Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22f2a45ccb56483

Jump to content

// Workers AI · dad joke modeWhat did design for additive manufacturing say? I'm layered with talent.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Design for additive manufacturing (DfAM or DFAM) is design for manufacturability as applied to additive manufacturing (AM). It is a general type of design methods or tools whereby functional performance and/or other key product life-cycle considerations such as manufacturability, reliability, and cost can be optimized subject to the capabilities of additive manufacturing technologies.[1]

This concept emerges due to the enormous design freedom provided by AM technologies. To take full advantages of unique capabilities from AM processes, DfAM methods or tools are needed. Typical DfAM methods or tools includes topology optimization, design for multiscale structures (lattice or cellular structures), multi-material design, mass customization, part consolidation, and other design methods which can make use of AM-enabled features.

DfAM is not always separate from broader DFM, as the making of many objects can involve both additive and subtractive steps. Nonetheless, the name "DfAM" has value because it focuses attention on the way that commercializing AM in production roles is not just a matter of figuring out how to switch existing parts from subtractive to additive. Rather, it is about redesigning entire objects (assemblies, subsystems) in view of the newfound availability of advanced AM. That is, it involves redesigning them because their entire earlier design—including even how, why, and at which places they were originally divided into discrete parts—was conceived within the constraints of a world where advanced AM did not yet exist. Thus instead of just modifying an existing part design to allow it to be made additively, full-fledged DfAM involves things like reimagining the overall object such that it has fewer parts or a new set of parts with substantially different boundaries and connections. The object thus may no longer be an assembly at all, or it may be an assembly with many fewer parts. Many examples of such deep-rooted practical impact of DfAM have been emerging in the 2010s, as AM greatly broadens its commercialization. For example, in 2017, GE Aviation revealed that it had used DfAM to create a helicopter engine with 16 parts instead of 900, with great potential impact on reducing the complexity of supply chains.[2] It is this radical rethinking aspect that has led to themes such as that "DfAM requires 'enterprise-level disruption'."[3] In other words, the disruptive innovation that AM can allow can logically extend throughout the enterprise and its supply chain, not just change the layout on a machine shop floor.

DfAM involves both broad themes (which apply to many AM processes) and optimizations specific to a particular AM process. For example, DFM analysis for stereolithography maximizes DfAM for that modality.

Background

[edit source]

Additive manufacturing is defined as a material joining process, whereby a product can be directly fabricated from its 3D model, usually layer upon layer.[4] Traditional manufacturing technologies such as CNC machining are a subtractive manufacturing process which removes material. Another method like casting which puts material into a certain form requires molds designed for that material. AM processes allow for generally less waste since it isn't subtractive while also not needing molds. AM processes like powder bed fusion, vat polymerization material extrusion enables the fabrication of parts with a complex geometry as well as achieving varied material distribution either through density or type of material.[5]

DfAM exists due to new workflows derived from AM processes which introduce both new design freedoms and limitations. Multi-material printing, generative design, and in-situ monitoring on one hand bring more diversity for manufacturing but come with their own challenges. Other unique design capabilities like internal channels for cooling, lattice structures, and part consolidation need consideration depending on the material used or the time-cost effectiveness of the process. However layer by layer construction introduces needs like elaborate support structure requirements, surface finish limitations, and anisotropy. Traditional Design for manufacturing (DFM) rules or guidelines are built off of traditional manufacturing methods and don't take advantage of the new possibilities provided by AM. Moreover, traditional feature-based CAD tools aren't built with the intention of expressing irregular geometry which is possible for AM. These design methods or tools can be categorized as Design for Additive Manufacturing.

