DFAM draws on the same idea as design for manufacturability (DFM) — integrating process planning and product development. But instead of optimizing a product for urethane casting or injection molding, DFAM optimizes a product for production-grade manufacturing with additive technologies by analyzing competing factors to develop the most efficient design.

Additive manufacturing isn’t as simple as hitting print, especially when using DFAM principles to design a part for industrial-grade quality while minimizing production costs. But the resulting parts meet the performance of traditionally manufactured parts while reducing lead times, eliminating tooling costs and maximizing design flexibility. Leveraging DFAM guidelines early on in the product development process allows product design teams to optimize their designs to capture the value of additive manufacturing.

Here are a few common principles of DFAM to consider when leaping from additive manufacturing for prototyping to additive manufacturing for production:

Minimize Overhangs and Reduce Reliance on Supports

Each successive slice of your part as it is printing (e.g., in FDM, DMLS, etc.) relies on the layers below it for support. Large overhangs, openings and other features may require additional support during the build to prevent warping and ensure the product achieves its performance tolerances.Parts designed with DFAM principles in mind will be self-supporting, minimizing the need for supporting features which can add cost through material waste and added post-processing needs. And if supports are required, one cost-saving consideration would be to orient the part so that supports are placed in regions that aren’t user-facing, where marks are acceptable. This reduces the sanding and finishing time required in post-processing.

Part Orientation

While additive manufactured parts can be built in many orientations, the angle at which a feature is built can affect its tolerances. And because features can only deviate from the spec so much until it affects tolerance limits, it’s important to consider a range of possible orientations early on in the design process. That way, you can identify which orientation is best-suited for producing your part.

Consolidate Multi-Part Assemblies

It’s difficult to produce complex shapes with traditional manufacturing, which can necessitate creating some products as multi-part assemblies. If you are transitioning your product from traditional to additive manufacturing, it can often be consolidated into fewer parts to significantly reduce assembly costs. When Steelcase designed an arm cap using for additive manufacturing, for example, we transformed a three-part assembly into one uninterrupted part with multiple functional zones

Leveraging Generative Design to Optimize Your Part

The unique geometries possible through additive processes allows product designers to leverage generative design tools (e.g., topology optimization or lattice structures) to optimize the structure of your part based on hundreds of variables. And because lattices allow you to precisely tune the strength and material density in different regions of a part, one contiguous part can meet different performance requirements in different regions.

The Most Important Additive Manufacturing Design Consideration

None of these guidelines address one of the biggest obstacles to transitioning to production-grade additive manufacturing: An additive manufacturing product design skills gap. Because of this gap, the most important design guideline is to align yourself with additive manufacturing product design experts at the outset of any DFAM project. They will recommend design modifications that will optimize the cost and performance of your product. And they’ll understand how to drive efficiencies at the supply chain level through on-demand production and virtual warehousing. The sooner you involve expert AM design and engineering support, the greater the benefits you stand to earn with your switch to additive.

Interested in learning more? Be sure to check out our article on how to go beyond prototyping, and make your case for additive. At SyBridge, we’ll partner with companies across industries to discover, design and develop any part or product using additive manufacturing technologies. Learn how our experienced additive manufacturing design team can partner with you to design and deliver production-grade parts precisely tuned to your performance and design requirements. We’ve helped multi-million-dollar companies capture value with additive manufacturing, and can help you with your application, too. Get in touch with us today.

The post Applying Smart Design Principles to Amplify Benefits of Additive Manufacturing appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Exploring AM as a means of production opens up design and performance possibilities simply not possible with CNC machining, urethane casting or injection molding. This article will cover how organizations can:

• Identify if there’s a strong business case for switching to AM for your part or product.
• Leverage design for additive manufacturing (DFAM) principles for a seamless transition from rapid prototyping to rapid production.

Building a Business Case for Adopting Production-Grade Additive Manufacturing

Generally speaking, switching to production-grade AM for a part or product makes sense if there’s potential for adding value through:

• Lightweighting Your Product 
  Lightweighting products using AM advances material usage and performance — and opens up opportunity to capture savings throughout the product’s lifecycle. AM has enabled the weight reduction of aerospace parts by as much as 70 percent, saving about $3,000 per year in fuel.
• Low-Cost Mass Customization
  Consumer demand for customization is rising, with 30 percent of Americans interested in product personalization. And additive manufacturing uniquely allows product designers to meet this demand with lower customization costs and lead times than legacy production methods.Once the base component of your product has been validated with AM, personalizing the product with a corporate logo or different texture is a simple change in the CAD file — with no custom tooling required. Allowing consumers to tailor a product to their design preferences or needs not only helps you stand out among the competition, but it also ultimately provides more value to the customer.
• Enhancing Your Product’s Performance
  Virtually any shape, feature or function can be produced using AM. And product designers can experiment with vastly different geometries and textures with each design iteration without incurring retooling costs — which can range from $25,000 to $100,000.
• Supply Chain Efficiency
  It’s estimated that companies leveraging on-demand additive manufacturing can achieve total supply chain savings as high as 50 to 90 percent. Especially for companies selling large quantities of replacement parts, on-demand additive manufacturing opens up opportunity to eliminate warehousing costs and reduce the risk of part obsolescence.
• Faster Product Iteration
  AM allows design teams to refine and optimize their product with each design iteration. And because you’re prototyping on the same machine your product will be produced on, you can begin to validate the manufacturing process and your product’s performance during the prototype stage. In some instances, the time it takes to go from initial product concept to final product design can be reduced by up to 90 percent.

