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.
Awesome! Thanks for this post! I believe filing first gives SGLB the edge should the patents be very similar. First to file is the one who owns it.
https://www.uspto.gov/patent/first-inventor-file-fitf-resources
T&L, I agree with you. The report should definitely have not left this much confusion. I reviewed the patent Method and system for monitoring additive manufacturing processes US 20160184893 A1 and I'm no scientist but seems to be that porosity and tensile strength were supposed to be measured some kinda way to establish that baseline dataset. I hope that MC can break it down into layman's terms and explain it. I do believe the SGLB is ahead of the competition; otherwise, Honeywell would not want to further develop PrintRite3D during the DARPA Phase 3 which leads to commercialization. Anyway, Here's a cut and paste of the patent part about porosity and tensile strength.
[0072]
At 803, one or more portions of the part at which the Eulerian and Lagrangian sensor data overlaps (i.e. the witness coupon) are analyzed to help produce a baseline dataset. There are generally three kinds of analysis that could be performed on the witness coupon, or an equivalent region of the part. First, the microstructure could be examined in detail. This includes, but is not limited to, such analyses as grain size, grain boundary orientation, chemical composition at a macro and micro scale, precipitate size and distribution in the case of age hardenable alloys, and grain sizes of prior phases which may have formed first, provided that such evidence of these previous grains is evident. The second category of evaluations that could be conducted are mechanical properties testing. This includes, but is not limited to, such analyses as hardness/micro-hardness, tensile properties, elongation/ductility, fatigue performance, impact strength, fracture toughness and measurements of crack growth, thermos-mechanical fatigue, and creep. The third series of evaluations that could be conducted on witness coupons or equivalent regions of the build are the characterization of defects and anomalies. This includes, but is not limited to, analysis of porosity shape, size and distribution, analysis of crack size and distribution, evidence of inclusions from the primary melt, i.e., those form during the gas atomization of the powders themselves, other inclusions which may have inadvertently entered during the Additive Manufacturing process, and other common welding defects such as lack of fusion. It should also be noted that in certain cases a location of the witness coupon or focus of the pyrometer can be adjusted to provide a more accurate representation of particularly critical portions of the part.
No response here either but it's great to see the pps hold steady.
Thinking about that 3D polymer thing again. Interesting development.
Stratasys Direct Manufacturing to 3D print polymer parts for Airbus A350 XWB aircraft
Stratasys Direct Manufacturing, a subsidiary of 3D printing company Stratasys Ltd., has been selected by aerospace giant Airbus to 3D print parts for its A350 XWB aircraft. The parts, which will be printed from an ULTEM™ 9085 polymer, will consist of non-structural parts such as brackets. Stratasys Direct Manufacturing says it will be 3D printing the aircraft components using the company’s FDM production printers.
The goal of 3D printing the non-structural parts will be to give Airbus more supply chain flexibility and better cost competitiveness. 3D printing will also enable the aerospace company to reduce both material consumption and waste in its aircraft manufacturing processes.
I did the same thing. I emailed Bret and asked that Mark address the way forward.
Z,
Thanks for the post. These results were not expected and certainly disappointing. There must be something that I'm missing with Additive Industries going with them. The DARPA Phase 3 contract award does not add up with this as well. I suppose it speaks to the state of the AM industry's ability to get in-process quality assurance done and SGLB is the best option at this point in time.
Great point Alan. Here's why I believe SGLB is undervalued even with the net losses. Just look at ONVO's Net Losses per Year. They are a 3D play as well who are waiting on standards to be developed.
2013 (26.58M)
2014 (25.85M)
2015 (30.08M)
2016 (38.58M)
2017 (38.45M)
ONVO is sitting at 279M market cap and SGLB is at 10.7M.
pps/market cap is what investors believe in and SGLB is on the short end of that belief for now. I still believe the pps will increase rapidly once SGLB shows increased earnings and the short campaign comes to an end. The good thing since SGLB's uplist is that sophisticated investors are coming in. They are enjoying the low prices. IMHO
Holder Shares Date Reported % Out Value
Sabby Management, LLC 182,244 Mar 30, 2017 3.99% 548,554
Susquehanna International Group, LLP 89,000 Mar 30, 2017 1.95% 267,889
Credit Suisse/ 20,296 Mar 30, 2017 0.44% 61,090
KCG Holdings, Inc. 17,799 Mar 30, 2017 0.39% 53,574
ARK Investment Management, LLC 17,793 Mar 30, 2017 0.39% 53,556
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. 1,150 Mar 30, 2017 0.03% 3,461
Morgan Stanley 243 Mar 30, 2017 0.01% 731
Top Mutual Fund Holders
Holder Shares Date Reported % Out Value
Perritt Ultra MicroCap Fund 140,000 Mar 30, 2017 3.06% 421,399
I believe that in the long run many investors stand to benefit quite handsomely. The AM industry is awaiting 2018 for those standards to be published and AM factories are popping up worldwide.
