IPQA was not designed to detect CTQs, however it was designed to detect the conditions in which defects occur.
The perfect summarization of what I've been saying since the "negative" America Makes project.
This is why we are gathering analytics and progressing with Contour thru DARPA and Honeywell.
IPQA + in-situ geometric measurements = verifiable evidence a quality part was printed.
***In order to be really useful
and produce validated results, the
Lagrangian and Eulerian data must
be cross-correlated. Then based
on this correlation, features can
be assigned as quality metrics
which could be predictive of
process quality. It is critical
to emphasize that in-process
measurements of this nature are not
directly sensing the presence or
absence of defects; rather they are
sensing the process conditions
under which such process defects
are most likely to occur. ***
Figure
3 therefore offers a template by
which in-process, real-time, on-
machine data could be used to
detect process conditions under
which defects may occur. This
data could be used for process
intervention, i.e. stopping or
altering the process before defects
occur. Alternatively if there is
access to the real-time operating
system governing the Additive
Manufacturing process, then such
in-process quality data could be
used for real-time process control
so as to completely avoid process
conditions which may lead to
defects.
APPLICATIONS TO THE IN-SITU
MEASUREMENT OF GEOMETRY
As discussed earlier in this
present work, the control and
measurement of as-built geometry is
critical for metal components,
especially those that will be
introduced into critical
applications such as aerospace or
automotive systems. The high
temperatures and non-linear thermal
gradients contribute to significant
thermal stresses which in turn
cause distortion and residual
stress. There the control of
geometry is a critically important
aspect of metal Additive
Manufacturing. However, the
measurement of just the outside
contour using contact or non-
contact means may well be
insufficient to fully capture part
geometry as additively manufactured articles can have complex internal
geometry. Additionally, the
currently available methods for
full geometric inspection of both
internal and external geometry are
based on tomographic scanning, such
as x-ray tomographic scanning.
Such techniques are slow, capital-
intensive, and involve the use of
ionizing radiation. Furthermore,
as part geometry gets bigger and as
the density and atomic number of
elemental constituents of a
metallic alloy increase, the x-ray
energy required to fully penetrate
such parts over large geometries
becomes quite large indeed. This
poses serious technical as well as
radiation safety challenges in
practice if x-ray tomographic
scanning had to be done with gamma
rays with energies of several
hundred thousand or even several
million electron volts. Therefore
an in-situ means of scanning and
detecting the as-built geometry is
highly desired.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
