Archive — This 2019 feature examines misconceptions through the experience of Markus May of 3Faktur and Jo De Groote of ZiggZagg. Roles and production equipment refer to that period.
Like so many other groundbreaking technologies, there is a need to strike a fair balance between what additive manufacturing technology is capable of doing and what is merely impossible. Several challenges in various sectors of the industry still need to be overcome, but one of the most important is to be able to separate the myth from reality. Markus May from 3Faktur and Jo De Groote from ZiggZagg draw on their own industry experience to address the common misconceptions and stereotypes at this current stage of the market.
3Faktur and ZiggZagg are two 3D Printing service bureaus. The first one is based in Germany, and the second one is based in Belgium. Both companies mainly rely on HP’s MJF technology to provide their clients with additive manufacturing services. Other technologies include Stereolithography machines and some conventional manufacturing systems.
3Faktur delivers its services to clients across a wide range of sectors: automotive, medical, machinery, defence, consumer goods, optical and high-tech. ZiggZagg on the other hand, targets the injection moulding industry, aerospace, design bureaus in addition to consumer goods, automotive and medical.
Markus May is the founder and CEO of 3Faktur, whereas Jo De Groote is the Sales Manager of ZiggZagg.
Their experience as service providers offers a practical view of customer expectations, rather than an independent assessment of every technology.
So, what’s the client’s mindset?
Two situations can contribute to these misunderstandings:
- Partial knowledge of process capabilities and limits can lead to unsuitable expectations.
- Experience with a home printer does not necessarily cover the requirements of industrial production or a critical application.
Speaking of their clients, Markus May explains that, “some less experienced clients tend to think that 3D printing is mainly a technology for ‘hobbyists. Others, however, believe 3D printing can be used for anything, even printing complex multi-material parts with included electronics.”
For Jo De Groote, having “a variety of customers who already have an experience in Additive Manufacturing is much easier when providing a 3D printing service. In fact, when the customer does not know anything about additive manufacturing, much work needs to be done to convince him to delve into the technology.”
Misconception: AM replaces every conventional process
Comparisons sometimes present additive and conventional manufacturing as mutually exclusive choices. In practice, the processes can complement one another according to the part, volume and requirements.
“Before supplying any service to a client that already leverages conventional manufacturing processes, we first visit their manufacturing facility. Their manufacturing facility will tell you how they think. Our observation so far is they are traditionally mechanically trained. So, every question related to a new approach of manufacturing will only result in an answer based on a conventional way of thinking (e.g. remove powder). It is understandable, but on the other hand, it leads to a misconception in a first attempt to explore industrial additive manufacturing”, explains the Sales Manager from ZiggZagg.
The truth?
AM can make certain geometries more accessible, while machining or moulding may better suit other components. Selection depends on function, tolerances, material and the complete production cost.
Misconception: just press “print”
One of the most commonly-held beliefs about 3D Printing is in the way a 3D printer functions. Most users compare 3D Printing with 2D printing: you just need to press the “print” button and it will take a few minutes to have a part that is ready for use. This analogy is a common belief among new users (hobbyists and professionals).
The truth?
Industrial production includes data and machine preparation, manufacturing, the required finishing operations and part inspection. Automation can simplify tasks, but does not remove the responsibility to define and verify the process.
However, industrial customers might not have this misconception. Markus May states regarding this myth: “AM generates raw parts, which need to be finished in order to fulfill their intended purpose. In our experience, most customers have a good understanding that this is not the case.”
“AM is the way to go”
That’s a common belief Jo De Groote often hears. “Some people think that, in a couple of years, everything will be built via AM,” said Jo. As far as this assertion is concerned, the founder of 3Faktur limits the use of AM to a small subset of parts.
The prominence of striking geometries can suggest that 3D printing suits every component. A successful example does not establish suitability for a different application.
Each demonstration must therefore be considered in its manufacturing and service conditions.
The truth?
3D Printing can do wonders when enhancing design development. The technology certainly opens up new opportunities in manufacturing, but in the end, it remains a tool in the toolbox, with its own limitations and appropriate applications.
Misconception: printed parts must be small
Available size depends on the process, machine and manufacturing constraints. Size alone does not establish a part’s mechanical strength or quality.
For demanding applications, the links between process, material structure, properties and performance must be characterised. Conventionally manufactured components also require appropriate controls, with risks and methods suited to each route.
A blatant example is seen at the level of design. As Jo De Groote said, “the design changes but the part remains the same.” The part needs to be designed for AM in order to enable reduction of materials and weight, which result in improved functionality. Moreover, the total material cost would be lower because less material would be used.
Reduced material use or weight can be design objectives. They do not guarantee better function or lower total cost: preparation, manufacturing, finishing and qualification must also be included.
One large-format example is Lockheed Martin’s satellite tank domes made with Sciaky’s EBAM process, described in an 18 July 2018 announcement. This demonstrates a capability for a particular system and qualified application.
3D Printing only equals to the FDM/FFF technology
Filament extrusion, commonly described as FDM or FFF, is familiar to many users. It represents only part of the range of additive manufacturing processes.
The founder and CEO of 3Faktur explains that: “There are technical misconceptions as well as varying levels of expectations of less experienced clients. Technologically, less experienced persons tend to believe 3D printing equals the FDM/FFF technology (e.g. they would ask with what infill we print parts). Furthermore, the expectation level tends to be too high in some cases (e.g. injection molding surfaces are expected) or too low (e.g. believe 3D printed parts are very unprofessional and could not be applied for end-use parts).”
Additive manufacturing includes vat photopolymerisation, powder-bed fusion, material extrusion, binder jetting, material jetting, directed energy deposition and sheet lamination. Their materials and constraints differ.
Misconception: no specific skills are needed
Some operations are automated and some systems include process monitoring. These functions do not make the complete chain autonomous.
The truth?
Skills are needed in design, data preparation, equipment setup and monitoring, finishing and quality assurance.
Calibration, maintenance and material handling also require appropriate training. Precautions depend on the powders, resins, energy sources and equipment used.
Access to parameters varies by system and supplier conditions. A closed environment limits some adjustments, but does not remove the operator’s need to understand the process and its control requirements.
Conclusion
As AM grows in popularity, more resources will be made available to allow a wider acceptance of the technology. Knowing what works and what does not, while separating myths from reality can help decision-makers in their strategy. The true disruption can only occur when every aspect of current manufacturing is examined.
THE 3D ADEPT WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
The industry moves fast. Stay ahead.
Every week, the latest additive manufacturing news, in-depth features and real-world applications, straight to your inbox. Plus, be the first to know when a new issue of 3D ADEPT Mag is out.
Free · One email a week · Unsubscribe anytime
Clicking loads our email provider’s sign-up form, including its analytics and Google’s anti-bot protection. You’re only subscribed if you complete the sign-up. Read our privacy policy.