Purpose

There are many investigations in design methodologies, but there are also divergences and convergences as there are so many points of view. This study aims to evaluate to corroborate and deepen other researchers’ findings, dissipate divergences and provide directing to future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective.

Design/methodology/approach

This study analyzes the previous reviews (about 15 reviews) and based on the consensus and the classifications provided by these authors, a significant sample of research is analyzed in the design for additive manufacturing (DFAM) theme (approximately 80 articles until June of 2017 and approximately 280–300 articles until February of 2019) through descriptive statistics, to corroborate and deepen the findings of other researchers.

Findings

Throughout this work, this paper found statistics indicating that the main areas studied are: multiple objective optimizations, execution of the design, general DFAM and DFAM for functional performance. Among the main conclusions: there is a lack of innovation in the products developed with the methodologies, there is a lack of exhaustivity in the methodologies, there are few efforts to include environmental aspects in the methodologies, many of the methods include economic and cost evaluation, but are not very explicit and broad (sustainability evaluation), it is necessary to consider a greater variety of functions, among other conclusions

Originality/value

The novelty in this study is the methodology. It is very objective, comprehensive and quantitative. The starting point is not the case studies nor the qualitative criteria, but the figures and quantities of methodologies. The main contribution of this review article is to guide future work on the subject from a methodological and convergent perspective and this article provides a broad database with articles containing information on many issues to make decisions: design methodology; optimization; processes, selection of parts and materials; cost and product management; mechanical, electrical and thermal properties; health and environmental impact, etc.

中文翻译：

---

增材制造设计：对方法学趋势和局限性的全面回顾

目的

设计方法论有很多研究，但也有分歧和趋同，因为有很多观点。本研究旨在评估以证实和深化其他研究人员的发现，消除分歧，并从方法论和趋同的角度为该主题的未来工作提供指导。

设计/方法/方法

本研究分析了之前的评论（约 15 篇评论），并根据这些作者提供的共识和分类，在增材制造设计 (DFAM) 主题（截至 2017 年 6 月和大约 280-300 篇文章，直到 2019 年 2 月）通过描述性统计，以证实和深化其他研究人员的发现。

发现

在整个工作中，本文发现统计数据表明研究的主要领域是：多目标优化、设计执行、通用 DFAM 和功能性能的 DFAM。主要结论包括：方法论开发的产品缺乏创新，方法论缺乏详尽性，方法论中几乎没有考虑环境因素，许多方法包括经济和成本评估，但不是很明确和广泛（可持续性评估），有必要考虑更多种类的功能，以及其他结论

原创性/价值

本研究的新颖之处在于方法论。它非常客观、全面和定量。起点不是案例研究，也不是定性标准，而是方法论的数字和数量。这篇评论文章的主要贡献是从方法论和融合的角度指导该主题的未来工作，本文提供了一个广泛的数据库，其中包含有关许多决策问题的信息的文章：设计方法；优化; 工艺、零件和材料的选择；成本和产品管理；机械、电气和热性能；健康和环境影响等。