ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Module 1

Introduction to Additive Manufacturing: Introduction to AM, AM evolution, Distinction

between AM & CNC machining, Advantages of AM,
AM process chain: Conceptualization, CAD, conversion to STL, Transfer to AM, STL file
manipulation, Machine setup, build , removal and clean up, post processing.
Classification of AM processes: Liquid polymer system, Discrete particle system, Molten
material systems and Solid sheet system.
Post processing of AM parts: Support material removal, surface texture improvement, accuracy
improvement, aesthetic improvement, preparation for use as a pattern, property enhancements
using non-thermal and thermal techniques.
Guidelines for process selection: Introduction, selection methods for a part, challenges of
selection AM Applications: Functional models, Pattern for investment and vacuum casting,
Medical models, art models, Engineering analysis models, Rapid tooling, new materials
development, Bi-metallic parts, Re-manufacturing. Application examples for Aerospace, defence,
automobile, Bio-medical and general engineering industries.

Introduction to Additive Manufacturing

The term „additive manufacturing‟ was given by the ASTM F42 committee.
• Technology that can make anything.
• Eliminates many constraints imposed by conventional manufacturing
• Leads to more market opportunities.
Additive Manufacturing (AM) refers to a process by which digital 3D design data is used to
build up a component in layers by depositing material. The term ‘3D printing’ is increasingly used
as a synonym for AM. However, the latter is more accurate in that it describes a professional
production technique which is clearly distinguished from conventional methods of material
removal. Additive manufacturing, also known as 3D printing, rapid prototyping or freeform
fabrication, is „the process of joining materials to make objects from 3D model data, usually layer
upon layer, as opposed to subtractive manufacturing methodologies‟ such as machining. The use
of Additive Manufacturing (AM) with metal powders is a new and growing industry sector with
many of its leading companies based in Europe. It became a suitable process to produce complex
metal net shape parts, and not only

1|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

prototypes, as before. Additive manufacturing now enables both a design and industrial
revolution, in various industrial sectors such as aerospace, energy, automotive, medical, tooling
and consumer goods.

Photo: Examples of direct metal laser sintering Photo: Selective laser sintered (SLS)

AM evolution
In the 60s Herbert Voelcker had thoughts of the possibilities of using computer aided machine
control to run machines that build parts from CAD geometry. In the 70s he developed the
mathematics to describe 3D aspects that resulted in the first algorithms for solid modeling in the
80s Carl Deckard came up with the idea of layer-based manufacturing And while there are several
people that have pioneered the Rapid Prototyping technology, the industry generally gives credit to
Charles Hull.
Additive manufacturing first emerged in 1987 with stereolithography (SL) from 3D Systems, a
process that solidifies thin layers of ultraviolet (UV) light‐sensitive liquid polymer using a laser.
The SLA‐1, the first commercially available AM system in the world, was the precursor of the
once popular SLA 250 machine. (SLA stands for StereoLithography Apparatus.) The Viper SLA
product from 3D Systems replaced the SLA 250 many years ago.
In 1988, 3D Systems and Ciba‐Geigy partnered in SL materials development and
commercialized the first‐generation acrylate resins. DuPont‟s Somos stereolithography machine
and materials were developed the same year. Loctite also entered the SL resin business in the late
1980s, but remained in the industry only until 1993. After 3D Systems commercialized SL in the
U.S., Japan‟s NTT Data CMET and Sony/D‐MEC commercialized versions of stereolithography
in 1988and 1989, respectively. NTT Data CMET (now a part of Teijin Seiki, a subsidiary of
Nabtesco) called its system Solid Object Ultraviolet Plotter (SOUP), while Sony/D‐MEC (now D‐
MEC) called its product Solid Creation System (SCS). Sony stopped manufacturing SL systems for
D‐MEC in 2007.

