Additive Manufacturing 1 ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Additive Manufacturing for the Individual Consumer Brooke Dickie Glen Allen High School

Additive Manufacturing 2 Introduction Additive manufacturing, colloquially known as 3D printing, has become something of a craze in engineering. This technology has taken off in research uses, and recently it has expanded to use in the industrial realm. Now, much research and experimenting is being done to develop 3D printers and associative design programs for personal consumer usage. There are two types of 3D printing; additive and subtractive, though this research will primarily be focused on the former as it is more efficient and less wasteful, making it the better technology for widespread use. According to the American Society for Testing and Materials, additive manufacturing is a process by which digital 3D design data is used to build up a component in layers by depositing material (as cited in Additive manufacturing: For the technology-interested, n.d.). The process, called selective laser sintering, is as follows: a laser sintering device applies a thin layer of raw material in either particle or liquid form to the building platform, a laser beam fuses the powder according to a computer-generated design, which functions as a digital blueprint, then the platform is lowered and the process is repeated (Additive manufacturing: For the technology-interested, n.d.). While this process of additive manufacturing is well developed, is it feasible to have 3D printers for personal use? The following review will assess the progress and improvements in 3D printing and both the advantages and drawbacks to its widespread use. The Progression, Advantages, and Drawbacks of Additive Manufacturing Industry has recently turned to additive manufacturing as a more cost effective way to produce their manufactured goods. In a piece of journalism, Jennifer May (2013) reported on General Electrics massive initiative to produce thousands of fuel nozzles for an aircraft engine using additive manufacturing, rather than the traditional method of casting and wielding the metal. Additive manufacturing has seen a great amount of action among entrepreneurs and small

Additive Manufacturing 3 businesses, but GEs use is seen as a major milestone where the technology could have its most significant impact (May, 2013). GE has bought several companies which specialize in additive manufacturing and invested nearly $4 billion (Catts, 2013) into an initiative which incorporates this technology into their factory floor by using 3D printing to manufacture 75,000 of the nozzles in three years (May, 2013). This process uses less material than conventional techniques, creating a higher profit and lighter product. It is also more efficient because it is a faster process and the printers are able to run around the clock. Now that the cobalt-chromium alloy has proved to be a success, GE engineers are experimenting with a wider range of metal alloys as well (May, 2013). GEs nozzles are the first test of whether or not additive manufacturing is ready to revolutionize the manufacturing of complex products. However, the massive industrial printers which General Electric uses to produce thousands of metal nozzles are extremely different from the desktop printers engineers are striving to produce in an affordable and effective manner. In an article published in 2013, Oxford explains a new machine known as RepRap (which stands for self-replicating rapid prototype) invented by Quentin Harley, a South African engineer (Oxford, 2013). It is a low cost desktop printer, which Harley intends to sell in easy-to-construct kits (Oxford, 2013). Harleys RepRap design is a revamped version of the original model created in 2005 by Dr. Adrian Bower (Oxford, 2013). Harleys design is unique in that its print head is mounted on a jointed arm, which gives the model a wider range of motion and creates more accurate printing than past models. Harley believes that, with the advances made from his invention, 3D printing has finally moved into a stage where it can be genuinely useful (as cited in Oxford, 2013). Several organizations have been founded in order to encourage and facilitate the development of personal 3D printers. In the news article by Tryft (2012), he describes how the

