4401 Lilla-4401 Brigden

3DS.COM/SOLIDWORKS © Dassault Systèmes | Confidential Information | 3/1/2017 | ref.
: 3DS_Document_2016
3DS_Document_2014
1
Design for Additive
Manufacturing
Metal
3DS.COM/SOLIDWORKS © Dassault Systèmes | Confidential Information | 3/1/2017 | ref.: 3DS_Document_2014
2
Applications Engineering
kevin.brigden@renishaw.com
Additive Manufacturing Products

3
4
Design for manufacture is the key to a successful product
5
Manufacturing Processes
Joining
Forging
Casting
Sheet-metal
Machining/Polishing
Useful over-lapping knowledge and experience from other processes
Useful over-lapping knowledge and experience from other processes
Casting Shrinkage, section thickness, overhang, draw direction etc.
Joining
Manufacturing Processes
Residual stress, distortion and thermal energy control
Forging
Sheet-metal
Machining/Polishing Speeds and feeds, tool path and clearance, work-holding/fixturing etc.
6
Some useful rules of thumb (1 of 2)
• Surface resolution and mechanical properties influenced by layer thickness
• Typical layer thicknesses: 25 to 90µm
• Laser spot size typically 70 to 100µm (melt-pool can be significantly larger)

• Influences minimum detail size, surface finish and density
• Overhanging surfaces with included angle less than 45° (wrt build plate) will usually
require support structure
• Supports can be generated in build preparation software or designed in CAD
• For holes, arches, bridges, ledges, flanges etc. a radius of up to R5mm should build
without the need for support
• Circularity far from guaranteed
• 1mm is the maximum 90° over-hang that most processes can tolerate without
significant defects
7
Some useful rules of thumb (2 of 2)
• Surface finish typically 7 to 20µmRa - material and local geometry
dependent
• Over-hanging surfaces and “hot-spots” can decrease surface quality
• Material density in the order of 99.5%+ is common

• Some geometries can aggravate porosity and should be considered
for redesign on a case by case basis
• Shrinkage in the order of 0.1 to 0.5% depending on geometry and residual

stress
• For critical geometry consider machining allowance
• Tensile properties very similar to wrought material, although ductility usually

slightly lower
• Apply sensible factors of safety
8
Three key defect types/failure modes in Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF)
1. Residual stress
2. Shift
3. Poor surface finish and/or burning
9
Residual stress
• Very difficult to predict without specialist simulation
software
• When designing, consider the manner in which the part

should “grow” – biomimicry anyone?
• Single greatest consideration with metal AM – and be

careful: each material and process can behave quite
differently!
SIMUFACT ADDITIVE – www.simufact.com
10
Shift
As well as residual stress, shift can cause
•
head-aches
• Causation of shift can be thermal or

mechanical
Laser scan
• Thermal shift occurs when large thermal
gradients create physical strains and Island of scanned material
deflections
• Mechanical shift can occur through Deflected/warped support

interaction with the powder wiping system -
rigid wipers more susceptible.
• Consider the use of heat-sinks, bracing

material such as webs or reorienting the
feature/part
11
Burning and other surface defects
• Burning can occur on inclined faces angled

toward the wiper
• Wiper compacts the powder in the vicinity of Wiper Burning
the surface
• Powder has relatively low thermal conductivity
(i.e. insulates)
• Partially melted powder can be embedded in

inclined faces
• “Down-skin” laser parameters are used to
mitigate
• Effects are exaggerated by poorly designed
geometry
12
13
Pit-falls of the STL conversion process
14
Intent
Design
STL Resolution versus Design Intent
Increasing accuracy and computational effort

STL Conversion Errors and loss of design intent
Triangles lost during conversion error
Automatic fixing routine causes loss of design intent

15
Loss of parametric model history
• STL file format essentially consists of co-ordinate values and vectors (normals)
• Once CAD data is converted to STL all parametric control is lost
• Poses significant challenges in environments where PLM is critical
• Consider creating build layouts with the assembly modeller – particularly useful when using the build substrate
as a machining fixture!
• Add serial numbers, identification marks, machining allowance, fixturing features etc. in the CAD environment!
16
Part orientation in build preparation software
Conventional wisdom is to design the part and worry about how it should be orientated later
 QuantAM 2017

