, because the bending stresses are in the weakest direc-
tion of the material and the staircase effect causes notches with 4. Design Guidelines for AM Snap-Fit Joints
stress concentrations. The freedom of design in additive man-
ufacturing gives designers the opportunity to choose the direc- Additive Manufacturing offers a higher freedom of design
tion of deflection independently of the given joining direction. compared to conventional manufacturing technologies. Never-
In figure 6(b) the beam is perpendicular to the joining direc- theless the designer has to follow a few design rules. Those are
tion. During snap-fit joining the material is stressed along the summarized here:
stronger directions of the anisotropic material and the notches General design rules of the chosen material and AM tech-
between layers have less impact on the durability of the can- nology e.g. feasible wall thickness and gap width [27,29].
tilever beam. An additional feature of the beam in figure 6(b) The designer has to pay attention to the movement of differ-
is its curvature to fit into the overall design of the demonstrator ent components in his assembly. Especially the staircase effect
described in section 5. on sloped surfaces has a strong impact on the smoothness of the
relative movement between parts. A movement along the steps
is smooth while a movement perpendicular to the stairs gives a
ratchet or chattering sound and feel.
z z When using an AM process with a pronounced mechanical
anisotropy the designer has to consider the load cases as well.
The durability of the part increases when it is oriented in the
building chamber according to the principal stresses. A pos-
sible conflict between smooth kinematics and stress oriented
toolpaths can be resolved by changing the design as shown in
figure 6. Therefore the orientation of the assembly during the
a) poor b) good build process should be determined early in the design process
based on the desired motion of the parts and the load cases.
Fig. 6. Orientation of cantilever beam with respect to build orientation Additional design features can make the post-processing of
a part easier. When using powder bed based AM processes ad-
The separation of joining direction and the orientation of the ditional openings in the structure help to remove powder out of
flexible features of snap-fits is the biggest extension to existing channels, guides etc.. If the chosen AM process requires sup-
design rules when it comes to the joining process. Some snap-fit port for overhanging structures those should be accessible to
joints are required to be separable either by force or by a release mechanically remove them after the build process. Some pro-
mechanism. The following section shows design opportunities cesses and machine manufacturers allow the use of a second
of additive manufacturing for releasing snap-fit joints. material to build the support structure from soluble material
[16]. The design should allow a sufficient convection of the
3.2. Release solvent around the support by adding additional openings.
These design guidelines are not restricted to snap-fit joints,
There are different ways to release a snap-fit joint. In general but can be applied for different AM processes and applications.
the snap-fit joint releases either by a separation force against the In addition to following the guidelines a designer should also
joining direction or by other means to deflect the snap-fit. The study different design examples and transfer the presented con-
first method calls for a design where the hook exhibits a slope cepts to his specific application. The following section presents
similar to the one in joining direction depicted in figure 1. By a snap-fit and release mechanism as an inspiration.
268 Christoph Klahn et al. / Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269

5. Concept Demonstrator The release mechanism consists of multiple elements that

are connected to one single part. To activate the mechanism the
A showcase was designed to demonstrate the strengths and user pinches the two elements of the interface together. This
possibilities of additive manufactured snap-fit joints. In addi- rotates the control ring and retracts the snap-fits from the lock-
tion to the lock and release function, the showcase was designed ing position. Figure 8 depicts a section of the lid showing the
as a single part without any assembly necessary. To demon- control indentions in ring and the corresponding cams on the
strate a variety of new kinematics and handling concepts the snap-fits.
lock and release features are separated in the design. In order
to be easily accessible and interesting to people, the showcase
is haptically attractive and invites people to play with it. This control ring user interface
includes moving parts and a similarity to everyday objects or
actions.
The showcase is the lid of a jar as it is found in many house- movement for
holds, workshops and offices. For a conventional threaded release and lift
lid two hands are necessary to assemble and disassemble it. snap-fit
The showcase replaces the lid this with a design that can be
closed and opened single-handedly. Assembly is accomplished release cam
through a translational movement and disassembly through the
rotation of a control ring on the lid. Both actions are possi- Fig. 8. Release mechanism to push the snap-fits back
ble without highly coordinated movements allowing for an easy
handling even without visual contact. A second action is integrated in the release mechanism to
The lid was prototyped on an FDM-machine and the final promote the separation of the lid from the jar. Figure 9 depicts
design was manufactured by selective laser sintering. This was a second set of control surfaces which is placed on the top of the
necessary because of the poor mechanical performance of FDM ring. After the snap-fits are retracted the control ring is rotated
which lead to the delamination of filaments in areas with large further and this second set is acted. The control indentions in
deflections. During the change from one additive manufactur- the ring slide on the cams of the lifting beams, marked in red in
ing process to the other a few modifications were made, espe- figure 7. The beams bend, push against the rim of the jar and
cially the gap width had to be increased to improve the removal lift the lid above the locking position.
of powder. In both additive manufacturing processes the bot-
tom of the lid is facing upwards to reduce support material in
the FDM process and to avoid any stairs on the sliding surfaces
release of snap-fits lifting of lid
of the control ring.
