The present invention relates generally to three-dimensional fabrication or what is generally known as additive manufacturing.
Nature constructs three-dimensional objects with ease and out of a seemingly unlimited variety of materials with limitless geometries and scales. From prehistoric times to the present people have come up with innumerable ways of constructing physical things. One of the most ubiquitous methods of making things created in the twentieth century is injection molding. Injection molding has a number of advantages. It is a mass production process and can produce parts cheaply and quickly. It can use a large number of thermoplastic materials and produce durable lightweight parts. It does have a number of problems and limitations. The tools for injection molding are expensive and take a long time to make, on the order of months. In addition often the molds do not work correctly when first used and have to be modified. The molds wear out and cause flash. The parts shrink and warp. After repeated use molds often break or wear out. Because of the limitation of injection molding there are many restrictions in the geometry of parts that can be produced. Undercuts and other kinds of geometries that cannot be removed from a press cannot be made. This leads to assembly of multiple parts. Objects with moving parts generally cannot be built. In addition it is very difficult to decorate parts when they are molded. The process is limited to the use of polymers and the use of high performance polymers like PEEK is very difficult and injection molding cannot produce true composite parts.
Present conventional additive manufacturing technologies (e.g., 3D printing) also have a number of problems. These include slow production times, poor material properties, and limited material selection. For all of these reasons there is a long felt need to improve the process by which three-dimensional objects are made.
Printing technologies on the other hand can produce books extremely quickly at low cost and have hundreds of years of improvement in their methods. In particular, lithography, flexography, gravure and waterless printing and silkscreen (among others) are mature fast technologies that can mass-produce products at great speeds and low costs. Books, magazines and newspapers are produced quickly and cheaply. The cost of making plates is very inexpensive and the process is quite quick. There is also well-developed technology related to folding and cutting.
Every page of a book is potentially different and the technology to produce such books is widely available. This can be true even when every sheet that comes off a printer from which the pages are made can be identical to one another.
Offset lithography is a particularly mature and suitable technology for mass production of paper items—maps, newspapers, packaging and books. As with all lithography from the past two hundred years, offset lithography relies on the immiscibility of oil and water. In modern offset lithography, a special polyester, mylar, metal, or paper printing plate is used. A photosensitive emulsion covers the surface of the plate. Ultraviolet light shines on the emulsion through a photographic negative, resulting in the emulsion having the “positive” image of the original source. This step can also be performed by direct laser imaging using a platesetter. A chemical process then typically removes non-image portions of the plate. The treated plate is now fixed to a roller on a printing press. Other rollers apply water, which cover the blank non-image portions. This image formed by the selectively deposited water is transferred to a blanket usually made of rubber. The blanket is now inked with an oil based ink, and the ink is deposited where there is no water. The ink is then transferred from the rubber blanket onto paper, usually through a process that sandwiches the paper between the rubber blanket roller and an impression cylinder, which creates counter-pressure. As a result, the printed sheet also has the “positive” of the original source image, just as the photoemulsion lithography plate did.
An additive manufacturing which takes advantage of the printing methods to solve many of the problems discussed above is described.
The approach is based on the CBAM process (“composite-based additive manufacturing”), except that it takes advantage of conventional printing technology. The CBAM process works by using, for example, an inkjet printer to print each page and uses digital methods to make each page different. This approach has the advantage that three-dimensional objects may be made individually, without expensive tooling costs and with very few geometric restrictions. Since every page is printed individually each page can be different and there is no need for any tooling. However by using conventional printing techniques this process can be made much faster since conventional printing methods can run many times faster than inkjet methods. This means that three dimensional parts can be made at greater speed and lower costs than conventional injection molding and eliminates expensive tooling costs and long tooling lead times and the problem that often occurs the first time a tool is used as it needs to be modified to work.
By using the invention, a given mass production process may be completed in hours rather than months, and the risks and problems of molds is also eliminated. There is substantial improvement in the number and type of geometries that can be produced, and the range of materials is enlarged as are the material properties.
In brief, offset conventional printing methods and others may be used to create sheets (multiple pages) often called signatures of printed substrate and bonding agents for respective layers of an object (the bonding agent can be a polymer powder)—the beginning step of a CBAM 3D printing operation. Essentially the inkjet step of the process is replaced with conventional printing and then powdering powder removal, stacking heating and fusing, and excess material removal are done as would have been done as described in the earlier patents (Application Nos. U.S. 61/528,537; PCT/US12/52946; U.S. Ser. No. 13/582,939; EP20120828967; U.S. 61/769,724; PCT/US14/18806; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,685; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,690; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,697; U.S. Ser. No. 14/703,372; U.S. 62/243,590). The resulting treated sheet is appropriately folded, and possibly cut with due regard for registration and alignment, using automated conventional folding processes. This puts the individual “pages” in order. The folded item can then be compressed and heated to permit fusing between layers, and then unwanted waste material can be removed as usual (e.g., by sandblasting).
