0
PAPERS: Part Design Methods and Specification Challenges in AM

(Re)Designing for Part Consolidation: Understanding the Challenges of Metal Additive Manufacturing

[+] Author and Article Information
John Schmelzle

NAVAIR Lakehurst,
Lakehurst, NJ 08733
e-mail: john.schmelzle@navy.mil

Eric V. Kline

NAVAIR Lakehurst,
Lakehurst, NJ 08733
e-mail: eric.kline2@navy.mil

Corey J. Dickman

Applied Research Laboratory,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: cjd160@arl.psu.edu

Edward W. Reutzel

Applied Research Laboratory,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: ewr101@arl.psu.edu

Griffin Jones

Applied Research Laboratory,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: gtj109@arl.psu.edu

Timothy W. Simpson

Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: tws8@psu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design for Manufacturing Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received February 27, 2015; final manuscript received June 17, 2015; published online October 12, 2015. Assoc. Editor: David Rosen. This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

J. Mech. Des 137(11), 111404 (Oct 12, 2015) (12 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1172; doi: 10.1115/1.4031156 History: Received February 27, 2015; Revised June 17, 2015

Additive manufacturing (AM) of metallic parts provides engineers with unprecedented design freedom. This enables designers to consolidate assemblies, lightweight designs, create intricate internal geometries for enhanced fluid flow or heat transfer performance, and fabricate complex components that previously could not be manufactured. While these design benefits may come “free” in many cases, it necessitates an understanding of the limitations and capabilities of the specific AM process used for production, the system-level design intent, and the postprocessing and inspection/qualification implications. Unfortunately, design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) guidelines for metal AM processes are nascent given the rapid advancements in metal AM technology recently. In this paper, we present a case study to provide insight into the challenges that engineers face when redesigning a multicomponent assembly into a single component fabricated using laser-based powder bed fusion for metal AM. In this case, part consolidation is used to reduce the weight by 60% and height by 53% of a multipart assembly while improving performance and minimizing leak points. Fabrication, postprocessing, and inspection issues are also discussed along with the implications on design. A generalized design approach for consolidating parts is presented to help designers realize the freedoms that metal AM provides, and numerous areas for investigation to improve DfAM are also highlighted and illustrated throughout the case study.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Campbell, I., Bourell, D., and Gibson, I., 2012, “Additive Manufacturing: Rapid Prototyping Comes of Age,” Rapid Prototyping J., 18(4), pp. 255–258. [CrossRef]
Frazier, W. E., 2010, “Direct Digital Manufacturing of Metallic Components: Vision and Roadmap,” 21st Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, TX, Aug. 9–11, pp. 717–732.
GE Capital, 2013, “Additive Manufacturing: Redefining What's Possible,” GE Capital, Norwalk, CT, http://www.americas.gecapital.com/GECA_Document/Additive_Manufacturing_Fall_2013.pdf
GE Reports, 2015, “The FAA Cleared the First 3D Printed Part to Fly in a Commercial Jet Engine From GE,” General Electric, Fairfield, CT, http://www.gereports.com/post/116402870270/the-faa-cleared-the-first-3d-printed-part-to-fly
Szondy, D., 2015, “GE Announces First FAA Approved 3D-Printed Engine Part,” Gizmag, http://www.gizmag.com/ge-faa-3d-printing-aircraft-engine-part/37018/
Bourell, D. L., Leu, M. C., and Rosen, D. R., eds., 2009, Roadmap for Additive Manufacturing: Identifying the Future of Freeform Processing , The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
ASTM F2792-12a, 2012, Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, p. 3.
Frazier, W. E., 2014, “Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Review,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 23(6), pp. 1917–1928. [CrossRef]
Murr, L. E., Martinez, E., Amato, K. N., Gaytan, S. M., Hernandez, J., Ramirez, D. A., Shindo, P. W., Medina, F., and Wicker, R. B., 2012, “Fabrication of Metal and Alloy Components by Additive Manufacturing: Examples of 3D Materials Science,” J. Mater. Res. Technol., 1(1), pp. 42–54. [CrossRef]
Carroll, B. E., Palmer, T. A., and Beese, A. M., 2015, “Anisotropic Tensile Behavior of Ti–6Al–4V Components Fabricated With Directed Energy Deposition Additive Manufacturing,” Acta Mater., 87, pp. 309–320. [CrossRef]
Anam, M. A., Pal, D., and Stucker, B., 2013, “Modeling and Experimental Validation of Nickel-Based Super Alloy (Inconel 625) Made Using Selective Laser Melting,” Solid Freeform Fabrication (SFF) Symposium, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, Aug. 12–14, pp. 463–473.
Michaleris, P., 2014, “Modeling Metal Deposition in Heat Transfer Analyses of Additive Manufacturing Processes,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 86, pp. 51–60. [CrossRef]
Pal, D., Patil, N., and Stucker, B., 2014, “An Integrated Approach to Additive Manufacturing Simulations Using Physics Based, Coupled Multiscale Process Modeling,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(6), p. 061022. [CrossRef]
Wang, D., Yang, Y., Liu, R., Xiao, D., and Sun, J., 2013, “Study on the Designing Rules and Processability of Porous Structure Based on Selective Laser Melting (SLM),” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 213(10), pp. 1734–1742. [CrossRef]
Paul, R., Anand, S., and Gerner, F., 2014, “Effect of Thermal Deformation on Part Errors in Metal Powder Based Additive Manufacturing Processes,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(3), p. 031009. [CrossRef]
Strano, G., Hao, L., Everson, R. M., and Evans, K. E., 2013, “Surface Roughness Analysis, Modelling and Prediction in Selective Laser Melting,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 213(4), pp. 589–597. [CrossRef]
