Three-dimensional (3D) print technology is a type of additive manufacturing (AM) in which successive layers of a build material are deposited upon a target zone such as a build bed, generally with the aid of a computing device. Software executed by the computing device includes a precise specification of the part or parts to be printed during a given build.
Sometimes, a single part is to be printed. Often though, it makes sense to simultaneously build multiple parts in the build bed. Particularly where high yield is desired, it makes sense to fill the build bed with as many parts as possible. Parts packing is the practice of arranging parts to be 3D printed into a virtual “build volume” which is then sent to the 3D printer.
Certain examples are described in the following detailed description and in reference to the drawings, in which:
The same numbers are used throughout the disclosure and the figures to reference like components and features. Numbers in the 100 series refer to features originally found in
In accordance with the examples described herein, a parts packing method is used to optimize build bed part placement for additive manufacturing. The method includes a user interface to parts packing software, enabling a user such as a process engineer to select parts from a pool of parts, group parts to have uniform orientation, and specify a range of angles and rotation of the parts. Additionally, the user interface accepts input related to process variations among different printers as well as drift over time of a single printer. The user interface feeds the data into the parts packing program to optimize build bed part placement.
Using this knowledge 102, a user interface 112 is accessed, such as by the process engineer or other user, to supply the user knowledge 102 to parts packing software 114. Further, via the user interface 112, an image 128 of an original build volume 116 generated by the parts packing software 114 may be accessed and manipulated, using both a parts pool 124 and tools 126, resulting in the updated build volume 122. The updated build volume 122, which is a 3D image is received as input to one or more of the 3D printers 118 as instructions to generate the 3D parts.
As used herein, parts packing software comprises software that receives as input information about multiple parts to be additive manufactured together in the same build volume. Using the parts specification 120, the parts packing software generates a build volume 116 to be optimized via the user interface 112. The parts specification 120 may be supplied to the parts packing software 114 via the user interface.
In additive manufacturing such as 3D printing, one goal is to ensure that each voxel forming the part goes through similar thermal experiences. This may minimize functional irregularities such as built-in thermal stress, which may result in warpage of the part. Thus, if multiple parts making up a single build volume or “lot” experience similar thermal journeys, uniformity of each part is more likely.
In 3D printing, the voxel may experience several stages. Thus, in
Parts packing software is designed to optimize the build volume for a given build. To drive up yield, for example, the parts packing software may do a good job for some builds. The yield refers to acceptable end-parts that meet the quality standards specified by the user. For example, multiple copies of the same part may be 3D printed. Some parts packing software include genetic algorithms to optimize part placement in a build volume and may receive inputs such as packing density and z-height.
In examples, the parts packing method 100 enables like parts to be constrained to the same orientation as one way to ensure the parts have similar thermal experiences. Additive manufacturing may involve directional differences, for example, the x-directional impact being different from the y-directional impact.
Anisotropicity is the concept of a material having uneven physical properties along different axes or views. Wood is an example of an anisotropic material. Currently available parts packing software fails to consider the anisotropicity of thermal experiences of a part or parts during build, process variations among different printers, and the drift over time about the same printer. The parts packing method 100 exploits the knowledge base 102 of the process engineer or other user to optimize the build volume 122 used to produce the 3D parts.
Process variations 106 of the 3D printers 118 may be the source of anisotropicity of a 3D printed part. For example, interior and downward-facing surfaces of a 3D printed part may be smoother than exterior and upward-facing surfaces (known as a staircase effect). Where the parts specification 120 indicates a preference for surface smoothness (or which is agnostic to surface smoothness), the additional knowledge 102 of process variations 106, such as the smoothness of a 3D printed surface, are part of the knowledge 102 of the user accessing the user interface 112.
Because 3D printers may have sizable machine-to-machine variation, and because a printer's thermal behavior may drift over time, the method 100 facilitates user-interactive computer-aided design/analysis. Via the user interface, input parameters reflecting current state of the printer may be selected.
One way to ensure that each part of a multiple-part build volume experiences similar thermal behavior is to manage the placement and orientation of each part in the build volume. It may be, for example, that the parts specification for the multi-part build volume has a small tolerance for differences in the 3D manufactured parts. Thus, placement and orientation of each part may be an additional constraint fed into the parts packing software, in some examples.
Constraint 1. User-Guided Placement and Grouping of Particular Types of Parts
The build volume 500B, generated by the parts packing method 100 of
Constraint 2. Short-Run Production
For short-run production, multiple copies of the same design are printed, in some examples. Process engineering tolerance of part functional performance (e.g., geometrical accuracy) usually is within a tighter band. By orienting the like parts similarly in the build volume, possible non-uniformity of thermal experiences between the parts may be avoided, in some examples. Otherwise, the parts may result in different functional properties, e.g., different anistropicity, as like parts of different orientation may experience a different thermal history.
In examples, the parts packing method 100, via the user interface 112, enables an orientation to be specified for identical parts making up the build volume. One solution is to tag the part with an identifier (ID) such that, when an orientation for the part is selected, other identical parts in the build volume will likewise have the selected orientation.
