Multi-axis Additive Manufacturing:

Development of Slicer and Toolpath

for 2.5D/3D/5D Printing

Gidugu Lakshmi Srinivas, Marius Laux, Vishnu Parameswaran Nair,

and Mathias Brandstötter

Abstract In 3D printing, components are created incrementally along the normal

direction through the sequential deposition of material. This methodology stream-
lines the manufacturing process and kinematics of 3D printers. However, due to the
staircase effect, the conventional printing process has drawbacks such as additional
material for supporting structures, more processing time, poor structural strength, and
surface finish. Multi-axis 3D printing is the solution to overcome the stated prob-
lems. Nevertheless, a fully developed slicer is inaccessible. This paper describes the
development of a slicer and toolpath for different printing strategies like 2.5D, 3D,
5D, and demonstrates its surface finish and structural strength. The HAGE1750L
5-axis machine is used to demonstrate the proposed methodology. The machine has
three prismatic joints followed by tilting and rotating print bed. Initially, inverse
kinematic equations of the machine are calculated, which will help give the joint
parameters to the motors. The conformal slicer and toolpath are developed using
the Rhino and Grasshopper software. Users can import or create the model into the
Rhino, and slicer automatically creates the toolpath and G-code in Grasshopper for
printing. The slicer generates isocurves of the geometry and divides the layers into
points. It spiralizes the layers for continuous printing and calculates the flow rate of
the extrusion material using the height of the nonlinear planes. It facilitates various
parameters such as nozzle size, layer height, and thickness. Three tubes are designed,
and compression test is conducted to validate the proposed methodology. Together,

WWW home page: http://www.admire.center.

G. L. Srinivas (B) · M. Laux · V. P. Nair · M. Brandstötter

ADMiRE Research Center, Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, Europastraße 4,
Villach, Austria
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Laux
e-mail: [email protected]
V. P. Nair
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Brandstötter
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 337
D. Pisla et al. (eds.), Advances in Service and Industrial Robotics, Mechanisms
and Machine Science 157, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59257-7_34
338 G. L. Srinivas et al.

the system delivers the design of the geometries, simulates the toolpath, generates
the G-code, and prints models.

Keywords Inverse kinematics · Additive manufacturing · Conformal slicing ·

3D/5D printing · Structural strength · Toolpath planning

1 Introduction

The significance of 3D printing in additive manufacturing (AM) is rapidly increasing,

driven by its applications in prototyping, manufacturing processes, and customization
across various industrial fields [4]. 3D printing can be done in different forms but
fused filament fabrication (FFF) is most popular because of high availability and
low cost [7]. However, 3D printing requires support material for overhangs, which
causes material waste and additional post-processing. The multi-axis printing is the
alternative to overcome these problems and it also improves the structural strength
of the printed parts. However, a fully developed slicer is not available for multi-axis
printer due to its complex structure and it requires the orientation of the nozzle to
generate the G-code [3, 12].
AM exhibits certain limitations, including requirement for support material, sur-
face finish, and anisotropy. Later, researchers are focused multi-axis printing using
CNC machine or robotic arm to overcome the stated problems. In 1998, the first 5-
DOF additive manufacturing machine was developed, using a high-powered laser as
the energy source [11]. R. Fry et al. undertook quantitative experiments to examine
the impact of printing at various orientations relative to gravity, as well as the effects
of dynamically altering the build orientation concerning the build tray when fabri-
cating overhanging features [2]. Lim et al. present an alternative approach known
as curved layer printing, which involves generating a curved toolpath. This innova-
tive curved layer printing method has found applications in diverse fields, including
large-scale construction [10] and prosthetics [1, 6]. Nevertheless, multi-axis printers
often encounter issues related to the collision of the nozzle or extruder head with the
printed parts. Wu et al. proposed collision avoidance algorithm that estimates con-
straints on order of edges [16]. The use of parametric curves, such as Bézier curves,
allows for the creation of complex part contours in FFF. However, aspects like con-
tour manipulation, overlapping, and slicing strategies in the process remain relatively
unexplored. 5-axis printers encounter time challenges in toolpath optimization and
slicing, especially in non-supporting material printing. Improving slicing algorithms
and harmonizing multi-axial printers can enhance control over material deposition,
improving mechanical characteristics [14]. Material extrusion along multiple axes
alters layering locally, distinguishing it from traditional 3D printing [9, 13]. In a study
by Kaill et al., 5-axis printed samples demonstrated predicted mechanical behavior,
outperforming 3D printed samples in compression loading tests [8]. Gunpinar et
al. introduced Helical5AM, a technique employing helical print-paths for five-axis
AM. Non-planar slicing enables material deposition in various directions, enhancing
Multi-axis AM: Slicer and Toolpath for 2.5D/3D/5D Printing 339

