As with any manufacturing process , there are good designs and there are bad designs , and understanding this is essential for successful outcomes .
are good designs and there are bad designs , and understanding this is essential for successful outcomes . For many design engineers and manufacturers , however , this is a leap into the unknown , and it can be a barrier to adoption .
But the rewards are there to be reaped .
DESIGN OPTIMIZATION
Whether for a new or a redesigned product or component , design optimization focuses on two key aspects :
• topology optimization — stronger and lighter parts , and
• part consolidation — reducing assemblies from multiple components to fewer or even a single part .
Both of these aspects are unique to AM , and cannot easily or cost-effectively be achieved with traditional manufacturing processes . Essentially , industrial 3D printing can produce components that are either impossible or too difficult / expensive to achieve using injection moulding , such as components that are hollow in certain areas or products that require an internal lattice structure . This is possible because 3D printing is an additive process , whereby material is added layer by layer and material density can be altered in predetermined areas of the part . Thus , not only can some areas be hollow , but other critical areas can be reinforced . This means that 3D printing is a key facilitator when it comes to lightweighting with increased strength and functionality .
Topology optimization is a methodology that uses software tools to optimize material distribution within a design . It is a powerful design technique that allows for the reduction of the weight of a product , by removing material where it is not required , while maintaining , sometimes even increasing the overall functional requirements of the part . This often results in complex geometries , something that only 3D printing as a manufacturing method can fulfil .
Part consolidation is another capability that the increased design freedom of 3D printing opens up by enabling the creation and production of complex internal geometries and complete complex products that incorporate the functionality of multiple components that cannot be made via conventional manufacturing technologies . While 3D printing processes are relatively agnostic to increased part complexity , it is important for design engineers and manufacturers to understand the limitations and capabilities of the particular AM process chosen for production , the system-level design intent , and the implications in terms of inspection , validation , and postprocessing .
While it is generally accepted that part consolidation can improve structural performance when compared with conventional multi-piece assemblies , this may not always be the case . For example , 3D printed materials are directionally weakened , usually in the “ build ” direction , and this can compromise design intent and ultimate part functionality .
For manufacturers that are assessing the feasibility of the use of industrial 3D printing for manufacturing and production , there are various considerations that need to be addressed . Nobody is denying that it is a relatively steep learning curve when it comes to design and achieving optimal outcomes in respect of part functionality , cost savings , and time savings .
As a result , there are benefits for manufacturers in forming strategic partnerships with service providers that have the breadth and depth of knowledge of 3D printing that allow them to achieve project success .
3DPRINTUK - DfAM Part 2 - Image 3 - Complex part designed by Komodo Simulations Issue 58 PECM 57