Novel Processes for Advanced Manufacturing: Summary of a Workshop (2013)

Interesting new release from NAP, Novel Processes for Advanced Manufacturing: Summary of a Workshop
Table of Contents

1. Workshop Introduction
2. Additive Manufacturing Session Summary
3. Electromagnetic Field Manipulation of Properties Session Summary
4. Design of Materials
5. Workshop Conclusion

I was most interested in the Additive Manufacturing section, which starts with a summary of a presentation by Dr Bourell of UT Austin. The seven types of additive manufacturing processes he identifies are,

• Binder jetting
• Directed energy deposition
• Material extrusion
• Material jetting
• Vat photopolymerization
• Powder bed fusion
• Sheet lamination

AM mantra: Low production runs, complicated geometry

Economics of additive manufacturing showing price per part as a function of quantity for a 2lbs nylon part manufactured via additive manufacturing and via injection molding.  SOURCE: David Bourell, University of Texas, Austin, presentation to the Standing Committee on Defense Materials Manufacturing and Infrastructure on December 5, 2012, Slide 15.

This part is interesting:

He [Dr Bourell] also could envision a “Kinko’s style” additive manufacturing capability, where the consumer designs his or her part and sends it to a neighborhood printer to be printed
and retrieved. He believes that the lower costs of 3D printing will drive the higher-cost technology along, and that the experience base will foster new applications and spur competition among different additive
manufacturing technologies.

I think the future is coming faster than people realize: UPS to Offer 3D Printing in Select Stores.

The metal additive processes are mentioned as well,

There is a need for new metal alloys with characteristics appropriate for additive manufacturing; however, certification considerations are one major concern. The Air Force is likely to reject an altered metal because it would not be able to incorporate parts made from such a metal without a lengthy and tedious recertification process.

One of the intended purposes of my work qualifying DMLS parts was to show that modern design of experiments (DOE) techniques can help decision makers manage risk more effectively than a traditional "lengthy and tedious recertification process." Not addressed in that work was all of the process development that the vendor I used had already done, breaking tensile and fatigue parts is admitadly just the tip of the iceberg.

Dr Prabhjot Singh of the Additive Manufacturing Laboratory at GE Global Research mentioned the weight reductions that GE hopes to achieve over current engines (500-600 lbs). They are also sponsoring a design challenge on Grab CAD focused in this area as well as one focused on developing advanced materials and precision processes. ive Manufacturing Session Summary

Electromagnetic Field Manipulation of Properties Session Summary

Design of Materials

Workshop Conclusion

I was most interested in the Additive Manufacturing section, which starts with a summary of a presentation by Dr Bourell of UT Austin. The seven types of additive manufacturing processes he identifies are,

• Binder jetting
• Directed energy deposition
• Material extrusion
• Material jetting
• Vat photopolymerization
• Powder bed fusion
• Sheet lamination

[show cost comparison figure]
AM mantra: Low production runs, complicated geometry

This part is interesting:

He [Dr Bourell] also could envision a “Kinko’s style” additive manufacturing capability, where the consumer designs his or her part and sends it to a neighborhood printer to be printed
and retrieved. He believes that the lower costs of 3D printing will drive the higher-cost technology along, and that the experience base will foster new applications and spur competition among different additive
manufacturing technologies.

I think the future is coming faster than people realize: UPS to Offer 3D Printing in Select Stores.

The metal additive processes are mentioned as well,

There is a need for new metal alloys with characteristics appropriate for additive manufacturing; however, certification considerations are one major concern. The Air Force is likely to reject an altered metal because it would not be able to incorporate parts made from such a metal without a lengthy and tedious recertification process.

One of the intended purposes of my work qualifying DMLS parts was to show that modern design of experiments (DOE) techniques can help decision makers manage risk more effectively than a traditional "lengthy and tedious recertification process." Not addressed in that work was all of the process development that the vendor I used had already done, breaking tensile and fatigue parts is admitadly just the tip of the iceberg.

Dr Prabhjot Singh of the Additive Manufacturing Laboratory at GE Global Research mentioned the weight reductions that GE hopes to achieve over current engines (500-600 lbs). They are also sponsoring a design challenge on Grab CAD focused in this area as well as one focused on developing advanced materials and precision processes.