Hello Adriano,
thanks for your presentation and the interesting case study. Espacially reducing the part number and reducing the mass significantly is a great result.
I’ve got a question concerning the generative design approach. Do you think it would be possible to optimice the generative design for hybrid manufacturing as well? I mean combining conventional manufacturing with PBF-LB/M. I talked with Autodesk about this, since they can optimice within one manufacturing technology, but not for a combination of technologies. Looking at your demonstrator part, it could be for example an improvement, to manufacture the lower part (on slide 17) conventional and add the “legs” by PBF. So you would reduce the AM time and costs.
I’m looking forward for your reply and ideas.
Lukas
Dear Dr. Lang,
Firstly, I would like to thank you for seeing our presentation. In addition, thank you for your very keen question. The GD optimized gear was built with a Concept Laser Mlab Cusing in 22 hours (layer thickness= 0.015 mm). In my personal opinion, it is possible to produce and optimize the gear with a hybrid manufacturing approach. In addition, even if the software used in this study does not allow the inclusion of multiple manufacturing optimizations, you can exclude the part produced by traditional technologies from the Design space, making it an area of no design space (Preserve geometry in Autodesk environment).
It should be noted that the junction of two metals produced with different techniques (e.g. casting and powder bed) can be critical; in particular, the first material (Preserve geometry) must have good weldability to the substrate. Hybrid Manufacturing is still little explored; you might think doing studies about it, both from the point of view of algorithms and the process. Indeed from the point of view of production, there can be advantages.
I hope I have answered your question, and I thank you again for your comment.
Best regards,
Adriano Pilagatti
Hello Adriano,
thanks for your reply and your point of view. 15 µm is quite a small layer thickness. Was it necessary for surface quality?
Actually my colleagues and I are working on the junction (We call it transition or bonding zone) of different manufactured parts (e.g. casting or milling + PBF). So if you would like to discuss this topic or your use case I would be happy to get in touch with you. And concerning the algorythm: Unfortunatly I don’t see GD getting there to analyze two manufacturing technologies at the same time soon, but your “workaround” sounds promicing. Geometrical analysis of the perfect “cutting plane” of the technologies as well as a cost model are part of our research as well. But right now it still needs more development.
Dear Dr. Langer,
I’m really interested in reading your work, and we will be pleased to fix a call to meet each other.
We decided to use that layer thickness, also linked to the low power of the machine, to achieve a good surface roughness and porosity free structure and surfaces. Moreover, complex and organic geometry such as the landing gear we optimized could have fatigue issues that cannot be neglected in the Aerospace sector. Many researches [1, 2, 3, 4], suggest using the minimum layer thickness to reduce defects due to the increasing Energy density.
Hope I have answered your question,
Best regards.
Adriano Pilagatti
[1] Shi, L., Zhou, J., Li, H., Liu, S., Shen, S., Wang, H., Tian, Q., Wen, S., & Lu, J. (2021). Evolution of multi pores in Ti6Al4V/AlSi10Mg alloy during laser post-processing. Materials Characterization,176, 111109. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2021.111109
[2] Muhammad, M., Nezhadfar, P. D., Thompson, S., Saharan, A., Phan, N., & Shamsaei, N. (2021). A comparative investigation on the microstructure and mechanical properties of additively manufactured aluminium alloys. International Journal of Fatigue,146, 106165. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106165
[3] Sajadi, F., Tiemann, J.-M., Bandari, N., CheloeeDarabi, A., Mola, J., & Schmauder, S. (2021). Fatigue Improvement of AlSi10Mg Fabricated by Laser-Based Powder Bed Fusion through Heat Treatment. Metals,11(5), 683. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4701/11/5/683
[4] Croccolo, D., de Agostinis, M., Fini, S., Olmi, G., Paiardini, L., Robusto, F., & Bonomo, A. (2021). Influence of Heat and Surface Treatments on the Fatigue Response of DMLS Manufactured AlSi10mg. Materials Science Forum,1016, 1205-1210. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.1016.1205
Hello Adriano,
thanks for your presentation and the interesting case study. Espacially reducing the part number and reducing the mass significantly is a great result.