mechanical characteristics. This method accelerates collision-free tool orientation

planning and is compatible with curved print-paths [5].
The main objective of this paper is to develop a slicer for multi-axis printing
such as 2.5D, 3D, and 5D. The HAGE 1750L machine is used to demonstrate the
proposed methodology. Initially, the forward and inverse kinematic equations of
the machine are derived to find the joint values q of the machine. The slicer can
easily adopt to the other multi-axis 3D printers by modifying its inverse kinematic
equations. The toolpath generation in the slicer can help to visualize the traces of
nozzle based on the given layer height. Users can change the slicer parameters based
on the requirements and visualize the toolpath automatically. The advantageous of
the multi-axis manufacturing is demonstrated in terms of structural strength and
surface finish by printing the various tubes with three printing strategies. Before
printing with the machine, the NCnetic V2.0 tool is used to check the G-code. It
helps to simulate the path and collision detection among the nozzle, machine parts,
and printed material.

2 Methodology

2.1 2.5D, 3D and 5D Printing

In this paper, three different printing strategies are used such as 2.5D, 3D, and 5D. In
2.5D and 3D printing, the nozzle follows the linear layers and iso curves respectively
and advances in perpendicularly upward direction. Whereas in 5D printing, nozzle
follows the iso curves and it is always normal to the curvature. The advantages and
disadvantages of the different printing strategies as well as types of 5-axis CNC
machine are provided in Fig. 1.

2.2 Forward Kinematics of the HAGE Xyzbc-Trt Machine

with Rotary Axis Offset

This section derives the forward and inverse kinematic equations for the HAGE
1750L machine, which has a serial RRPPP structure. It is a multi-axis CNC machine
used for printing filament or pellet material. It has a print volume of 1.2 × 1.2 × 1 m3
and 0.5 × 0.5 × 0.4 m3 for 3D and 5D printing, respectively. The machine has three
prismatic joints (x yz-axes), and a printing bed that rotates about z-axis (c-rotation)
mounted on tilting table that rotates about y-axis (b-rotation). The machine has rotary
axis offset in the z-direction ( f z ). The coordinate systems of the HAGE 1750L are
shown in Fig. 2. In short, the machine’s configuration is named xyzbc-trt (table rota-
tion/tilting) with rotary offset. The forward kinematics of the machine is calculated
by describing a relation between the printing bed (B) coordinate system and nozzle
340 G. L. Srinivas et al.

Fig. 1 Advantages and disadvantages of 2.5D, 3D, and 5D (types of 5-axis machine)

Fig. 2 a The printing bed (c-rotation) and tilting table (b-rotation) of HAGE 1750L. b Assignment
of coordinate systems of the machine from print bed (B) to nozzle (N) with prismatic and revolute
joints. c Location of the nozzle and its normal and position vector

or extruder (N) coordinate system. This can be defined by a homogenous transfor-

mation matrix BNT by succeeding transformation between the coordinate systems,
as shown in (1). The homogenous transformation matrix of each structural element,
such as c rotation of the bed, offset in z-direction, b-rotation of the tilting table and
linear movements in three directions are shown in (2). The matrix multiplication
gives the forward transformation matrix of the HAGE 1750L, as shown in (3). The
Multi-axis AM: Slicer and Toolpath for 2.5D/3D/5D Printing 341

first 3 × 3 matrix and last column vector represents the orientation and position of
the nozzle, respectively. The last column of (3) is the position vector p, and it can
be written in the matrix form for calculation of inverse form, as shown in (4). In the
following equations, si = sin(θi ) and ci = cos(θi ) hold for i = 4, 5.