Methods

[edit source]

Topology optimization

[edit source]

Topology optimization is a type of structural optimization technique which can optimize material layout within a given design space. Compared to other typical structural optimization techniques, such as size optimization or shape optimization, topology optimization improves efficiency for material usage in a part. In addition to this the complex optimized shapes obtained from topology optimization can handle complex interior geometries which take more resources to handle for traditional manufacturing processes like CNC machining.[6] To address this issue, additive manufacturing can be used to fabricate these topology-optimized parts.[7] A factor of topology optimization comes from manufacturing constraints. Small feature sizes also need to be considered as they can either prove as weak points in the manufacturing process and an obstacle during the topology optimization process.[8] Achieving optimal geometry and slicing for additive manufacturing, balancing production quality with efficiency, is also aided by machine learning and generative AI techniques, including multimodal approaches.[9]

Multiscale structure design

[edit source]

Due to the unique capabilities of AM processes, parts with multiscale complexities can be realized. This provides a great design freedom for designers to use cellular structures or lattice structures on micro or meso-scales for the preferred properties. For example, in the aerospace field, lattice structures fabricated by AM process can be used for weight reduction.[10] In the bio-medical field, bio-implant made of lattice or cellular structures can enhance osseointegration.[11]

Multi-material design

[edit source]

Parts with multi-material or complex material distribution can be achieved by additive manufacturing processes. To help designers take advantage of this capability, several design and simulation methods[12][13][14] have been proposed to support the design of a part with multiple materials or Functionally Graded Materials . These design methods also bring a challenge to traditional CAD system. Most of them can only deal with homogeneous materials now.

Design for mass customization

[edit source]

Since additive manufacturing can directly fabricate parts from products’ digital model, it significantly reduces the cost and leading time of producing customized products. Thus, how to rapidly generate customized parts becomes a central issue for mass customization. Several design methods[15] have been proposed to help designers or users to obtain the customized product in an easy way. These methods or tools can also be considered as the DfAM methods.

Parts consolidation

[edit source]

Due to the constraints of traditional manufacturing methods, some complex components are usually separated into several parts for the ease of manufacturing as well as assembly. This situation has been changed by the use of additive manufacturing technologies. Some case studies have been done to show some parts in the original design can be consolidated into one complex part and fabricated by additive manufacturing processes. This redesigning process can be called as parts consolidation. The research shows parts consolidation will not only reduce part count, it can also improve the product functional performance.[16] The design methods which can guide designers to do part consolidation can also be regarded as a type of DfAM methods.

Lattice structures

[edit source]

Lattice structures is a type of cellular structures (i.e. open). These structures were previously difficult to manufacture, hence was not widely used. Thanks to the free-form manufacturing capability of additive manufacturing technology, it is now possible to design and manufacture complex forms. Lattice structures have high strength and low mass mechanical properties and multifunctionality.[17] These structures can be found in parts in the aerospace and biomedical industries.[18][19] It has been observed that these lattice structures mimic atomic crystal lattice, where the nodes and struts represent atoms and atomic bonds, respectively, and termed as meta-crystals. They obey the metallurgical hardening principles (grain boundary strengthening, precipitate hardening etc.) when undergoing deformation.[20] It has been further reported that the yield strength and ductility of the struts (meta-atomic bonds) can be increased drastically by taking advantage of the non-equilibrium solidification phenomenon in Additive Manufacturing, thus increasing the performance of the bulk structures.[21]

Thermal issues in design

[edit source]

For AM processes that use heat to fuse powder or feedstock, process consistency and part quality are strongly influenced by the temperature history inside the part during manufacture, especially for metal AM.[22][23] Thermal modelling can be used to inform part design and the choice of process parameters for manufacture, in place of expensive empirical testing.[24][25][26]

Optimal design for additive manufacturing

[edit source]

Additively manufactured metallic structures with the same (macroscopic) shape and size but fabricated by different process parameters have strikingly different microstructures and hence mechanical properties.[27] The abundant and highly flexible AM process parameters substantially influence the AM microstructures.[27] Therefore, in principle, one could simultaneously 3D-print the (macro-)structure as well as the desirable microstructure depending on the expected performance of the specialized AM component under the known service load. In this context, multi-scale and multi-physics integrated computational materials engineering (ICME) for computational linkage of process-(micro)structure-properties-performance (PSPP) chain can be used to efficiently search an AM design subspace for the optimum point with respect to the performance of the AM structure under the known service load.[28] The comprehensive design space of metal AM is boundless and high dimensional, which includes all the possible combinations of alloy compositions, process parameters and structural geometries. However, always a constrained subset of the design space (design subspace) is under consideration. The performance, as the design objective, depending on the thermo-chemo-mechanical service load, may include multiple functional aspects, such as specific energy absorption capacity, fatigue life/strength, high temperature strength, creep resistance, erosion/wear resistance and/or corrosion resistance. It is hypothesized that the optimal design approach is essential for unraveling the full potential of metal AM technologies and thus their widespread adoption for production of structurally critical load-bearing components.[28]

