Terms such as Industry 4.0, the Digital Thread and the Digital Twin have become familiar buzzwords in manufacturing, but many such terms barely make sense to IT experts, let alone AM professionals. In the crowded and jargon-heavy landscape of solutions for digitalisation, articulating future AM software trends can help offer clarity and confidence in IT investments and give insight into the data-driven future of manufacturing, believes Authentise’s Andre Wegner, who shares his vision of the route to developing an effective digital factory with Metal AM’s Emily-Jo Hopson. [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 2, Summer 2019]
... Read more »
Powder specifications vary significantly across the various metal Additive Manufacturing technologies. As Andrew Klein, Director of R&D at The ExOne Company, and Jamie Clayton, Operations Director at Freeman Technology explain, powders for binder jetting in particular have very specific process-related requirements. In the following article, the two offer their insight into the rapid assessment and qualification process for a new 316L stainless steel powder. [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 2, Summer 2019]
... Read more »
The limited number of alloys currently commercially available for metal Additive Manufacturing is regarded as a key factor hindering the growth of the industry. In this article, Rosswag GmbH’s Daniel Beckers reports on a high-speed qualification process that the company has developed for new alloys, and that spans the complete AM process chain – from alloy atomisation to L-PBF process parameters, heat-treatment and mechanical testing [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 2, Summer 2019]
... Read more »
Additive Manufacturing is not a cheap production process. The software, machine time, materials and expertise required to make the most of the technology all come at a significant cost. The resulting financial pressures may give rise to the temptation to select a material on its price and view advanced topology optimisation as a luxury. As Jon Meyer, APWORKS, and John Barnes, The Barnes Group Advisors, demonstrate, the unique capabilities of AM mean that basing material choice on cost without considering the impact of material performance on the mass of the part is a false economy, limiting the competitiveness of AM and the potential of an application [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 1, Spring 2019]
... Read more »
In the following article, UL LLC’s Balakrishnan V Nair discusses key safety issues in metal Additive Manufacturing, identifying some of the principal sources of risk associated with production operations and sharing safety concerns as encountered in UL’s work with metal AM clients globally. In addition, Nair highlights some of the benefits that many AM facilities have enjoyed as a result of the successful implementation of sound safety practices [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 1, Spring 2019]
... Read more »
In a bid to better understand the impact of process parameters on material performance, the U.S. Navy turned to Senvol to develop data-driven machine learning software for Additive Manufacturing. As Zach Simkin and Annie Wang explain, such an approach allows the user to overcome the time and expense required by a conventional trial-and-error process, whilst delivering remarkably accurate results that have the potential to accelerate application development [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 1, Spring 2019]
... Read more »
Build failures remain a major challenge in metal Additive Manufacturing, particularly on large parts for which build times are measured in many days rather than hours. They come at a high price in lost machine time, wasted material and delayed deliveries. Olaf Diegel and Terry Wohlers explain a number of reasons for such failures in Laser Powder Bed Fusion processes. In many cases, one can reduce their risk through effective part and support design, parameter control and machine maintenance. [First published in Metal AM Vol. 5 No. 1, Spring 2019]
... Read more »
With the launch of a number of new systems targeting the series production of components, Binder Jetting is generating a high level of interest in the world of metal Additive Manufacturing and beyond. In the following report, Sebastian Boris Hein, Claus Aumund-Kopp and Bastian Barthel of Fraunhofer IFAM review the main process considerations and production steps in the Binder Jetting of metals as related to series production, highlighting both the advantages of the technology and the challenges that it poses [First published in Metal AM Vol. 4 No. 4, Winter 2018]
... Read more »
X-ray Computed Tomography (CT), also widely known as MicroCT, is a proven method for not only checking the structural integrity of additively manufactured (AM) parts – for example for unwanted porosity – but also for checking a build’s dimensional accuracy. The main advantage of the technique is of course the non-destructive nature of the assessment; however, there are also many misunderstandings about the capabilities and complexity of the technology. Prof Anton du Plessis and Dr Jess M Waller review the application of CT testing in relation to metal AM and highlight the advantages of a move towards standardised test methods [First published in Metal AM Vol. 4 No. 4, Winter 2018]
... Read more »
From November 13-16, 2018, the Additive Manufacturing world congregated in Frankfurt, Germany, to attend the year’s final and arguably most significant international exhibition on the technology. Occupying more than 37,000 m2 of floor space, Formnext 2018 attracted nearly 27,000 visitors – an increase of more than 25% on the previous year – and over 600 global exhibitors. In this report, Metal AM’s Emily-Jo Hopson covers some of the news and developments out of Formnext, and looks at how they reflect an industry turning its focus toward productivity and efficiency for true industrialisation [First published in Metal AM Vol. 4 No. 4, Winter 2018]
... Read more »
