Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Excellent find Jackle! Thanks for sharing this. It's continued confirmation of Sigma Lab's lead in AM quality assurance!
Wow! Hello! Loving it! Thanks for sharing your DD! SGLB is in the right place for AM mass production. It's nice to see our partners EOS machines offered right below as well!
SGLB working with Siemens as
Siemens industrializes Additive Manufacturing | IN(3D)USTRY 2017 PARTICIPANTS
Sigma labs working with Siemens and Stratasys recently teaming with Siemens.
Produce Certified Aircraft Interiors with Additive Manufacturing
Yes, I agree and when we tie that to FAA visiting SGLB last year. I see it as a very positive sign!
Yep, I agree with you and the additional authorized shares can be utilized to discourage a hostile takeover as well.
Just an FYI for those investors concerning some shorts
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/analyst/030102.asp
The Short and Distort: Stock Manipulation in a Bear Market
S&D Traders Manipulate Stock Prices With Smear Campaigns
On the other hand, S&D traders manipulate stock prices in a bear market by taking short positions and then using a smear campaign to drive down the price of the targeted stock. This is the inverse version of the "pump and dump" tactic, whereby crooks buy stock (take a long position) and issue false information that causes the target stock's price to increase.
Generally, it is easier to manipulate stocks to go down in a bear market and up in a bull market. The pump and dump is better known than the S&D because of the long bull market and the media. For example, the stock market had been in a general uptrend in the early to mid 1980s, which provided ample fodder for "pumpers". Movies like "Wall Street" (1987) and "The Boiler Room"(2000) helped educate investors about the risk of this type of stock manipulation. (To read more about stock market movies, see Financial Careers According To Hollywood.)
The S&D shysters try to profit by stimulating fear, but this only works if they have credibility. As such, when working online they will often use screen names and email addresses that imply that they are associated with the SEC or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) (formerly the National Association of Securities Dealers), or that they can regularly spot worthless stocks. Their goal is to convince investors that every proponent of the stock has ties to the company and that the SEC is watching and will halt the stock. S&Ds also intimate that they are looking out for investors' interests.
S&D players clutter message boards, so optimistic information cannot easily be found. "Get out before it all comes crashing down" and "Investors who wish to enter a class action lawsuit can contact…" are typical posts, as are their projections of $0 stock prices and 100% losses. If their strategy is suspected by "longs", they attack the person who has caught them. In other words, the market manipulator will do everything in his or her power to keep buyers out of the stock and keep the price heading south.
All I can really tell you is that based on the short attacks over the years. I believe there is an entity that wants either a) destroy SGLB shareholder value and thus destroy the company or b) destroy shareholder value and buyout SGLB. There are many companies that are attempting to do process control and it seems universally understood that SGLB does it the best so far. I believe that an entity probably wanted t to buyout SGLB and was turned down. That entity has been on the attack since it's a corporate Art of War.
I certainly wish I had a clear answer to prevent it. The only thing that can be done is for investors to hold the line when shorts attack but it takes a strong stomach to do so. The short strategy is to continue theri attack and break the spirit of those Long investors who have held. That's why it's important to understand what you hold and revisit why as an investor you brought in the first place. I continue to believe in the long term success of SGLB; thus, I'm here and have doubled down. Everyone has their own decisions to make. I wish all the best.
Remember why you are here is because you believe in the DD:
Sigma Labs Wins Phase III DARPA Contract with Honeywell
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/12/21/899585/0/en/Sigma-Labs-Wins-Phase-III-DARPA-Contract-with-Honeywell.html
Sigma Labs announces Pratt & Whitney contract
http://www.metal-am.com/sigma-labs-announces-pratt-whitney-contract/
Sigma Labs Wins Additional Contract with Aerojet Rocketdyne for U.S. Air Force Applications
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/03/02/930054/0/en/Sigma-Labs-Wins-Additional-Contract-with-Aerojet-Rocketdyne-for-U-S-Air-Force-Applications.html
SIGMA LABS ENTERS COMMERCIAL AGREEMENT WITH ADDITIVE INDUSTRIES BV
http://www.reuters.com/article/brief-sigma-labs-enters-commercial-agree-idUSFWN1H60MH
Woodward Inc. Aircraft Turbine Systems group installs Sigma Labs PrintRite3D INSPECT V2.0 software
https://www.tctmagazine.com/3D-software-news/woodward-inc-aircraft-turbine-systems-sigma-labs/
Aerojet Rocketdyne, a subsidiary of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: AJRD), received a $6 million contract from the U.S. Air Force to define the standards that will be used to qualify additively manufactured components for use in liquid-fueled rocket engine applications.