2|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

In 1988, Asahi Denka Kogyo introduced the first epoxy resin for the CMET SL machine.
The following year, Japan Synthetic Rubber (now JSR Corp.) and DSM Desotech began to offer
resins for the Sony/D‐MEC machines.
In 1990, Electro Optical Systems (EOS) of Germany sold its first Stereos stereolithography
system. The same year, Quadrax introduced the Mark 1000 SL system, which used visible light
resin. The following year, Imperial Chemical Industries introduced a visible light resin product for
use with the Mark 1000. ICI stopped selling its resin about one year later when Quadrax dissolved
due to a legal conflict with 3D Systems.
In 1991, three AM technologies were commercialized, including fused deposition modeling
(FDM) from Stratasys, solid ground curing (SGC) from Cubital, and laminated object
manufacturing (LOM) from Helisys. Selective laser sintering (SLS) from DTM (now a part of 3D
Systems) and the Soliform stereolithography system from Teijin Seiki became available in 1992.
In 1993, Soligen commercialized direct shell production casting (DSPC). Using an inkjet
mechanism, DSPC deposited liquid binder onto ceramic powder to form shells for use in the
investment‐casting process. 1994 was a year of many new additive‐manufacturing system
introductions. ModelMaker from Solidscape (then called Sanders Prototype) became available, as
did new systems from Japanese and European companies.
In 1996, Stratasys introduced the Genisys machine, which used an extrusion process similar
to FDM but based on technology developed at IBM‟s Watson Research Center.
In 1998, Beijing Yinhua Laser Rapid Prototypes Making & Mould Technology Co., Ltd. stepped
up the promotion of its products.
In March 1999, 3D Systems introduced a faster and less expensive version of Actua 2100
called ThermoJet
In January 2000, Helisys announced that Toyoda Machine Works of Japan would
manufacture and sell LOM systems in Japan.

3|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

4|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Distinction between AM & CNC machining

CNC machining and additive manufacturings are both computer-controlled solutions to making
products out of a given material. They‟re both machines at the forefront of building technology
safely and efficiently.

As machinists and engineers want to build a prototype, a part or a custom product, they can turn to
one of these machines to do the job for them. As long as the machines have the design, you don‟t
have to worry about human error because the machines are automated. While this doesn‟t mean
issues don‟t arise, there‟s more consistency with production and less chance of injury.

There is some overlap with these two manufacturing methods. Some CNC machines can use STL
and OBJ files, which 3D printers also accept.

CNC machinery is older than 3D printing and still has a stronger foothold in manufacturing. The
form started in the 1940s and had molded to fit into the industry up to the present. 3D printing
came along in 1986. It‟s still relatively new and evolving to be more accessible and versatile. 3D
printing can help in some areas of prototyping, but it‟s not a replacement tool for CNC machining.

They‟re not so much alternatives to the other as they are both aspects of the manufacturing world.
They meet different demands and handle different materials and markets. CNC machines and 3D
printing both have unique capabilities and constraints that suit them for specific jobs. As they fit
their niches in the market, you‟ll want to compare it to whatever industry you‟re in.

3D printers are typically more efficient than traditional manufacturing. The printer uses the
materials that make up the item it‟s creating, whereas traditional manufacturing methods such as
CNC Machining require more materials for the mold to work. On average, 3D printers produce
less waste than traditional manufacturing methods.
However, when production is large-scale, traditional manufacturing methods have a distinct
advantage. Assembly lines are faster than a 3D printer in mass production because printers build
layer by layer. In the hours that it could take to 3D print a product, an assembly line could have
mass- produced hundreds of the same product.
Additionally, 3D printers can only use the area of the printing bed for making parts. Large-scale
parts might not fit in that space. While the parts can be broken down into smaller pieces 3D

5|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

printers can build, that might not be cost-effective and will take time. Traditional manufacturing
has the advantage of the assembly line‟s labor and will be able to produce items on a larger scale.
Future 3D printers could be able to build larger items, but not on the level of what CNC machines
offer with regard to quality and quantity.
3D printers can manipulate different materials such as plastics, metals and polymers. However:
 Not all 3D printers can use these materials. It takes separate machines for each material.
 3D printers cannot work with every material that traditional manufacturers use due to high melting
points.

 Some projects might not be able to consider using 3D printers if they require specific materials that
are incompatible with the printers.
3D Printing vs. Traditional Manufacturing
CNC machining starts with a block of material and shapes it with a rotating tool. Following the
program, it carves away excess until you have the finished product. This is the subtractive method
because it‟s taking away material.
3D printing layers on material in the additive method that builds your design. Both ways have pros
and cons in terms of durability, precision and use of materials.
Material Usage for CNC and 3D
CNC machining works with a variety of materials. They can use:
 Metal alloys
 Woods
 Acrylic
 Modeling foam
 Thermoplastics
 Machining wax
CNC machines have heating systems that can manage heavy materials. These materials are used
to build substantial parts for engines, aircraft and other machines. They need to be exact,
dependable and durable. The cutting tools for the design might have to switch, but most tools are
standardized to fit any CNC machine.
3D printing doesn‟t have this variety, using materials like plastics or resins. They can‟t produce
items strong enough to withstand intense environments like airplanes or other machinery. Also,
3D printers can‟t switch between materials. Certain 3D printers are for specific kinds of material.
3D and CNC Precision of Production