Using a book example the process of this invention is described as follows.
Like a book each layer of the object corresponds to a page of the book and can be different so that when all the layers are stacked this will result in a three dimensional object. There are multiple pages per sheet in the printing process. This process can be practiced using flexography, lithography, gravure, waterless printing and other printing techniques, including silkscreen. The folded item is then subjected to further conventional treatment as described in earlier applications (Application Nos. U.S. 61/528,537; PCT/US12/52946; U.S. Ser. No. 13/582,939; EP20120828967; U.S. 61/769,724; PCT/US14/18806; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,685; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,690; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,697; U.S. Ser. No. 14/703,372; U.S. 62/243,590) to reveal the 3D object within it (e.g., sandblasting away the non-printed substrate matter).
To provide a concrete example to conceptualize how the process works as it relates to the printing of a book, to generate a pamphlet with 20 pages, only 10 pages are needed since each page is printed on both sides. But in reality only 5 sheets are needed because each sheet can be folded in half like a book so that after folding, there are actually 10 pages that need to be flipped in the pamphlet during reading or writing, with 20 pages needed to be read or written onto. Because the 5 sheets are folded, there will be some excess sheet that will need to be cut according to the sheet size, page size, and signature size.
The advantage of this process among the others described is that it is extremely fast. Printing presses can print large sheets at the rate of thousands of sheets per hour. Conventional tooling is replaced with plate making which is cheap and fast. This reduces the tooling costs by orders of magnitude. This can be accomplished in hours rather than months and the risks and problems of molds are also eliminated since there are no molds. There is substantial improvement in the geometries that can be produced. The range of materials and the material properties is enlarged. It is important that this process works just as well with high performance materials such as carbon fiber as it does with inexpensive material such as PET substrates. In addition, in the instances of polymer substrates, removal is a bulk process that can be accomplished using chemicals or sometimes water. For example, if the substrate is polyvinyl alcohol and the polymer is thermoplastic such as polylactic acid, which is renewable and biodegradable, the excess polyvinyl alcohol substrate can be removed by water (or other aqueous solution). Additionally since the process uses conventional printing technology the substrates can be printed so that decoration and photosculptures can be made as described in application nos. U.S. 61/773,810 and U.S. Ser. No. 14/199,603. In the lithographic example a lithographic press could be modified so that instead of transferring the water (or other aqueous solution) to a blanket and transferring the ink to the blanket and to the page, the aqueous solution could be transferred directly from the plate or the blanket to the substrate, since ink is not necessary in cases where the “printing” of aqueous solution is the central step for creating the layered slice.
Although there is time necessary for final processing including heating, abrasive blasting or chemical removal and these processes add to the time it takes to serially print a part (i.e. get the first part out), the production rate will be the speed of the printing step alone and that can be as fast or faster than injection molding. In other words, when many objects are being printed one after the other, the substrates for one object can be printed while the substrates for the object printed before it are being heated while the substrates for the object heated before it are being subjected to removal. Further, printing step can be performed simultaneously with or in line with the folding so that time to produce a part can be sped up further.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/256,413, filed Nov. 17, 2015. This application incorporates the following applications by reference (including their drawing figures): Application Nos. U.S. 61/528,537; PCT/US12/52946; U.S. Ser. No. 13/582,939; EP20120828967; U.S. 61/769,724; PCT/US14/18806; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,685; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,690; U.S. Ser. No. 14/835,697; U.S. Ser. No. 14/703,372; U.S. 62/243,590; U.S. 61/773,810; U.S. Ser. No. 14/199,603; U.S. 61/914,613; and U.S. Ser. No. 14/566,661. This is also a continuation of application Ser. No. 15/631,611 filed Jun. 23, 2017 which is hereby also incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1774078 | Belluche | Aug 1930 | A |
3431166 | Mizutani | Mar 1969 | A |
4312268 | King et al. | Jan 1982 | A |
4393389 | Rasekhi et al. | Jul 1983 | A |
4453694 | Andreasson | Jun 1984 | A |
4863538 | Deckard | Sep 1989 | A |
5176949 | Allagnat et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5204055 | Sachs et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5260009 | Penn | Nov 1993 | A |
5340656 | Sachs et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5364657 | Throne | Nov 1994 | A |
5369192 | Ko et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5514232 | Burns | May 1996 | A |
5637175 | Feygin et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5876550 | Feygin et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5988959 | Sugata | Nov 1999 | A |
6147138 | Hochsmann et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6161995 | Wakazono et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6471800 | Jang et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6551038 | Sugata et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6596224 | Sachs et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6632054 | Geiger et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6740185 | Baldwin | May 2004 | B2 |
6780368 | Liu et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
8377547 | Noguchi et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
