CAD Archives -

3D-Printers everywhere – a review of the TCT Show

dawn0206 — Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:43:16 +0000

My impression of the TCT Show, September 2019

I’ve been to many CAD/CAM and Manufacturing shows, but I think yesterday was my first visit to the TCT Show in Birmingham’s NEC.

The TCT Show – busy on Tuesday & Wednesday – not so busy on Thursday pm

The show ran from Tuesday 24th to Thursday 26th September. I chose to visit on the last day because I hoped it would be quiet. However, I wasn’t quite prepared for how quiet it was. Admittedly I didn’t arrive unto after 12:15 (due to an argument with an ‘upgrade’ on my ‘phone), but it was very quiet. Good news is that Wednesday had been very busy, and Tuesday was also reasonably brisk.

The organisers had chosen Halls 3 and 3a, and the show certainly didn’t seem lost in the space. Most of the 137 exhibitors had decent sized stands. One or two were spectacular (Stratasys probably won that little battle), but most were not overpowering and were nicely put together.

A point I must take issue with is the organisers claim on the website that there were 300 exhibitors. If there were, then 163 didn’t make entries in the catalogue. In fairness though, something that I quite liked was that several of the big stands had a lead-brand and then a number of others making-up their ecosystem to provide a more complete service offering. So if that’s how they reached their total of 300 exhibitors then maybe, but I think it’s a hard claim to justify, as is (I suspect) the 10,000+ visitors they claim. But that’s just a niggle worth remembering when you negotiate for a stand next year.

A benefit (for me) of the show being quiet was that people staffing the exhibition stands were not pushed for time and were happy to talk, even though they knew I was ‘selling and learning’.

3D-Printing

The theme that dominated the show was without doubt 3D-Printing. The SLA models I first wrote about 20+ years ago are still there, but they have been joined by a range of other techniques. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, but the most astonishing to me were the systems that print in metal.
Laser sintering of metal has really taken off, with exhibitors displaying aircraft components in titanium, jewellery in gold and many other amazingly complex items that would be impossible to make economically any way other than using 3D-printing technology.

There will always be a place for 4 and 5-axis milling devices. One of them has been an area I’m currently very familiar with – dentistry. However, I even saw one company (Zortrax) that was 3D-Printing dental crowns and inlays. It appears that the range of applications for 3D-Printing is bounded only by what people are prepared to try.

Other Technologies

Another technique that intrigued me was the layered wire system demonstrated by Cranfield University. This technique builds high strength items by layering wire and welding it together. They had a very impressive story to tell.

There were also a number of people demonstrating milling and cutting systems, but I’m a ‘software guy’ at heart, and I was disappointed by the lack (or at least visibility) of CAD systems on show. But I was taken by Open Mind Technologies and their hyperMILL system. This is a focused CAM system. Yes, it reads CAD designs, and yes, it can modify them. But it is focused on making a design manufacturable – turning designs into practical tool-paths that work in a production environment. I like that approach, and it is rare to find a CAD/CAM/CAE vendor leading with the CAM component.

Other stuff

Catering seemed adequate, but it’s difficult to judge with so few people there. But the coffee stall smelled very nice. Less pleasant was the £16 parking fee.
Again, probably because I was there on a quiet day, the busses had seats available, the car park had places to park, and there were no traffic issues with getting off the site – I’m going to start going to the NEC for the last afternoon of shows in future.

I didn’t go to any lectures or presentations, but there was a full programme, so well done to the organisers.

Another nice touch was the TCT Connect meeting area. I didn’t use this because I wasn’t sure what time I’d be at the show, but I’m certainly going to try it next year. Essentially, when you register, you can book a meeting table on the TCT Connect stand and meet exhibitors etc (if they agree) in a quiet, more relaxed space than their stand. Again, they were empty on Thursday, but full on Wednesday – worth a thought for next year.

Yokogawa flow meter

Flow meters on display

My badge for TCT also allowed me to enter ‘Sensors & Instrumentation Live’ next door in Hall 2. This was a small exhibition with about 50 stands. It was running over Wednesday and Thursday and was pretty dead by the time I went in on late Thursday afternoon.