I’ve got a question concerning the generative design approach. Do you think it would be possible to optimice the generative design for hybrid manufacturing as well? I mean combining conventional manufacturing with PBF-LB/M. I talked with Autodesk about this, since they can optimice within one manufacturing technology, but not for a combination of technologies. Looking at your demonstrator part, it could be for example an improvement, to manufacture the lower part (on slide 17) conventional and add the “legs” by PBF. So you would reduce the AM time and costs.
I’m looking forward for your reply and ideas.
Lukas
Dear Dr. Lang,
Firstly, I would like to thank you for seeing our presentation. In addition, thank you for your very keen question. The GD optimized gear was built with a Concept Laser Mlab Cusing in 22 hours (layer thickness= 0.015 mm). In my personal opinion, it is possible to produce and optimize the gear with a hybrid manufacturing approach. In addition, even if the software used in this study does not allow the inclusion of multiple manufacturing optimizations, you can exclude the part produced by traditional technologies from the Design space, making it an area of no design space (Preserve geometry in Autodesk environment).
It should be noted that the junction of two metals produced with different techniques (e.g. casting and powder bed) can be critical; in particular, the first material (Preserve geometry) must have good weldability to the substrate. Hybrid Manufacturing is still little explored; you might think doing studies about it, both from the point of view of algorithms and the process. Indeed from the point of view of production, there can be advantages.
I hope I have answered your question, and I thank you again for your comment.
Best regards,
Adriano Pilagatti
Hello Adriano,
thanks for your reply and your point of view. 15 µm is quite a small layer thickness. Was it necessary for surface quality?
Actually my colleagues and I are working on the junction (We call it transition or bonding zone) of different manufactured parts (e.g. casting or milling + PBF). So if you would like to discuss this topic or your use case I would be happy to get in touch with you. And concerning the algorythm: Unfortunatly I don’t see GD getting there to analyze two manufacturing technologies at the same time soon, but your “workaround” sounds promicing. Geometrical analysis of the perfect “cutting plane” of the technologies as well as a cost model are part of our research as well. But right now it still needs more development.
Best regards,
Lukas
Dear Dr. Langer,
I’m really interested in reading your work, and we will be pleased to fix a call to meet each other.
We decided to use that layer thickness, also linked to the low power of the machine, to achieve a good surface roughness and porosity free structure and surfaces. Moreover, complex and organic geometry such as the landing gear we optimized could have fatigue issues that cannot be neglected in the Aerospace sector. Many researches [1, 2, 3, 4], suggest using the minimum layer thickness to reduce defects due to the increasing Energy density.
Hope I have answered your question,
Best regards.
Adriano Pilagatti
[1] Shi, L., Zhou, J., Li, H., Liu, S., Shen, S., Wang, H., Tian, Q., Wen, S., & Lu, J. (2021). Evolution of multi pores in Ti6Al4V/AlSi10Mg alloy during laser post-processing. Materials Characterization,176, 111109. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2021.111109
[2] Muhammad, M., Nezhadfar, P. D., Thompson, S., Saharan, A., Phan, N., & Shamsaei, N. (2021). A comparative investigation on the microstructure and mechanical properties of additively manufactured aluminium alloys. International Journal of Fatigue,146, 106165. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2021.106165
[3] Sajadi, F., Tiemann, J.-M., Bandari, N., CheloeeDarabi, A., Mola, J., & Schmauder, S. (2021). Fatigue Improvement of AlSi10Mg Fabricated by Laser-Based Powder Bed Fusion through Heat Treatment. Metals,11(5), 683. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4701/11/5/683
[4] Croccolo, D., de Agostinis, M., Fini, S., Olmi, G., Paiardini, L., Robusto, F., & Bonomo, A. (2021). Influence of Heat and Surface Treatments on the Fatigue Response of DMLS Manufactured AlSi10mg. Materials Science Forum,1016, 1205-1210. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.1016.1205