6|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

CNC machining is more precise and consistent than 3D printing because they have a higher
tolerance for heat. 3D printers end up with distorted products when there‟s too much heat. They
can offer precision but cannot remain consistent. 3D printers are often regarded as more user-
friendly than CNC machines, but when they malfunction, someone has to troubleshoot them
because the fault means production of unusable products.
CNC and 3D Speed of Production
CNC is a faster solution than 3D printing. Automated CNC machines can work around the clock
as long as they‟re properly maintained. A project that could take CNC machining an hour would
equate to a 3D printer taking hours to get the final product because it has to build the product layer
by layer. A 3D printer‟s pace might have to slow down during the process to get the design right.
Different 3D printers could also be programmed with specific speeds that you can‟t alter. It
depends on the machine you use.
3D printed products also require work after they‟re built. The products need to be washed,
polished and sealed before people can use the product. This could extend prototype testing to a
longer time period with a lot of waiting in between. 3D printers are also popular for smaller,
custom-manufactured items. But if you have to wait for the item to be built and still do a lot of
work post-print, you lose a lot of time before you can move the product.

Versatility of Machinery for CNC vs. 3D

CNC machines can produce fixtures, tools and custom-designed parts. They have a wide range of
quality settings so you can make a prototype that has a rougher design in some areas and perfect in
others so you can test that part.
When testing prototypes for a project, a CNC machine could quickly build a design so the
developers can test it. 3D printers don‟t have these kinds of options. It will slowly shape the
design as it was programmed. Accuracy is key when constructing a final product, but when time is
a constraint and you want to test some prototypes, 3D printers can slow down you and your
project. Designs made for a CNC machine usually can‟t be substituted with a 3D printer because
the products are voluminous and it would take hours for a 3D printer to finish them.
Noise and Mess Produced by CNC and 3D
These differences relate to the subtractive and additive methods. CNC machining is much noisier
and messier than 3D printing because it uses a tool to cut away material. This creates noise and a
lot of scrap metal or wood shavings. CNC machines cause a lot of vibrations, so they need to be in
a space where they won‟t bother anyone. 3D printing only uses the material it needs for the
product. There‟s little to no waste, and the printers don‟t vibrate like a CNC machine.

7|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Advantages of AM
 Increased design freedom versus conventional casting and machining
 Light weight structures, made possible either by the use of lattice design or by designing parts
where material is only where it needs to be, without other constraints
 New functions such as complex internal channels or several parts built in one
 Net shape process meaning less raw material consumption, up to 25 times less versus machining,
important in the case of expensive or difficult to machine alloys. The net shape capability helps
creating complex parts in one step only thus reducing the number of assembly operations such as
welding, brazing.
 No tools needed, unlike other conventional metallurgy processes which require molds and metal
forming or removal tools
 Short production cycle time: complex parts can be produced layer by layer in a few hours in
additive machines. The total cycle time including post processing usually amounts to a few days
or weeks and it is usually much shorter than conventional metallurgy processes which often
require production cycles of several months.
AM process chain
A series of steps goes into the process chain required to generate a useful physical part from the
concept of the same part using additive manufacturing processes. Depending on the technology
and, at times the machines and components, the process chain is mainly made up of six steps:
• Generation of CAD model of the design;
• Conversion of CAD model into AM machine acceptable format;
• CAD model preparation;
• Machine setup;
• Part removal; • Post-processing.

8|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

These steps can be grouped or broken down and can look different from case to case, but overall
the process chain from one technology remains similar to that of a different technology. The
process chain is also constantly evolving and can change as the existing technologies develop and
new technologies surface.
Generation of Computer-Aided Design Model of Design
In terms of process chain, the first enabler of AM technologies is 3D digital Computer-Aided
Design (CAD) models where the conceptualized product exist in a “computer” space and the
values of its geometry, material, and properties are stored in digital form and are readily
retrievable.
In general, the AM process chains start with 3D CAD modeling. The process of producing a 3D
CAD model from an idea in the designer‟s mind can take on many forms, but all requires CAD
software programs. There are a large number of CAD programs with different modeling principles,
capabilities, accessibilities, and cost. Some examples includes Autodesk Inventor, Solidworks,
Creo, NX, etc.
Once a 3D CAD model is produced, the steps in the AM process chain can take place. Though the
process chain typically progresses in one direction that starts with CAD modeling and ends with a
finished part or prototype, it is often an iterative process where changes to the CAD model and
design are made to reflect feedback from each steps of the process chain.
Conversion of CAD Model into AM Machine Acceptable Format
Almost all AM technology available today uses the STereoLithography (STL) file format. Shown
in below Fig. is an example part in its STL format.

