3D Printing Metal End-use Part Applications

This article describes the ideal use-cases for each process & comparison with other solutions to help you identify opportunities using 3D Hubs in your organization for metal 3d printing service.

Definition: End-use part is any good that is either sold as a product or placed in service within a company’s internal operations.

There are 6 processes to consider:

  1. FDM / FFF (plastics)
  2. SLA / DLP (plastics)
  3. SLS / MJF (plastics)
  4. SLM / DMLS (metals)
  5. Metal FFF (metals)
  6. Binder Jetting (metals)

In part 1 we talked about plastic parts, in part 2 we discuss only metals. 

4. SLM/DMLS

Selective Laser Melting (SLM) and Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) are metal powder bed fusion 3D Hubs printing processes that are most commonly used today as they are especially suitable for high-end applications since they offer advanced material properties and superb design freedom.

While both utilize high laser power to bond together metal powder particles to form a part– layer-by-layer, SLM will achieve a full melt, while — due to the very high temperatures — DMLS will cause the metal particles to fuse together at a molecular level. 

The majority of metal alloys are compatible with the DMLS method, wherein SLM, only certain (pure) metal materials may be used.

Still, the differences between these two 3D Hubs printing technologies are so slim; they can be treated as the same for designing purposes. 

In this section, we will take a closer look at the technical characteristics, manufacturing process, and the limitations and benefits of these two, very similar techniques.

How it works: SLM/DMLS 3D Hubs printing process basic steps:

  • First, the build chamber is filled with inert gas then heated to the optimum print temperature.
  • A thin layer (typically 50 μm) of metal powder is spread over the build platform.
  • Next, the laser scans the cross-section of the part, selectively bonding the metal particles.
  • Thus, the build platform moves down a layer when the entire area is scanned, and the process repeats until the build is complete.
  • After the printing process is complete, the build must first cool down before the loose powder is extracted.

This step is only the beginning of the SLM/DMLS 3D printing manufacturing process. Once the print is complete, several compulsory and/or optional post-processing steps are also required before the parts will be ready for use. 

Compulsory post-processing steps include

  • Stress relief: Before continuing with any other operation, the internal stresses that develop during printing, due to the very high processing temperatures, need to be relieved through a thermal cycle.
  • Removal of the parts: In SLM/DMLS the parts are welded onto the build platform and EDM wire cutting or a band saw are used.
  • Removal of the support: To mitigate the distortion and warping that occurs during printing, support in SLM/DMLS is required. Support is CNC machined or removed manually.

Additional post-processing steps are often required to meet engineering specifications that may include:

  • CNC machining: When tolerances are tighter than the standard ± 0.1 mm that’s required, machining is employed as a finishing step. Only the slight material is removed this way.
  • Heat treatments: Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP) or heat treatments can be used to improve the material properties of the part.
  • Smoothing/Polishing: Certain application requires a smoother surface than the standard RA 10 μm of as-printed SLM/DMLS. CNC machining and Vibro, chemical, or manual polishing are available solutions.

How it works: Laser source bonds metal powder particles

Strengths:

  • Geometric freedom
  • High accuracy & fine details
  • High-performance materials

Materials:

  • Stainless Steel
  • Aluminum
  • Titanium
  • Superalloys

Use case #1 – Optimized brackets

DMLS / SLM is used to create lightweight parts through advanced CAD processes, such as topology optimization. They are of particular interest in the automotive and aerospace industries.

Use case #2 – Internal geometries

A far more common use of DMLS / SLM is the creation of parts with internal channels. These find applications in the manufacturing industry (for example injection molding tooling with internal channels for cooling) or for heat exchangers.

Pro tip: Make sure that no support structures are needed to manufacture the internal channels, as they will be impossible to remove.

5. Metal FFF: What is metal extrusion?

Metal Extrusion is a low-cost metal 3D printing process alternative that is most suitable for prototyping purposes or for one-off custom parts.

It is a variation of the classic FDM method for plastics. In 2018, the first Metal Extrusion 3D printers were released also known as an Atomic Diffusion Additive Manufacturing (ADAM) and Bound Metal Deposition (BMD).

A part is built layer-by-layer, like FDM, by extruding material through a nozzle, but the material is not plastic, unlike FDM but is a metal powder held together with a polymer binder. The result of the printing step is a “green” part that needs to be sintered and de-bonded to become fully metal.

Here, we examine the characteristics and key limitations and benefits of this additive process to help you understand how you can use it more effectively.

How does metal extrusion work?

Metal Extrusion consists of a three-stage process involving a printing stage, a de-binding stage, and a sintering stage. 

The Printing Stage…

  • Raw material in a rod or filament form, which basically consists of metal particles that are bound together by wax and/or polymer.
  • This filament or rod is extruded through a heated nozzle and then deposited– layer-by-layer to build a designed part based on the CAD model.
  • While, if necessary, support structures are built. The interface between the part and the support is printed with ceramic support material that can easily be removed later manually.

