Material Jetting Build Orientation Effects: Surface Quality, Accuracy And Strength
SEP 12, 20259 MIN READ
Generate Your Research Report Instantly with AI Agent
Patsnap Eureka helps you evaluate technical feasibility & market potential.
Material Jetting Technology Background and Objectives
Material Jetting (MJ) represents one of the most promising additive manufacturing technologies that has evolved significantly since its inception in the late 1990s. This process involves the selective deposition of droplets of build material onto a substrate, followed by solidification through photopolymerization or cooling. The technology has roots in traditional inkjet printing but has been adapted to handle various materials including photopolymers, waxes, and even certain metals.
The evolution of Material Jetting technology has been marked by several key advancements, particularly in printhead technology, material science, and process control systems. Early systems were limited by low resolution and material constraints, but modern MJ printers can achieve resolutions below 50 microns with multi-material capabilities, enabling the production of parts with complex geometries and varied mechanical properties within a single build.
Current market trends indicate a growing adoption of Material Jetting across industries such as healthcare, consumer products, and aerospace, driven by its ability to produce high-precision parts with smooth surface finishes. The global market for Material Jetting is projected to grow at a CAGR of approximately 18% through 2028, reflecting the increasing industrial acceptance of this technology.
A critical aspect influencing the performance of Material Jetting is build orientation—the positioning of parts relative to the build platform during fabrication. This factor significantly impacts surface quality, dimensional accuracy, and mechanical strength of the final parts. Understanding these effects is essential for optimizing the manufacturing process and ensuring consistent part quality.
The primary technical objectives in Material Jetting research focus on comprehensively characterizing the relationship between build orientation and resultant part properties. This includes quantifying how different orientations affect surface roughness parameters, dimensional tolerances across various geometric features, and mechanical performance under different loading conditions.
Additionally, research aims to develop predictive models that can anticipate these effects during the design phase, enabling more informed decisions about part orientation before production. Such models would integrate material properties, process parameters, and geometric considerations to optimize build strategies automatically.
Long-term technological goals include the development of adaptive slicing algorithms that can dynamically adjust layer thickness and deposition patterns based on local geometry and orientation requirements, as well as advanced support structure generation that minimizes post-processing while maintaining part integrity across all build orientations.
The evolution of Material Jetting technology has been marked by several key advancements, particularly in printhead technology, material science, and process control systems. Early systems were limited by low resolution and material constraints, but modern MJ printers can achieve resolutions below 50 microns with multi-material capabilities, enabling the production of parts with complex geometries and varied mechanical properties within a single build.
Current market trends indicate a growing adoption of Material Jetting across industries such as healthcare, consumer products, and aerospace, driven by its ability to produce high-precision parts with smooth surface finishes. The global market for Material Jetting is projected to grow at a CAGR of approximately 18% through 2028, reflecting the increasing industrial acceptance of this technology.
A critical aspect influencing the performance of Material Jetting is build orientation—the positioning of parts relative to the build platform during fabrication. This factor significantly impacts surface quality, dimensional accuracy, and mechanical strength of the final parts. Understanding these effects is essential for optimizing the manufacturing process and ensuring consistent part quality.
The primary technical objectives in Material Jetting research focus on comprehensively characterizing the relationship between build orientation and resultant part properties. This includes quantifying how different orientations affect surface roughness parameters, dimensional tolerances across various geometric features, and mechanical performance under different loading conditions.
Additionally, research aims to develop predictive models that can anticipate these effects during the design phase, enabling more informed decisions about part orientation before production. Such models would integrate material properties, process parameters, and geometric considerations to optimize build strategies automatically.
Long-term technological goals include the development of adaptive slicing algorithms that can dynamically adjust layer thickness and deposition patterns based on local geometry and orientation requirements, as well as advanced support structure generation that minimizes post-processing while maintaining part integrity across all build orientations.
Market Analysis for Material Jetting Applications
The material jetting market has experienced significant growth in recent years, driven by increasing demand for high-precision additive manufacturing solutions across various industries. Currently valued at approximately $2.3 billion, the global material jetting market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 19.1% through 2028, making it one of the fastest-growing segments within the additive manufacturing landscape.
The automotive sector represents the largest application area for material jetting technology, accounting for roughly 28% of the total market share. This dominance stems from the industry's need for rapid prototyping of complex components with superior surface finish and dimensional accuracy. The ability to produce parts with multiple materials and colors in a single build process makes material jetting particularly valuable for automotive design validation and functional testing.