17
Part orientation in build preparation software
I would argue that there are more sophisticated, repeatable and robust approaches
 QuantAM 2017

18
Waste
All support material must be removed post-process
Consider the creation of “designed” support structures for a parametric solution, providing
production engineering with a clear indication of how the part should be built,
𝜋𝜋 2 𝜋𝜋
𝑉𝑉𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 = 𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑟 − 25 𝑉𝑉𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 = 𝑙𝑙𝑟𝑟 2 −1 𝑉𝑉𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 = ?
2 2
Where ri = 5mm
19
Evils of the “rapid prototyping” approach to metal AM
• Increased risk of builds failing and low manufacturing yield

• Residual stress from poorly designed geometry
• Thermal and wiper induced shift can wreak havoc with slender structures
• Wasteful!
• Excessive reliance on support material undermines a key advantage of the AM process
• Potential complications during post-processing

• Poor surface finish (witness marks and other detritus from support material)
• Often difficult and time consuming removal/machining of support structures
• Difficult to maintain revision control

• At the moment, much of the AM process is outside of the CAD/PLM environment
• Industry is moving toward adopting CAM-like principles but progress is slow
20
A more sophisticated approach to sacrificial material
• Support structure designed in the

CAD environment
• Fully parametric
• Key variables (e.g. break-off points)

controlled with use of
• Configurations
• Design tables
• Macros
• Crucially: the designer must re-

consider the design intent!
21
22
“The true value of AM comes from unique products, not the process”
Design ingredients
Application
• Boundary conditions
• Operating environment
• Life-time requirements Application
Manufacture
Manufacture
• Process limitations
• Associated processes (machining, heat treatment, surface System
treatments etc.)
• Tooling, work holding and inspection
System
• Upstream dependencies
Downstream dependents
Part design
•
• Organisational design hierarchy and strategy
23
24
Specification development loop
A common [mis]application of AM
• Simple component
• Where’s the benefit?
• How can AM add value?
• Clearly designed for another process

• Design for manufacture clues
suggest fabrication
• Cost/Benefit analysis needed
• No obvious build orientation - at risk of

losing design intent!
25
Adaptation
• Extract key working surfaces by

considering:
• Interfaces/assembly
• Mechanical/Thermal loads
• Fluid flow
• Design envelope
• “Connect the dots” with minimal

use of material
• Add value to the product by

considering the application,
installation and manufacture
26
Design for manufacture tweaks
• Design sacrificial structures

• Rather than rely on conventional 3DP supports
• Remove ambiguity
• The designer should make it clear how he/she expects a
product to be manufactured – AM should be no exception!
• Define the correct solution

• Specific aspects of the detail design have been tailored to
ensure that the part can only be built as I have determined
(also known as poka-yoke design)
27
28
Proposed manufacturing solution
29
Build setup and completed build – Inconel 718
Comparison of conventional approach and DFM
Build volume
Original 45.4cm3
Redesigned 15.5cm3
Finished part volume

Original 11.9cm3 (74% waste)
Redesigned 9.15cm3 (41% waste)
30
31
Topology Optimisation
A hot-topic in AM design
• By analysing load paths through a structure, we can theoretically reduce the

structure to consist only of the material needed to carry the load
• Objectives such as stiffness, strength and mass are used to define the topology
solution
• Design for manufacture shouldn’t be forgotten about but very often is!
32
Suspension bell-crank example
MIN FOS: 1.75
1000N
Bearing free to rotate about axis
42
Target of load
transfer 41 105
33
Conventional machined solution
I-Section is a classic solution to a simple