https://additivemanufacturingtoday.com/aerojet-rocketdyne-to-define-standards-for-3d-printed-rocket-engines
Sigma Labs has received two high-profile contracts from aerospace company Aerojet Rocketdyne to develop advanced quality control measures for the metal 3D printing of aerospace parts. The first contract will see Sigma Labs’ technology used by Aerojet and the U.S. Air Force to define standards for qualifying metal 3D printed aerospace components.
http://www.3ders.org/articles/20160307-aerojet-rocketdyne-contracts-sigma-labs-for-us-air-force-and-america-makes-metal-3d-printing-initiatives.html
Research and Markets’ new report is projecting that the yearly value of additive manufactured parts in the space industry will reach $4.7 billion, driving nearly $1 billion in yearly sales of 3D-printed equipment, software and materials.
"It is an honor to announce this new agreement with Siemens for evaluation of our proprietary PrintRite3D quality assurance software," said Mark Cola, President and CEO of Sigma Labs. "We will provide statistical process control and assure part quality for burner repairs as well as set the stage for productivity optimization. Siemens plays a leading role in applying additive manufacturing across its highly demanding gas turbine operations. We are proud to assist them in providing the highest quality 3-D printed components for such technology applications, where Siemens is continuously working on further process improvements. We look forward to a close and beneficial partnership together."
http://mfgnewsweb.com/archives/4/48401/Additive-Manufacturing-mar17/Sigma-Labs-Enters-into-Agreement-with-Siemens-for-PrintRite3D.aspx
Siemens has achieved a breakthrough in the 3D printing of gas turbine blades. For the first time, a team of experts has full-load tested gas turbine blades that were entirely produced using additive manufacturing.
https://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/home/pictures-of-the-future/industry-and-automation/additive-manufacturing-3d-printed-gas-turbine-blades.html
Siemens and Materialise have integrated additive manufacturing (AM) technology from Materialise into Siemens’ NX™ software, streamlining the design to manufacturing process for the rapidly growing universe of products being produced using AM (a.k.a. 3D printing)
https://community.plm.automation.siemens.com/t5/News-NX-Manufacturing/Siemens-and-Materialise-integrate-additive-manufacturing/ba-p/402662
Sciaky will adopt Siemens NX and NX Nastran software for its metal additive manufacturing process, which has been used by companies like Airbus and Lockheed Martin to produce titanium parts.
http://www.mro-network.com/advanced-materials-composites/sciaky-adopt-siemens-software-additive-manufacturing-tech
“Siemens is one of the only companies addressing the diverse needs of all additive manufacturing market participants – from designers and engineers, to manufacturers, 3D printing machine OEMs, material vendors and software providers – with a comprehensive set of seamless technology solutions for distributed industrial additive manufacturing and co-innovation,” said Tony Hemmelgarn, President and Chief Executive Officer, Siemens PLM Software.
https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en/about_us/newsroom/press/press_release.cfm?Component=256111&ComponentTemplate=822
I appreciate that us Longs actually do the DD and know what we hold. Longs like you, KMey, jfray, DWOL, Hawks, silversmith, t&l, kanya, dadx4, jeff, herringaid, Z, critical and others. I do appreciate everyone who shares their DD.
Yep. The short strategy continues and the execution of this strategy is working. Short and try to drop it 10 percent. Many folks automatically sell on a ten percent loss. Express concern for the folks still holding on then bad mouth the company further. Rinse Repeat. Rinse Repeat. All the while sigma labs is in a stronger financial position than when on the OTC. SGLB actually has contracts. SGLB has institutional investors. SGLB is working with Honeywell and DARPA in Phase III with a stated goal of commercialization. Rocketdyne Aerojet is certifying AM rocket parts for the AirForce. Shorts still using the same Rinse and Repeat Strategy from the OTC and some investors are actually falling for it. It's a snowball rolling downhill effect. Well, I know that I'm here and not going anywhere. I know what I hold.
Agreed man! The rapidity in which sales will come may surprise a few. Just waiting for AM industry to get that blueprint down. Wish everyone understood what they hold here.
Asia Pacific is a critical market for 3D printing give that the region is a cog in the manufacturing sector. Meanwhile, contract equipment manufacturers such as Jabil are trialing HP's 3D printing technology.