Kevin,
In response to your post.
From the PDF you posted....always read the summary... Still expiremental.
Jackle,
Interesting about that polymer 3D from NASA site.
A Fully Nonmetallic Gas Turbine Engine Enabled by Additive Manufacturing
Part II: Additive Manufacturing and Characterization of Polymer Composites
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150011644.pdf
It so happens that Honeywell did some work with Stratasys on this
"All the FDM printing was performed at Rapid Prototype Plus Manufacturing (rp+m), using Stratasys’ open source Fortus 400 or 900 mc FDM machines. The experimental XH6050 resin and carbon-fiber-filled Ultem 1000 filaments were supplied by Stratasys under the Ohio Third Frontier Program—Advanced
Materials for Additive Manufacturing Maturation. The Ultem resins and composites were printed between 375 to 420 °C (707 to 788 °F). The specific engine components were selected by Honeywell Aerospace.
As the largest additive manufacturing center in the American Southwest, the Additive Manufacturing Center is dedicated to keeping students, faculty and industry partners on the forefront of the rapidly growing additive manufacturing sector.
With the use of cutting edge plastic, polymer and metal 3D printing equipment, along with advanced processing and analysis capabilities, the Additive Manufacturing Center is the premier hub to develop the next generation of manufacturing engineers in conjunction with industry partners.
Partners
Formed as a partnership between Arizona State University, Honeywell Aerospace, Concept Laser, Inc., PADT Inc., Intel and Stratasys Ltd., the center is home to $2 million in state-of-the-art additive manufacturing equipment.
The aerospace certification solution consists of a new ULTEM™ 9085 resin and a, “new edition of the Fortus 900mc Production 3D Printer with specialized hardware and software designed to deliver highly repeatable mechanical properties.
to integrate Siemens’ Digital Factory solutions with Stratasys’ additive manufacturing solutions.
broaden the market reach of the Company's PrintRite3D® technology to the Smart Factory and the larger Digital Enterprise, including polymer-based 3D printing.https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/07/06/1039663/0/en/Sigma-Labs-Inc-Announces-Alliance-with-OXYS-Corporation-of-Cambridge-MA-to-Bring-Industrie-4-0-Solutions-to-Additive-Manufacturing-and-the-Broader-Digital-Enterprise.html
Longs understand where PrintRite3D fits and follow AM industry. AM industry has to be ready and get the green light from regulators to get AM mass production going. Articles like this help verify what Longs have been saying.
Norsk Titanium AS has developed a new, faster approach to 3-D printing, using titanium wire rather than powder as the printing base. The company will soon unveil a broad partnership with Spirit AeroSystems, a major subcontractor for Boeing.
Norsk and other aerospace manufacturers are ready to begin crafting large structural jetliner parts via 3-D printing technology, but they're waiting on the approval of U.S. safety regulators, who are not expected to act until 2018.
Though approximately 30% less expensive than traditionally made parts, the FAA seeks consistency of production quality regarding the the titanium-printed parts. According to a recent report from Additive Manufacturing, an AM lab had to be shut down because it did not meet safety protocol.
Though makers of new technology often chafe at the delays imposed by government safety committees, safety is still important. Businesses often want to take risks with new technology as they experiment how to grow and improve production, but the flip side is that they need to be prepared for federal scrutiny and potential setbacks due to safety concerns.
Furthermore, quality assurance (QA) is notoriously difficult for manufacturers to guarantee. One way to measure quality is the pyramid method, with quality parts at the top, resting on two key components: build planning and build monitoring, joined by feedback control. The third tier consists of raw materials and calibration, while the base holds information management and information assurance, both of which support a sound QA process.
3-D printing may increase optimization — expediting the supply chain process so that manufacturers can test prototypes quickly before moving to production — but regulatory scrutiny may negate any increase in production speed. This may be frustrating for supply chain managers, but until 3-D printing is accepted by regulators as a reliable means of production, manufacturers that use 3-D printing should expect delays.