B
NT = cB T · cF T · bF T · bN T (1)
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
c4 −s4 0 0 1 0 0 0 c5 0 s5 0 1 0 0 d1
⎢ s c 0 0 ⎥ ⎢ 0 1 0 0⎥ ⎢ 0 1 0 0⎥ ⎢0 1 0 d2 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥·⎢ ⎥·⎢ ⎥
N T = ⎣ 0 0 1 0⎦ · ⎣0
B 4 4
(2)
0 1 Fz ⎦ ⎣−s5 0 c5 0⎦ ⎣0 0 1 d3 − f z ⎦
0 0 01 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

⎡ ⎤
c4 c5 −s4 c4 s5 c4 c5 d1 − s4 d2 + c4 s5 d3 − c4 s5 f z
⎢s4 c5 c4 s4 s5 s4 c5 d1 + c4 d2 + s4 s5 d3 − s4 s5 f z ⎥
⎢ ⎥
N T = ⎣ −s
B
(3)
5 0 c5 −s5 d1 + c5 d3 − c5 f z + f z ⎦
0 0 0 1
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
x c4 c5 −s4 c4 s5 c4 s5 f z d1 d1
⎢ y ⎥ ⎢s4 c5 c4 s4 s5 −s4 s5 f z ⎥ ⎢d2 ⎥ ⎢d2 ⎥
⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥·⎢ ⎥=D·⎢ ⎥ (4)
⎣ z ⎦ ⎣ −s5 0 c5 −c5 f z + f z ⎦ ⎣d3 ⎦ ⎣d3 ⎦
1 0 0 0 1 1 1

2.3 Inverse Kinematics of the Machines

To compute the values of the prismatic joints d1 , . . . , d3 , we are using (4) and the
inverse of D. The final prismatic joint angles of the motors are given in (5), these are
used to reach the target position by the nozzle tip.

d1 = c4 c5 x + s4 c5 y − s5 z + s5 f z (5)
d2 = −s4 x + c4 y (6)
d3 = c4 s5 x + s4 s5 y + c5 z − c5 f z + f z (7)

The orientation of the extruder is computed using the normal vector k of the curve
at divided points as shown in Fig. 2c. The information of the normal vector can be
obtained from the perpendicular frames in Grasshopper. It is equivalent to the first
column of (3), and the rotation angles θ4 and θ5 are provided below.

θ4 = a tan 2(k y , k x ) (8)

θ5 = a sin(−k z ) (9)
342 G. L. Srinivas et al.

3 Conformal Slicing Using Grasshopper

3.1 Slicer for Multi-axis Printing

The Grasshopper software is the visual scripting language used to develop the slicing
algorithm for generating the G-code. Grasshopper is a plugin that runs within the
Rhino CAD modeling software. Different printing strategies (2.5D, 3D, and 5D) are
demonstrated using a non-linear surface tubes such as star, ellipse, and hexagonal,
as shown in Fig. 3. In 2.5D and 3D printing, nozzle follows the linear layers, this
creates the seam at the corner of the object. Whereas in 5D printing, a ramp is created
to eliminate the seam and make the printing spiralize that results in uniform printing
thickness and avoids the retraction of the material [15].
The tubes are designed in the Rhino CAD software, the base and height of the all
geometries are approximately 50 and 100 mm, respectively. The base shape is created
by selecting its respective polygon and control point curve is shaped to extrude the
object using array curve in the software. The loft option is used to visualize the final
geometry by selecting the curves in the sequence of bottom to top. Later, the iso
curve functional block is used to create the nonlinear curves to mimic the geometry
curvature.