HP's expansion into Asia Pacific also includes Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Australia. The company said it will expand its HP Partner First 3D Printing Specialization program to more than a dozen partners in the region.
Meanwhile, HP said it will build 3D printing reference and experience centers in Beijing, Hangzhou, Qingdao, Shanghai, Suzhou, Taipei, Tokyo, Singapore, and Melbourne.
Agreed, at least we have institutions investing here now; thus, shaking the tree for shares is a little bit harder to do.
Shorts still working overtime.
I like these 3rd and 4th order relationships
Sigma Labs Wins Phase III DARPA Contract with Honeywell
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/12/21/899585/0/en/Sigma-Labs-Wins-Phase-III-DARPA-Contract-with-Honeywell.html
Sigma Labs announces Pratt & Whitney contract
http://www.metal-am.com/sigma-labs-announces-pratt-whitney-contract/
Sigma Labs Wins Additional Contract with Aerojet Rocketdyne for U.S. Air Force Applications
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/03/02/930054/0/en/Sigma-Labs-Wins-Additional-Contract-with-Aerojet-Rocketdyne-for-U-S-Air-Force-Applications.html
SIGMA LABS ENTERS COMMERCIAL AGREEMENT WITH ADDITIVE INDUSTRIES BV
http://www.reuters.com/article/brief-sigma-labs-enters-commercial-agree-idUSFWN1H60MH
Woodward Inc. Aircraft Turbine Systems group installs Sigma Labs PrintRite3D INSPECT V2.0 software
https://www.tctmagazine.com/3D-software-news/woodward-inc-aircraft-turbine-systems-sigma-labs/
Yep. We are working with Stryker.
The company is currently beta testing its software in North America and Europe with about a dozen companies, according to Cola. Among them are companies like General Electric, Honeywell, Siemens, Stryker, and Additive Industries, a 3D metal printing company that's investigating incorporating Sigma's technology into its machines.
GE Additive Signs New Customers, Partnerships
Posted by: balbright in Additive Manufacturing Materials, Aerospace, Industrial Additive Manufacturing Systems, Manufacturers August 21, 2017
GE Additive announced a slate of new partnerships aimed at advancing he company’s additive manufacturing business.
In late June, GE and its Concept Laser and Arcam subsidiaries signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Oerlikon, an additive manufacturing specialist based in Switzerland.
Executives from Oerlikon and GE Additive announce their partnership. From left to right: Florian Mauerer, Oerlikon; Roland Fischer, CEO of Oerlikon; David Joyce, Vice Chairman, GE; Mohammad Ehteshami, VP and GM, GE Additive. Image: GE Additive
Under the terms of the agreement, GE will provision additive machines and services to Oerlikon, and the company will become a preferred component manufacture and materials supplier to GE Additive and its affiliates. The two companies will also collaborate on additive machine and materials research and development over the next five years.
“GE Additive and Oerlikon both understand the transformative power of additive manufacturing,” said Mohammad Ehteshami, vice president and general manager of GE Additive. “This is further proof that the adoption rate of additive is growing rapidly and we’re proud to partner with Oerlikon.”
GE Additive also formed a partnership with Stryker, a medical technology company, to provide new additive machines, materials, and services for the company’s supply chain operations. Stryker previously purchased Concept Laser and Arcam machines.
The company recently opened a global technology development center and an additive technology manufacturing hub in Ireland.
“Working with GE Additive and leveraging their expertise is a very compelling proposition for Stryker,” said John Haller, vice president of Global Supply at Stryker. “We believe this collaboration will accelerate our additive manufacturing journey and support our mission to make healthcare better.”
Finally, Concept Laser and French aeronautical company Lauak signed a letter of intent to create a new alliance. Lauak plans to purchase Concept Laser additive manufacturing machines and will serve as a reference customer.
Concept Laser will provide support services during the implementation, and collaborate with Lauak to redesign components in the Lauak portfolio.
“We see the huge potential in additive manufacturing and we want to use this technology to complete and improve our current manufacturing processes, as well as the manufacture of new components for the aviation industry,” said Mikel Charritton, CEO of Lauak.
Source: GE Additive
Yes. Indeed!
The shorts are working overtime.
Yeah.. Same pattern and same format being followed time and again... I give it too them for sheer persistence... Some day it will be different but until then..