“We've started to engage the whole industry in the U.S.,” says Sevcik “We are working with National Institution of Aviation research to develop a comprehensive certification of the process. This will be a materials and process specification that the FAA has already seen and understands so that everyone can leverage it. On top of that, we will create a very substantial test data set based on these specifications so that there is statistical confidence. Not every company should have to go through the qualification programme; multiple businesses should leverage the same data, the same accepted standard specs to efficiently certify parts for aircraft.”
Another company stating what many Longs here believe and why I certainly believe that Printrite3D will become the defacto IPQA standard. Customers will require that "digital fingerprint" that PrintRite3D provides and companies are not looking to reinvent the wheel that's already been vetted by SGLB, GE Aviation, Honeywell, NIST, etc.
“We’re taking an open approach — trying to stay away from ‘only use this in our machine’ — for software and materials. There will be no BeAM-labeled powder, no instance of ‘only run this in the machine or else.’ We may develop materials in collaboration with people and say that running this material in the machine, this is what you can expect to get, but we’re not requiring that. It’s [the customer’s] machine to turn the knobs in the way that they want,” LaLonde said of the approach.
“There’s already an uphill battle for additive technology to be adapted; why make it more difficult with another new software or something people aren’t familiar with, to wrap their heads around, to adapt the technology for their use? We’re looking at industry standard software, how you program and run the machines, materials they’re familiar with or it’s easy to get their hands on. Level the playing field, lower the barriers to entry. Give them something they’re pretty familiar with that allows them to do something different.”
https://3dprint.com/180414/beam-realistic-metal-am/
Concept Laser, a GE Additive company (Lichtenfels, Germany), and aeronautical subcontractor LAUAK Group (Paris, France) have signed a Letter of Intent to launch an alliance that will advance additive manufacturing in the aerospace industry. The agreement was signed at the Paris Air Show, which took place June 19-25, 2017.
LAUAK will invest in Concept Laser additive manufacturing machines as a reference customer for Concept Laser technology. Also, Concept Laser will work closely with LAUAK to implement additive manufacturing processes and design new products, supporting LAUAK during the implementation phase of the equipment into its manufacturing process. LAUAK will also present the Concept Laser machine to reference customers in its showroom, including presentation of test objects for demonstration purposes.
Concept Laser provides machine technology for 3D printing metal components. The company's LaserCUSING process involves powder-bed-based laser melting of metals.
LAUAK is a direct subcontractor for detail parts, subassemblies, and assemblies for the aerospace industry. Key customers are aircraft manufacturers such as Airbus, Dassault Aviation, Embraer, and several major suppliers, including Aernnova, Daher Socata, Liebherr, and Safran.
http://www.industrial-lasers.com/articles/2017/07/concept-laser-lauak-launch-additive-manufacturing-alliance.html
Kevin,
Thanks for all your posts and sharing insight from the AM conferences. It is appreciated.
Jackle,
Great to see you post again. I agree. Longs understand the T&E cycle is long for this new technology and companies will adopt what they have tested and modified and re-engineered to meet AM production needs. It's amazing that SGLB is right in the middle of it. I'm looking forward to when AM industry is ready. FAA should be releasing AM guidance and it will be on. I was reading about how stringent FAA standards are and that the 10,000 part should be exactly the same as the first, second, third and on. The "digital fingerprint" that PrintRite3D achieves should definitely assist companies with meeting that FAA standard.
Good Luck Longs. It's been quite a wait for us as we watch the AM industry slowly develop. SGLB appears to be lock step with where AM industry is heading for a number of years now.
Will PrintRite3D assist P&W with those production issues last year concerning quality? I'm betting they will. I think our revenue numbers will increase a bit quarter by quarter as more AM machines get PrintRite3D installed in them with P&W's ramp up.
Leduc noted that, having had some well-publicized PW1000G production issues involving part quality (particularly of the larger PW1000G models’ hybrid aluminum-titanium fan blades) and late delivery of parts by some suppliers, Pratt & Whitney has beefed up its staff of supply-chain oversight managers. “We have 300 supply-chain pros we didn’t have a year ago to oversee the parts we considered at risk for [supplier delivery] commits,” said Leduc.
“At 120 to 200 [engines a year], we never went to validate commitments,” added Leduc. “We weren’t thinking about it a year ago. We were not as organized. We’re seeing a lot less of that this year and we have more warning” if any given supplier is in danger of failing to meet its parts-delivery promises. “We have that kind of granularity now.” While some parts-production and parts-delivery issues still occur, “they are normal, day-to-day ones”—issues Leduc classes as “Whackamole,” after the well-known arcade game in which players use a mallet to smack down “moles” as they pop up from under the game board. “But they’re not systemic issues.”