Stimpson, C. K., Snyder, J. C., Thole, K. A., and Mongillo, D., 2015, “Roughness Effects on Flow and Heat Transfer for Additively Manufactured Channels,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-43940.
Duleba, B., Greškovič, F., and Sikora, J. W., 2011, “Materials and Finishing Methods of DMLS Manufactured Parts,” Transfer Inovácií, 21, pp. 143–148.
Huang, Y., Leu, M. C., Mazumder, J., and Donmez, A., 2015, “Additive Manufacturing: Current State, Future Potential, Gaps and Needs, and Recommendations,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 137(1), p. 014001. [CrossRef]
Rosen, D., 2014, “Design for Additive Manufacturing: Past, Present, and Future Directions,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 136(9), p. 090301. [CrossRef]
Thomas, D., 2009, “The Development of Design Rules for Selective Laser Melting,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wales Institute, Cardiff, UK.
Kranz, J., Herzog, D., and Emmelmann, C., 2015, “Design Guidelines for Laser Additive Manufacturing of Lightweight Structures in TiAl6V4,” J. Laser Appl., 27(S1), p. S14001. [CrossRef]
Vayre, B., Vigant, F., and Villeneuve, F., 2012, “Designing for Additive Manufacturing,” Procedia CIRP, 3, pp. 632–637. [CrossRef]
Ponche, R., Hascoet, J. Y., Kerbrat, O., and Mognol, P., 2012, “A New Global Approach to Design for Additive Manufacturing,” Virtual Phys. Prototyping, 7(2), pp. 93–105. [CrossRef]
Ponche, R., Kerbrat, O., Mognol, P., and Hascoet, J.-Y., 2014, “A Novel Methodology of Design for Additive Manufacturing Applied to Additive Laser Manufacturing Process,” Rob. Comput.-Integr. Manuf., 30(4), pp. 389–398. [CrossRef]
Calignano, F., 2014, “Design Optimization of Supports for Overhanging Structures in Aluminum and Titanium Alloys by Selective Laser Melting,” Mater. Des., 64, pp. 203–213. [CrossRef]
Wright, S., 2015, “3D Printing Titanium & the Bin of Broken Dreams (Part 3),” 3D Printing Industry, Last accessed Mar. 12, 2015, http://3dprintingindustry.com/2015/03/12/3d-printing-titanium-the-bin-of-broken-dreams-part-3/
Bayer Corporation, 2000, Part and Mold Design: A Design Guide, Bayer Material Science, Pittsburgh, PA.
General Electric, 1999, GE Engineering Thermoplastics Design Guide, General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA.
Fagade, A. A., and Kazmer, D., 1999, “Optimal Component Consolidation in Molded Product Design,” ASME Paper No. DETC1999/DFM-8921.
Denlinger, E. R., Irwin, J., and Michaleris, P., 2014, “Thermomechanical Modeling of Additive Manufacturing Large Parts,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(6), p. 061007. [CrossRef]
Gibson, I., Rosen, D. W., and Stucker, B., 2010, Additive Manufacturing Technologies: Rapid Prototyping to Direct Digital Manufacturing, Springer, New York.
Wohlers, T., and Caffrey, T., 2013, “Additive Manufacturing: Going Mainstream,” Manuf. Eng., 151(6), pp. 67–73.
Crump, S., 2009, Direct Digital Manufacturing Part Two: Advantages and Considerations, Stratasys Incorporate, Eden Prairie, MN.
Frey, D., Palladino, J., Sullivan, J., and Atherton, M., 2007, “Part Count and Design of Robust Systems,” Syst. Eng., 10(3), pp. 203–221. [CrossRef]
Boothroyd, G., and Dewhurst, P., 1989, Product Design for Assembly, Boothroyd Dewhurst, Wakefield, RI.
Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., and Knight, W., 2002, Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Zelinski, P., 2015, “Additive's Idiosyncrasies,” Additive Manufacturing, http://www.additivemanufacturinginsight.com/articles/additives-idiosyncrasies
Simpson, T. W., 2015, “AM Needs MEs,” ASME Mech. Eng. Mag., 137(8), pp. 30–35.
Schmelzle, J., 2013, “Three-Dimensional (3D) Portable Document Format (PDF) as the Solution for Model Based Definition (MBD),” Support Equipment Engineering Division, Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, NJ, Design Data Report No. NAWCADLKE-DDR-486600-0008.
Snyder, J. C., Stimpson, C. K., Thole, K. A., and Mongillo, D., 2015, “Build Direction Effects on Additively Manufactured Channels,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-43935.
Seppala, J., Rockel, D., and Hupfer, A., 2014, “Performance and Functionality Based Design Methods for Improved and Novel Aircraft Engine Components for Additive Manufacturing,” 25th Annual International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, University of Texas in Austin, Austin, TX, Aug. 4–6, pp. 837–847.
Emmelmann, C., Sander, P., Kranz, J., and Wycisk, E., 2011, “Laser Additive Manufacturing and Bionics: Redefining Lightweight Design,” Phys. Procedia, 12(Pt. A), pp. 364–368. [CrossRef]
Bendsoe, M., and Sigmund, O., 2003, Topology Optimization, Theory, Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Sigmund, O., and Maute, K., 2013, “Topology Optimization Approaches,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 48(6), pp. 1031–1055. [CrossRef]
Mohammadi, B., and Pironneau, O., 2004, “Shape Optimization in Fluid Mechanics,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 36, pp. 255–279. [CrossRef]
Gersborg-Hansen, A., Sigmund, O., and Haber, R. B., 2005, “Topology Optimization of Channel Flow Problems,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 30(3), pp. 181–192. [CrossRef]
Yoon, G. H., 2009, “Topology Optimization for Stationary Fluid–Structure Interaction Problems Using a New Monolithic Formulation,” Int. Numer. Methods Eng., 82(5), pp. 591–616.
Allen, M., and Maute, K., 2005, “Reliability-Based Shape Optimization of Structures Undergoing Fluid–Structure Interaction Phenomena,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 194(30–33), pp. 3472–3495. [CrossRef]
Ayre, M., 2014, “DMLS Design Guide V4,” Last accessed Feb. 27, 2015, https://prezi.com/q55mkdhc7dwo/dmls-design-guide-v4/
Bralla, J. G., ed., 1999, Design for Manufacturability Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Poli, C., 2002, Design for Manufacturing: A Structured Approach, Butterworth Heinemann, Boston, MA.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Main landing gear drag strut retract actuator