The STL format of a 3D CAD model captures all surfaces of the 3D model by means of stitching
triangles of various sizes on its surfaces. The spatial locations of the vertices of each triangle and
the vectors normal to each triangle, when combined, these features allow AM pre-process
programs to determine the spatial locations of surfaces of the part in a build envelope, and on
which side of the surface is the interior of the part.
9|Page
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
STL format has been consider the de facto standard, it has limitations intrinsic to the fact that only
geometry information is stored in these files while all other information that a CAD model can
contain is eliminated. Information such as unit, color, material, etc. can play critical role in the
functionality of the built part is lost through the file translation process.
The “AMF” format was developed specifically to address these issues and limitations, and is now
the ASTM/ISO standard format. Beyond geometry information, it also contains dimensions, color,
material, and additional information is also possible with this file format. Though currently the
predominate format of file used by AM systems and supported by CAD modeling programs is still
the STL format.
CAD Model Preparation
Once a correct STL file is available, a series of steps is required to generate the information an
AM system needs to start the build process. The needed information varies, depending on the
technology but in general these steps start with repairing any errors within the STL file. Typical
errors can be gaps between surface triangle facets, inverted normal where the “wrong side” of a
triangle facet is identified as the interior of the part. Once the errors have been repaired, a proper
orientation of the 3D model with respect to the build platform/envelope is then decided. Following
the orientation, the geometry, density, geometry of support structures are decided and generated in
3D model space and assigned to the part model. The process then progresses to slicing the 3D
model defined by the STL as well the support structure into a given number of layers of a desired
height each representing a slice of the part and support models. Within each slice the cross-
sectional geometry is kept constant.
STL file has been processed and machine specific information to allow placement of the material
unit into the desired location in a controlled manner to construct the physical model layer by layer.

Support structure generated on the model

10 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
STL file is first imported into a software that allows repairing and manipulating of the file, as well
as the generation of support, and the slicing of the part and support models. The sliced data are
then transferred into the AM system machine for build preparation and the start of the building
process. There are a number of software programs that allows these tasks to be carried out, Magics,
for example by Materialise is one such software program that is capable of integrating all CAD
model preparation steps into one program and generating data files directly accepted by machine
systems.

STL File Preparation

The CAD model preparation starts with importing an STL, or other compatible file formats, into
the pre-process software program (e.g., Magics). Once imported, the dimensions can be modified
if needed. Once the model is in desired dimensions, a series of steps is carried out to correct
possible errors in the model file. These errors can include missing triangles, inverted or double
triangles, transverse triangles, open edges and contours, and shells. Each type of error can cause
issues in the building process or result in incorrect parts and geometries. While some errors such
as shells and double triangles are non-critical and can sometimes be tolerated, errors such as
inverted triangles and open contours can cause critical issue in the building process and needs to
be resolved during STL preparation.
Support Generation
Generation of support structures can be accomplished in a few different ways. Also applied to any
other AM processes, the first way is to generate the support structures during CAD modeling and
design the support to be features of the geometry of the part. Alternatively, the support structures
can be generated in the STL preprocess software program. This second approach provides much
more flexibility in terms of being able to tailor the structures based on the detailed needs.
Build File Preparation
Once the CAD models of part and support are generated and prepared in the pre-process software
program, a slicer program is used to divide the models into layers in the build direction based on
the desired layer thickness.
Machine Setup
Following software preparation steps in the AM process chain, machine preparation is the next
step before a build a can start. Machine preparation can roughly be divided into two groups of
tasks: machine hardware setup, and process control.

Hardware setup entails cleaning of build chamber from previous build, loading of powder
material, a routine check of all critical build settings and process controls such as gas pressure,
11 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
flow rate, oxygen sensors, etc. Details of how each task in this group is carried out can vary from
one system to another, but overall once the machine hardware setup is complete, the AM system is
ready to accept the build files (slices generated from previous step) and start the build.
Build Removal
The build time of the powder bed process depends on a number of factors. Of them, the height of
the entire build has the largest effect on the total time. It can take anywhere from minutes to days.
Nevertheless, once the build completes, the laser metal powder bed technology allows for
immediate unpacking of build chamber and retrieval of finished part, because the process does not
maintain the build platform at elevated temperatures (as opposed to laser powder bed for polymers
and electron beam-based powder bed processes). The unpacking process typically involves raising
the platform in the build chamber and removing loose powder at the same time. The loose powder
from one process can be re-used and has to go through a series of sieving steps to remove
contaminates and unwanted particulates.