Additionally, said Leduc, “We have a strategy of ‘no single point of failure’ in our value assembly. I?n some cases, we have two or three sources.” All the ‘no single point of failure’ PW1000G supply-chain and assembly arrangements resulted from a P&W strategic decision to outsource 80 percent of parts production for the engines, where traditionally Pratt & Whitney has outsourced about 60 percent. “That’s different for us,” he said.
Admitting that “for some commodities we’re single-source,” such as the parts produced by lightweight metals specialist Arconic and by Precision Castparts subsidiary PCC Forged Products, Leduc revealed that “we do think there are suppliers out there, not necessarily large ones, that are strategic for us—and we’re thinking of acquiring them.” However, Leduc didn’t say whether Arconic and PCC Forged Products were among the suppliers P&W is considering.
Yet another factor which P&W reckons will help its PW1000G production ramp-up is that production of the company’s existing V2500 engine—almost all examples of which power A320ceo-family aircraft–will fall from about 500 units this year to “a handful” by 2019.
Will P&W’s supply-chain arrangements are being affected adversely by various airlines’ decisions to switch A320neo-family orders due to delivery in the near term to A320ceo-family aircraft instead, as a result of continuing low oil prices? Leduc said that it isn’t, to any noticeable degree. “We manage both programs,” he explained. “Our command center is seeing [supplier] commits, and as long as the capacity and manpower and raw materials are there, we have high confidence they will deliver, and for the most part they do.”
However, Leduc did admit the substantial ramp-down of V2500 production has slipped a year to the low assembly rate required annually for the Embraer KC-390 military transport-aircraft program, from 2018 to 2019. This is as a result of airlines either switching their A320-family orders or deferring them. “We did think it would be 2018, and now it’s 2019, but it’s still [going to decline to] a handful,” in 2019, he said.
Calio said Pratt & Whitney is confident it will be able to deliver from 350 to 400 production PW1000G engines this year, per the forecast it made early in the year. He confirmed P&W delivered approximately 70 PW1000Gs in the first quarter, “23 a month, basically,” which means that in each of 2017’s remaining nine months P&W will have to deliver an average of at least 31 engines—and at least 36 a month if it is to near the upper limit of its 2017 target delivery range.
“I don’t think there are any issues,” said Calio. “We’re on track to deliver 350-to-400 [PW1000G] engines this year. That’s 280 in the next three quarters [after the first quarter], and we’re positioned to do just that.”
Of necessity, this means that Pratt & Whitney is confident it has overcome the fan blade production-quality issues that led to the company having to reject some 70 percent of all the hybrid aluminum-titanium fan blades it and its suppliers produced last year. (Because of fan-blade strength and durability issues, P&W replaced the original hybrid-alloy fan-blade design for the PW1200G and the PW1700G, which share identical turbomachinery and are the PW1000G models with the smallest fan diameters, in favor of an all-titanium design.)
Calio’s confidence is due in large part to the fact P&W recently doubled its PW1000G fan-blade production capacity by opening two new production facilities, one at program partner IHI in Japan. Itpresumably will make all the fan blades for PW1200G production engines, as well as fan blades for other PW1000G models. The second facilityis in Lansing, Michigan. These locations have received “the benefit of our learnings over the last year, and they’re more automated” than P&W’s other two PW1000G fan-blade-manufacturing plants, said Calio, who added that the two facilities “continue to ramp up [to full production], toward the end of this year.”
Clearly then, the FAA hasn’t been freely handing out certifications like in-flight bags of pretzels. But it is still up for debate as to whether the regulator, which is ultimately responsible for the lives of aircraft crew and passengers, could (or should) be working faster to approve 3D printed parts. While the regulator’s certification processes are not entirely transparent, the FAA has intermittently attempted to explain its school of thought on additive manufacturing—as well as its own role in the future of aerospace 3D printing.
Interestingly, the FAA also addressed what it termed the “challenges and concerns” about additive manufacturing—the very reasons why FAA approval for 3D printed parts might appear to be coming along slowly.
Those concerns about AM included, amongst other things, the possibility of material defects in 3D printed parts (and the resulting impact on the part’s airworthiness); a lack understanding about “failure modes” and their connection to key production parameters for AM produced parts; the unknown mechanical properties of metal 3D printed parts; and the susceptibility of 3D printed parts to environmental conditions.