3.2 G-Code Generation

The slicer automatically generates the toolpath for imported geometry into Rhino
and the user can select the slicing parameters such as layer height, layer thickness,
nozzle size, etc. Initially, each layer of iso curves are divided into the required number
of points in the slicer and nozzle should follows the cartesian coordinates (x yz) and

Seam Iso Curves

a b c d

Fig. 3 Different non-linear surface tubes such as a hexagonal, b ellipse, c star, and d iso curves of
the star
Multi-axis AM: Slicer and Toolpath for 2.5D/3D/5D Printing 343

Control Cabinet

z y
b
c
x

Printer Control Unit

Fig. 4 The HAGE 1750L machine with control unit and its coordinate systems

normal vector k. Using inverse kinematic equations as detailed in the Sect. 2, joint
parameter are derived as shown in (5) and (6). The flow rate is calculated in the
grasshopper based on the distance between the layers and the line segments [15].
Finally, the printer commands know as G-code is generated from the output of inverse
kinematics equations and flowrate. The code is saved as an MPF file and sent to the
HAGE 1750L machine for printing the models using tough PLA material from the
filament manufacturer Form Futura.

3.3 Experimental Setup

The structural strength of the models is examined using a Zwick Roell Z020 test-
ing machine. The experiment involves positioning the model between compression
plates, applying force using a movable crosshead connected to a 20 kN load cell.
The force is exerted until it decreases to 80% of its maximum value. A force versus
displacement graph is generated and compared among different printed models.

4 Results and Discussion

As detailed in the above section, the G-code generated from the slicer is imported to
the HAGE machine using external drive. The setup of the machine and its coordinate
system is shown in Fig. 4. The printer is controlled by the Siemens Sinumerik 840D
sl with positioning accuracy and print speed as 0.05 mm and 150 mm/s, respectively.
344 G. L. Srinivas et al.

2.5D 3D 5D

Fig. 5 Printed components (star, hexagonal, and ellipse) of 2.5D, 3D, and 5D

2500
Star 2.5D

2000 Star 3D
Applied Force / N

Star 5D

1500 Ellipse 2.5D

Ellipse 3D

1000 Ellipse 5D
Hexa 2.5D

500 Hexa 3D
Hexa 5D
0
0 2 4 6 8
Displacement / mm

Fig. 6 Printed components (star, hexagonal, and ellipse) of 2.5D, 3D, and 5D

The 2.5D models exhibit inferior geometrical features, characterized by a stair-

case effect, in contrast to 3D and 5D printing, as shown in Fig. 5. Each three samples
are printed for compression tests that involves star, ellipse, and hexagonal samples
in 2.5D, 3D, and 5D printing aim to assess their respective structural strengths.

Structural strength: The compression test is conducted to find the structural strength
of the printed components using an universal testing machine (UTM). The average
applied force vs displacement graph is plotted for all test sample, as shown in Fig. 6.
The best maximum of average forces is recorded as 2292.2, 1033.9, and 1627.8 N for
Star 5D, Hexagonal 3D, and Ellipse 5D, respectively. The hexagonal models yield
unexpected findings, experiencing buckling during testing. The maximum value for
Hexa 3D is obtained post-component failure. Overall, the 5D printed components
shown good surface finish and structural strength compared to the 2.5D and 3D.

5 Conclusions

Traditional 3D printing builds parts layer-by-layer along the z-axis, resulting in weak
structures, longer printing times, and the need for support structures. Multi-axis 3D
printing addresses these issues, allowing diverse filament deposition for improved
mechanical characteristics, especially with anisotropic polymers. This paper pro-
posed conformal slicer and toolpath for the multi-axis printer using Rhino CAD and
Multi-axis AM: Slicer and Toolpath for 2.5D/3D/5D Printing 345

Grasshopper software. Initially, forward and inverse kinematics of the HAGE 1750L
machine are derived. The iso curves are generated for nonlinear printing to mimic
the geometric features and extrusion values are calculated using functional blocks in
the Grasshopper. Users can select the different printing strategies, slicer parameters
such as 2.5D, 3D, 5D, nozzle size, layer thickness, layer height etc. The slicer auto-
matically generates the toolpath and G-code for printing. Three different objects are
designed and printed to validate the proposed methodology. The compression test is
conducted to find the structural strength of the components using UTM. The average
force vs displacement graphs are plotted for all test samples. The 5D printing results
for star and ellipse are recorded 11.2 and 19.3% more compared to other printing
strategies. However, the results for ellipse 5D printing is not expected because it is
subjected to more buckling during the test. Overall, the proposed slicer is helpful
for multi-axis printing, and it is easy adoptable for other printers by changing its
kinematic equations.