Thanks Jackle. That was a great post today. My confidence in SGLB is still high because they continue to make great moves with getting their software in the hands of these AM industry leaders. The fact that their 2.0 went to Woodward after the America Makes project was an indicator to me. The GE association is still strong with Woodward installing that 2.0 version. I believe that SGLB is viewed by the AM leaders as a very valid and credible choice to meeting stringent AM customer standards and allow a reduction of post processing to enable cost savings. The continued T&E is a very strong validation of the value of PrintRite3D.
You said it Jackle. Anyone who is doing the DD can see that the AM industry is not quite ready to for AM mass production of critical metallic parts. SGLB needs to continue improving on their product and working with AM industry leaders to meet their needs. FAA AM standards are coming next year and so is the DARPA Phase 3 completion. I believe that the AM standards development by next year will set the stage for AM industry to embrace mass production. The AM roadmap will be laid out and the way forward will be available for all to see. SGLB will be perfectly positioned to capture a great deal of business.
Thanks for posting T&L. It's nice to see them mentioned together in the same article. It's been awhile. It might raise awareness to new investors of the relationship that Boeing and Sigma Labs established five years ago.
Woodward sees the INSPECT software as a key part of its additive manufacturing strategies as it works to ensure that their aerospace and industrial customers benefit from high quality products.
Yes! Indeed! Very exciting news today!
Woodward, Inc. (NASDAQ:WWD) and GE Aviation today announced the formal creation of the large engine fuel systems joint venture announced on May 20, 2015. Under terms of the agreements related to the joint venture, Woodward today received $250 millionfrom GE Aviation in exchange for GE Aviation’s acquisition of its equity interest in the joint venture. GE Aviation and Woodward will participate equally in the operating results of the joint venture programs and the future cash flows from the joint venture.
The joint venture will design, develop, source, supply and service fuel system components from the inlet up to the fuel nozzle for the GE90, GEnx, GE9X and all future large commercial engines developed by GE Aviation.
Woodward will be the preferred supplier to the joint venture. As a result, Woodward content on the GE9X engine will increase significantly, compared to the GE90 engine.
The GE9X engine for Boeing’s 777x will also include 3D printed fuel nozzles. It is believed that GE’s acquisition of 3D printing companies Concept Laser and Arcam was motivated by large order numbers for these fuel nozzles.
Using the GEnx testing engine, GE assessed new additive manufactured blades for the engine’s turbine. Produced by Avio Aero, the “lightweight low-pressure turbine titanium aluminide (TiAl) blades” are the most efficient cooling circuits ever produced according to GE.
Hmmm. Now if Siemens adopts SGLB for the In-process QA piece then we could be rolling.
By becoming a Software and Technology partner, Sciaky will adopt Siemens’ product lifecycle management (PLM) software, in order to offer its existing and future customers in the metal 3D printing market a quality additive manufacturing software solution which integrates with technology that companies worldwide use to not only make better products, but also augment their product development decision-making.
Awesome find! Thanks KMey! SGLB is right in the middle of this.
Found whitepaper on GE Oil and Gas Supplier Requirements. I believe that SGLB will qualify nicely.
https://www.geoilandgas.com/sites/geog.dev.local/files/arsb-og-001_rev_4.0_final.pdf
8.1.2 NDE
Suppliers, including sub-tier Suppliers, performing NDE shall be qualified in accordance with procedures and technical specifications applicable to GE Oil & Gas.
Submittal of procedures for review and approval may be required. This certification may be performed by a third party, as required by GE Oil & Gas.
8.2 Independent Validation / Certification
When required by equipment specification and data sheets, the Supplier shall engage a recognized independent Certification Authority (i.e. Lloyds, DNV, etc.) to certify equipment design and compliance to specified codes such as pressure vessels, heat exchangers, lifting equipment, etc. Material certification should have independent
verification indicating the scope of verification, including witnessed, reviewed, it shall be signed, dated, position of the representative, shall have official stamps.
8.3 Material Certification
The agreed levels of material certification for supplied items/parts shall be detailed within the approved MPP or within the ITP submitted for review after purchase order award or specified in the purchase order requirements. The Supplier shall ensure that these requirements are included in associated sub-orders and clarified with Suppliers.
Material test reports, certificates of compliance, type test certificates etc. as applicable for materials and items/parts of equipment within packages shall be made available for review (original or verified copies) at the package Supplier’s or sub-Supplier’s
works. Documents shall quote GE Oil & Gas purchase order and item/part numbers.