The regulator has also discussed additive manufacturing on other occasions. In June 2016, at a joint FAA-Air Force workshop on 3D printing, a roundtable of experts concluded that aerospace additive manufacturing would generally require “better input powder material,” while also noting that the potential for unwanted manufacturing variation in AM was high.
Perhaps tellingly, the experts on the roundtable also concluded that “near-net or finished shapes, complex geometries, and as-built, or even post-processed, surface finishes” all represented “challenges for inspection,” with many parts requiring “sophisticated volume inspections, such as computed tomography, augmented by actual cutups.”
JPI, Thanks much. It's great to see SGLB mentioned in research reports such as these. I'm looking forward to the bright future that MC has been positioning Sigma Labs for. The AM industry leaders are ready to start production and it's great that MC has SGLB involved with them. The many years of test and evaluation are about to payoff.
Safran, which has entered into 3D printing partnerships with Amaero Engineering and Prodways Group in the last several months, is joining several other companies, such as Stratasys, Sciaky, and Norsk Titanium, at the International Paris Air Show this week, and it has a pretty big announcement.
Safran Power Units has obtained the first certification for a 3D printed APU major part from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). This milestone certification for a gas turbine nozzle will set Safran in the right direction for eventually achieving mass production.
https://www.3dprint.com/178575/safran-easa-certification-nozzle/
I bet Printrite3D played a part in the certification for that nozzle.
Safran is customer of Spartacus3D I do believe
Safran, the French-based international leader in aerospace, defence and security, welcomes the partnership. “We are very interested in the collaboration between Aequs and Farinia on Spartacus3D, because of its potential for producing enhanced manufacturing capabilities and favourable supply chain economics”, said Xavier Dessemond, Vice President of Purchasing for Safran.
Is'nt RUAG one of Morf3D's partnerss?? There's a lot happening in Alabama around AM.
The Paris Air Show, which begins this week, and its alternating sibling, the Farnborough International Airshow, offer Alabama’s team an unmatched opportunity to develop and build relationships with key industry figures.
In some cases, air show discussions have led directly to projects that have created jobs in Alabama.
Over the years, Alabama’s team has engaged in scores of private meetings with industry decision-makers in Paris and Farnborough. With Governor Kay Ivey leading the team in Paris, this year will be no different.
Talks initiated at the air shows can lead companies to make investments in Alabama.
One example is RUAG Space, a Swiss company that just opened a 130,000-square-foot manufacturing center on the campus of United Launch Alliance’s rocket factory in Decatur. The $30 million project is expected to create at least 100 jobs.
The project got started at the 2014 Farnborough Airshow, when Alabama officials met with RUAG Space’s Swiss executive team. Talks with ULA leaders about the collaboration took place at that Farnborough show and the next year at the Paris Air Show.
A grand opening for the RUAG facility, which produces aerodynamic fairings for rockets, was held May 31.
“The RUAG Space USA partnership with ULA will help keep our state on the cutting edge of aerospace innovation,” U.S. Senator Luther Strange (R-Alabama) said at the event.
Another example is GE Aviation’s additive manufacturing project in Auburn.
Plans for the additive manufacturing facility in Auburn were first discussed at the 2013 Paris Air Show when GE Aviation CEO David Joyce met with Alabama leaders. They discussed what the next generation of technology would look like and how the existing Auburn facility could fit into that.
At the 2014 Farnbough show, GE Aviation executives joined Alabama leaders to announce the $50 million project.
Altair, RUAG and Morf3D have recently entered a non-exclusive partnership for cooperation in advancing additive manufacturing (AM) for Aerospace applications. The partnership will address the full additive manufacturing process including design, analysis, build, test and certification. The partnership aims to offer a start-to-finish service primarily to the Aerospace industry for AM including space, propulsion, aircraft interior, and airframe applications. Other application areas will be pursued as opportunities present themselves.
Things are heating up. AM mass production is coming to fruition. The stage is nearly set for PrintRite3D.
GE Ready for CFM Ramp-up
Airframers have tasked engine manufacturers GE Aviation (Chalet 142) and Safran Aircraft Engines to produce 800 additional CFM56 and LEAP engines through their CFM International joint venture over the next four years. “We’re ready for the ramp,” declared GE Aviation president and CEO David Joyce.
“Over the last year we’ve been asked by Airbus and Boeing to add an additional 800 engines—CFMs and LEAPs—between now and 2020,” Joyce told reporters on Monday at the Paris Air Show. “We’ve been working through slowing the rate of reduction [of CFM56s] down and trying to get more ramp into the LEAP to the best of our ability to the tune of about 800 engines” between 2017-2020, he explained.
