This application is a national phase filing under 35 USC §371 from POT Application serial number PCT/DE2011/000385 filed on Apr. 11, 2011, and claims priority therefrom. This application further claims priority from DE 10 2010 014 969.1 filed Apr. 14, 2010 on both incorporated herein by reference.
The invention relates to a device for manufacturing three-dimensional models as expressed in the generic concept of patent claim 1.
Methods for producing three-dimensional components by layerwise depositing of material have been known for some time.
For example, a method for producing three-dimensional objects from computer data is described in the European patent specification EP 0 431 924 B1. In this method, a particulate material is deposited in a thin layer onto a platform, and a liquid binder material is selectively printed on the particulate material, using a print head. The particle area onto which the binder is printed sticks together and solidifies under the influence of the binder and, if necessary, an additional hardener. The platform is then lowered by a distance of one layer thickness into a build cylinder and provided with a new layer of particulate material, which is also printed as described above. These steps are repeated until a certain, desired height of the object is achieved. A three-dimensional object is thereby produced from the printed and solidified areas.
After it is completed, this object produced from solidified particulate material is embedded in loose particulate material and is subsequently removed therefrom. This is done, for example, using an extractor. This leaves the desired objects, from which the remaining particulate material is removed, e.g. by brushing.
Other particulate material-supported rapid prototyping processes work in a similar manner, for example, selective laser sintering or electron beam sintering, in which a loose particulate material is also deposited in layers and selectively solidified with the aid of a controlled physical radiation source.
All these methods are referred to collectively below as “three-dimensional printing methods” or “3D printing methods”.
During the spreading process that generates a particulate material layer, there occur, for example, as is known from U.S. Pat. No. 6,375,874 B1, particulate material flows perpendicular to the spreading movement direction. This must be controlled.
This especially applies if a print head has to be moved close to the particulate material since a contact of the print head with the particulate material can influence the print head operation or even lead to its destruction. In U.S. Pat. No. 6,375,874 E1 a device is described that prevents such a particulate material flow by attaching a scraper laterally to the spreader device that closes the space between the spreader device and the top deck of the machine. However, the disadvantages to this type of design are parts moving in opposite directions to each other and the frictional connections, which tend to jam when particulate material is present. There is also wear due to the moving parts.
In the case of other variants, such as laser sintering of particulate material, spreader devices are used to which no special attention has been paid regarding the side area. An example is that which can be derived from the drawings and description in DE 10 2006 053 121, in which the edge area is implemented in a box-like manner and the “edge problems” are not taken into consideration. In the case of laser sintering, accumulations of particulate material at the edge are considered noncritical.
It must be ensured that in the motion range of the print head no particulate material accumulations occur with which the print head might come in contact. The device must work simply and reliably to this purpose and should therefore not have any active suction apparatuses or cleaning systems.
If the spreader device, such as described in e.g. EP1377389B1, exhibits a leveling element over the entire build area width, then it is not expected that particulate material accumulations occur in the build area.
At the spreading start point and at the end of the spreading path it is possible to implement recesses such as those described in DE10216013B4. These possess a volume for reception of particulate material located under the build area. The spreader device is to be controlled in such a manner that overflows, which are created during spreading, are securely transported into the containers.
During the work step of the spreader device, a certain quantity of particulate material will accumulate, which is immediately leveled. Due to vibration, particulate material leaks out from a gap that almost spans the entire width to be coated. Depending on the flow properties of the particulate material, a particulate material flow occurs perpendicular to the travel motion of the spreader device. If the particulate material flow reaches the end of the leveling blade, then little by little a “particulate material pile” results, which presents a risk of contact between the print head and the particulate material.
One option for solving this problem is to extend the width of the leveling blade beyond the area of the leak gap. In this manner, the development of “piling” is temporarily delayed. If the width is sufficient, then building can proceed contact-free—and therefore damage-free—until the end of the build job.
This option does not always exist since, depending on the flow properties of the particulate material, the machine dimensions may not be sufficient to provide adequate space for a suitable width extension of the leveling blade.
Another option exists ran that containers are used around the build area as shown in WO199534468A1.
However, containers along the sides of the build area are difficult to implement when using an interchangeable job-box system for the build space and the build platform.
For example, the job box could be inserted beneath the containers. This means an additional enlargement of the overall height of the device, which cannot be used during the build process.
It is also conceivable to design the container in a swivelable manner, thus enabling removal of the job-box frame.
A further variant would include additional containers mounted laterally on the job box for reception of particulate material overflow. However, this requires a larger build chamber.
In all cases, the embodiment requires an emptying stem after each build job. It is therefore appropriate and economical if the spreader device itself cleans way the laterally resulting overflow quantities into corresponding recesses.