8.3.1 Certified Laboratories
GE Oil & Gas requires that certificates of conformity to GE quality requirements related to forgings must be issued by laboratories that meet the requirements of ISO17025 or equivalent or higher standards (NADCAP) for mechanical properties (the laboratories
GE Oil & Gas Quality Management System
Sourcing
Supplier Quality Requirements
ARSB-O&G-001
Rev: 4.0
GE PROPRIETARY UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED OR TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY PAGE 16 OF 46
g
OGQ-0101.1F Rev 1.1
need to be certified for each type of mechanical properties tests specified in GE specifications)
Additional requirements (like S-400) will be applicable when specified in
product/process specifications.
8.4 Material Traceability
Traceability is meant to ensure proper identification of finished products down to raw materials. Suppliers shall demonstrate effective material control procedures that, where specified, can trace materials from point of origin through stages of the manufacturing process through to acceptance by GE Oil & Gas. The Supplier material control system and traceability procedures shall be made available, upon request, for
review.
I went back to reread the whitepaper about the DARPA ICME rapid qualification framework. This is the probalistic framework that DARPA has IPQA built right into it and we are in Phase 3 now with completion mid 2018. I'm betting AM standards from FAA will be out right around the time this Phase 3 is concluded. IPQA being part of this framework that saves time and money is a great thing for SGLB. I see many orders coming for this PrintRite3D in this framework next year. Here's a few quotes.
Targeted testing and in-process sensing must be performed in order to inform the models such that they can be calibrated, validated, and verified. The models must be framed in a probabilistic setting in order to ascertain the sensitivity of the predictions to the parameters of interest and to understand the expected variability as a result of the
random nature of the inputs. At the same time, in situ process monitoring is being implemented in order to provide evidence in the form of In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA® ) that the process is under control for the purpose of certification. It is this suite of activities and the knowledge generated that makes the rapid qualification possible.
The goal is to be able to reduce the qualification process time by 40 % and costs by 20 %. We intend to achieve the time savings by exercising the process and material models to predict the best processing conditions to minimize defects in the build and to predict the best heat treatment cycle to obtain the highest material strength. This will substantially reduce the exploratory set of experiments needed to define processing conditions and to optimize the heat treatment cycle. The cost savings will be the result of the substantial reduction in material testing needed to optimize the above processes.
A discussion of the different technologies that are needed in the rapid qualification process was presented, including the probabilistic design format, ICME models, and the quality assurance methods that form the framework. It was demonstrated how sensitivity analysis within a probabilistic format can be used to identify the important design variables as well as how model calibration can be used to improve the model accuracy. The process models were able to identify the processing conditions that can lead to defect-free manufacturing process parameter settings. The residual stress models were able to reasonably predict the residual stresses and deformation during the build process. The analytical models that were used to predict the alloy microstructure
as a result of post processing heat treatment were validated. These models were able to identify the type of experimental samples needed to characterize the material microstructure under processing conditions of interest.
The current status of the computational codes is encouraging, but there is a need to improve computational efficiency to enable simulation of the larger build spaces associated with real-world components. The tools and models are now available to simulate the DMLS® process for many material and processing conditions. They can be used to predict the process parameters that will yield good material consolidation with low porosity and to the top layer surface roughness from the predicted melt pool profiles. This leads to the capability to more narrowly defined process parameter conditions to perform a confirmatory series of specimens that is much smaller, thus saving time and resources especially during the metallographic analysis step, which typically takes a significant amount of time.
In-process monitoring is used to validate the models as well as In-Process Quality Assurance™. The sensors and corresponding IPQA® provide the link between specification and numerical process window selection to the actual build and final product. The uncertainty quantification tools provide a probabilistic foundation for decision making enabling the
assessment of overall process risk.
Lastly, while the models are described as fully integrated and somewhat sequential in the process, the use of them is independently valuable. For example, a process model can help define process limits for good integrity builds, independent of microstructure or strength. These models and this rapid qualification framework require, and will continue
to require, a substantial amount of “informed testing” to continuously support the analytical predictions and ensure qualification/certification authorities can have confidence in the results.
In order to enable rapid qualification, a holistic risk-based probabilistic framework is proposed. The models are utilized to identify the optimum process window. The applicable bandwidth of process controls and material property variations is estimated using uncertainty quantification. Manufacturing risks are mitigated by incorporating process monitoring and IPQA® ; the real-time assessment of build quality utilizes the range defined by models and uncertainty quantification to immediately inform the user of the manufacturing process status.
A high-level schematic of the probabilistic framework is shown in Fig. 2, where ICME is coupled with design models and methods. The inputs to the framework are requirements and critical-to-quality (CTQ) metrics, which are redefined as risk-based acceptance criteria to be consistent with a probabilistic framework. The preferred output of the framework is validation of design by analysis.