Additive manufacturing will be used for large-scale production in the aerospace and defense industry under a newly announced collaboration between Dassault Systèmes and Airbus APWorks.
The MetalFAB1 metal 3D printer is set to change the industrial 3D printing space with unprecedented levels of automation and quality control. Though the system itself was not physically present at formnext, the virtual unveiling made a big enough splash for Airbus to install one in their Airbus APWorks manufacturing facilities.
Statements in articles like this help to confirm in my mind the significant lead SGLB has over the competition.
Part certification and qualification is another key barriers to progress in bringing 3D printed parts to the market. In aerospace it can take an average of 15 years to qualify a new material for use to make parts. It can then take another number of years to get the manufacturing process and parameters cleared for launch.
A good reason why GE has the acoustic monitoring patent could be for the following reason
Large companies with a cash-cow product will just do about everything to avoid competition from entering the market. Many organizations are patenting every possible alternative way to manufacture a certain product. These alternative manufacturing ways will never be used by the patenting company. In fact, their only reason for existence is to block competitors from manufacturing a competing product through alternative processes.
It depends on that America Makes agreement to me. MC already said that the PrintRite3D's that GE brought were licensed for eval and not production and indicated the he was anticipating production run orders from GE and Honeywell. We shall see but yeah does drop my 100 percent confidence that GE will be deploying PrintRite3D throughout their AM plants. It's great to see the Siemens, P&W, Aerojet RocketDyne and Additive Industries orders this year that ramps up my confidence in their adoption of PRintRite3D. The Aerojet RocketDyne(having been a partner with GE and Honeywell) continued use certainly keeps me excited that the America Makes agreement is still good but I yeah don't know. It does leave a question mark in the 100 percent GE confidence I once had. I'll put my confidence level at 80 percent that GE will utilize PrintRite3D across their AM plants.
https://chemical-materials.elsevier.com/new-materials-applications/ge-patents-ear-validating-3d-printing-quality/
Here's our IPQA. SGLB should get some credit since GE utilized our product to further enhance it during America Makes.
3D printing may have revolutionized part design and manufacture, but uses a deposition process sensitive to consistent material delivery. By ‘listening’ to parts during the additive manufacturing cycle, engineers at GE have devised a new method of assuring parts are free from defects and voids which could cause premature failure.
As reported by 3D Printing Industry, GE has been granted two separate patents in May of this year for acoustic monitoring methods of additive manufacturing processes. Both patents introduce an inspection method for additive manufacturing using an acoustic wave for non-contact measurement, however US 20170146488 pertains to measurement of energy generated by the weld pool while US 20170146489 measures displacement of the build surface. Both methods create a non-destructive inspection process for in-situ quality assurance of parts fabricated by 3D printing that saves time and cost over traditional methods. Parts created through additive manufacturing are typically inspected in a separate, dedicated step following manufacture.
The process of acoustic monitoring is not new and has been used for many years in a variety of applications including industrial bearing lubrication monitoring, boiler pipe leaks, bridge wire breakage, and even remote monitoring of patients in the healthcare industry. It is a mature, proven technology so a good fit for application in additive manufacturing.
The GE process like other applications of acoustic monitoring utilizes a wave signature of a known good part. Relatime data is compared to the control signature to detect anomalies like cracks or voids. The following video shared by Nikolaas Van Reit provides a more detailed overview:
Quality assurance is an important part of manufacturing in all industries, but takes on critical importance in industries such as automotive or aerospace where part failures can risk lives. Novel inspection methods such as that proposed by GE can eliminate dedicated inspection steps while enable faster times to market. It is far more efficient and cost-effective to catch errors in process rather than after the fact. As a manufacturer, I wonder what other interesting stories we can learn by following GE’s lead and listening to our parts?
What nondestructive testing methods does your company use in manufacturing its product line? Tell us about your quest for unconventional knowledge and what it could mean for the future of your products or companies. Share your thoughts in the comments section below and don’t forget to follow us on your favorite social media channel.
HP said its 3D printing portfolio will be available across Asia-Pacific as it has forged partnerships to expand its reach in China.
The company, which has been expanding its reseller and commercial reach for its Jet Fusion 3D Printing portfolio, announced pacts with two Chinese 3D printing services to build out a network of 50 facilities.
Shining 3D ePrint, which has more than 10,000 customers globally, will deploy HP's 3D printing hardware and software in Beijing, Chengdu, Guangzhou, Nanjing, and Shanghai. In addition, Infinite 3D Printing will deploy HP's 3D in more locations such as Suzhou and Qingdao.