For the purpose of more detailed explanation, the invention is described in further detail below on the basis of preferred embodiments with reference to the drawing.
In the drawing;
The object of the spreader device (1) to apply thin particulate material layers to the build area (2), which are then selectively bonded with the aid of a print head (15) in correspondence with the model data of the current cross-section (3) (
The rear end position corresponds to Position (11) (
If the build space of the machine is defined by a job box, then special considerations must be taken into account. If the overall height of the machine is to be kept small, then the job box can only be brought out of the machine parallel to the collecting recesses.
During the spreading process, there occur both the desired particulate material flows as well as the undesirable flows. For example, particulate material is pushed out lateral to the spreader device and perpendicular to the spreading direction (100), which (12) extends beyond the build area edge, A “hill” (14) grows after multiple spreading processes. The height of such is determined by the size of the particulate material roll and the dynamics of the forward motion of the spreader device (
If the “hill” (14) grows to a certain size, then the print head (15) may come in contact with particulate material during its movement and thereby be damaged (
According to the invention, this problem can be eliminated by a landing (16) in the build area's delimitation (116), which is parallel to the movement direction of the spreader device along the build area (2). Now the particulate material (4) does not rise over the level (17) during a spreading process (
This behavior corresponds to the fluid character of the moving particulate material. The liquid does not flow over the more elevated landing. If the spreader device amasses a “wave”, then the landing must be pulled up higher.
Since the landing (is situated over the particulate material layer leveled by the spreader device, the distance from the print head (15) to the landing edge is reduced. This increases the probability of a collision. Therefore the following embodiment of the above-described invention is especially preferred.
The landing (16) is implemented as a small serrated cavity (19). This can be designed at a low level since the greatest overflow quantities are transported by a slide (20) into the large-volume front and rear collecting recesses (
A likewise especially preferred embodiment of the invention uses brushes to evacuate the channel (19) instead of the slider (20). In comparison to a slider (20), this enables a higher tolerance of the system against geometric inaccuracies.
A container (19) preferably has opposing side was (32, 34), such as illustrated in
A favorable side effect of the invention is an exactly defined particulate material bed, which requires less cleaning effort and appears more attractive.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 2010 014 969 | Apr 2010 | DE | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/DE2011/000385 | 4/11/2011 | WO | 00 | 10/9/2012 |
| Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| WO2011/127900 | 10/20/2011 | WO | A |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2640629 | McDonald et al. | Jun 1953 | A |
| 2692142 | Hunter | Oct 1954 | A |
| 2857938 | Wahl | Oct 1958 | A |
| 3616969 | Koizumi | Nov 1971 | A |
| 3616972 | Christy | Nov 1971 | A |
| 3815527 | Dobbins | Jun 1974 | A |
| 3884401 | Winkler | May 1975 | A |
| 3913503 | Becker | Oct 1975 | A |
| 4239715 | Pratt | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4279949 | Esser | Jul 1981 | A |
| 4369025 | Von Der Weid | Jan 1983 | A |
| 4575330 | Hull | Mar 1986 | A |
| 4579252 | Wilson | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4630755 | Campbell | Dec 1986 | A |
| 4665492 | Masters | May 1987 | A |
| 4669634 | Leroux | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4752352 | Feygin | Jun 1988 | A |
| 4863538 | Deckard | Sep 1989 | A |
| 4889433 | Pratt | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4938816 | Beaman et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
| 4944817 | Bourell et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
| 5017753 | Deckard | May 1991 | A |
| 5053090 | Beaman et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5059266 | Yamane et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5076869 | Bourell et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5127037 | Bynum | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5132143 | Deckard | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5134569 | Masters | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5136515 | Helinski | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5140937 | Yamane et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5147587 | Marcus et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5149548 | Yamane et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5155324 | Deckard et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5156697 | Bourell et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5182170 | Marcus et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5204055 | Sachs et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
| 5216616 | Masters | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5248456 | Evans, Jr. et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5252264 | Forderhase et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
| 5269982 | Brotz | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5284695 | Barlow et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
| 5296062 | Bourell et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5316580 | Deckard | May 1994 | A |
| 5340656 | Sachs et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5342919 | Dickens, Jr. et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5352405 | Beaman et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5354414 | Feygin | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5382308 | Bourell et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5387380 | Cima et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