Additive Manufacturing 4 United States federal government has recently set its sights on additive manufacturing by dedicating $70 million to the creation of the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Instituted (NAMII). According to Tryft, additive manufacturing is now seen as the key to the future of US economy (2012). NAMII is the first of 15 institutions and serves as a proof of concept pilot institute. It not only serves to unify industries, universities, and federal agencies around creating and implementing the best technology in the field, but it is also aimed at educating workers in advanced additive manufacturing skills (Tryft, 2012). The National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining is the government agency in charge of NAMII, supported by interest from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy (Tryft, 2012). However, these government agencies are more focused on the industrial value of additive manufacturing, rather than its use from a consumers standpoint. Chen (2012) reviews a smaller scale project known as Fab@School, which is more focused on 3D printing in the household. Hod Lipson of Cornell University partnered with Glenn L. Bull of the University of Virginia Bull to create the program Fab@School, which introduces 3D printing to secondary schools (Chen, 2012). The Fab@School project has also created the first homemade printer and is working to make this technology less expensive and more accessible. Their design of open-source printers gives people at home the ability to reproduce their designs and make their own 3D printer for only a few hundred dollars (Chen, 2012). However, the use of this process has been hindered by large corporations holding general, over-arching patents. The patents held by large businesses have the ability to squash out the sale of 3D printers from small businesses or personal inventors, making the variety and quality of 3D printers that are available to the public much lower. Mark Ganter of Washington expressed his uncertainty over the future of 3D printers when he stated that they're either going to get to the

Additive Manufacturing 5 ubiquity of Kinko's, or lots of people are going to have them in their house" (as cited in Chen, 2012). Finally, an article by Johnston (2011) gives a look at how 3D printing will change the economy in the future, while also explaining some of the major drawbacks to the comprehensive use of this technology. Improvements made to the accessibility of 3D printing include the design programs becoming more user-friendly; some versions are even available as apps for the iPad (Johnston, 2011). However, advances must be made in size, usable materials, and precision before additive manufacturing is ready to be relocated to the home. One major benefit of desktop manufacturing is that it is a design-driven process, which enables design freedom and customizable product, which can be used in both rapid prototyping and serial production (Additive manufacturing: For the technology-interested, n.d.). This freedom for an individual to make products one at a time and adapt them according to current interest allows for ondemand, one-at-a-time manufacturing (Johnston, 2011). However, this is solely beneficial for products with a high intrinsic value. One major drawback to a reliance on 3D printers as a staple of the economy and flow of goods is virtual pirating and digital counterfeiting. Because of how easily digital files can be copied, previously secure objects can quickly and easily be counterfeited when the files are stolen and printed (Johnston, 2011). The only way to counteract this piracy movement is to use certain laws and limitations to prevent illegal copying form flourishing and killing industries. However, these regulations may find legal and public opposition and could potentially harm the trade of digital products. Conclusion 3D printing has been brought into global manufacturing in a big, dramatic way, and in the span of the next 7 years, additive manufacturing is projected to grow into a $10.8 billion industry

Additive Manufacturing 6 (Hessman, 2014). Additive manufacturing has burst onto the scene of the industrial world, and engineers and researchers around the world are working to make this technology a commodity of everyday life. While vast improvements have been made to this technology that look promising to the future of personal printers, inhibitions such as large corporation patents and counterfeiting continue to interfere with additive manufacturing as a reliable foundation of international economy.

Additive Manufacturing 7 References Additive manufacturing: For the technology-interested. e-Manufacturing Solutions. Retrieved from http://www.eos.info/additive_manufacturing/for_technology_interested. Catts, T. (2013, November 27). GE Turns to 3D Printers for Plane Parts. BloomburgBusinessweek. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/201311-27/general-electric-turns-to-3d-printers-for-plane-parts. Chen, A. (2012, September 17). 3-D printers spread from engineering departments to designs across disciplines. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/3-D-Printers-Arent-Just-for/134440/. Hessman, T. (2014, January). Technology: Whats next for 3-D printing?. IndustryWeek. Johnston, P. (2011, October 11). 3-D printing: The future comes round again. The Seybold Report, 11(19), 5-9. LaMonica, M. (2013, April 23). Additive manufacturing. MIT Technology Review, 116(3), 59. Retrieved from http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/513716/additivemanufacturing/. Ofxord, A. (2013, June 18). Will this $100 RepRap be the device that takes 3D printing to the masses?. ZDNet. Retrieved from http://www.zdnet.com/will-this-100-reprap-be-thedevice-that-takes-3d-printing-to-the-masses-7000016742/. Tryft, A. (2012, November). 3D printing stars in manufacturing initiative. Design News, 67(11), 34.