I heard very different opinions about how busy it was from different exhibitors. One chap I spoke to on a stand that was near the entrance said it had been very quiet for both days. Whereas a stand tucked away, right at the back of the hall, told me they had only just slowed down having been busy both days.

Because of the work I’ve done in the past (with Yokogawa), I guess I’m attuned to flow meters, but there did seem to be a lot of people showing flow meters. I really only registered pressure sensors and electronic test equipment beyond this, but I was very impressed by a circuit testing system shown by Devtank. Top Hex’s interfacing system was also of interest, and they certainly had the best presented stand in ‘Sensors & Instrumentation Live’.

So, worth driving 125 miles?

Yes, I’d say so. Even though I was streaming with cold and the person I specifically went to see wasn’t expecting me, and even though my ‘phone was trying to get me to launch it across the half-empty car park, I had a really good afternoon. I learned a lot and met some very nice, unhurried and friendly people prepared to give their time to explain their products, and to discuss any possibilities of working with Precision PR in the future.
And attending on the last afternoon is a strategy I will be following again and would recommend to others.

Precision PR in Computer-Aided Manufacturing

Chris Webb has been working with manufacturing, logistics and engineering design systems since 1984. Having worked on brands such as SDRC-IDEAS, Solidworks, CATIA, Epson, Brother, SSI, SSA, QAD and Adatsys (and many others) he has an excellent understanding of engineering and manufacturing processes, and some great press contacts. For more information, contact us on 07432 189149 or email chris@precisionpr.co.uk

The post 3D-Printers everywhere – a review of the TCT Show appeared first on .

Once upon a time 3D-Printing was called Rapid Prototyping

chris@precisionpr.co.uk — Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:04:20 +0000

The democratisation of one-off digital-to-physical things

Once upon a time in a far, far world, people used to make one-off prototypes of planned new products using really exotic stuff and incredibly expensive computer systems. Today, in a small office near you, someone is doing the same thing for a fraction of the cost. And without the need to prepare baths of unpleasant organic chemical compounds. The rise of the 3D-Printer is not a new thing: it’s just got a catchier name and a more user-friendly price tag. So how has it got here, and what exactly does ‘here’ look like?

An introduction to CAD

As a child I had always wanted to be involved in car design and mechanical engineering. As a teenager I was too lazy to get myself through sixth-form and off to university. My career dreams were partially fulfilled by working at Avon County Council Highways & Engineering Department, where I ended-up operating the department’s super-mini computer as it was used to create the designs of what became the Bristol Ring Road and several other major highways schemes. This was my first introduction to Computer Aided Design (CAD).

Roll on a few years and I’m helping show journalists round the Williams F1 team factory. Damon Hill’s Championship-winning car sat in the entrance hall behind the door we’ve just come through. There is science fiction made real in this place.

Ford Duratec engine – modelled in I-DEAS CAD software

Tool paths and Lasers

Back in the 1990s I was learning my trade in PR at the brilliant Insight Marketing and Communications Limited. One of my clients was SDRC (Structural Dynamics Research Corporation). I absolutely loved working on that account. SDRC made 3D-Solid Modelling software for designers.

At the time SDRC was the technology leader in the design software market. Most of the F1 Grand Prix teams (and a host of other competition car manufacturers) used their software, proving the point. SDRC software was also used by several manufacturers, including the Ford Motor Company. Take a look at this video to for the Duratec engine, modelled using SDRC software.

Damon Hill – 1996 F1 World Champion driving his Williams FW18

If you want Grand Prix software you pay Grand Prix prices.

Williams was one of the manufacturers using SDRC’s software. Their designers developed solid models which were then used to generate tool-paths for multi-axis milling machines that carved moulds, or else cut components directly from blocks of metal and plastic. If the team needed a part to be redesigned between races it could be modelled, made, shipped and on the car within 72-hours. But the cost was truly incomprehensible – £25k for each UNIX workstation computer and about the same for the software. And that’s just one workstation – Williams had dozens.