SLM part being extracted from build chamber

Post-processing
Depending on AM technology used to create the part, the purpose, and requirements of the
finished part, the post-fabrication processes can vary in a wide range. It can require anything from
no post process to several additional steps of processing to change the surface, dimensions, and/or
material properties of the built part.
Ex: In metal powder bed AM systems, the minimum required processing is removal of built part
from build plate and the removal of support structures from the built part. Removal of support
structures can be as simple as manually breaking the supports from the surface of the part, but it
can also be a process that utilizes CNC tools to not only remove the support, but also to achieve
desired surface finish and/or dimension tolerance.

12 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Classification of AM Processes
There are numerous ways to classify AM technologies. A popular approach is to classify
according to baseline technology, like whether the process uses lasers, printer technology,
extrusion technology, etc. Another approach is to collect processes together according to the type
of raw material input. The problem with these classification methods is that some processes get
lumped together in what seems to be odd combinations (like Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) being
grouped together with 3D Printing) or that some processes that may appear to produce similar
results end up being separated (like Stereolithography and material jetting with photopolymers). It
is probably inappropriate, therefore, to use a single classification approach.
An excellent and comprehensive classification method is described by Pham, which uses a two-
dimensional classification method as shown in Fig.

Liquid Polymer Systems

The first commercial system was the 3D Systems Stereolithography process based on liquid
photopolymers. A large portion of systems in use today are, in fact, not just liquid polymer
systems but more specifically liquid photopolymer systems. However, this classification should
not be restricted to just photopolymers, since a number of experimental systems are using
hydrogels that would also fit into this category.
Using this material and a 1D channel or 2X1D channel scanning method, the best option is to use
a laser like in the Stereolithography process. Droplet deposition of polymers using an array of 1D
channels can simplify the curing process to a floodlight (for photopolymers) or similar method.

13 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Stereolithography
• One of the most important additive manufacturing technologies currently available.
• The first ever commercial RP systems were resin-based systems commonly called
stereolithography or SLA.
• The resin is a liquid photosensitive polymer that cures or hardens Stereolithography when
exposed to ultraviolet radiation.
• This technique involves the curing or solidification of a liquid photosensitive polymer through
the use of the irradiation light source.
• The source supplies the energy that is needed to induce a chemical reaction (curing reaction),
bonding large no of small molecules and forming a highly cross-linked polymer.
• The UV light comes from a laser, which is controlled to scan across the surface according to
the cross-section of the part that corresponds to the layer.
• The laser penetrates into the resin for a short distance that corresponds to the layer thickness.
• The first layer is bonded to a platform, which is placed just below the surface of the resin container.
• The platform lowers by one-layer thickness and the scanning is performed for the next layer.

This process continues until the part has been completed.

14 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Discrete Particle Systems

Discrete particles are normally powders that are generally graded into a relatively uniform particle
size and shape and narrow size distribution. The finer the particles the better, but there will be
problems if the dimensions get too small in terms of controlling the distribution and dispersion.
Again, the conventional 1D channel approach is to use a laser, this time to produce thermal energy
in a controlled manner and, therefore, raise the temperature sufficiently to melt the powder.
Polymer powders must therefore exhibit thermoplastic behavior so that they can be melted and re-
melted to permit bonding of one layer to another. There are a wide variety of such systems that
generally differ in terms of the material that can be processed.
The two main polymer-based systems commercially available are the SLS technology marketed by
3D Systems and the EOSint processes developed by the German company EOS.
Application of printer technology to powder beds resulted in the (original) 3D Printing (3DP)
process. This technique was developed by researchers at MIT in the USA. Droplet printing
technology is used to print a binder, or glue, onto a powder bed. The glue sticks the powder
particles together to form a 3D structure. This basic technique has been developed for different
applications dependent on the type of powder and binder combination. The most successful
approaches use low-cost, starch- and plaster- based powders with inexpensive glues, as
commercialized by ZCorp, USA, which is now part of 3D Systems. Ceramic powders and
appropriate binders as similarly used in the Direct Shell Production Casting (DSPC) process used
by Soligen as part of a service to create shells for casting of metal parts.