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.
On the materials front, HP said Sinopec Yanshan Petrochemical Company will join its materials ecosystem.
HP Inc. is battling incumbent Stratasys, which has been busy focusing on verticals and outlining new approaches to additive manufacturing
The next half decade will see machine manufacturers combining 3D printing methods, as HP did with Multi Jet Fusion, which combines something like Binder Jetting with Material Jetting, Powder Bed Fusion, and possibly Directed Energy Deposition (DED). We will also see innovations in ASTM International’s 7 basic types of 3D printing technologies, such as Markforged’s process for making dense metal parts with Material Extrusion and Adamtec’s metal parts made with Vat Photopolymerization. We will also see innovations beyond the seven basic processes, such as Disney Research’s 3D copier and Carbon’s CLIP, and Boeing’s true 3D printing process, which builds in multiple axes, not just Z. The Disney and Carbon processes are like injection molding without the mold, making instantaneously whole parts. No layers. Boeing combines a levitated part, multiple build heads (could be Binder Jet, DED, Material Extrusion, or Material Jet, or all of the above), and apparently infinitely variable orientations to such heads. The next five years will also see increased integration of 3D printing with in-process controls (such as Sigma Labs’ PrintRite3D), robotics, and post-processing.
Last year, Boeing said it was testing an industrial 3D printer from Stratasys that can build objects of virtually any size using materials such as carbon fiber for lighter weight and stronger parts. The printers were designed to address the requirements of aerospace, automotive and other industries by being able to build completed parts with repeatable mechanical properties.
Sigma Labs has also achieved an important technical milestone in getting its IPQA – In Process Quality Assurance – technology approved for production on a new Boeing (NYSE: BA) manufacturing process that we believe will change the way aircraft structures are built. Mark Cola, President of Sigma Labs, noted, "Getting written into a production specification is a major breakthrough for us. Now that our IPQA technology is part of an approved production process for Boeing and can be used in lieu of traditional ultrasonic inspection, we plan to work with Boeing suppliers to implement our unique inspection method for this new production process. Furthermore we believe it will become an important part of producing Boeing commercial aircraft structures."
Excellent Thanks. All these collaborations and connections are adding up fast. I'm looking forward to continued developments with Sigma Labs.
Stratasys partners with Boeing, Siemens and Ford on new 3-D printing technologies
Stratasys Ltd. unveiled new technologies and partnerships with heavyweights Siemens, Boeing and Ford Motor Co. in a move that could accelerate the 3-D printer’s prominence in lightweight auto and aerospace parts manufacturing, company officials said.
Stratasys CEO Ilan Levin told investors and trade writers from eight countries Tuesday at the Crowne Plaza Bloomington that from now on Stratasys would rely on partnerships with industrial customers to help solve manufacturing problems, drive innovation and grow the company.
To that end, Levin introduced what he called “game changers” — technologies that can make industrial-strength but lightweight parts for cars and planes and can print parts in extremely large sizes for the first time.
The Infinite-Build 3-D Demonstrator — made to satisfy specifications from Boeing and Ford Motor — can seamlessly print large lightweight components that are the size of a building or the length of an entire airplane.
https://3dprint.com/176666/stratasys-3d-printing-paris/
From June 19 to 25, visitors and exhibitors from the aviation industry will gather in Paris for the International Paris Air Show. Among those exhibitors will be Stratasys, which knows a thing or two about aviation. The company’s 3D printing systems were recently used to create the first certified fully 3D printed part in the Middle East, a plastic monitor frame produced through a collaboration between Siemens, Etihad Airways and Strata Manufacturing.
At the air show, Stratasys will present additive manufacturing solutions for the production of FAA- and EASA-certified parts. It’s not the first time the company has taken a spotlight role at the conference; they’ve been involved in 3D printing for aviation for quite some time. Lately, their involvement has gotten even more comprehensive, and they’ll be talking about some of the partnerships that have furthered their presence in the industry, such as that with SIAEC, or SIA Engineering Company. The partnership was recently announced as a means of establishing an Additive Manufacturing Center in Singapore, as well as accelerating the adoption of 3D printing by the aviation industry.
“Customers such as SWU Verkehr GmbH see ‘availability’ as the most important asset to their business—trams and services need to be available and run constantly throughout the day in order for the transport company to be profitable,” said Andreas Düvel, a customer service sales rep at Siemens Mobility. “The ability to quickly and cost-effectively 3D print customized parts specific to customer requirements enables clients such as SWU Verkehr GmbH to be closely involved in the design and production of its own parts.”