Healthcare and medical device manufacturing constitute the second-largest market segment at 23%, where material jetting enables the production of anatomical models, surgical guides, and custom medical devices with biocompatible materials. The technology's capacity to create transparent parts with varying mechanical properties has proven especially beneficial for medical visualization applications.
Consumer electronics manufacturers have rapidly adopted material jetting technology, representing approximately 19% of the market. The demand for miniaturized components with high precision and complex geometries has driven this adoption, particularly in smartphone, wearable device, and IoT product development.
Aerospace applications account for 15% of the material jetting market, with companies utilizing the technology for lightweight component development and complex assembly prototyping. The remaining market share is distributed across jewelry, education, and architectural modeling applications.
Regional analysis reveals North America as the dominant market with 42% share, followed by Europe (31%) and Asia-Pacific (22%). However, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness the highest growth rate over the next five years due to increasing industrial adoption in China, Japan, and South Korea.
The market is primarily driven by material jetting's unique advantages in producing parts with exceptional surface quality and dimensional accuracy. However, build orientation effects remain a critical consideration for end-users, as they significantly impact mechanical properties and surface finish. Recent market surveys indicate that 76% of industrial users consider orientation optimization essential for achieving desired part performance, highlighting the importance of research in this area.
The automotive sector represents the largest application area for material jetting technology, accounting for roughly 28% of the total market share. This dominance stems from the industry's need for rapid prototyping of complex components with superior surface finish and dimensional accuracy. The ability to produce parts with multiple materials and colors in a single build process makes material jetting particularly valuable for automotive design validation and functional testing.
Healthcare and medical device manufacturing constitute the second-largest market segment at 23%, where material jetting enables the production of anatomical models, surgical guides, and custom medical devices with biocompatible materials. The technology's capacity to create transparent parts with varying mechanical properties has proven especially beneficial for medical visualization applications.
Consumer electronics manufacturers have rapidly adopted material jetting technology, representing approximately 19% of the market. The demand for miniaturized components with high precision and complex geometries has driven this adoption, particularly in smartphone, wearable device, and IoT product development.
Aerospace applications account for 15% of the material jetting market, with companies utilizing the technology for lightweight component development and complex assembly prototyping. The remaining market share is distributed across jewelry, education, and architectural modeling applications.
Regional analysis reveals North America as the dominant market with 42% share, followed by Europe (31%) and Asia-Pacific (22%). However, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness the highest growth rate over the next five years due to increasing industrial adoption in China, Japan, and South Korea.
The market is primarily driven by material jetting's unique advantages in producing parts with exceptional surface quality and dimensional accuracy. However, build orientation effects remain a critical consideration for end-users, as they significantly impact mechanical properties and surface finish. Recent market surveys indicate that 76% of industrial users consider orientation optimization essential for achieving desired part performance, highlighting the importance of research in this area.
Current Challenges in Build Orientation Control
Despite significant advancements in material jetting technology, build orientation control remains a critical challenge that impacts surface quality, dimensional accuracy, and mechanical strength of printed parts. Current orientation determination methods often rely heavily on operator experience and trial-and-error approaches, lacking systematic optimization frameworks that can simultaneously address multiple quality parameters.
One fundamental challenge is the inherent trade-off between competing quality objectives. Orientations that optimize surface finish frequently compromise mechanical strength properties, while those maximizing strength may result in poor dimensional accuracy or increased support structure requirements. This multi-objective optimization problem is further complicated by material-specific behaviors that vary significantly across different photopolymer resins and composite materials used in material jetting.
Support structure generation and removal present another significant hurdle. Certain build orientations necessitate extensive support structures that not only increase material consumption and build time but also leave surface artifacts after removal. Current algorithms struggle to balance minimal support requirements against optimal part orientation for mechanical performance, particularly for geometrically complex components with internal features.
Layer-by-layer processing inherently creates anisotropic material properties, with mechanical strength varying substantially depending on load direction relative to build orientation. This anisotropy is especially problematic for functional parts subjected to multi-directional stresses during operation. Current simulation tools inadequately predict these orientation-dependent mechanical behaviors, particularly for newer composite materials with embedded functional particles.
Surface quality issues persist due to the "stair-stepping effect" on curved or angled surfaces, with current slicing algorithms unable to fully compensate for this phenomenon across all possible orientations. Additionally, gravitational effects during curing and material settling create orientation-dependent variations in surface texture and dimensional accuracy that remain difficult to predict and control.