Molten Material Systems

Molten material systems are characterized by a pre-heating chamber that raises the material
temperature to melting point so that it can flow through a delivery system. The most well-known
method for doing this is the Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) material extrusion technology
developed by the US company Stratasys. This approach extrudes the material through a nozzle in
a controlled manner. Two extrusion heads are often used so that support structures can be
fabricated from a different material to facilitate part cleanup and removal.
A single jet piezoelectric deposition head lays down wax material. Another head lays down a
second wax material with a lower melting temperature that is used for support structures. The
droplets from these print heads are very small so the resulting parts are fine in detail. To further
maintain the part precision, a planar cutting process is used to level each layer once the printing
has been completed. Supports are removed by inserting the complete part into a temperature-
controlled bath that melts the support material away, leaving the part material intact. The use of
15 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
wax along with the precision of Solidscape machines makes this approach ideal for precision
casting applications like jewelry, medical devices, and dental castings. Few machines are sold
outside of these niche areas.
The 1D channel approach, however, is very slow in comparison with other methods and applying
a parallel element does significantly improve throughput. The Thermojet technology from 3D
Systems also deposits a wax material through droplet-based printing heads. The use of parallel
print heads as an array of 1D channels effectively multiplies the deposition rate. The Thermojet
approach, however, is not widely used because wax materials are difficult and fragile when
handled. Thermojet machines are no longer being made, although existing machines are
commonly used for investment casting patterns.
Solid Sheet Systems
One of the earliest AM technologies was the Laminated Object Manufacturing (LOM) system
from Helisys, USA. This technology used a laser to cut out profiles from sheet paper, supplied
from a continuous roll, which formed the layers of the final part. Layers were bonded together
using a heat- activated resin that was coated on one surface of the paper. Once all the layers were
bonded together the result was very much like a wooden block. A hatch pattern cut into the excess
material allowed the user to separate away waste material and reveal the part.
A similar approach was used by the Japanese company Kira, in their Solid Center machine, and by
the Israeli company Solidimension with their Solido machine. The major difference is that both
these machines cut out the part profile using a blade similar to those found in vinyl sign-making
machines, driven using a 2D plotter drive. The Kira machine used a heat-activated adhesive
applied using laser printing technology to bond the paper layers together. Both the Solido and Kira
machines have been discontinued for reasons like poor reliability material wastage and the need
for excessive amounts of manual post-processing. Recently, however, Mcor Technologies have
produced a modern version of this technology, using low-cost color printing to make it possible to
laminate color parts in a single process.

Post processing of AM parts

What is post-processing?
Post-processing is an essential stage of additive manufacturing. It‟s the last step in the
manufacturing process, where parts receive finishing touches such as smoothing and painting.
Why is post-processing important?
Post-processing improves the quality of parts and ensures that they meet their design
specifications. The finishing process can enhance a part‟s surface characteristics, geometric
16 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
accuracy, aesthetics, mechanical properties, and more. For samples and prototypes, this can mean
the difference between a sale or a loss. For production parts, finishing creates a part that is ready
to use.
A metal additive manufacturing (AM) part is essentially “welded” to the build plate, and you
will not be able to pull it off without some assistance. Even then, the AM part will need
postprocessing before it is ready to use. Here are some costs associated with postprocessing AM
parts.
Powder Removal: AM parts build “down” in a powder-bed fusion system as new layers are
added to the top, which means that parts are buried in powder when they are done (see Figure 1).
After the build has finished and the parts/build plate have cooled, the machine operator has to
remove all of the powder from the build volume and sieve/filter/recycle it for later use, assuming
you want to reuse it. This is not an expensive step, but it does take time.

Stress Relief: The heating and cooling of the metal as the part builds layer-by-layer leads to
internal stresses that must be relieved before the part is removed from the build plate. Otherwise,
the part may warp or even crack. Stress-relieving the part requires an oven or furnace (preferably
with environmental controls) that is big enough to fit the entire build plate. Many recommend using
an oven with an inert environment to minimize oxidation on the part surface. Others prefer a
vacuum furnace, which costs a lot more ($100,000 versus $10,000 to $30,000). Stress-relieving a
batch of parts typically costs $500 to $600, plus shipping.
Part Removal: Most companies use wire EDM to remove parts from the build plate, however
many machine shops are starting to use a bandsaw (see Figure 2) because it is faster and the
bottoms of the parts must be finished anyway. Keep in mind that materials such as Inconel strain-
harden as they are worked, making it difficult to remove them from the build plate with just a
bandsaw. Using a local machine shop, we spend about $200 to $300 per plate for wire EDM,
which can take a few hours depending on the number and size of the parts. A bandsaw can
complete the task in minutes.
Heat Treatment: Heat treatment (aging, solution annealing and so on) improves the
microstructure and mechanical properties of the parts and is necessary for nearly all AM parts. In
many cases, this step also requires an environmentally controlled furnace with the ability to
regulate the temperature and cool-down schedule. Heat treatment may affect the dimensions of the
parts, so most people prefer to heat-treat parts before they machine/finish them. The American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) just released a standard for thermal postprocessing of
metal AM parts. Heat treatment can easily cost $500 to $2,000 depending the material and how
many parts are being treated.
17 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
Hot Isostatic Pressing: Instead of heat treatment, many aerospace companies are starting to use
hot isostatic pressing (HIP), which is frequently used in the casting industry to improve the fatigue
life of cast parts. A HIP system costs substantially more than a furnace/oven and comes with its
own safety measures due to the high pressures (100 megapascals or more) at which it operates. Like
heat treatment, HIP costs $500 to $2,000, but you often do not need to heat treat the part if you
HIP it.
Machining: Machining of mating interfaces, surfaces, threads, support structures and more likely
will be required to ensure dimensional accuracy of the finished part (see Figure 3). Few AM parts
meet specifications “as built,” and if nothing else, the surface of the part that was connected to the
build plate will need to be finished. Most manufacturing companies already have machining
systems on hand, but registering parts and establishing datums for machining can be tricky,
especially for complex, organically shaped parts made with AM. Accessing internal channels or
cooling passages that need to be machined can also increase costs. The cost here is highly
dependent on the material and the job as well as the fixturing needed to hold the part.
Surface Treatments: Surface finishing also might be required to improve surface finish/quality,
reduce surface roughness, clean internal channels or remove partially melted particles on a part.
When outsourced, these costs can easily run in the hundreds if not thousands of dollars.
Inspection and Testing: Metrology, inspection and nondestructive testing using white/blue-light
scanning, dye-penetrant testing, ultrasonic testing, computed tomography (CT) scanning and more
will be needed after post processing and possibly at multiple points during post processing.
Destructive testing of sample parts and analysis of witness coupons (for example, tensile bars),
powder chemistry, material microstructure and more also may be needed to gather data to help
with process qualification and ultimately part certification. Most companies will have a range of
metrology and non-destructive testing methods on hand, but AM parts with internal channels,
lattice structures and other internal enhancements may require CT scanning to ensure clear
passageways, evaluation of internal geometries and more. A CT scanner will easily cost $1 million
to buy, install and operate.

