-
August 22, 2018
Additive manufacturing today is a complementary tool to traditional manufacturing methods. In the foundry industry, models, patterns and dies are printed to achieve low prices and fast turnaround times. In particular, FDM (fused plastic) technology has two clear advantages
3D printing began to resonate in 2005 with the start of the RepRap (Replicating Rapid Prototyper) project, which aimed to develop a low-cost 3D printer. A few years later, in 2009, the project received a strong boost with the release of the FDM technology patent. Prior to this Stratasys was already developing the technology and cornering the market with its high value machines and proprietary inputs. Today, with a marketplace fueled by open source technology, there is a supply of low-cost FDM 3D printers that use generic inputs and achieve similar results.
The price reduction of generic consumables has made 3D printing of bulky parts cost-efficient. Normally machines that work with more expensive proprietary consumables tend to offer small print volumes. At Trideo today, we have equipment that can print up to 1 cubic meter in one part.
The main distinction between equipment lies in dimensional accuracy. However, for casting models used to generate sand and clay molds, low-cost 3D printing is more than sufficient. We will expand on this in the next post.
Another important issue to consider is the inputs. Broadly speaking, the market is divided in two: 3D printers with proprietary or generic inputs. Proprietary inputs have their advantages for specific technical applications. However, to materialize casting models, the material needed is PLA or PETG, even taking into account dimensional accuracy.
Proprietary inputs can cost around U$ 500/kg while generic PLA or PETG costs around U$ 20/kg. Therefore, given the advancement of technology today there are more applications becoming cost efficient gaining cost and time reduction over traditional methods.
The choice of whether to incorporate the 3D printer in-house or to use the 3D printing service will depend on the company's strategy according to resources and needs. However, both options are cost-efficient for the generation of casting models compared to traditional manufacturing methods. Moreover, despite the slow materialization of 3D printing, turnaround times are shorter than the manual work of a model maker.
FDM technology consists of an overlapping of layers. The higher the resolution (lower the height of each layer) the less post-processing work for a complete smoothness, if necessary.
Having a 3D printer, to contemplate the costs of materialization of a piece, we consider the electrical cost 390 Watts (approx.), input cost and preparation time of an expert operator (15 minutes approx.).
-Prototyping to generate a virtuous circle of design iteration before sending to mass production.
Customized, low-cost jig-style tools to speed up operator production times.
-Low quantityfinal parts (10,100 or 1000) for parts that do not make sense to manufacture in large quantities.