Figure 7 depicts the bottom view of the lid. Some impor-
tant features are highlighted by different colors. The assembly
mechanism is a modified cantilever design. As described in
section 3.1 the cantilever beams, marked in green, are perpen- movement for
dicular to the build direction so the bending strain occurs within release and lift
the layers. Locators are placed around the circumference take
lateral forces on the lid. Without those locators one can open the control ring lifting beam lifting cam
lid by a push on the side. The bottom view also reveals small Fig. 9. Release mechanism to lift the lid of the jar
openings to remove residue powder from the gap between lid
and control ring. In the final position of the control ring hits an end stop block-
ing any further rotation. The control ring is returned into the ini-
tial position by integrated springs. In figure 7 the return springs
release mechanism: release mechanism: are highlighted in blue. The spring’s ends merge into the con-
user interface control ring
trol ring and the center of the lid. The lid is therefore a single
highly complex part with movable elements that are connected
locators by flexible elements. Only additive manufacturing offers the
freedom of design to manufacture the lid. A conventionally
manufactured lid with similar functions would require the de-
signer to split the part in many simple parts and assemble them
afterward.

6. Conclusion
snap-fits
Additive manufacturing’s cost advantage over conventional
release mechanism: plastic processing at low lot sizes allows more plastic products
release mechanism:
return spring lifting beam for niche markets and individualized products. Snap-fit joints
proved to be a simple and cheap method of joining for plas-
Fig. 7. Lid with snap-fit and release mechanism tic products. This contribution analyzed the possibilities and
 Christoph Klahn et al. / Procedia CIRP 50 (2016) 264 – 269 269

restrictions of additive manufactured snap-fit joints. Different [17] T. Wohlers, T. Caffrey (Eds.), Wohlers Report 2015 - Additive Manufac-
potentials for the two main user interactions joining and release turing and 3D Printing State of the Industry - Annual Worldwide Progress
Report, Wohlers Associates, Fort Collins, CO, 2015.
have been identified. Conventionally designed snap-fits showed
[18] A. Gebhardt, Understanding additive manufacturing : Rapid Prototyping -
little room for improvement in the joining mechanism while re- Rapid Tooling - Rapid Manufacturing, 1st Edition, Hanser, Munich, 2012.
lease mechanisms will benefit significantly from the ability to [19] S.-H. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell, S. Roundy, P. K. Wright, Anisotropic
create more sophisticated kinematics. material properties of fused deposition modeling ABS, Rapid Prototyping
The restrictions of additive manufacturing derive mainly 8 (2002) 248 – 257.
[20] A. K. Sood, R. Ohdar, S. Mahapatra, Parametric appraisal of mechanical
from the anisotropy of mechanical properties and the stair-
property of fused deposition modelling processed parts, Materials and De-
case effect on the surface of additive manufactured parts. The sign 31 (2010) 287 – 295.
anisotropy may reduce the durability of load bearing features [21] M. S. Hossain, J. Ramos, D. Espalin, M. Perez, R. Wicker, Improving ten-
while the stair stepping hinders the movement of sliders, con- sile mechanical properties of fdm-manufactured specimens via modifying
trol rings and other kinematics. To incorporate these restrictions build parameters, in: 24th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication
(SFF) Symposium, Austin, TX, 2013, pp. 380 – 392.
in the design one has to determine the build direction of the part
[22] M. Schmid, A. Amado, K. Wegener, Materials perspective of polymers for
at an early design phase. Based on this decision the designer is additive manufacturing with selective laser sintering, Journal of Materials
able to design the part with respect to the properties of the se- Research 29 (2014) 1824 – 1832.
lected additive manufacturing technology. In addition to this [23] J. Breuninger, R. Becker, A. Wolf, S. Rommel, A. Verl, Generative Ferti-
general recommendation a few guidelines were presented. gung mit Kunststoffen, Springer, Berlin, 2013.
[24] C. Klahn, B. Leutenecker, M. Meboldt, Design strategies for the process of
A showcase illustrates how additive manufacturing’s capa-
additive manufacturing, Procedia CIRP 36 (2015) 230–235.
bilities change the way to integrate snap-fits into a part. This [25] R. Hague, Unlocking the design potential of rapid manufacturing, in:
example is intended to inspire designers to add new functions N. Hopkinson, R. Hague, P. Dickens (Eds.), Rapid Manufacturing: An
to their snap-fit designs and respect the specific properties of Industrial Revolution for the Digital Age, 1st Edition, J. Wiley, Chichester,
additive manufacturing. 2006, pp. 5–18.