Guidelines for process selection

A variety of AM technologies have been developed. According to ASTM Standard F2792 (ASTM
F2792-12a 2012), these technologies can be catalogued into seven groups: binder jetting, directed
energy deposition, material extrusion, material jetting, powder bed fusion, sheet lamination and
vat photo-polymerization. More than 350 industrial AM machines and 450 materials have been
identified in the market (Senvol LLC 2015). The debate about which machine or technology fares

18 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
better than others has little value as each of them has its targeted applications. AM technologies
are no longer limited to prototyping usage, but are increasingly also being used for making end
products (Rosen 2007). Therefore, „Design for Additive Manufacture‟ (DfAM) becomes
increasingly significant for avoiding potential manufacturing pitfalls and maximizing utilization of
AM capability (Rosen 2007, Adam, Zimmer 2014). To achieve that, the designer needs to be able
to select a proper AM process in the early design stage. Therefore, a comprehensive and robust
selection system becomes paramount for users to select a machine/technology that is fit for
purpose (Moylan et al. 2012).
Unlike conventional manufacturing process selection, AM process selection is still a nontrivial
task. For each of the various conventional manufacturing processes, a wealth of knowledge has
been accumulated over the years. Much of it has become engineering “common sense”, and
different systems have evolved over the years to suit their preferred and perceived applications.
The same however cannot be said about AM processes. AM processes are free from many
conventional manufacturing constraints in that they can produce nearly any geometric feature with
little auxiliary tools. While the different AM processes show considerable overlap in terms of
possible applications, there are also significant differences between the various AM technologies
and processes in terms of suitable materials and quality of printed parts. Because it is a relatively
new technology, most users do not have enough knowledge and experience to make good
judgments. Various knowledge based decision support systems (kb-DSS) to help users make
sensible decisions have been published. This paper reviews a number of these kb-DSS solutions for
AM process selection and examines their ability to guide the user in a DfAM approach which aims
at maximising the benefits derived from AM. We propose a framework that uses concepts from
decision theory and the notion of performance and preference functions.

Decision support systems can generally be described by the normative decision theory, which
addresses the problem of how decisions should be made in order to maximise the value of
outcomes for the user. In order to do that, the theory assumes a fully informed and rational user
who is able to compute exactly. Obviously, a kb-DSS is particularly suited to improve the level of
information available to the user (stored in the knowledge base) and the ability to compute
exactly.
The commonly used decision process can be described by a six-stage sequential decision-making
model as proposed
• Identification of the problem

• Obtaining necessary information

19 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
• Production of possible solutions

• Evaluation of such solutions

• Selection of a strategy for performance

• Implementation and subsequent learning and reformulation

Inclusion of a kb-DSS alters this process considerably, in particular stages 2 and 3. Without a kb-
DSS, in stage 2 the user would obtain information about potential solutions and then assemble that
information into possible solutions (stage 3). In contrast, the kb-DSS holds this information about
possible solutions within its knowledge base and requests the user‟s problem description as
„necessary information‟ in stage 2. A common characteristic for both alternatives is the need of a
complete understanding of the problem by the user as a starting point. The „problem‟ in this case can
be described as a set of user preferences, through which all relevant attributes (such as
dimensional accuracy and surface finish) as well as their desired/preferred target values are
identified and ranked against each other.