Another important benefit of a probabilistic framework is that once the validation testing is completed, the data gathered would be used to update/validate/calibrate the models. As a matter of fact, any additional down the line testing, such as certification and substantiation testing, would also be used to update/validate/calibrate the framework. This ensures continuous improvement of the frameworks’ overall robustness and predictability.
The framework presented in Fig. 2 contains within the dotted line box the set of ICME tools needed to achieve rapid qualification. A micro-model which describes the melting of the powder and solidification of the material to form the part, and a macro-model which describes the residual stresses that build up as a result of the rapid cooling and solidification of the material. Both of these models were developed by ESI to simulate the powderbed laser additive manufacturing process. QuesTek® developed the models to predict the material microstructure that develops as a result of the heat treatment process along with
a model to predict the tensile properties of the resulting microstructure. Sigma Labs and Stratonics developed techniques for in situ monitoring of the process. Sigma Labs uses a pyrometer to monitor the response of the melt pool whereas Stratonics uses a digital
imaging technique to capture the response of the melt pool. Furthermore, Sigma Labs has implemented their In-Process-Quality-Assurance (IPQA) technologies to determine if and when the process may be out of control. Honeywell is implementing non-destructive evaluation (NDE) methods to determine if defects that may develop in the part during the
manufacturing process can be detected by inspection. SwRI® is developing the probabilistic design and uncertainty quantification tools to be able to define the minimum predicted material property and risk derived from the novel manufacturing process. Lastly, Honeywell is developing the overall rapid qualification framework to bring all these technologies
together in order to demonstrate an acceptable means of compliance with
extensive use of simulation models.
went back to reread the a whitepaper about the DARPA ICME rapid qualification framework. This is the probalistic framework that DARPA has IPQA built right into it and we are in Phase 3 now with completion mid 2018. I'm betting AM standards from FAA will be out right around the time this Phase 3 is concluded. IPQA being part of this framework that saves time and money is a great thing for SGLB. I see many orders coming for this PrintRite3D in this framework next year. Here's a few quotes.
Targeted testing and in-process sensing must be performed in order to inform the models such that they can be calibrated, validated, and verified. The models must be framed in a probabilistic setting in order to ascertain the sensitivity of the predictions to the parameters of interest and to understand the expected variability as a result of the
random nature of the inputs. At the same time, in situ process monitoring is being implemented in order to provide evidence in the form of In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA® ) that the process is under control for the purpose of certification. It is this suite of activities and the knowledge generated that makes the rapid qualification possible.
The goal is to be able to reduce the qualification process time by 40 % and costs by 20 %. We intend to achieve the time savings by exercising the process and material models to predict the best processing conditions to minimize defects in the build and to predict the best heat treatment cycle to obtain the highest material strength. This will substantially reduce the exploratory set of experiments needed to define processing conditions and to optimize the heat treatment cycle. The cost savings will be the result of the substantial reduction in material testing needed to optimize the above processes.
A discussion of the different technologies that are needed in the rapid qualification process was presented, including the probabilistic design format, ICME models, and the quality assurance methods that form the framework. It was demonstrated how sensitivity analysis within a probabilistic format can be used to identify the important design variables as well as how model calibration can be used to improve the model accuracy. The process models were able to identify the processing conditions that can lead to defect-free manufacturing process parameter settings. The residual stress models were able to reasonably predict the residual stresses and deformation during the build process. The analytical models that were used to predict the alloy microstructure
as a result of post processing heat treatment were validated. These models were able to identify the type of experimental samples needed to characterize the material microstructure under processing conditions of interest.
The current status of the computational codes is encouraging, but there is a need to improve computational efficiency to enable simulation of the larger build spaces associated with real-world components. The tools and models are now available to simulate the DMLS® process for many material and processing conditions. They can be used to predict the process parameters that will yield good material consolidation with low porosity and to the top layer surface roughness from the predicted melt pool profiles. This leads to the capability to more narrowly defined process parameter conditions to perform a confirmatory series of specimens that is much smaller, thus saving time and resources especially during the metallographic analysis step, which typically takes a significant amount of time.
In-process monitoring is used to validate the models as well as In-Process Quality Assurance™. The sensors and corresponding IPQA® provide the link between specification and numerical process window selection to the actual build and final product. The uncertainty quantification tools provide a probabilistic foundation for decision making enabling the
assessment of overall process risk.