For more mainstream products the costs could be scaled back a little, and you might not need a room full of designers if you were making a shower head. But you probably still wanted a prototype to see what it looks like in the flesh, and to gauge reactions from potential buyers. This is where Rapid Prototyping steps up. You could create your model, but instead of a tool-path, you generated the path that a laser might shine on a bath of light-cured epoxy resin. The model would gradually drop into the bath as the laser shone on the surface. After a clean-up and finishing you had a very good approximation of your finished item.

SolidWorks – 3D for the masses ?

The next step to democratisation was the development of solid modelling capability on a much cheaper computer. I was fortunate enough to be part of the team that launched SolidWorks onto the unsuspecting British design community. This delivered many of the same solid modelling features as SDRC but on a Microsoft Windows PC costing a fraction of the price of a UNIX workstation. And the software was cheaper too. True it didn’t have all the clever simulation capabilities for structural testing etc., but do you really need that if you’re making shower heads or vacuum cleaners?

So while SolidWorks started the revolution in terms of computing and software costs, it would still be several years before someone came up with a technology that could turn digital models into cheap physical models. But about ten years ago someone came-up with a way to make models by melting and depositing plastic filament, and someone named it 3D-Printing, and all that changed.

Replacement parts made by Enterprise XD Design – 3D design services

Rapid Prototyping becomes 3D-Printing

There are of course many variations on 3D-Printing, just as there were different processes to create ‘rapid prototypes’. But essentially, they all work by turning a digital model into multiple physical layers that are bonded together. People have created digitally controlled concrete pumps (that only seem to make round buildings, but I’m sure that will change), laser-sintered metal components, and of course the plastic models most people will have seen.

But while hobbyists and video bloggers may have made the most noise about 3D-Printing, a new bread of designers have started offering their services to the public in much the same way that graphic artists and copy shops cater for flat-surface printing needs.

I caught up with one – Trevor Day – to help me get up to speed with the latest thinking. Trevor offers design and build services from his business (Enterprise XD Design) in Essex, a few miles from Precision PR.

“In the last 10-years, 3D-Printing has moved from an arcane art form used purely by professional product designers into something that can be accessed by the general public,” says Trevor. “It has changed from a method of making prototype products and speeding up product testing into a whole range of applications. But while many people will have heard of 3D-Printing, very few understand it or what you can actually do with it.”

Things you can make

“People choose it [3D-Printing] to create limited production runs and one-off items to professional standards of fit and finish. I’ve been asked to recreate unobtainable spare parts, or to make models, souvenirs and gadgets,” says Trevor. “There are only four factors that limit what you can make using 3D-Printing techniques; size, strength, purpose and your imagination. And all four can have effective work-arounds, though some uses are just too difficult to make 3D-Printing a sensible approach.”

The size limitation is changing all the time. Typical low-end hobbyist printers (such as the Da Vinci Junior 3D Printer from Maplin) can print with a single ABS filament within a 15x15x15cm spaces and cost around £300. Trevor’s main printer has multiple filaments and can print up to 20cm wide using a variety of materials. “You need to print some items in sections. You then need a bit of extra thought put in to how to join them,” he says. “But you can also design bigger pieces and have them printed by a 3rd-party. There are several companies offering their services to print items up to 100x100x100cm (one cubic metre) from your design.”

Making it in Metal

Strength again requires a little thought. “3d-Printing builds in layers. Like the grain in a piece of wood, it will have different strength and stiffness along the layers or across the layers,” explains Trevor. “Depending on the purpose of the item this may or may not be a problem. But like working in wood, you can design to use it to your advantage or design around the problem. Sometimes you need to think about the printer path and the direction that the material is deposited. Sometimes it means adding reinforcement, sometimes it’s choice of material and sometimes it means adding a step to the process.”

Bugatti brake calliper created using a 3D-Printing technique

Selective laser sintering (SLS) is a 3D-Printing method that fuses metal powders together with a laser. Designers increasingly use it for complex automotive and engineering components. For example, Bugatti used the technique recently to make complex brake parts.

Trevor also uses 3D-Printing to make custom jewellery using a range of precious and semi-precious metals. “To do that, I print a wax model and then use a lost-wax mould to cast in the metal.”

That really leaves the last limitation as your imagination. Once you’re past that it’s down to how many finished items you need. But with the cost of materials and printers falling all the time, even the economics of using 3D-Printing to create large numbers of finished items is changing.