See also

[edit source]

References

[edit source]
  1. Tang, Yunlong; Zhao, Yaoyao Fiona (18 April 2016). "A survey of the design methods for additive manufacturing to improve functional performance". Rapid Prototyping Journal. 22 (3): 569–590. doi:10.1108/RPJ-01-2015-0011.
  2. Zelinski, Peter (31 March 2017). "GE Team Secretly Printed a Helicopter Engine, Replacing 900 Parts with 16". Additive Manufacturing.
  3. Hendrixson, Stephanie (18 June 2026). "How to Think About Design for Additive Manufacturing". Additive Manufacturing.
  4. "Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies, (Withdrawn 2015)". ASTM.[unreliable source?]
  5. Gibson, Ian; Rosen, David W.; Stucker, Brent (2010). "Design for Additive Manufacturing". Additive Manufacturing Technologies. pp. 299–332. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1120-9_11. ISBN 978-1-4419-1119-3.
  6. Zhu, Jihong; Zhou, Han; Wang, Chuang; Zhou, Lu; Yuan, Shangqin; Zhang, Weihong (January 2021). "A review of topology optimization for additive manufacturing: Status and challenges". Chinese Journal of Aeronautics. 34 (1): 91–110. Bibcode:2021ChJAn..34a..91Z. doi:10.1016/j.cja.2020.09.020.
  7. Barbieri, Loris; Muzzupappa, Maurizio (17 February 2022). "Performance-Driven Engineering Design Approaches Based on Generative Design and Topology Optimization Tools: A Comparative Study". Applied Sciences. 12 (4): 2106. doi:10.3390/app12042106.
  8. Leary, Martin; Merli, Luigi; Torti, Federico; Mazur, Maciej; Brandt, Milan (November 2014). "Optimal topology for additive manufacture: A method for enabling additive manufacture of support-free optimal structures". Materials & Design. 63: 678–690. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2014.06.015.
  9. Ciccone, Francesco; Bacciaglia, Antonio; Ceruti, Alessandro (June 2023). "Optimization with artificial intelligence in additive manufacturing: a systematic review". Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering. 45 (6) 303. doi:10.1007/s40430-023-04200-2. hdl:11585/926595.
  10. Tang, Yunlong; Kurtz, Aidan; Zhao, Yaoyao Fiona (December 2015). "Bidirectional Evolutionary Structural Optimization (BESO) based design method for lattice structure to be fabricated by additive manufacturing". Computer-Aided Design. 69: 91–101. doi:10.1016/j.cad.2015.06.001.
  11. Emmelmann, C.; Scheinemann, P.; Munsch, M.; Seyda, V. (2011). "Laser Additive Manufacturing of Modified Implant Surfaces with Osseointegrative Characteristics". Physics Procedia. 12: 375–384. Bibcode:2011PhPro..12..375E. doi:10.1016/j.phpro.2011.03.048. hdl:11420/2013.
  12. Zhang, Feng; Zhou, Chi; Das, Sonjoy (2015). "An Efficient Design Optimization Method for Functional Gradient Material Objects Based on Finite Element Analysis". Volume 1A: 35th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. doi:10.1115/DETC2015-47772. ISBN 978-0-7918-5704-5.
  13. Zhou, Shiwei; Wang, Michael Yu (29 December 2006). "Multimaterial structural topology optimization with a generalized Cahn–Hilliard model of multiphase transition". Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization. 33 (2): 89–111. doi:10.1007/s00158-006-0035-9.
  14. Stankovic, Tino; Mueller, Jochen; Egan, Paul; Shea, Kristina (2015). "Optimization of Additively Manufactured Multi-Material Lattice Structures Using Generalized Optimality Criteria". Volume 1A: 35th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. doi:10.1115/DETC2015-47403. ISBN 978-0-7918-5704-5.
  15. Reeves, Phil; Tuck, Chris; Hague, Richard (2011). "Additive Manufacturing for Mass Customization". Mass Customization. Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing. pp. 275–289. doi:10.1007/978-1-84996-489-0_13. ISBN 978-1-84996-488-3.