20 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Typical procedure of AM process selection

Figure summarizes the typical procedure of selecting an AM process according to our framework.
There are two predominant issues – preference evaluation and performance evaluation. The

outcomes of two modules can be combined and generate the ratings for different alternatives.
Preference evaluation

Implicitly or explicitly, all the methods for selecting AM processes formulate various preference
functions to describe users‟ preferences. Usually more than one attributes need to be considered.
To exactly describe users‟ preferences, a plurality of information is needed from users, e.g. the
thresholds (lowest and/or highest levels) they accept for each attribute, the shape (monotonicity and
curvature) of the preference curve for each attribute, the interdependency of the attributes and the
trade-offs between all attributes. The monotonicity of preference indicates whether the preference
is consistently increasing/decreasing (monotonic) or increasing/decreasing towards a goal (non-
monotonic).

21 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
Depending on the level of the detail to which the user‟s preferences have been captured, we divide
AM process selection methods into two groups: Judgement of Feasibility (JoF) and Judgement
of Suitability (JoS). The JoF approach only considers the lowest acceptable level for each attribute
and uses that to decide whether a given solution can fulfil users‟ requirements. In contrast, the JoS
approach mainly considers the trade-offs between different attributes and recommends the best
marked solution for users while the threshold is usually not taken into account.

JoF approach

The Judgement of Feasibility approach is utilized to rule out unfeasible solutions, i.e. solutions
with a performance below the threshold. This approach defines two indifference levels. Any
performance above the threshold is equally preferable for users, i.e. the preference function for
each attribute takes the form of a step function as shown in Figure

22 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

JoS approach

23 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

AM Applications

24 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

1. Rapid Prototyping

 Models and parts for research purposes can be easily manufacture whenever required. Easy
to make changes in the models as per the research proceedings.
2. Food

 Cornell Creative Machines Lab is making food items such as chocolates, candy, pasta,
pizza using 3D printing technique since 2012.
3. Apparel
 Products such as customize shoes, clothes and eye wears are being manufactured.
 Nike is using 3D printing to manufacture the “Vapor Laser Talon” football shoe for
players of American football
4. Vehicle
 In 2010 Urbee became the first car whose whole body was 3D printed (by US engineering
group Kor Ecologic and the company Stratasys ).

 In early 2014, Swedish supercar manufacturer, Koenigsegg, manufactured a supercar

having many 3D printed mechanical parts in it.
5. Firearms
 Defense arms such as guns, rifles and safety equipment has also been manufacture byAM.
 In 2012 US based group “Defense Distributed”, designed a working plastic gun that could
be downloaded and reproduced by anybody with a 3D printer.
 In 2013, „Solid Concepts‟, based in Austin, Texas, USA succeeded in manufacturing first
working metal gun.
6. Medical
 Nowadays medical devices, specific implants, hearing aids, dental products and pills are
being manufacture byAM.
 During October 2014, a five year old girl born without fully formed fingers on her left
hand became the first child in the UK to have a prosthetic hand made with 3D printing .
Till now more than 400 hands have been transplanted by E-NABLE.
 In august 2015, US FDA( Food and Drug administration) approved 3D printed pills which
allows very porous pills to be produced, which enables high drug doses in a single pill
which dissolves quickly and can be ingested easily.

25 | P a g e
 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

7. Bioprinting
 Bioprinting refers to manufacturing artificial biological organs and body parts capable of
working like original ones.
 In this process, layers of living cells are deposited onto a gel medium or sugar matrix and
slowly built up to form three dimensional structures including vascular systems.
 The first production system for 3D tissue printing was delivered in 2009, based on
NovoGen bio-printing technology.
 In 2013, Chinese scientists began printing ears, livers and kidneys, with living tissue.
 In 2014, researchers at the University of Hasselt, in Belgium had successfully printed a
new jawbone for an 83 year old woman.
8. Space
 In September 2014, “SpaceX” delivered the first zero gravity 3D printer to the
International Space Station (ISS).
 In December 2014, NASA emailed CAD drawings for a socket wrench to astronauts
aboard the ISS, who then printed the tool using its 3D printer.
 The European Space Agency plans to deliver its new advance Portable OnBoard 3D
Printer to the International Space Station by the end of 2015.

26 | P a g e