When printing is complete, the “green” resulting part must be post-processed using similar steps like Binder Jetting, in order to become metal. The “green” part is washed first for several hours in a solution to remove almost all of the binders. Then it is sintered inside a furnace so that the metal particles are bonded together to form the fully-metal part.

During the sintering process, the dimensions of the parts are reduced by about 20 percent. to compensate for this, the parts are printed larger. Like the Binder Jetting process, the shrinkage isn’t homogenous, meaning that trial and error will be required to get accurate results for particular designs.

How it works: Metal/binder is extruded through a nozzle to print the part, which is then thermally sintered.

Strengths:

  • Does not require industrial facilities
  • Based on MIM
  • Complex metal parts

Materials:

  • Stainless steel
  • Tool steel

Main use: For internal operations

An alternative to CNC, Sand casting

Quantity: 1-50 parts

Use case #1 – CNC part replacements

Metal Extrusion is excellent for functional CNC prototyping and small productions of metal parts that would otherwise require a 5-axis CNC machining to produce.

6. Metal Binder Jetting

Metal Binder Jetting is increasing in popularity rapidly. What makes it especially suitable for small to medium production runs, is its unique characteristics.

In this section, we will dive deeper within the steps used in the Binder Jetting to learn the basic characteristics of metal parts production.

What is Metal Binder Jetting?

Metal Binder Jetting is a process of building parts by placing a binding agent on a slightly thin layer of powder in through inkjet nozzles. Originally, it was used to develop full-color models and prototypes from sandstone. A variation of the technique is becoming more popular lately, because of its batch production capabilities.

In metal Binder Jetting printing, the printing step is done at room temperature, which means the thermal effects, such as, internal stresses and warping aren’t a problem, like in SLM/ DMLS, and therefore, supports are not needed. To create a fully metal part, an additional post-processing step is required.

How does Metal Binder Jetting work?

Metal Binder Jetting involves two-stages; a printing stage and a post-processing stage.

The printing process works like this…

  • A thin layer (typically 50 μm) of metal powder is spread out over the build platform.
  • A carriage that has inkjet nozzles will pass over the bed while selectively depositing binding agent droplets of wax and polymer to bond together the metal powder particles.
  • When done, the build platform will move down, then the process will repeat until the entire build is complete.

The result of this printing process is a part of the “green” state. To create fully metal parts and remove the binding agent, a post-processing step is necessary.

This post-processing stage requires two variations: Infiltration and Sintering.

How it works: Binder is jetted onto metal powder particles to create the part, which is then thermally sintered

Strengths:

  • Great design freedom
  • Based on MIM
  • Batch production

Materials:

  • Stainless steel 
  • Tool steel

Main use: Low-run metal production

An alternative to Metal Injection Molding, Die casting

Use case – Low-run production

Binder Jetting is the only metal 3D printing technology today that can be used cost-effectively for low-to-medium batch production of metal parts that are smaller than a tennis ball.

Why engineers use 3D Hubs for 3D printing

Instant quoting & DFM feedback

Build and edit your quote online. Review your parts for manufacturability and assess the cost of different materials, processes and lead times for your project in real-time. Explore our 3d printing service for every type of additive manufacturing project. 

Readily available capacity

Benefit from our network of 250 manufacturing partners to access instantly available capacity. Our manufacturing partners are both local and overseas.

Quality & reliability

Dedicated 3D Hubs team to ensure your parts consistently meet your quality expectations. We also offer phone, email and chat support for any concerns or questions you may have.

The post 3D Printing Metal End-use Part Applications appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

3DHubs Killing Off Its Community? 3D Printing Company Commits Suicide for No Reason.


3DHubs has grown by having a unique premise and idea. The 3Dhubs community of 3D printer operators from all over the world can sign up to 3DHubs and offer their 3D printers to others. I can send a part to 3DHubs, and it will be 3D printed locally by a neighbor or someone that lives close to my work. In this way, 3DHubs has been a vital connection point in the 3D printing community since its inception. The company has tens of thousands of people signed up to its network. So far 3DHubs has not really been imitated and copied, so it alone competes directly with Shapeways, i.materialise, and Sculpteo as a unique company. 3DHubs is different since it is a distributed manufacturing platform of independent operators across the world. This lead to support for 3DHubs stated goals of localizing manufacturing and making it more efficient.