Things you can’t make

“Guns. It’s been done, but it’s understandably illegal and it’s dangerous,” explains Trevor. “There are designs for a 3D-Printed single-shot pistol on the internet. However the inherent weaknesses between layers makes them very unpredictable devices. Plastics are not good at containing sudden pressure changes. They are good for ancillary parts such as handles, but you need metal for pressure containers.”

Aerospace Stator Ring – made in one piece – 3T RPD Ltd

The limitations are ultimately the economics – the bigger the item the higher the printing costs, with a flat pretty linear progression for repeats (meaning printing more doesn’t significantly reduce the unit cost) – and human imagination (which might mean a law). Plus a bit of common sense.

“You can certainly overcome most strength problems and size problems,” says Trevor. “It just takes a bit of thought in the design and choice of materials. You might need to find a print agency capable of printing large sizes and using exotic materials. If you need a small number of repeats of your design – simple or complicated – you can do it in 3D-Printing.”

Industrial print consultancies such as 3T RPD Ltd can print large engineering components in metals or a range of plastics. Designers such as Trevor’s Enterprise XD Design can make parts, custom-designed items and even small castings.

So, what next?

That’s hard to say. I’ve been working in this field on and off for 20-years. In some ways it has changed hugely. But you can also view those changes as just an evolution of ideas and the economics of IT. Compared with 20-years ago, 3D-Printing has gained a wider choice of materials and a snazzy new name. In my view, the real change is that it is now a genuinely economic option for a huge range of applications. The only limitation I can see for 3D-Printing is human imagination.

Acknowledgements

I’d like to thank Trevor Day of Enterprise XD Design Limited for his comments and the pages of material I still have for future articles. The Stator Ring picture was taken from 3T RPD Ltd’s website where you can find some fantastic case studies and images of prototypes and finished items made in a variety of plastics and metals. I-DEAS software is now marketed by Siemens as part of their PLM range. SolidWorks is now owned and marketed by Dassault Systems. I could have also mentioned AutoCAD from AutoDESK. I believe that too now has some 3D modelling technology, but SolidWorks was by far the earliest on a Windows platform.

If you would like to discuss PR, marketing communications or case studies in the engineering or design industries, please call us as we’ll be delighted to help.

The post Once upon a time 3D-Printing was called Rapid Prototyping appeared first on .

Things I wish I could do in CAD

chris@precisionpr.co.uk — Mon, 09 Oct 2017 16:32:37 +0000

Computer Aided Geekiness

I’m no designer or engineer, but I absolutely love Computer Aided Design (CAD) software and all its derivatives and associated applications.

I love 3D-modelling, I love surface manufacturing. I love rendered visualisations. And I love all the things you can do with them.

I’m also pretty keen on Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) and Computer Aided Engineering (CAE). The things for which you can use these classes of applications seems to increase weekly. From machining parts for racing cars direct from the designer’s computer screen, to milling dental crowns and inlays developed from digital scans of the patient’s teeth.

How it all started

For me, CAD started during my first employment at Avon County Council Highways & Engineering department. One of my jobs there was as a computer operator, running the programmes that modelled the horizontal and vertical alignments of the Avon Ring Road (now often called the Bristol Ring Road). I turned these models into the huge A0 drawings used as the plans for the scheme. I also ran programmes to simulate traffic flows, and mystical ‘cost/benefit analysis’ models.

Even as someone relatively new to computing, it was obvious how much more productive were the design teams using the departmental computer system than those teams that weren’t. That got me excited. I could see that the scheme would take for years to design without the computer. Like so many other schemes in and around Bristol, it was riven by political NIMBYism that required multiple changes to the design. Without the ability to redesign sections quickly the Avon Ring Road would never have been completed – like the infamous Three Lamps Junction scheme.

English Electric Lightening

Formula One and Jet Fighters

The front line fighter defending Britain’s airspace during the 1960s was the English Electric Lightening – the only all British Mach 2 war plane. It was designed using slide rules to compute the Finite Element Analysis (FEA) modelling techniques used in its development And while its service life spanned thirty years, the design resources required were simply enormous.