There are many benefits to making the switch to AM, but of course there are challenges to consider. Producing a part through AM may mean you’re paying a higher per-part cost than conventional manufacturing. However, those fees can be offset because AM also virtually eliminates the need for warehousing, which is critical because housing inventory can add anywhere from 20 to 25 percent to overall costs of production. Contact us today to learn more.

The post Beyond Prototyping: Scaling Up to Additive Manufacturing for Production appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.

Prototyping is a key phase of the manufacturing lifecycle that typically links the end of the design stage with the start of production. The process enables designers and engineers to refine part design, gather feedback, and gain stakeholder buy-in.

Prototypes can be created a number of different ways. Rapid 3D prototyping, which uses additive manufacturing methods to produce parts, has become an increasingly popular choice for prototyping because it allows engineers to quickly and cost-effectively identify design issues before production begins. This helps to avoid potentially costly or time-consuming tool revisions, improves product quality, and ensures that production stays on-track with projected timelines.

However, certain part applications and materials aren’t good fits for 3D-based prototyping. Processes like fused deposition modeling (FDM) produce non-isotropic parts that might be more fragile and react differently than production elastomer parts, while other additive methods may be limited by cost or material options.

This can present a challenge for rapid prototyping elastomer molding, seals, and other highly elastic parts with low durometers, where flexibility is a desirable material characteristic. While developments in additive manufacturing methods have enabled engineers to print rubber, or “elastomer” products, there are still limitations to what can be done with the technology. However, elastomer components and prototypes can be effectively made with traditional manufacturing methods.

Methods to Produce Elastomeric Prototypes

Processes like compression molding and transfer molding are highly efficient methods for producing rubber parts such as gaskets, seals, and O-rings, but the tooling required to manufacture rubber compression mold designs tends to come with a high price tag. The two most common traditional methods for prototyping rubber parts are urethane casting and die-cutting.

Urethane casting involves creating a silicone mold around a master pattern with the exact geometry of the desired final part. The master pattern can be CNC-machined or 3D-printed, depending on the application and geometric complexity. Once the mold sets, it can be cut open and used to create highly precise replicas of the master pattern in low volumes. One significant advantage of urethane casting is that the process allows for more durometers and colors than other methods of elastomer prototyping. Die-cutting of elastomeric sheet stock is also very common for gaskets and seals.

CNC milling is a subtractive manufacturing process that uses rotating tools to quickly and efficiently cut material away from a solid workpiece, thereby shaping the desired part. This method can also be used to create rubber designs, but there’s one major design limitation: attempting to cut elastic, pliable material with any degree of accuracy is incredibly difficult. For this reason, only very rigid rubbers can be effectively milled.

Cast urethane prototyping is a more efficient way of creating soft rubber parts. If for some reason the prototype must be milled, engineers should consider placing a collar just above the mill to prevent the rubber workpiece from moving. Rubber workpieces can also be frozen in liquid nitrogen prior to milling to increase their hardness.

One of the primary advantages of 3D printing rubber prototypes is speed. Once the CAD file is finalized, parts can often be manufactured in less than a day. However, some additive methods come with material limitations, which means that while they may be effective at testing the fit and form of components, they are often not ideal for functional testing.

Some material limitations vary based on process. One of the first methods of 3D-printed elastomer prototyping used selective laser sintering (SLS) with an elastic base material. Prototypes created through SLS display some elasticity, but still exhibit relative stiffness and are prone to breaking after repeated flexing. These parts also often have low-resolution finishes.

The development of PolyJet technology enabled engineers to print multiple materials in different combinations from the same head. This allows for the production of prototypes that accurately simulate the various properties of rubber, including durometers ranging from 27-95 on the Shore hardness scale. Unfortunately, many PolyJet materials lack the strength of true rubber prototypes, though some newer materials provide more comparable strength and functionality.

Carbon’s Digital Light Synthesis (DLS) technology can also be used to print elastomer prototypes, with one advantage of the process being that it allows for greater isotropic properties. This method has some limitations when it comes to material properties, durometer, color, part complexity, and part size, but can be used to create production-quality rubber prototypes.

Prototyping Rubber Parts Efficiently

Technological advances have made it much easier to rapidly and economically prototype elastomer parts, and letting the required material specifications determine which process manufacturers is key to maximizing efficiency. If the prototype is intended as a proof of concept or to test the form and fit of components, then the efficiency afforded by 3D printing is hard to beat. On the other hand, urethane casting has far fewer material limitations, which will often prove more useful for the purpose of functional testing.

At SyBridge, we’re committed to streamlining the manufacturing process of every project from concept to delivery. We work hand-in-hand with our customers during each phase of the production lifecycle, helping product teams of all shapes and sizes optimize their part design, prototype, select best-fit materials, test, and manufacture at scale. Our team of seasoned designers, engineers, and advisors are prepared to become your dedicated manufacturing partner. We promise cost- and time-efficient production that yields products of unmatched quality. Contact us today to get started.

The post Guide to Elastomer Prototyping appeared first on SyBridge Technologies.