Additive Manufacturing Of Titanium Alloys – A Comprehensive Analysis

Traditional manufacturing procedure

Manufacturing industry is taken to be a boon to the growing industrial aspects in today’s world. For every manufacturing module, there stays a requirement for a prototype that produces a schematic design for the product within a third dimension. management, there are existence of three production categories one being the additive manufacturing or (3D printing) and other being the subtractive manufacturing (CNC machined) and moulded parts through injecting procedure. Favouring such aspects the following content would be dealing with the aspects of additive and that of subtractive manufacturing through their functionalities and their limitations. Also a recommendation would be taken into consideration with a final conclusion, ending the content.

The traditional manufacturing procedure comprising the concept of CNC machinery stands for Numerical controlling through Computer aspects. Being the successor of Numerical controlled machine, the CNC stands out to be efficient through having application of the minicomputers and that of micro ones to act in form of machinery controlling unit. As mentioned by Paris & Mandil (2017), the use of CNC is taken is taken into several industries featuring metal fabrication or that of wood workings. Advancements within the subtractive manufacturing industry now cater to CAD modelling through third dimension that efficiently reduces the coding aspects being a time killing work.

CAD is also having limitations beyond the subtractive manufacturing through provision of three dimensional printing or that of milling or even sometimes both. As stated by Newman et al. (2015), the module is also effective to produce more precise parts for concern that would be effective for detailed outlet of the prototype.

For subtractive manufacturing, the material processing capabilities are relative for it being removing the materials than that of adding it. Through such, aspects the milling undercuts procedure are in sometime difficult to process. Favouring such, it can be stated that the material processing capability stays a less behind eases. According to Manogharan, Wysk & Harrysson (2016), further the volume of to-be-produced outlet is a dependent factor for subtractive manufacturing. In case of plastic moulding, the time factors doesn’t effects much while it adheres in case of metal scraping or moulding through CNC.

The factors especially arise when there are any applications of metal printing within three dimensions. It stays as a minor problem as CNC machinery is affects the minor details of the prototype being manufactured. In words of Lu et al. (2015), it is inefficient to produce the desired cuts and square corners for the outlet or prototype being manufactured.

Manufacturing aspects

Variations within the subtractive manufacturing aspect are taken in form of removing the materials from that of bigger sources. The complexities are subjective of being putting the manufacturing aspect being limited to details that are created through use of singular tools, through usage of varied tooling methods, complex parts are created with more precision. In opinion of Kietzmann, Pitt & Berthon (2015), against the additive manufacturing procedure, subtractive manufacturing tends to provide variation through their materials such as the use of metals, woods or that of foam prototype.

It can be stated that the ease of using the subtractive manufacturing aspects are bit difficult as it the machinery depends on hardcore material usages such as wood or metal. Through carving techniques, precisions are sometimes hindered to obtain the actual prototype designed. As opined by Kalpakjian, Vijai Sekar & Schmid, (2014), also there are complexities of being limited for not producing any hollow prototype through use of singular device.

The prospects of additive manufacturing or that of three dimension manufacturing is having relevance to the procedure through which digital designs in third dimension are taken to be constructed through layering by deposition of subtle materials. As mentioned by Dutta & Froes (2016), within these sort of manufacturing the aspects of using unsubtle materials such as use of foam or wood or metal comes to an end. The primary materials to be used are taken into powder forms, generally being plastic or composite materials. It is mainly used for series production.

The prospects of additive manufacturing have been taken into usage in almost every manufacturing industry. For example, the aviation industry takes the use of additive manufacturing for producing aircraft machinery prototypes to be used for demonstration or that of sample usages. As stated by Chua & Leong (2014), the automobile industry also procures the usage to prototype the machinery parts to manage their automotive models for detailed evaluation.

As that of subtractive manufacturing, the similarity exists being both used for manufacturing prototypes through use of leveraged materials while the additive one being more widely used. For the manufacturing, materials such as nylon or metals or both are taken into consideration are fusee to produce the desired outcome. In words of Kim et al. (2017), with wider applications, the additive manufacturing subtends for the automobile industry to provide a better prototypes for being used for any purpose while that of using the plastic variants such as nylon or ABS in multinational corporations. The use of third dimension printers subtending the additive manufacturing procedure is taken to be way more capable of processing the materials to produce the desired product prototype. In opinion of Zhao et al. (2018), with dependence over the materials, other manufacturing aspects can be taken such as laser sintering or stereo lithography.   

Complexities and variations

The technological platform of both the additive and that of subtractive manufacturing differs through having varied aspects. Regarding such the technological aspects behind additive manufacturing summons the materials suitability sustaining those with lower melting points or example plastic while that of the subtractive manufacturing without any such boundations. As opined by Yoon et al. (2014), the technological background of additive manufacturing depends upon deposition modelling through fusion while that of subtractive one subtends to scraping of metals or wood to produce the prototype.

Furthermore there are available lesser or no losses of materials in case of additive manufacturing to that of subtractive manufacturing. As mentioned by Paris & Mandil (2017), technological advances in additive mode takes the help of the laser sintering along with melting of electron beams, while that of subtractive manufacturing, it caters to the use of EBM or that of DLMS.

The digitisation can be referred to that of the software used for the both the manufacturing modules namely the additive and that of subtractive. For additive manufacturing, there exists the use of software’s PTC Creo 3. The software is effective for undertaking designing aspects along with optimising along with preparation and validating the design regarding the printing of outlet in third dimension. As stated by Newman et al. (2015), apart from such, the use of CAD is also taken into consideration. Using CAD, the basic of drawing can be formed through specified dimensions and then converting it into a model of third dimension.