Constraint 3. User-Specified Orientation for a Given Part
One idea of constraint 2, above, is that, for all copies of the same design, the parts are handled in the same way, e.g., in the same orientation. For constraint 3, by contrast, an individual design may have more complex customer specifications. There exist use cases that in which the process engineer or other user may want to specify the allowed orientation of a given part, such as a boat. As an example, the user may prefer that the boat be printed upside down to keep the deck as an interior surface, while the bottom of the boat is printed as an exterior surface, such that the exterior is smooth. Preferred (or accepted) orientations of the part, from the perspective of the process engineer or other user, may be a range of angles rather than one particular angle.
In
By recording information about how a part is to be fabricated onto the part itself (in this case, a symbol recording the orientation of the part placement), this allows reproduction of the part with the same quality at a later time.
Returning to
Via the user interface, constraints and printer characteristics to the parts packing software may be supplied (block 802). From this information, as well as the parts specification, the parts packing software generates the initial build volume of the parts to be printed (block 804). The image of the build volume is visible via the user interface. At this stage, if satisfied that the build volume is optimized (block 806), no further action is taken. Otherwise, the build volume may be manipulated via the user interface (block 808), such as selecting one or more parts of the build volume from the parts pool 124, and by using tools 126, such as assigning a part ID so like parts can be similarly manipulated, attaching an orientation to one or more parts, whether identical or not, and moving one or more like parts so that they may be stacked. The parts packing software then updates the build volume based on the input via the user interface (block 810). These processes may be repeated, as indicated, until the build volume is optimized.
The operations of
In the example user interface 112, user input such as build name 902 and build volume 906 are coupled to fillable text field boxes 904 and 908, respectively, for receipt of the build name and volume (e.g., how many parts are to be included in the build volume). Three constraint fields 910, 914, and 918 include respective pull-down menus 912, 916, and 920, as shown. The first constraint 910, for example, includes a stackability option. In other examples, the three constraints 910, 914, and 918 may instead be three different parts making up the build volume. In an example, the pull-down menus 912, 916, and 920 permit “other” to be selected and may further include a text box that enables the user to specify an unenumerated constraint or characteristic of the part.
The user interface 112 may also enable information about given printers to be specified. A printer 1 field 922 enables information about printer drift to be specified, for example. In the example of
A parts pool selection field 934 enables one or more parts 936 to be selected from the parts pool 124 (
Finally, in an example, the user interface 112 includes a retrieve build volume button 938. When selected, the information supplied via the user interface, is received by the parts packing software and either an initial or an updated build volume is generated. The build volume is visible on the user interface, and this enables placement of one or more parts in the build volume to be manipulated.
In an example, the user interface may be accessible via a mouse or by typing coordinates or other means, such that transition or rotation of a part in the build volume image is possible. In another example, the user interface allows translation and/or rotation of multiple parts such that these parts are placed relative to each other to achieve a minimal bounding volume. In this way, the buckets 502 of
Web designers of ordinary skill in the art recognize a number of different schemes for implementing a suitable user interface to be used with the method 100. For example, the pull-down menus may instead be presented as a navigation bar from which the selections may be made. Or, pull-down menus may be replaced with slider bars to indicate drift within a range. Or, the pull-down menus may be presented on different pages. Or, information may be obtained by way of query-response menus. In examples, the user interface of the parts packing method 100 is simple to use and enables valuable information to be provided to facilitate generation of the build volume by the parts packing software. Further, the user interface may enable the constraints to be ranked or weighted so as to indicate their relative priorities.
Thus, using the parts packing method 100, back-end parts packing software accepts the user-specified constraints, as well as ranking and/or weights that signify their priorities to the user, then automatically generate pareto-optimal packing solution. Multiple packing solutions that optimize different aspects of the user's objectives, and/or trade-off different aspects of the user's constraints, may be presented to the user along with analyses values to allow a final selection of the build volume to be made.
The non-transitory, machine readable medium 1000 may include code to direct the processor 1002 to implement operations for performing the parts packing method of parts to be 3D printed. User knowledge processing 1006, for example, receives input about part characteristics such as anisotropicity, printer process variations, and printer drift, and supplies that information to the parts packing software to update the build volume, as described above. Part orientation control 1008 enables an orientation of a single part or multiple like parts to be specified, as described above, such that the part packing software is able to interpret the specification. Part stackability 1010 enables the one or more parts from the build volume to be selected and reoriented such that they are optimally stacked by the parts packing software, thus potentially increasing available space of the build volume and thus yield of the parts to be 3D printed. Device ID for identical control of like parts 1012 enables orientation of one part of a grouping of parts to be made, and have that orientation reflected by other parts of the group by the parts packing software.
While the present techniques may be susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, the techniques discussed above have been shown by way of example. It is to be understood that the technique is not intended to be limited to the particular examples disclosed herein. Indeed, the present techniques include all alternatives, modifications, and equivalents falling within the scope of the following claims.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2018/029921 | 4/27/2018 | WO |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2019/209333 | 10/31/2019 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
9636872 | Batchelder | May 2017 | B2 |
10696038 | Thomas-Lepore | Jun 2020 | B2 |
20150154321 | Schmidt et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150251356 | Batchelder | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160236407 | Armani et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160236414 | Reese | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160280403 | Colson et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160370791 | Revanur | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170173888 | Thomas-Lepore | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170173889 | Thomas-Lepore | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170225402 | Batchelder | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170232515 | DeMuth | Aug 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO-2017075258 | May 2017 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20210039320 A1 | Feb 2021 | US |