A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON PRECISION METROLOGY SYSTEMS FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING

Öz

This paper presents a comparative study on precision metrology systems such as Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM), 3-Dimensional Scanning (3DS) and Computed Tomography (CT) for polymer additive manufacturing. A special test sample was designed and manufactured by Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) AM systems. The manufactured parts were then measured by three different precision metrology systems and the results were compared in terms of different measurement and AM methods. Uncertainty analyses were conducted based on the results of CMM measurements. The benchmark highlighted the difference between part characteristics manufactured by FDM and SLS, where FDM part represented higher surface roughness and more deviation to the nominal design. Furthermore, expanded uncertainties computed for the FDM manufactured part were almost three times of the uncertainties computed for the SLS manufactured part. It was also demonstrated that one of the major contributors to the expanded uncertainty occurred because of rougher surface of FDM manufactured part. Similar tendency of part to nominal deviations were observable in all metrology systems including CMM, CT and 3DS. Findings of the study revealed the need of standardized measurement for inspection and control of AM parts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• 3-Dimensional Scanning (3DS)
• Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM)
• Computed Tomography (CT)
• Additive Manufacturing (AM)
• Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM)
• Selective Laser Sintering (SLS).

Teşekkür

CMM and CT measurements were carried out at the Laboratory of Industrial Metrology and Adaptronic Systems, TU Wien (Vienna University of Technology), Austria. 3DS measurements were taken at Mayis Tasarim-Turkey. The authors would like to thank for all the supports.

Kaynakça

1. 1. Razavi, S. M. J., Bordonaro, G. G., Ferro, P., Torgersen, J., Berto, F., “Porosity effect on tensile behavior of Ti-6Al-4V specimens produced by laser engineered net shaping technology”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol. 235, Issue 10, Pages 1930-1937, 2018. 2. ISO/ASTM52900-15., “Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing – General Principles – Terminology”, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015.
2. 3. Gibson, I., Rosen, D. W., Stucker, B., Khorasani, M., Rosen, D., Stucker, B., Khorasani, M., “Additive manufacturing technologies”, Springer, Vol. 17. Cham, Switzerland, 2021.
3. 4. Wang, X., Jiang, M., Zhou, Z., Gou, J., Hui, D., “3D printing of polymer matrix composites: A review and prospective”, Composites Part B: Engineering, Vol. 110, Pages 442-458, 2017.
4. 5. Singh, R., Garg, H. K., “Fused deposition modeling–a state of art review and future applications”, Reference Module in Materials Science and Materials Engineering, Pages 1-20, 2016.
5. 6. Sagbas, B., Boyacı, T. H., Durakbasa, N. M., “Precision metrology for additive manufacturing”, In The International Symposium for Production Research, Springer, Cham, Pages 324-332, 2019.
6. 7. Poyraz, Ö., Solakoğlu, E. U., Ören, S., Tüzemen, C., Akbulut, G., “Surface texture and form characterization for powder bed additive manufacturing”, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, Vol. 34, Issue 3, Pages 1653-1664, 2019.
7. 8. Leach, R. K., Bourell, D., Carmignato, S., Donmez, A., Senin, N., Dewulf, W., “Geometrical metrology for metal additive manufacturing”, CIRP annals, Vol. 68, Issue 2, Pages 677-700, 2019.
8. 9. Minetola, P., Iuliano, L., Marchiandi, G., “Benchmarking of FDM machines through part quality using IT grades”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 41, Pages 1027-1032, 2019.

9. 10. Gillaugh, D., Copenhaver, W. W., Janczewski, T., Holycross, C., Sanders, D., Nessler, C., “Aeromechanical Evaluation of an FDM Printed Thermoplastic StreamVane (TM)”, In 53rd AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Pages 4600, 2017.
10. 11. Wang, Z., Liu, R., Sparks, T., Liu, H., Liou, F., “Stereo vision-based hybrid manufacturing process for precision metal parts”, Precision Engineering, Vol. 42, Pages 1-5, 2015.
11. 12. Stavroulakis, P. I., Leach, R. K., “Invited review article: review of post-process optical form metrology for industrial-grade metal additive manufactured parts”, Review of Scientific instruments, Vol. 87, Issue 4, 041101, 2016.
12. 13. Thompson, A., Körner, L., Senin, N., Lawes, S., Maskery, I., Leach, R. K., “Measurement of internal surfaces of additively manufactured parts by X-ray computed tomography”, Conf. Industrial Computed Tomography, Leuven, Belgium, 2017.
13. 14. Sagbas, B., Durakbasa, M. N., “Industrial computed tomography for nondestructive inspection of additive manufactured parts”, In Proceedings of the International Symposium for Production Research 2019, Pages 481-490, Springer, Cham, 2019.
14. 15. Du Plessis, A., “X‐ray tomography for the advancement of laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing”, Journal of Microscopy, Vol. 285, Issue 3, Pages 121-130, 2022.
15. 16. Shah, P., Racasan, R., Bills, P., “Comparison of different additive manufacturing methods using computed tomography”, Case studies in nondestructive testing and evaluation, Vol. 6, Pages 69-78, 2016.
16. 17. Villarraga-Gómez, H., Lee, C., Smith, S. T., “Dimensional metrology with X-ray CT: A comparison with CMM measurements on internal features and compliant structures”, Precision Engineering, Vol. 51, Pages 291-307, 2018
17. 18. Thompson, M. K., Moroni, G., Vaneker, T., Fadel, G., Campbell, R. I., Gibson, I., Martina, F., “Design for Additive Manufacturing: Trends, opportunities, considerations, and constraints”, CIRP annals, Vol. 65, Issue 2, 737-760, 2016
18. 19. Rebaioli, L., Fassi, I., “A review on benchmark artifacts for evaluating the geometrical performance of additive manufacturing processes”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 93, Issue 5, Pages 2571-2598, 2017.
19. 20. Carmignato, S., De Chiffre, L., Bosse, H., Leach, R. K., Balsamo, A., Estler, W. T., “Dimensional artefacts to achieve metrological traceability in advanced manufacturing”, CIRP annals, Vol. 69, Issue 2, Pages 693-716, 2020.
20. 21. ISO 10360-2, “Acceptance and Reverification Tests for Coordinate Measuring Machines (CMM)—Part 2: CMMs Used for Measuring Linear Dimensions”, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009.
21. 22. ISO/IEC Guide 98-3, “Uncertainty of measurement — Part 3: guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
22. 23. Santos, V. M. R., Thompson, A., Sims-Waterhouse, D., Maskery, I., Woolliams, P., Leach, R., “Design and characterization of an additive manufacturing benchmarking artefact following a design-for-metrology approach”, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 32, Pages 100964, 2020.
23. 24. Zanini, F., Sorgato, M., Savio, E., Carmignato, S., “Uncertainty of CT dimensional measurements performed on metal additively manufactured lattice structures”, In 10th Conference on Industrial Computed Tomography, Wels, Austria, 2020.
24. 25. Minetola, P., Calignano, F., Galati, M., “Comparing geometric tolerance capabilities of additive manufacturing systems for polymers”, Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 32, Pages 101103, 2020.
25. 26. Drbul, M., Czán, A., Šajgalík, M., Piešová, M., Stępień, K., Influence of normal vectors on the accuracy of product's geometrical specification. Procedia engineering, Vol. 192, Pages 119-123, 2017.