It seems that the company is now turning its back on its roots and will focus solely on working with professional service bureaus to fulfill orders as per October 1st. A radical departure from the previous path and a radical going back on its community has confused many. The value of 3DHubs is in its community; the community gives it granular local presence and a barrier to entry. Now it is just like any 3D printing service upstart and will lose its community entirely. I’ve always liked 3DHubs, although I have been very skeptical of their Trends Report I like the company and what they’re doing. I liked the idealism coupled with business. I’ve also personally met with the founders who I consider to be nice and more importantly very capable 3D printing people. People who now have decided to create their own new Coke moment. I can not think of a business rationale for this nor can I fathom why they would do this in this way. Even if 3DHubs thought that the future of its business is in working only with 3D printing services, then it can still support its community? Why wreck a marketing and possible monetization instrument like that? It could through content, product sales, courses, support or any number of ways profit and help its existing community of tens of thousands. So even if it would move to service bureaus, then I would still recommend that they coddle and keep the one thing that makes them unique.

I’m not the only one that is confused by this; these are just some community member responses today:

MikByte @viperz28
Why? Don’t you plan on screwing over the 3d printing community due to greed.

“With #3dHubs dropping smaller independent printer hubs starting Oct, what are other comparable P2P options out there? #3Dprinting #makersgonnamake

2lol555@2lol555
A big F you to @3DHubs today! Switching over from “Locally sourced 3D prints” to the “Closed manufacturing program” basically… This was a big reason for me to own a 3d printer… now it’s all gone!

Buildingthings

“Dear 3DHubs, Get f-ed. That is all.
Sincerely,

The People you stepped on to get to where you are today.”

The company today emailed any nonqualifying people and told them that they could not be active after October 1st.

I’ve quoted from the email people got below:

“On Monday, October 1st, 2018, we’re going to completely switch our 3D printing service to the Fulfilled by 3D Hubs
offering. This means that it will no longer be possible for Hubs outside the Manufacturing Partner Program to receive
orders on 3D Hubs.

This email explains why we’ve decided to make this switch, what this means for you, and the options you have going
forward.

Why are we doing this?
3D Hubs’ mission is to make manufacturing easier and more accessible. Since we started we have produced more
than 1.7 million parts for customers through our online platform and global network of manufacturing Hubs. We’ve
noticed that as our platform has improved over the years, the customers who order most often are businesses. As we
discussed back in February in this blog post, it has become more and more essential for 3D Hubs to deliver a highly
reliable and consistent manufacturing service to our customers.

To achieve this we started building Fulfilled by 3D Hubs at the end of 2017. We tested the impact of a more controlled
and consistent manufacturing service and customer feedback has been so overwhelmingly positive, it is hard to
ignore. Since launching this service, we have seen significant growth in the usage of our 3D print service, particularly
by the professional user group. We’ve seen customer order value doubling since January. Therefore, over the past year
it has become clear that in order to best serve our growing number of professional customers, 3D Hubs has to double
down on standardisation. That’s why we are taking the hard decision to move away from our original peer-to-peer
model and become fully B2B focused.

What does this mean for you?
As of Monday, October 1st, 2018 Fulfilled by 3D Hubs will be the only option for ordering 3D Printed parts on 3D Hubs.
On this date, the following services will be discontinued:
Platform Orders to non-manufacturing partners
Embeddable Order widget orders
Individual Hub profile pages

Unfortunately, based on your 3D Hubs order history you don’t qualify to become a Manufacturing Partner. This means
that you won’t be able to run your 3D Printing service on 3D Hubs from October 1st, 2018.
If you’re not looking to run a commercial 3D printing business but still want to offer your 3D Printing services locally,
you can consider joining our Talk Maker Forum. On this new subsection of Talk, Hubs can freely connect with local
makers, hobbyists and students interested to get their projects 3D printed. While this is by no means a full blown
replacement of our peer-to-peer platform, we hope we can keep supporting makers, hobbyist and students to keep
printing locally.

It’s unclear how they want to support a peer to peer program by effectively ending it. The company has one data point it relies on, “We’ve seen customer order value doubling since January.” Since 3DHubs is not great at statistics, I could point out that across the board in 3D printing customer order values have increased dramatically over the past months since more companies are using higher value materials and also turning more and more to metal 3D printing which 3DHubs also offers. Generally, all projects of all of my clients, for example, have increased in complexity and size as 3D printing is going from something for the business development team to a business process or implementation. This is something that I’ve been tracking in a number of areas and to me seems independent of 3DHubs but just a general market development. We are maturing as an industry, and higher order values is a result of this. Simultaneously if we go from bulk PLA to all sorts of specialist models while also increasing the print volume of systems dramatically then order values will increase. It’s kind of if Mercedes would see a rise in customer spend due to perceived economic growth and decide to get rid of the A class. In this case, I think they’ve completely misinterpreted the data, and even if their conclusion was what it was, they shouldn’t have done it. They could have spent less money on the A class for example or released fewer models but killing it outright would damage their portfolio overall.