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic for the prototype hydraulic manifold design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Original test equipment design using conventional components

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Example of MBD: (a) documentation for as-built design and (b) documentation for final design postmachining

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Lightweighting features enabled by AM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Alignment of features atop mesh influences success of fillets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Merging complex passages illustrates complex fillet requirements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Incorporation of registration features for postprocess machining operations and wrench flats on outer surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Assembly and interior transitioning from diamond to round cross section passages: (a) assembly drawing with fittings and (b) cutaway view of interior geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Generating consistent flow paths in multiple orientations in cad

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Results of final stress analysis using diamond-shaped internal passage geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Stress analysis of various internal passage geometries

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Final hydraulic manifold with connectors and fittings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Image of final build layout of the hydraulic manifold and additional test coupons

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

An isometric view and cross section (enlarged) of the reconstructed volume of the manifold obtained from X-ray CT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Views of the internal passageways from three orthogonal viewing angles; regions indicated by the arrows show examples of the machining debris that was discovered during the CT scan

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Impact of build angle on surface roughness: (a) surface roughness versus print angle of as-built part and (b) surface roughness versus print angle of part after shot peen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

An early design concept that was challenging to fabricate with powder bed fusion: (a) an early design concept for the manifold and (b) support structures required for its build

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Build layouts in magics (supports shown in red and yellow): (a) optimal orientation to reduce distortion and (b) build orientation for final design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Hydraulic burst test coupon: (a) hydraulic burst coupon tube and (b) analysis showing areas of expected high stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

(Re)design approach for part consolidation using metal AM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Recoater blade contact points with unsupported surfaces which lead to jams

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Attempt to use fillets to reduce stress risers in internal passageways

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In