For subtractive manufacturing, th software advances to GibbsCAM that is effective for improving production along with its efficiency. According to Manogharan, Wysk & Harrysson (2016), through such, empowering of numerical controlling aspects can be taken into consideration through solid modelling along with multi axis milling.

Table 1: Metric of additive and subtractive manufacturing

(Source: Created by author)

The main limitation for the use of additive manufacturing procedures tends to its non suitability for larger products. In words of Lu et al. (2015), apart from such, there are also limitations for such being limited to only those materials that are with lower melting points such as wax or plastics. Any sort of high melting point materials are devoid. For the subtractive manufacturing, there are no present alternations of material’s volumetric density along with presence of wastage of materials. In opinion of Kietzmann, Pitt & Berthon (2015), furthermore the manufacturing aspects are having limitations within their capabilities through featured forms that is there are no generation of enclosed features.

Additive manufacturing procedure

For the additive manufacturing procedure, recommendations can be entailed for using high end software’s in order to speed up the procedure. Apart from that, as it is denied for procuring larger products, hence it can be recommended to alter the machinery designs in order to cater such. Also chemical advantages can be taken into consideration. As opined by Kalpakjian et al. (2014), through use of chemical applications, the melting point of other elements can be taken into consultation through which other subtle materials can also be taken for additive manufacturing.

As mentioned by Dutta & Froes (2016), for the subtractive manufacturing aspects, use of secondary technology is recommended. As the procedure planning is taken as a mandatory concept, and is alone considered to be a laborious task, the use of technology can be taken into prospects. Through technological calculations and formulations, the procedure planning can be procured through a matter of ease. The material wastage can be reduced through upgrading the system whenever there are available any. As stated by Chua & Leong (2014), through updating to newest versions, material wastages can also be averted. Also for such, use of elastic materials can be taken into experimentation.  

Conclusion

From the following content various conclusions are to be drawn out. Both the additive as well as subtractive manufacturing aspects are taken into consideration where it is seen that both of them are with different formulations within their working styles. The additive manufacturing procedure is en with use of 3 dimensional printing technological advances whereas the subtractive manufacturing is with scraping of the unsubtle materials such as wood or metallic interfaces. Apart from that, there are seen various metric variations, in case of additive and that of subtractive manufacturing aspects.

Apart from such, there are also technological advances within both the manufacturing modules. The uses of CAD along with EBMS or DLM are having their variegated applications for both the system. Moving further, there seen limitations for the use of both the systems. Additive manufacturing is taken to be limited to material melting point whereas subtractive one is commenced to have material density issues. For such instances both the systems are recommended to have their software alterations along with use of chemical applications for managing the composition of materials. Through such, other materials can also be catered for additive manufacturing.

Reference list

Chua, C. K., & Leong, K. F. (2014). 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing: Principles and Applications (with Companion Media Pack) of Rapid Prototyping Fourth Edition. World Scientific Publishing Company. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2wSi9av

Dutta, B., & Froes, F. H. (2016). Additive manufacturing of Titanium alloys: state of the art, challenges and opportunities. Butterworth-Heinemann. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2wHWim0

Kalpakjian, S., Vijai Sekar, K. S., & Schmid, S. R. (2014). Manufacturing engineering and technology. Pearson. Retrieved from: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2318298

Kietzmann, J., Pitt, L., & Berthon, P. (2015). Disruptions, decisions, and destinations: Enter the age of 3-D printing and additive manufacturing. Business Horizons, 58(2), 209-215. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/download/40666375/2015_3D_Printing_BH.pdf

Lu, B., Li, D., & Tian, X. (2015). Development trends in additive manufacturing and 3D printing. Civil Engineering, 1(1), 85-89. Retrieved from: https://engineering.ckcest.cn/eng/EN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=12604

Manogharan, G., Wysk, R. A., & Harrysson, O. L. (2016). Additive manufacturing–integrated hybrid manufacturing and subtractive processes: economic model and analysis. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 29(5), 473-488. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2wJgbJc

Newman, S. T., Zhu, Z., Dhokia, V., & Shokrani, A. (2015). Process planning for additive and subtractive manufacturing technologies. CIRP Annals, 64(1), 467-470. Retrieved from: https://opus.bath.ac.uk/44538/1/O20_Newman_Zhu_Dhokia_Shokrani_final.docx

Paris, H., & Mandil, G. (2017). Environmental impact assessment of an innovative strategy based on an additive and subtractive manufacturing combination. Journal of cleaner production, 164, 508-523. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2wJLYcX

Yoon, H. S., Lee, J. Y., Kim, H. S., Kim, M. S., Kim, E. S., Shin, Y. J., … & Ahn, S. H. (2014). A comparison of energy consumption in bulk forming, subtractive, and additive processes: Review and case study. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 1(3), 261-279. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40684-014-0033-0.pdf

Zhao, H., Zhang, H., Xin, S., Deng, Y., Tu, C., Wang, W., … & Chen, B. (2018). DSCarver: decompose-and-spiral-carve for subtractive manufacturing. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(4), 137. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b380/9cabe183c964a603ad05d7b606aae0e593db.pdf

Kim, D. Y., Kim, E. B., Kim, H. Y., Kim, J. H., & Kim, W. C. (2017). Evaluation of marginal and internal gap of three-unit metal framework according to subtractive manufacturing and additive manufacturing of CAD/CAM systems. The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 9(6), 463-469. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2NMet0k

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order