3DHubs also states, “it has become more and more essential for 3D Hubs to deliver a highly reliable and consistent manufacturing service to our customers” just at the time when desktop 3D printers are starting to equal or come close to equalling the dimensional accuracy and surface quality of some industrial systems. Just when newer more advanced desktop systems are reaching consumers, 3DHubs gives up on them? Also for certain materials such as flexible materials, desktop 3D printers outperform industrial systems both in the fit and finish of the part and the strength of the part. Part costs are lower on desktop systems as well with the material prices 30 to 10 times less per kilo. 3DHubs would have always won a price war with all service bureaus, until now. Skill levels of operators and improvements in machines have also increased the reliability and repeatability of desktop systems to the point where many more builds succeed, and more things can be printed in one build. Effectively for a year or so, 3D printing has a lower “cost” in terms of time for the desktop 3D printer operator.

Then the killer quote, “the hard decision to move away from our original peer-to-peer model and become fully B2B focused.” These two things are not mutually exclusive. Especially with higher quality 3D printed parts and more educated 3D printer users the business to business focus of the company could still be served by skilled amateurs with good machines. Or the company could have just had two service levels, well explained and kept on tucking. Now, 3DHubs has gone from a unique company with tens of thousands of people to a service bureau. It goes from having a unique value proposition of being the only company to be able to manufacture locally globally to being just another service bureau. It goes from having a unique message of being able to make efficient low carbon 3D prints everywhere on earth to be a kind of Shapeways but ten years later. Instead of growing a community now the company is going to have to out-execute Materialise and Shapeways directly. It could have won in the long run, but it would be almost impossible for them to either be higher quality than Materialise or cheaper at scale than Shapeways. They’ve gone from unique positioning, unique value proposition and unique competitive edge to a competitive no man’s land. I’ve never been more thoroughly confused by a move in business than this one. I’ll reiterate, they could have easily concluded that the future was through service bureau partners and just not have killed off the community but have kept them. This large platform of users around the world could have been incredibly valuable. No words. I can only describe this a business unforced error.

Student Creates CUDA, the 3D Printed Underwater Jet Pack

About 71% of the Earth’s surface is covered with water and while technology for traveling on dry land has developed that allows people of moderate income to cover a fair amount of ground relatively quickly, underwater exploration of a comparable sort has remained out of reach for all but a few. In terms of individual exploration, the ‘luxury seatoy’ SEABOB underwater scooter has infiltrated the dreams of those interested in underwater transport — but with a price tag of about $17,000 it will remain a dream for most. In response to the inaccessibility of this kind of technology, one young man decided he was going to work to create a more price-friendly alternative.

This innovative young man, Archie O’Brien, worked with 3D Hubs to create his underwater enhanced transportation device, which he has named the CUDA. O’Brien’s creation won him first place in the recently announced 2018 3D Hubs Student Grant program in the Product Design category.

The CUDA is a jet propulsion-driven backpack which the user wears allowing a hands-free jet pack experience underwater. The initial idea was to miniaturize a jet ski and utilize that, but it didn’t quite fit in the backpack configuration. After a careful reading of “Numerical Analysis of a Waterjet Propulsion System” by Norbert Willem Herman Bulten, O’Brien was convinced that despite the difficulties involved, he could come up with something that would be better suited to the backpack configuration.

With dreams of gliding effortlessly through the clear waters off of Iceland or as a member of a pod of dolphins, he set out to experiment and research and experiment again. In order to be able to quickly create and rapidly iterate while developing the jet pack, O’Brien utilized 3D printing and CNC technologies. This also allowed him to control for costs as it was part of his primary objective to create something that could be significantly more affordable than anything else on the market. As such, he used FDM technology and PLA, two of the most widely accessible and economically viable methods for fabricating. In addition, SLS was used to create the impeller, using carbon fiber infused powder which gave extreme stiffness needed for such parts.

The key test was determining how the 45 3D printed parts would hold up underwater. To prepare them to operate in such extreme conditions, all the 3D printed parts were first coated with a thin layer of epoxy resin that was then slow-dried, and silicone seals were added to all of the access doors in order to keep water from leaking in and shorting out the battery and other electronics.

But, of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and so there was nothing else to do but throw the thing on and get in the water, which O’Brien has done with gusto, testing the CUDA out in both pools and open water. In addition, parts have been left in water for months to see if they can withstand prolonged exposure, and so far it has all been up to snuff. The CUDA itself requires only 10 minutes to assemble – though I’m assuming that’s for someone with experience if my history of IKEA assembly finish times are any indicator. Once assembly is complete, the backpack is designed to work intuitively, with its harness holding it at 90 degrees in relation to your shoulders and speed controlled by a handheld trigger.

The CUDA is currently patent pending with hopes for the first commercially available models to hit the market in 2019.

What do you think of this news? Let us know your thoughts; join the discussion of this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com.

[Source/Images: 3D Hubs]