If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to get in touch 01452 386608
Additive
“The engineer’s first problem in any design situation is to discover what the problem really is.”
This pretty much sums up the challenge we face when we speak to a client for the first time on a new project!
We want to help get your part(s) made the best way we can. Thus knowledge of what you want from the part(s) is very useful and helps us select the most appropriate option.
Hence we thought it might be helpful to put together a checklist, which will help us give you a more accurate quote in as short a time frame as possible.
Tight production schedule? Imagine production quality parts delivered the next day!
The simple answer is, it is possible for parts to be shipped the same day we receive your data (depending on geometry and availability of course)!
One of the drawbacks of Additive Manufacturing (AM) or 3D Printing (3DP) is the quality of the surface finish. Building parts layer by layer will naturally result in visible layering or ‘stair stepping’ as it is often known. Let’s take a look at three options to improve the surface finish of your AM components.
When producing parts through additive manufacturing processes, it often becomes necessary to post-process and finish components in order to get the desired cosmetic finish required.
For those that do not recognise Polyjet, this is the process name behind the Objet line of printers. Today both processes are supplied by Stratasys and are not likely contenders to put against each other. That said there are some unexpected similarities!
Process choice, as is so often the case, hangs on your objectives.
Micro resin-based parts – we’ve got it covered! Ideal for those situations where high resolution is just not enough.
One of the questions we sometimes get asked is ‘How do polymers actually behave at high temperatures?’ or ‘What do the quoted thermal properties mean in reality?’
To answer these questions we thought we would describe what the tests are and how it is easiest to interpret them. Then we had a look at a practical example, testing the effects of temperature on the mechanical performance of a clear Stereolithography resin.
You have your new and improved design, but when you run it through simulation it is over-engineered, and a lot heavier than you'd like. So you just hollow it out...right?
The problem with this approach is a dramatic loss in mechanical strength. That key central material that made your part so effective at distributing load is no longer there, and subsequently you are in a bit of a bind.
The easiest solution would be to plough on with the inefficient design, but that would incur larger material costs, and more importantly would (to all intents and purposes) be giving up. You’re not ready to give up yet, so you are left with two choices: painstakingly create an internal structure by hand or use some form of magical software to generate this structure for you.
Recently there has been a large increase in the number of software packages available for such operations, due to the increasing ease with which such structures can be built care of additive manufacture.
"But which software should I use" you cry in confusion, "there are so many and they look terribly complicated?" Okay then…let's talk about lattice generation software.