Lastly, while the models are described as fully integrated and somewhat sequential in the process, the use of them is independently valuable. For example, a process model can help define process limits for good integrity builds, independent of microstructure or strength. These models and this rapid qualification framework require, and will continue
to require, a substantial amount of “informed testing” to continuously support the analytical predictions and ensure qualification/certification authorities can have confidence in the results.
In order to enable rapid qualification, a holistic risk-based probabilistic framework is proposed. The models are utilized to identify the optimum process window. The applicable bandwidth of process controls and material property variations is estimated using uncertainty quantification. Manufacturing risks are mitigated by incorporating process monitoring and IPQA® ; the real-time assessment of build quality utilizes the range defined by models and uncertainty quantification to immediately inform the user of the manufacturing process status.
A high-level schematic of the probabilistic framework is shown in Fig. 2, where ICME is coupled with design models and methods. The inputs to the framework are requirements and critical-to-quality (CTQ) metrics, which are redefined as risk-based acceptance criteria to be consistent with a probabilistic framework. The preferred output of the framework is validation of design by analysis.
Another important benefit of a probabilistic framework is that once the validation testing is completed, the data gathered would be used to update/validate/calibrate the models. As a matter of fact, any additional down the line testing, such as certification and substantiation testing, would also be used to update/validate/calibrate the framework. This ensures continuous improvement of the frameworks’ overall robustness and predictability.
The framework presented in Fig. 2 contains within the dotted line box the set of ICME tools needed to achieve rapid qualification. A micro-model which describes the melting of the powder and solidification of the material to form the part, and a macro-model which describes the residual stresses that build up as a result of the rapid cooling and solidification of the material. Both of these models were developed by ESI to simulate the powderbed laser additive manufacturing process. QuesTek® developed the models to predict the material microstructure that develops as a result of the heat treatment process along with
a model to predict the tensile properties of the resulting microstructure. Sigma Labs and Stratonics developed techniques for in situ monitoring of the process. Sigma Labs uses a pyrometer to monitor the response of the melt pool whereas Stratonics uses a digital
imaging technique to capture the response of the melt pool. Furthermore, Sigma Labs has implemented their In-Process-Quality-Assurance (IPQA) technologies to determine if and when the process may be out of control. Honeywell is implementing non-destructive evaluation (NDE) methods to determine if defects that may develop in the part during the
manufacturing process can be detected by inspection. SwRI® is developing the probabilistic design and uncertainty quantification tools to be able to define the minimum predicted material property and risk derived from the novel manufacturing process. Lastly, Honeywell is developing the overall rapid qualification framework to bring all these technologies
together in order to demonstrate an acceptable means of compliance with
extensive use of simulation models.
JJ, Thanks for weighing in. Your expert opinion is most welcome here. It's great to see you post again. I appreciated the call and explanation that you made on Additive Industries a couple years ago.
Agreed sir!
I would love to here Arcam refer to us as their partner. It would make my day!
3D printing a 'billion dollar industry' for tooling
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170801/NEWS/170809986/3d-printing-a-billion-dollar-industry-for-tooling
I believe that SGLB is making the right moves via teaming up with Jaguar Precision Machine. SGLB sees the huge potential here.
"We're pleased to announce a partnership agreement with another innovative company in the A&D space, Jaguar Precision Machine," said Mark Cola, President and CEO of Sigma Labs. "Due to the growth in demand for high-precision, high-quality metal components within this industry, we've decided to join forces to better serve a number of OEMs with their next-generation applications. Working together, we can design, engineer, manufacture, and assure the quality of AM components across a number of exciting A&D applications. The team of companies - Sigma Labs, Jaguar Precision Machine, and Morf3D - now have the capability to deliver additional services to a broad customer base."
Dan Schatzman, CEO/Owner of Jaguar, added, "Partnering with Sigma Labs is a critical step for Jaguar in developing our branded '3D Advanced Manufacturing Ecosystem™' capabilities. Sigma Labs' proprietary PrintRite3D® software will enable us to offer our customers high-quality 3D printed parts for end use A&D components, and we believe our combined expertise will give our customers the best solutions for additive manufacturing."
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170801/NEWS/170809986/3d-printing-a-billion-dollar-industry-for-tooling
ARCAM INCREASES SALES, MOVING THROUGH “CHALLENGING MARKET SITUATION”
Magnus René, Arcam President & CEO, writes “The growth in the period is due to the interest from our largest shareholder GE, in EBM systems for test and evaluation. In the period the order intake from GE was 12 EBM systems and 16 systems were delivered to GE.”