Later designs have become ever more complex and expensive to develop. As a result, the lighting’s successors – The Panavia Tornado and the Eurofighter Typhoon – were so expensive to develop that the costs were spread across several European countries. Without CAD these projects would have been virtually impossible. The interchange of design data would have been too complicated.

Williams

Williams FW18 – Damon Hill

During the late 1990’s I was lucky enough to further expand on my CAD geekiness by becoming account director at Insight Marketing & Communications. One of my clients there was SDRC – at the time the technology and market leader in 3D Solid Modelling CAD/CAM/CAE.

One of SDRC’s clients was the grand prix racing team of Williams Formula One. Actually, most of the formula one teams of the time used SDRC software; but SDRC sponsored Williams. This also happened to be during William’s F1’s time as the number 1 team in F1. And that meant I got to take journalists to attend events and visit the factory.

One over-riding and abiding memory is touring the factory. A 5-axis milling machine was making parts for a front wing – straight from the model, immediately it was signed off. But then at the next workstation were two chaps who made exhaust pipes. They made them the old fashioned way; cutting sheets of metal, forming them into tubes, and bending the tubes to shape by hand and hammer. But they were still working to plans made on a computer terminal.

Shower head – exploded view – created in SolidWorks

CAD for the masses

I can’t recall what happened to the SDRC account while I was at Insight, but I do recall that we were hired to launch a new product called SolidWorks into the UK. Unlike the UNIX-based SDRC software, SolidWorks ran on a Windows-based PC. This made the hardware significantly less expensive. At the time, SolidWorks wouldn’t be your first choice to design a jet fighter or a grand prix racing car. However, it was brilliant for the more mundane industrial design that most companies do. And SolidWorks is still going strong, now owned by Dassault Systèmes. So ironically, it’s now part of a company best known for making jet fighters.

And the things I wish I could do are?

I would just love to have got that engineering qualification I planned at school. I would have been thrilled to have spent at least part of my working life designing things using CAD. Instead I went into ‘computing’ and I’ve spent my life watching CAD from the side line. Running models through the system, plotting drawings, and writing about the relative merits of solid modelling versus surface modelling.

I don’t regret my chosen career path as such, but I am a little jealous.

If you share my enthusiasm for CAD, digital modelling and visualisation technology – and especially if you would like help marketing such technology – please call us.

The post Things I wish I could do in CAD appeared first on .

It’s all in the name

chris@precisionpr.co.uk — Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:34:42 +0000

One day a couple of years ago, I looked up from my desk, glanced at a paper, and discovered that someone had invented 3D-Printing. Except they hadn’t.

Once I worked out what was being described I realised that I wrote about it 20-odd years ago (in a publication called Time Compression Technologies) while working with one of my CAD clients. So long ago that it’s no-longer in the magazine’s online archive.

So what’s the fuss over 3D-Printing all about given that it would appear people were using the technique decades ago? Why do I feel so annoyed by the current fashion to 3D-Print everything, and even more annoyed by the media’s fascination for 3D-Printing?

To my mind, it’s all in the name – and I’m jealous. Jealous that I didn’t think of that name at the time, because I’m sure it would have got masses of publicity for my client and made a personal fortune for me. But I didn’t, and instead focussed my efforts on writing complicated technical descriptions for niche publications read by the handful of engineers and industrial designers who ‘got it’. And because a few more of them eventually got it, we’re here today. Only it’s got a new name and EVERYONE gets it. Or do they?

3D-Printing is (in my opinion) wrongly used by the press more often than it used correctly. What is often meant by 3D-Printing is actually Additive Manufacturing or AM. This refers to manufacturing techniques where components are made by adding material rather than cutting or moulding material.

3D-Models

Dyson DC01 (source : www.dyson.co.uk)

‘Back in the day’, we called it ‘Rapid Prototyping’. 3D CAD products were just becoming mainstream (though they were still hugely expensive) and their ability to create new designs through computer models was opening new doors for engineers and industrial designers. Vehicle manufacturers were using them to create simulations of aerodynamic performance and even crash-testing designs before building a single car. Domestic appliance designers were using 3D CAD to create visually exciting products that also happened to be vastly more efficient. It was all going on.