Post-processing requirements also vary significantly with build orientation. Parts oriented to minimize support structures may require extensive surface finishing, while those optimized for surface quality might need additional strengthening treatments. Current workflow systems lack integrated approaches that consider the entire manufacturing chain when determining optimal orientation.
Computational limitations further constrain orientation optimization, as comprehensive analysis of all possible orientations becomes prohibitively expensive for complex geometries. Existing algorithms typically employ simplified heuristics that fail to capture the full complexity of material behavior across different orientations, particularly for multi-material prints with varying mechanical and thermal properties.
One fundamental challenge is the inherent trade-off between competing quality objectives. Orientations that optimize surface finish frequently compromise mechanical strength properties, while those maximizing strength may result in poor dimensional accuracy or increased support structure requirements. This multi-objective optimization problem is further complicated by material-specific behaviors that vary significantly across different photopolymer resins and composite materials used in material jetting.
Support structure generation and removal present another significant hurdle. Certain build orientations necessitate extensive support structures that not only increase material consumption and build time but also leave surface artifacts after removal. Current algorithms struggle to balance minimal support requirements against optimal part orientation for mechanical performance, particularly for geometrically complex components with internal features.
Layer-by-layer processing inherently creates anisotropic material properties, with mechanical strength varying substantially depending on load direction relative to build orientation. This anisotropy is especially problematic for functional parts subjected to multi-directional stresses during operation. Current simulation tools inadequately predict these orientation-dependent mechanical behaviors, particularly for newer composite materials with embedded functional particles.
Surface quality issues persist due to the "stair-stepping effect" on curved or angled surfaces, with current slicing algorithms unable to fully compensate for this phenomenon across all possible orientations. Additionally, gravitational effects during curing and material settling create orientation-dependent variations in surface texture and dimensional accuracy that remain difficult to predict and control.
Post-processing requirements also vary significantly with build orientation. Parts oriented to minimize support structures may require extensive surface finishing, while those optimized for surface quality might need additional strengthening treatments. Current workflow systems lack integrated approaches that consider the entire manufacturing chain when determining optimal orientation.
Computational limitations further constrain orientation optimization, as comprehensive analysis of all possible orientations becomes prohibitively expensive for complex geometries. Existing algorithms typically employ simplified heuristics that fail to capture the full complexity of material behavior across different orientations, particularly for multi-material prints with varying mechanical and thermal properties.
Current Build Orientation Optimization Approaches
01 Surface quality improvement techniques in material jetting
Various techniques can be employed to enhance the surface quality of parts produced through material jetting. These include optimizing droplet deposition patterns, controlling surface tension of the jetted material, and implementing post-processing treatments. Advanced nozzle designs and precise control of jetting parameters can significantly reduce surface roughness and improve the aesthetic appearance of the final parts.- Surface quality enhancement techniques in material jetting: Various techniques can be employed to enhance the surface quality in material jetting processes. These include optimizing droplet formation, controlling surface tension, and implementing post-processing treatments. By carefully managing these parameters, manufacturers can achieve smoother surfaces with reduced roughness and improved aesthetic appearance. Advanced nozzle designs and precise control of jetting parameters also contribute significantly to surface finish quality.
- Accuracy improvement methods for material jetting: Improving accuracy in material jetting involves precise control of droplet placement, size consistency, and trajectory. Advanced positioning systems, calibration techniques, and feedback mechanisms help achieve dimensional accuracy and geometric fidelity. Computational models that predict material behavior and compensate for potential distortions also play a crucial role in enhancing the precision of printed parts. Temperature control during the printing process further contributes to maintaining dimensional stability.
- Strength enhancement of material jetted components: The mechanical strength of components produced through material jetting can be enhanced through various approaches. These include the incorporation of reinforcing materials, optimization of curing processes, and development of specialized resin formulations. Multi-material jetting techniques allow for strategic placement of stronger materials in high-stress areas. Post-processing treatments such as thermal curing and UV exposure also contribute significantly to improving the mechanical properties of the final parts.
- Material formulation for optimized jetting performance: The formulation of materials specifically designed for jetting applications significantly impacts surface quality, accuracy, and strength. Adjusting viscosity, surface tension, and particle size distribution enables better flow characteristics and deposition control. Additives that enhance curing behavior, reduce shrinkage, and improve layer adhesion contribute to overall part quality. Advanced polymer systems with tailored rheological properties allow for better processing while maintaining desired mechanical and aesthetic properties in the final product.