Acknowledgements This research work was supported by the Federal Ministry for Digital and
Economic Affairs (BMDW) within the framework of “COIN Aufbau”, 8th call of the Austrian
Research Promotion Agency (FFG), iLEAD—project number 884136.

References

1. Anas, S., Khan, M.Y., Rafey, M., Faheem, K.: Concept of 5d printing technology and its
applicability in the healthcare industry. Mater. Today: Proc. 56, 1726–1732 (2022)
2. Fry, N.R., Richardson, R.C., Boyle, J.H.: Robotic additive manufacturing system for dynamic
build orientations. Rapid Prototyp. J. 26(4), 659–667 (2020)
3. Gardner, J., Nethercott-Garabet, T., Kaill, N., Campbell, R., Bingham, G.A., Engstrøm, D.,
Balc, N.: Aligning material extrusion direction with mechanical stress via 5-axis tool paths.
In: 2018 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium. University of Texas at Austin
(2018)
4. Gul, J.Z., Sajid, M., Rehman, M.M., Siddiqui, G.U., Shah, I., Kim, K.H., Lee, J.W., Choi, K.H.:
3D printing for soft robotics–a review. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 19(1), 243–262 (2018)
5. Gunpinar, E., Armanfar, A.: Helical5am: Five-axis parametrized helical additive manufactur-
ing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 304, 117565 (2022)
6. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Vaishya, R.: 5d printing and its expected applications in orthopaedics.
J. Clin. Orthopaed. Trauma 10(4), 809–810 (2019)
7. Kafle, A., Luis, E., Silwal, R., Pan, H.M., Shrestha, P.L., Bastola, A.K.: 3D/4D printing of poly-
mers: fused deposition modelling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and stereolithography
(SLA). Polymers 13(18), 3101 (2021)
8. Kaill, N., Campbell, R.I., Pradel, P., Bingham, G.: A comparative study between 3-axis and
5-axis additively manufactured samples and their ability to resist compressive loading. In: 2019
International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium. University of Texas at Austin (2019)
9. Kubalak, J.R., Wicks, A.L., Williams, C.B.: Exploring multi-axis material extrusion additive
manufacturing for improving mechanical properties of printed parts. Rapid Prototyp. J. 25(2),
356–362 (2018)
10. Lim, S., Buswell, R.A., Valentine, P.J., Piker, D., Austin, S.A., De Kestelier, X.: Modelling
curved-layered printing paths for fabricating large-scale construction components. Addit.
Manuf. 12, 216–230 (2016)
346 G. L. Srinivas et al.

11. Milewski, J.O., Lewis, G.K., Thoma, D., Keel, G., Nemec, R.B., Reinert, R.: Directed light
fabrication of a solid metal hemisphere using 5-axis powder deposition. J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 75(1–3), 165–172 (1998)
12. Mishra, S.B., Khan, M.S., Banerjee, D., Kumar, M.A.: Journey from 2d to 5d printing: a brief
review. Adv. Mechan. Ind. Eng. 95–101 (2022)
13. Ramos, B., Pinho, D., Martins, D., Vaz, A., Vicente, L.: Optimal 3d printing of complex objects
in a 5–axis printer. Optim. Eng. 1–32 (2022)
14. Shembekar, A.V., Yoon, Y.J., Kanyuck, A., Gupta, S.K.: Trajectory planning for conformal 3D
printing using non-planar layers. In: International Design Engineering Technical Conferences
and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, vol. 51722. American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (2018)
15. Srinivas, G.L., Pawel, M., Marius, L., Faller, L.M., et al.: Supportless 5-axis 3d-printing and
conformal slicing: a simulation-based approach. In: 2023 24th International Conference on
Thermal, Mechanical and Multi-Physics Simulation and Experiments in Microelectronics and
Microsystems (EuroSimE), pp. 1–7. IEEE (2023)
16. Wu, R., Peng, H., Guimbretière, F., Marschner, S.: Printing arbitrary meshes with a 5DOF
wireframe printer. ACM Trans. Gr. (TOG) 35(4), 1–9 (2016)