“Pork-chop” shape follows layout of the main interfaces member in bending
34
Creation of design space and initial optimisation run
STL Mesh representation of Topology Optimised results
Excluded geometry
Design-Space “Wrapped” poly-nurb model
Altair INSPIRE 2016
35
Build setup for initial optimisation run
Part orientated to try and minimise

support requirement and achieve best
surface finish
Very long supports are an

increased risk for shift failures Support structures in these bores
occurring. will be difficult to remove
1
𝑘𝑘𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 ∝
𝑙𝑙 3
Powder trapped here can cause

problems for wire EDM operators!
36
Tweaked design space with pre-determined build orientation
Fillet radii added in CAD
Reduced design-space
Designed structural support webbing

Self-supporting geometry
37
Self-supporting structure – fillet radii ≤ R5mm
Machined features substituted with self-

supporting place-holders
Wire EDM allowance included in the design
38
39
Build quality in AlSi10Mg versus Ti6Al4V
Comparison of designs
Version Part mass Build Peak VM stress Min FOS

(g) waste (MPa)
Original 338 77.3%* 111 8.58
Altair INSPIRE 181 40.7% 190 5.00
DFM 164 16.6% 294 3.23
40
41
2.61lbs (Aluminium)
Land Rover BAR Race Manifold
Volume reduced by 60%

1.7lbs (Titanium)
Built-in fixturing
features aid
machining and
installation
Self – supporting structures

also help to maintain part
rigidity
Wire – EDM
allowance
42
Summary
• Design for manufacture is all about: “why”, “how” and “when” to compromise
• Contrary to popular belief, 3DP and AM do not give designers free-reign
• “Design in” the intended build orientation from the outset and consider how a design
will “grow” during the process. The most successful designs grow organically from an
origin – just like a plant!
• Incorporate the tricks shown into your way of thinking about design! The ideas I’ve
shared here are just as applicable to polymer 3D printing.
43
44

4401 Lilla-4401 Brigden

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

4401 Lilla-4401 Brigden

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3DS.COM/SOLIDWORKS © Dassault Systèmes | Confidential Information | 3/1/2017 | ref.

Additive Manufacturing Products

Casting Shrinkage, section thickness, overhang, draw direction etc.

Residual stress, distortion and thermal energy control

• Typical layer thicknesses: 25 to 90µm

• Laser spot size typically 70 to 100µm (melt-pool can be significantly larger)

• Material density in the order of 99.5%+ is common

• Shrinkage in the order of 0.1 to 0.5% depending on geometry and residual

• Tensile properties very similar to wrought material, although ductility usually

• When designing, consider the manner in which the part

• Single greatest consideration with metal AM – and be

SIMUFACT ADDITIVE – www.simufact.com

• Causation of shift can be thermal or

• Mechanical shift can occur through Deflected/warped support

• Consider the use of heat-sinks, bracing

• Burning can occur on inclined faces angled

• Partially melted powder can be embedded in

Increasing accuracy and computational effort

Triangles lost during conversion error

Automatic fixing routine causes loss of design intent

• Once CAD data is converted to STL all parametric control is lost

• Poses significant challenges in environments where PLM is critical

 QuantAM 2017

 QuantAM 2017

All support material must be removed post-process

• Increased risk of builds failing and low manufacturing yield

• Potential complications during post-processing

• Difficult to maintain revision control

• Support structure designed in the

• Key variables (e.g. break-off points)

• Crucially: the designer must re-

• Clearly designed for another process

• Cost/Benefit analysis needed

• No obvious build orientation - at risk of

• Extract key working surfaces by

• “Connect the dots” with minimal

• Add value to the product by

• Design sacrificial structures

• Define the correct solution

Finished part volume

• By analysing load paths through a structure, we can theoretically reduce the

MIN FOS: 1.75

I-Section is a classic solution to a simple

STL Mesh representation of Topology Optimised results

Design-Space “Wrapped” poly-nurb model

Altair INSPIRE 2016

Part orientated to try and minimise

Very long supports are an

Powder trapped here can cause

Fillet radii added in CAD

Designed structural support webbing

Self-supporting structure – fillet radii ≤ R5mm

Machined features substituted with self-

Wire EDM allowance included in the design

Version Part mass Build Peak VM stress Min FOS

Volume reduced by 60%

Self – supporting structures

You might also like