[26] C. Klahn, B. Leutenecker, M. Meboldt, Design for additive manufacturing
- supporting the substitution of components in series products, Procedia
CIRP 21 (2014) 138 – 143.
References [27] VDI 3405 Part 3, Additive manufacturing processes, rapid manufacturing -
Design rules for part production using laser sintering and laser beam melt-
[1] R. W. Messler, S. Genc, G. A. Gabriele, Integral attachment using snap-fit ing, 2015.
features: a key to assembly automation. part 1 - introduction to integral [28] J. Kranz, D. Herzog, C. Emmelmann, Design guidelines for laser additive
attachment using snap-fit features, Assembly Automation 17 (1997) 143– manufacturing of lightweight structures in TiAl6V4, Journal of Laser Ap-
155. plications 27 (2015) S14001.
[2] P. R. Bonenberger, The first snap-fit handbook: creating attachments for [29] G. Adam, Systematische Erarbeitung von Konstruktionsregeln fr die addi-
plastic parts, Hanser, Munich, 2000. tiven Fertigungsverfahren Lasersintern, Laserschmelzen und Fused Depo-
[3] U. Delpy, H.-G. Adelhard, B. Bader, T. Schmaus, J. Schmitz, E. Siege- sition Modeling, 1st Edition, Shaker, Aachen, 2015.
mund, G. Würtz, Schnappverbindungen aus Kunststoff, Expert, Ehningen, [30] G. Pahl, W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen, K.-H. Grote, Konstruktionslehre - Grund-
1989. lagen erfolgreicher Produktentwicklung Methoden und Anwendung, 7th
[4] U. Poestgens, Das schraub- und werkzeuglose Montagesystem - Innovative Edition, Springer, Berlin, 2007.
Befestigung fr die industrielle Blechverarbeitung, no. 296 in Die Biblio- [31] G. Fornasini, L. C. Schmidt, A call for FDM design rules to include road
thek der Technik, Verl. Moderne Industrie, Munich, 2006. deposition, in: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engi-
[5] M. J. Troughton, Handbook of plastics joining - A practical guide, 2nd neering Design (ICED15), Design Society, Milan, 2015.
Edition, William Andrew, Norwich, 2008. [32] K. Torossian, D. Bourell, Experimental study of snap-fits using additive
[6] BASF, Snap-fit design manual (2007). manufacturing, in: 26th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication
[7] Bayer Material Science LLC, Snap-fit joints for plastics - a design guide, (SFF) Symposium, Austin, TX, 2015, pp. 1794– 1803.
Pittsburg (2013).
[8] S. Genc, R. W. Messler, G. A. Gabriele, A systematic approach to integral
snap-fit attachment design, Research in Engineering Design 10 (1998) 84–
93.
[9] D. Küper, Ausführung und Beispiele von Schnapp-Verbindungen, in: VDI-
Wissensforum (Ed.), Konstruieren mit Kunststoffen, 4th Edition, Springer,
Düsseldorf, 2006, pp. 175–210.
[10] C. Robeller, P. Mayencourt, Y. Weinand, Snap-fit joints: Cnc fabricated,
integrated mechanical attachment for structural wood panels, in: D. Gerber,
A. Huang, J. Sanchez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference
of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA),
Design Agency, Los Angeles, 2014, pp. 189–198.
[11] M. Xanthos, D. Todd, Plastics processing, in: H. Mark (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of Polymer Science and Technology, 3rd Edition, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim,
2004, pp. 1–29.
[12] G. Pötsch, W. Michaeli, Injection molding: An introduction, 2nd Edition,
Hanser Gardner, Munich, 2008.
[13] F. Johannaber, Injection molding machines: A user’s guide, 4th Edition,
Hanser Gardner, Munich, 2008.
[14] G. Menges, W. Michaeli, P. Mohren, Spritzgiewerkzeuge - Auslegung,
Bau, Anwendung, 6th Edition, Hanser, Munich, 2007.
[15] ISO/ASTM 52921, Terminology for Additive Manufacturing - Coordinate
Systems and Test Methodologies, 2013.
[16] U. Berger, A. Hartmann, D. Schmid, Additive Fertigungsverfahren - Rapid
Prototyping, Rapid Tooling, Rapid Manufacturing, 1st Edition, Europa
Lehrmittel, Haan-Gruiten, 2013.