Arcam’s CEO says that the new orders and demand in general is driven by the, “aerospace industry that is now moving into production, and by the increasing interest for Additive Manufacturing from the orthopedic industry.” The CEO also notes that, “customers are still hesitant launching large manufacturing projects.”
René notes that, “demand of metal powder for Additive Manufacturing continues to grow rapidly” and Arcam continues “to secure long-term supply agreements to important customers within the orthopedic and the aerospace industries.”
Arcam plans to double their production capacity of metal powder within months. “At AP&C we have expanded the organization to prepare for the opening of our new metal powder manufacturing plant. The expansion of AP&C’s new plant is proceeding according to plan and the new facility is expected to be completed in September,” says René.
I agree silversmith. I emailed IR the day after the report came out and asked Bret to let MC know that he should address the results of the America Makes report. Here's what I sent.
Bret,
Good Evening.
I've been an SGLB investor for 4 years now and have advocated for their success. The recent article from America Makes article states "The program results provided data on the material properties that were researched and discovered to not be reliably related to the IPQA process, laying the groundwork for future investigation into other new tools and approaches for in-process monitoring of laser powder bed additive manufacturing."
Is there a successful future for SGLB's IPQA process? This report was very disappointing and Mark Cola did not give any indication that the product was not delivering what he's been stating all along that he has been "lock step" with GE. He indicated that SGLB could be the defacto standard for quality assurance. Please have Mark address this report as I fear that the pps will suffer immensely along with my significant investment over the years into this company without any positive news. He needs to state where SGLB stands and what his way forward is now that IPQA is shown to not be the "Defacto standard as the report indicates "laying the groundwork for future investigation into other new tools and approaches for in-process monitoring of laser powder bed additive manufacturing"
From our partners Spartacus3D See their customer list.
http://itp-forum.ru/upload/iblock/000a1/Spartacus3D_ITP-forum_2017_V2.pdf
No single company will propel 3D printing technology to its full potential; the industry around additive manufacturing will have to come together for a realizable future. The necessity of collaboration is increasingly coming into focus
General Electric Aviation, the GE unit that makes the Leap engines powering Boeing's new 737 Max, says it had a good first half on the engine production front.
GE said it delivered 93 Leap engines in the second quarter, below its forecast of 100 but up from 81 in the first quarter.
The first 737 Max 9, with fuel-saving blended winglets, took to the skies on its first-ever flight a during a morning journey from Boeing's huge Renton complex.
The first 737 Max 9, with fuel-saving blended winglets, took to the skies on its… more
That brings first-half Leap production to 174 for the first six months of the year.
The aviation giant said it remains on track to produce the 450 to 500 engines it wants to crank out this year.
CFM, a partnership of GE Aviation and French company Safran, makes the new Leap engines, which are quieter and more fuel efficient than those on older jets. The joint venture makes the Leap 1B for Boeing (NYSE: BA) and the Leap 1A for its rival Airbus, and is closely watched by the aerospace industry.
ANALYSIS: GE engine spin-up hints at Boeing 737 rate increase
Sam Pearlstein, the lead aerospace analyst at Wells Fargo, said the latest engine numbers were "a little short of expectations," calling that a clear negative.
"To achieve the low end of 2017’s targeted 450-500 Leap deliveries, Q3 and Q4 shipments each would need to rise 30 percent sequentially," Pearlstein said in a note to clients, without further comment on the shortfall.
Yes, indeed. I'm looking forward to the next few years here. I definitely believe pps will going up with those sales. I'm still feeling good about SGLB. Did you see this article?
Materialise software engineers have integrated the company’s additive manufacturing (AM) technology into Siemens Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) Software Inc.’s NX computer-aided design, manufacturing, and engineering (CAD/CAM/CAE) software to prepare CAD models for powder bed fusion and material jetting 3D printing processes. The result links NX with Materialise lattice technology and supports structures design, 3D nesting, build tray preparation, and build processors framework technology for AM. The integration eliminates data translation and conversions, and ensures that changes to digital product design models are automatically and associatively reflected in the 3D print jobs for greater model accuracy, higher quality, and a faster design-to-production process.
Yep. I'm really starting to believe now that GE did attempt a buyout and MC said No! MC once said that they did not no how to value SGLB. Hmmmmmmm!! This would explain some observations over the years here. Anyway All IMHO!