Stratasys and Siemens have announced a formal partnership to integrate Siemens’ Digital Factory solutions with Stratasys’ additive manufacturing solutions.
The partnership is intended to lay the foundation for the two companies to fulfill their shared vision of incorporating additive manufacturing into the traditional manufacturing workflow, helping it to become a universally recognized production practice which can benefit multiple industries, including aerospace, automotive, transportation, energy and industrial tooling.
Agreed KMey3434. Some folks need to understand where PrintRite3D fits in the AM lifecycle maybe some more DD will help.
Despite the optimistic outlook and some notable success stories, most manufacturers are not yet using metal additive manufacturing for mass production. This is primarily because the machinery and materials are expensive and production is still relatively slow.
In the video above, we look at how 3D printer developers like Desktop Metal are advancing additive manufacturing technology to make mass production possible.
“Additive manufacturing of metals has seen pretty amazing advancement over the last 10 years, but has never delivered on its promise; all you can do right now is prototype parts,” said Jonah Myerberg, CTO at Desktop Metal.
“However, we developed our first printer to additively manufacture metal injection molding feedstock, so after printing, you can move to our production machine and mass produce it at very high volumes with the same cost-competitive model you can with injection molding.”
http://www.aerospacemanufacturinganddesign.com/article/airbus-safran-launchers-siemens-plm-102116/
Airbus Safran Launchers has selected Siemens over other suppliers to help transform its entire product lifecycle process in order to maximize quality and efficiency and minimize costs associated with the development and realization of all its launcher programs. Airbus Safran Launchers is a joint venture equally owned by Airbus Defence and Space and Safran.
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/business/manufacturing/Siemens-sets-up-its-Asia-Pacific-experience-center-in-Beijing/shdaily.shtml
GERMAN industrial group Siemens launched a “digitalization experience center” in Beijing today to show its smart manufacturing cases, tapping China’s “high-potential” smart manufacturing market.
Yes. I've been tracking that for a couple years now. It's a very orchestrated campaign. IMHO.
I'm a believer and still calling $100pps in 2020. There's a lot of companies finally getting their initial AM factories built. The need for SGLB will greatly increase with AM full rate production. I can see that occurring across multiple industries by 2020. The right AM printers are finally being built for AM production ie Metal Fab. The next few years SGLB should be able to capitalize on by being first to market and as more investors become educated on where SGLB fits in this AM Space.
The following kinds of articles enhance my confidence in Printrited3D being used heavily by some Big Players in the next few years.
“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’ll 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 3D 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.”
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.
The tests were conducted at the Siemens test center for industrial gas turbines in Lincoln, Great Britain. Over the course of several months, Siemens engineers from Lincoln, Berlin, and the Swedish municipality of Finspong worked with experts from Materials Solutions to optimize the gas turbine blades and their production. Within just 18 months, the international project team succeeded in developing the entire process chain, from the design of individual components, to the development of materials, all the way to new methods of quality control and the simulation of component service life. In addition, Siemens tested a new additively manufactured blade design with a fully revised and improved internal cooling geometry
The only issue is that GE did purchase PrintRite3D as well as Honeywell and Aerojet RocketDyne all who developed SGLB's IPQA technology together via America Makes project.
I agree with you. PrintRite3D is installed on a number of EOS machines now and they are our partner and Morf3D's partner. I appreciate how PrintRite3D software is complementary to OEM's AM machines.
IMHO a Big reason that Mark is not forthcoming with my details. NDA's are preventing disclosure.
Boeing declined to comment on specific production plans, typically a closely guarded secret by airplane makers. However, speaking to several suppliers, The Daily Herald pieced together the company’s tentative production schedule for the 737 program. None of the suppliers is approved to publicly discuss the information and could face retribution for doing so. They agreed to speak only if they are not named.
Cobalt typically makes parts for other, bigger aerospace suppliers. Its customers have wanted more finished parts, he said. Larger suppliers “want more packaged or kitted parts,” rather than pieces that have to be assembled.
Adding production capabilities and doing more assembly work has made Cobalt more competitive. Also, “by being larger, you might have a better chance to hold onto work that might shift otherwise,” Clark said.
Taking over Integrated Aerospace Machining gave Cobalt new capabilities, such as stretch forming aluminum — a production process that uses powerful machines to pull and push the metal into shapes.
Companies are accountable for what they post on their web sites; thus, I for one would not be dismissive of that statement.