TY - JOUR
T1 - Design for metal powder bed fusion
T2 - The geometry for additive part selection (GAPS) worksheet
AU - Bracken, Jennifer
AU - Pomorski, Thomas
AU - Armstrong, Clinton
AU - Prabhu, Rohan
AU - Simpson, Timothy W.
AU - Jablokow, Kathryn
AU - Cleary, William
AU - Meisel, Nicholas A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - In industry, Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) is currently synonymous with expert knowledge and external consultants for many companies. Particularly in higher cost technologies, such as metal powder bed fusion, component design requires extensive additive manufacturing (AM) knowledge. If a part is improperly designed, then it can cause thousands of dollars of lost time and material through a failed print. To avoid this situation, specialists must be consulted throughout the printing process; however, the shortage of trained personnel familiar with AM can create a bottleneck during design. In order to help businesses identify candidate parts for Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) AM, this paper presents a DfAM worksheet to help engineers, drafters, and designers select good part candidates with little prior knowledge of the specific technology. This worksheet uses data from the literature to support the values used for design guidance. Example components are shown to demonstrate the worksheet process. Ratings of these components are then compared with expert raters’ assessments of their suitability for fabrication with PBF from a geometric standpoint. In addition to introducing the worksheet, preliminary user feedback about the worksheet is presented, and future work is discussed.
AB - In industry, Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) is currently synonymous with expert knowledge and external consultants for many companies. Particularly in higher cost technologies, such as metal powder bed fusion, component design requires extensive additive manufacturing (AM) knowledge. If a part is improperly designed, then it can cause thousands of dollars of lost time and material through a failed print. To avoid this situation, specialists must be consulted throughout the printing process; however, the shortage of trained personnel familiar with AM can create a bottleneck during design. In order to help businesses identify candidate parts for Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) AM, this paper presents a DfAM worksheet to help engineers, drafters, and designers select good part candidates with little prior knowledge of the specific technology. This worksheet uses data from the literature to support the values used for design guidance. Example components are shown to demonstrate the worksheet process. Ratings of these components are then compared with expert raters’ assessments of their suitability for fabrication with PBF from a geometric standpoint. In addition to introducing the worksheet, preliminary user feedback about the worksheet is presented, and future work is discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085256180&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85085256180&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.addma.2020.101163
DO - 10.1016/j.addma.2020.101163
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85085256180
SN - 2214-8604
VL - 35
JO - Additive Manufacturing
JF - Additive Manufacturing
M1 - 101163
ER -