Over the past few years, 3D printing technologies have managed to go quite a long way in quite a short time. Established to improve and optimize rapid prototyping, at some point the 3D printers began to be used for low-series manufacturing of final details. 3D printing is now opened up to completely new possibilities, but also much higher expectations…
During many conversations in the context of additive technologies with people from the world of traditional manufacturing – specialists in casting, milling, stamping, injection molding, etc., they often complain that 3D printing is completely unsuitable for the production of large volumes of elements for end use. As I mentioned above – this is the obvious truth. The concept of using 3D printing in the production of final products really hit the heads of 3D printer manufacturers only along with a significant increase in their sales after 2010 and an increase in users’ awareness for which they can still use additive technologies?
Today, virtually every additive technique is used in low-volume production – from naturally predisposed powder methods – SLS and 3D printing with metals (SLM, DMP, DMLS etc.), to the so-called 3D printer farms composed of FDM / FFF or SLA / DLP / LCD devices. Of course, none of them can compare in terms of performance with classic production methods – in particular injection molding, and it is this argument that is often raised by the above-mentioned specialists. An important aspect from their point of view is also the quality of the details obtained and the need to use more or less complex post-processing to obtain the desired effects.
In the report published last year by consulting and research company Wohlers Associates we find out, among others, that as much as 26% of the costs of producing details using the additive technique consume finishing works – removing excess material (resin or powders), removing supports, or sanding / smoothing surfaces. 14% of the costs are consumed by work preceding 3D printing. The very process of creating details (including consumables) is less than 60% of the cost of production.
Reduction of post-processing costs can take place in two ways: the first is obvious beyond our control – producers of 3D printers and consumables must simply improve technological processes. Excellent examples here are Multi Jet Fusion HP systems that allow clean and largely automated work of cooling and cleaning details from powders, and Zortrax Apoller – a device for chemical smoothing of print surfaces made from selected thermoplastic materials using the FDM / FFF technique, which solve the problem of rough surface.
The other way may be the responsibility of users – making appropriate design of 3D models that are lacking or have a significantly reduced number of supports and the correct arrangement of the detail on the table or in the working chamber of the device, which also translates into a smaller number of supports.
BELOW: model with support structures, and after manual removal…
Either way, solving this problem is one of the biggest challenges facing the additive manufacturing industry. 3D printers will never replace traditional forms of production, but they can be successfully found in industry.