20010011507 | Korem | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20020104935 | Schweizer | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20040070582 | Smith et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040112523 | Crom et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20050059757 | Bredt et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050170153 | Miller | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060061618 | Hernandez et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20070241482 | Giller et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080006958 | Davidson | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080260954 | Paton et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090255428 | Stiel | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090321979 | Hiraide | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100302326 | Morohoshi et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110045724 | Bahukudumbi | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110101564 | Keenihan et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110121491 | Costabeber | May 2011 | A1 |
20120059503 | Pax et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20130171431 | Swartz et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20140238173 | Swartz et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140257549 | Swartz et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150137423 | Ding | May 2015 | A1 |
20150158246 | Swartz et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150231825 | Swartz et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20160082657 | Swartz et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160082658 | Swartz et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160082695 | Swartz et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160339645 | Swartz et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101181776 | May 2008 | CN |
201329424 | Oct 2009 | CN |
104150915 | Nov 2014 | CN |
2776233 | Sep 2014 | EP |
2961585 | Jan 2016 | EP |
H11236541 | Aug 1999 | JP |
WO-2007114895 | Oct 2007 | WO |
WO-2013010108 | Jan 2013 | WO |
WO-2013033273 | Mar 2013 | WO |
WO 2014134224 | Sep 2014 | WO |
WO-2014134224 | Sep 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/566,661 (“Tow Stabilization Method and Apparatus”), dated Mar. 21, 2017. |
Applicant Initiated Interview Summary in U.S. Appl. No. 14/703,372 (“. . . Flattened Substrate Sheets”), dated Feb. 9, 2017. |
Invitation to Pay Additional Fees for International Application No. PCT/US17/17672 (“Method/Apparatus Automated Composite-Based Additive Manufacturing”), dated Apr. 17, 2017. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 13/582,939 (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), dated Apr. 27, 2017. |
Decision on Protest for PCT/US17/17672 (“Method and Apparatus for Automated Composite-Based Additive Manufacturing”), dated May 26, 2017. |
Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/190,912 (“Methods and Apparatus for Construction of Machine Tools”), dated Jun. 13, 2017. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/199,603 (“Methods and Apparatus for Photosculpture”), dated Apr. 12, 2016. |
Restriction Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 14/566,661 (“Tow Stabilization Method and Apparatus”), dated Dec. 9, 2016. |
Restriction Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 14/703,372 (“Methods and Apparatus for Three Dimensional Printed Composites Based on Flattened Substrate Sheets”), dated Jul. 25, 2016. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/703,372 (“Methods and Apparatus for Three Dimensional Printed Composites Based on Flattened Substrate Sheets”), dated Dec. 22, 2016. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US16/62319 (“Additive Manufacturing Method and Apparatus”), dated Jan. 23, 2017. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US16/62356 (“. . . Metal Matrix Composites . . . ”), dated Jan. 23, 2017. |
Extended European Search Report in EP20140757160 (“Method and Apparatus for Three-Dimensional Printed Composites”), dated Jul. 4, 2016. |
Restriction in U.S. Appl. No. 14/190,912 (“Methods and Apparatus for Construction of Machine Tools”), dated Dec. 1, 2015. |
Restriction in U.S. Appl. No. 14/190,912 (“Methods and Apparatus for Construction of Machine Tools”), dated Jun. 24, 2016. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/190,912 (“Methods and Apparatus for Construction of Machine Tools”), dated Oct. 3, 2016. |
International Search Report for PCT/US12/52946 (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), dated Jan. 10, 2013. |
J. Eltgen, A Short Review of Magnetography and Its Related Materials Problems, Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev., vol. 24, No. 2, 1985, pp. 196-201. |
Extended European Search Report, from EP Application No. 12828967 (EP20120828967) (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), Jun. 9, 2015. |
International Search Report for International Applicaton No. PCT/US14/18806 (“Methods and Apparatus for Three-Dimensional Printed Composites”), dated Aug. 5, 2014. |
Invitation to Pay Additional Fees for International Applicaton No. PCT/US14/18806 (“Methods and Apparatus for Three-Dimensional Printed Composites”), dated May 6, 2014. |
Decision on Protest for International Applicaton No. PCT/US14/18806 (“Methods and Apparatus for Three-Dimensional Printed Composites”), dated Jun. 19, 2014. |
Restriction Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 13/582,939 (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), dated Sep. 30, 2015. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 13/582,939 (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), dated Mar. 29, 2016. |
Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 13/582,939 (“Methods and Apparatus for 3D Fabrication”), dated Oct. 7, 2016. |
Non-Final Rejection in U.S. Appl. No. 14/835,690 (“Apparatus for Fabricating Three-Dimensional Printed Composites”), dated Nov. 15, 2016. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190202164 A1 | Jul 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62256413 | Nov 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15631611 | Jun 2017 | US |
Child | 16298630 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | PCT/US2016/062319 | Nov 2016 | US |
Child | 15631611 | US |