| 5431967 | Manthiram et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5433520 | Adams | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5482659 | Sauerhoefer | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5490962 | Cima et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5506607 | Sanders, Jr. et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5555176 | Menhennett et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5573055 | Melling et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5597589 | Deckard | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5599581 | Burton et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5601868 | Gerhardt | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5616294 | Deckard | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5639070 | Deckard | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5639402 | Barlow et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5647931 | Retallick et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5658412 | Retallick et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5730925 | Mattes et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5740051 | Sanders, Jr. et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5753274 | Wilkening et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5807437 | Sachs et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5837373 | Siak et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5851465 | Bredt | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5902441 | Bredt et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5902537 | Almquist et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5934343 | Gaylo et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5943235 | Earl et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 6007318 | Russell et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6036777 | Sachs | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6042774 | Wilkening et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6048188 | Hull et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6094994 | Satake et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6116517 | Heinzl et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6133353 | Bui et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6146567 | Sachs et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6147138 | Hochsmann et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6155331 | Langer et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6165406 | Jang et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6169605 | Penn et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6193922 | Ederer | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6217816 | Tang | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6259962 | Gothait | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6305769 | Thayer et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6316060 | Elvidge et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6322728 | Brodkin et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6355196 | Kotnis et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6375874 | Russell et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6395811 | Nguyen et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6401001 | Jang et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6403002 | Van Der Geest | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6405095 | Jang et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6416850 | Bredt et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6423255 | Hoechsmann et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6436334 | Hattori et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6467525 | Herreid et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
| 6476122 | Leyden | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6500378 | Smith | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6554600 | Hofmann et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6610429 | Bredt et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
| 6733528 | Abe et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
| 6764636 | Allanic et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6838035 | Ederer et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 7004222 | Ederer et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7049363 | Shen | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7137431 | Ederer et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7608672 | Hachikian | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7767130 | Elsner et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 20010050031 | Bredt et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020026982 | Bredt et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111707 | Li et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20030083771 | Schmidt | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20040012112 | Davidson et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040035542 | Ederer et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040038009 | Leyden et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040056378 | Bredt et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040094058 | Kasperchik et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040145088 | Patel et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040170765 | Ederer et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20050017394 | Hochsmann et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050093194 | Oriakhi et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050167872 | Tsubaki et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20060105102 | Hochsmann et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060175346 | Ederer et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20080001331 | Ederer | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080047628 | Davidson et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20090011066 | Davidson et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20100247742 | Shi et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 720255 | May 2000 | AU |
| 4440397 | Sep 1995 | DE |
| 19545167 | Jun 1997 | DE |
| 69634921 | Dec 2005 | DE |
| 0361847 | Apr 1990 | EP |
| 1415792 | May 2004 | EP |
| 1442870 | Aug 2004 | EP |
| 2790418 | Sep 2000 | FR |
| 2382798 | Jun 2003 | GB |
| 9518715 | Jul 1995 | WO |
| 9534468 | Dec 1995 | WO |
| WO 9534468 | Dec 1995 | WO |
| 9605038 | Feb 1996 | WO |
| 0021736 | Apr 2000 | WO |
| 0051809 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| 0134371 | May 2001 | WO |
| 02064353 | Aug 2002 | WO |
| 02064354 | Aug 2002 | WO |
| 03016030 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| 03016067 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| 2004010907 | Feb 2004 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| US 4,937,420, 06/26/1990, Deckard (withdrawn). |
| Cima et al., “Computer-derived Microstructures by 3D Printing: Bio- and Structural Materials,” SFF Symposium, Austin, TX, 1994. |
| Sachs et al., “Three-Dimensional Printing: Rapid Tooling and Prototypes Directly from a CAD Model”, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 131-136. |
| Sachs et al., “Three-Dimensional Printing: Rapid Tooling and Prototypes Directly from a CAD Model”, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 143 & 151, Jan. 1990. |
| Jacobs et al., 2005 SME Technical Paper, title “Are QuickCast Patterns Suitable for Limited Production?” |
| Feature Article—Rapid Tooling—Cast Resin and Sprayed Metal Tooling by Joel Segal, Apr. 2000. |
| Williams, “Feasibility Study of Investment Casting Pattern Design by Means of Three Dimensional Printing”, Department of Mechanical Engineering, pp. 2-15, Jun. 1987. |
| Gebhart, Rapid Prototyping, pp. 118-119, 1996. |
| Marcus et al., Solid Freeform Fabrication Proceedings, Nov. 1993. |
| Marcus, et al., Solid Freeform Frabrication Proceedings, Sep. 1995, p. 130-33. |
| Related U.S. Appl. No. 10/510,543, filed Apr. 8, 2003, publication No. 2006/0105102. |
| Related U.S. Appl. No. 10/473,301, filed Apr. 26, 2002, publication No. 2004/0170765. |
| Translation of Written Opinion, Application No. PCT/DE2011/000385, dated Apr. 14, 2010. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20130029001 A1 | Jan 2013 | US |