SLS 63 AMG (C 197) 2009

Around that time, software developers created Computer Aided Manufacturing – the CAM part of CAD/CAM. Linking the two ideas meant that they could create instructions to drive computer controlled tools straight from the CAD model. The design was simply converted into the code needed to guide milling machines, lathes, etc. in order to create the moulds and other tools needed for production.

Rapid Prototyping

In the early 1980s some bright spark realised that they could use a CAD/CAM tool path to guide a laser. The laser could then be used to precisely cut materials, or to cure photo-hardening polymers. This could then be used to create prototype products quickly and much more cheaply than first creating the production tooling. Users (increasingly ‘consumers’) could react to the design before it was committed to manufacturing. The rapid prototype was born.

At the time this technology was still expensive. As well as the complex software and powerful workstations needed, you needed complex devices to manage unpleasant chemicals, and you needed skilled model-makers to assemble the parts and create a realistic finish. But it was still better than pulling a few out of a warehouse only to find the public prefers a different colour and wants it longer.

3D-Printing – so what is all the fuss about?

The buzz-phrase is ‘democratisation of technology’. Basically, as the idea has become more mainstream, people have found new ways of doing cheaper, better and simpler.

While writing about Rapid Prototyping in the late nineties, a parallel technology was also developing – Inkjet printing. This was originally designed for 2-D printing on paper and similar substrates. Combining this technology with materials that could be deposited to create a 3-D object has given rise to a whole group of relatively cheap ‘deposition’ devices for 3D-Printing and AM.

So let’s look as a few 3D-Printing technologies

Stereolithography

A prototype air vent made using stereolithography (source: www.wb-3d.com)

The Granddad of 3-D printing. Developed in the early 1980’s, lasers are used to create layer-upon-layer of the model from photo-hardened polymer resin. The laser shines on the surfaces and the printed item is lowered into the bath of polymer layer-by-layer as it cures. This technique was one of the first used by industrial designers to create ‘rapid prototypes’ of products (such as mobile ‘phones) for consumer testing.

Stereolithography – how it works (source: www.i.materialise.com)

The development of stereolithography led to the creation of the STL file format, widely used by multiple 3D-Printing technologies. It can create accurate models, but is a complex and expensive technique, and strength depends on the material used.

Metal sintering

This is really an AM technique uses a computer controlled laser to melt metal powder to form a design. It is also sometimes used with plastics. Early techhniques had names such as selective laser sintering, direct metal laser sintering, and selective laser melting, but they all work in much the same way.

Direct Metal Laser Sintering (source: www.plunkettassociates.co.uk)

Items made like this can be used in production or for prototyping, but like all 3D-Printing techniques, design and the material used have a big influence on strength and accuracy, and it is therefore not always a suitable technique for all production components. Additional design work and modified tool paths might also be required to achieve desired results.

For long production runs, other techniques might be quicker or cheaper, but metal sintering opens new opportunities for customised and short run components.

Fused deposition modelling

Fortus 400mc – professional FDM system – priced around $185,000

Fused deposition modelling (FDM) is the technique that most people think of when they use the phrase 3D-Prnting.

FDM most frequently refers to models made of small beads of thermoplastic resin that is deposited hot and sticks to previous layers as it cools. This is a highly scalable technique that can be used for everything from hobbyist and model making uses, to creating complex industrial components for test rigs or specialist equipment.

Fortus 400mc – professional FDM system – priced around $185,000

Again, strength depends of design and material. It often has a ‘grained’ strength like wood, which exhibits great tensile or compressive strength in one direction but might be weak in torsion, or deformable in another direction.

Finish

The resolution of the finished item depends on many factors, and use of 3D-Printing and AM techniques should always take this into account when considering any application. But let’s face it – this group of technologies are here to stay.

Industrial 3D-Printers costing six-figure sums are in common use, and hobbyist machines costing just a few hundred pounds are mainstream. There are other technologie0s, and all are becoming more refined and everyday.

I’m proud to have done my bit for stereo lithography, rapid prototyping and 3D-Printing. I just wish I’d thought of the name.

The post It’s all in the name appeared first on .