  16. Yang, Sheng; Tang, Yunlong; Zhao, Yaoyao Fiona (October 2015). "A new part consolidation method to embrace the design freedom of additive manufacturing". Journal of Manufacturing Processes. 20: 444–449. doi:10.1016/j.jmapro.2015.06.024.
  17. Azman, Abdul Hadi; Vignat, Frédéric; Villeneuve, François (29 April 2018). "CAD Tools and File Format Performance Evaluation in Designing Lattice Structures for Additive Manufacturing". Jurnal Teknologi. 80 (4).
  18. Gao, Wei; Zhang, Yunbo; Ramanujan, Devarajan; Ramani, Karthik; Chen, Yong; Williams, Christopher B.; Wang, Charlie C.L.; Shin, Yung C.; Zhang, Song; Zavattieri, Pablo D. (December 2015). "The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering". Computer-Aided Design. 69: 65–89. doi:10.1016/j.cad.2015.04.001.
  19. Rashed, M.G.; Ashraf, Mahmud; Mines, R.A.W.; Hazell, Paul J. (April 2016). "Metallic microlattice materials: A current state of the art on manufacturing, mechanical properties and applications". Materials & Design. 95: 518–533. Bibcode:2016MatDe..95..518R. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.146.
  20. Pham, Minh-Son; Liu, Chen; Todd, Iain; Lertthanasarn, Jedsada (17 January 2019). "Damage-tolerant architected materials inspired by crystal microstructure". Nature. 565 (7739): 305–311. Bibcode:2019Natur.565..305P. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0850-3. PMID 30651615.
  21. Rashed, M.G.; Bhattacharyya, Dhriti; Mines, R.A.W.; Saadatfar, M.; Xu, Alan; Ashraf, Mahmud; Smith, M.; Hazell, Paul J. (January 2021). "Enhancing the bond strength in the meta-crystal lattice of architected materials by harnessing the non-equilibrium solidification in metal additive manufacturing". Additive Manufacturing. 37 101682. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2020.101682. hdl:1885/292177.
  22. Dowling, L.; Kennedy, J.; O'Shaughnessy, S.; Trimble, D. (January 2020). "A review of critical repeatability and reproducibility issues in powder bed fusion". Materials & Design. 186 108346. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108346.
  23. Diegel, Olaf; Nordin, Axel; Motte, Damien (2019). A Practical Guide to Design for Additive Manufacturing. Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-8281-9. ISBN 978-981-13-8280-2.[page needed]
  24. Yavari, M. Reza; Cole, Kevin D.; Rao, Prahalada K. (2019). "Design Rules for Additive Manufacturing – Understanding the Fundamental Thermal Phenomena to Reduce Scrap". Procedia Manufacturing. 33: 375–382. doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2019.04.046.
  25. Yavari, M. Reza; Cole, Kevin D.; Rao, Prahalada (July 2019). "Thermal Modeling in Metal Additive Manufacturing Using Graph Theory". Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. 141 (7) 071007. doi:10.1115/1.4043648.
  26. Denlinger, Erik R.; Irwin, Jeff; Michaleris, Pan (December 2014). "Thermomechanical Modeling of Additive Manufacturing Large Parts". Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. 136 (6) 061007. doi:10.1115/1.4028669.
  27. 1 2 Motaman, S. Amir H.; Haase, Christian (May 2021). "The microstructural effects on the mechanical response of polycrystals: A comparative experimental-numerical study on conventionally and additively manufactured metallic materials". International Journal of Plasticity. 140 102941. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2021.102941.
  28. 1 2 Motaman, S. Amir H.; Kies, Fabian; Köhnen, Patrick; Létang, Maike; Lin, Mingxuan; Molotnikov, Andrey; Haase, Christian (March 2020). "Optimal Design for Metal Additive Manufacturing: An Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) Approach". JOM. 72 (3): 1092–1104. Bibcode:2020JOM....72.1092M. doi:10.1007/s11837-020-04028-4.