0
Technical Briefs

Direct Three-Dimensional Layer Metal Deposition

[+] Author and Article Information
Jianzhong Ruan, Lie Tang, Frank W. Liou, Robert G. Landers

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 132(6), 064502 (Nov 01, 2010) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002624 History: Received August 20, 2009; Revised September 22, 2010; Published November 01, 2010; Online November 01, 2010

Multi-axis slicing for solid freeform fabrication manufacturing processes can yield nonuniform thickness layers or three-dimensional (3D) layers. The traditional parallel layer construction approach to building such layers leads to the so-called staircase effect, which requires machining or other postprocessing to form the desired shape. This paper presents a direct 3D layer deposition approach that uses an empirical model to predict the layer thickness. The toolpath between layers is not parallel; instead, it follows the final shape of the designed geometry and the distance between the toolpath in the adjacent layers varies at different locations. Directly depositing 3D layers not only eliminates the staircase effect but also improves manufacturing efficiency by shortening the deposition and machining times. Simulation and experimental studies are conducted that demonstrate these advantages. Thus, the 3D deposition method is a beneficial addition to the traditional parallel deposition method.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Slicing example using traditional and 3D layer approaches

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Designed profile, toolpath, and laser scanning speed for a freeform shape: (a) designed profile, (b) toolpath for direct 3D layer deposition, and (c) defined scanning speed for fourth track

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Height of designed profile and deposition results using both approaches

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Height difference between measured and target values for both deposition approaches

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Segment of a freeform curve toolpath

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Deposition time used by two deposition approaches for different cases

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Double sine curve part deposited using both approaches

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Laser spot on curved surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Toolpath generation for 3D layer deposition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Thin-wall structure example

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Experiment result relating track height to scanning speed given a laser power of 850 W and a powder flow rate of 12 g/min

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Staircase effect of parallel layer deposition

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In