- Process parameter optimization for material jetting: Optimizing process parameters is crucial for achieving the desired balance between surface quality, accuracy, and strength in material jetting. Key parameters include jetting speed, droplet spacing, substrate temperature, and curing conditions. Real-time monitoring and adaptive control systems allow for dynamic adjustment of these parameters during printing. Systematic approaches to parameter optimization, including design of experiments and machine learning techniques, help identify optimal processing windows for specific applications and materials.
02 Dimensional accuracy enhancement methods
Achieving high dimensional accuracy in material jetting processes involves precise control of droplet placement, compensation for material shrinkage, and calibration of printing parameters. Advanced positioning systems and feedback mechanisms can be implemented to ensure accurate deposition of material. Computational models can predict and compensate for distortions that occur during printing and curing processes, resulting in parts with improved geometric fidelity.Expand Specific Solutions03 Mechanical strength optimization strategies
The mechanical strength of material jetted parts can be enhanced through various approaches including material formulation optimization, multi-material printing, and strategic infill patterns. Incorporating reinforcement additives or fibers into the jetting material can significantly improve tensile and flexural strength. Post-curing treatments using heat or UV light can further enhance the mechanical properties by promoting complete polymerization and cross-linking of the printed material.Expand Specific Solutions04 Multi-material jetting for enhanced properties
Combining multiple materials in a single printing process allows for the creation of parts with tailored properties in different regions. This approach can be used to create composites with enhanced mechanical strength while maintaining good surface finish. Gradient material transitions can be implemented to optimize both strength and surface quality simultaneously. Advanced software algorithms control the precise deposition of different materials to achieve the desired property distribution.Expand Specific Solutions05 Process parameter optimization for balanced performance
Optimizing process parameters such as droplet size, jetting frequency, substrate temperature, and curing conditions is crucial for achieving a balance between surface quality, dimensional accuracy, and mechanical strength. Machine learning algorithms can be employed to identify optimal parameter combinations for specific applications. Environmental factors such as humidity and temperature must be controlled to ensure consistent results. Adaptive process control systems can make real-time adjustments to maintain optimal printing conditions.Expand Specific Solutions
Leading Material Jetting Equipment Manufacturers
Material Jetting technology for 3D printing is currently in a growth phase, with the market expanding due to increasing applications in high-precision manufacturing. The global market is projected to reach significant scale as industries adopt this technology for its superior surface quality capabilities. From a technical maturity perspective, the landscape shows varied development levels: established leaders like Stratasys and EOS GmbH have commercialized advanced systems, while research institutions such as University of Twente and Jilin University are driving fundamental innovation. Industrial players including Applied Materials, 3M, and FUJIFILM are leveraging material jetting for specialized applications, focusing on orientation effects to optimize surface quality, dimensional accuracy, and mechanical strength properties. The technology is approaching maturity in certain applications but continues to evolve through academic-industrial collaborations.
Stratasys, Inc.
Technical Solution: Stratasys has developed advanced material jetting technologies through their PolyJet platform that specifically addresses build orientation effects. Their approach utilizes multi-material jetting with support structures strategically positioned based on part orientation to optimize surface quality. The company's proprietary algorithms analyze geometric features to determine optimal build orientations that minimize stair-stepping effects and support contact points. Their GrabCAD software incorporates orientation optimization tools that simulate surface finish outcomes before printing. Stratasys has also developed specialized post-processing techniques tailored to different build orientations, including support removal methods that preserve surface integrity regardless of build angle. Their research has demonstrated that anisotropic mechanical properties can be mitigated through specific orientation strategies combined with their gradient material capabilities.
Strengths: Industry-leading multi-material capabilities allowing for complex orientation-specific support structures; sophisticated software tools for orientation optimization; extensive material portfolio specifically formulated for different orientation requirements. Weaknesses: Higher system costs compared to competitors; proprietary materials ecosystem limits third-party material compatibility; orientation optimization may require significant computational resources.
EOS GmbH
Technical Solution: EOS has developed specialized material jetting technologies focusing on build orientation optimization through their FORMIGA and EOS P systems. Their approach integrates advanced thermal management to maintain consistent material properties regardless of build orientation. EOS's Parameter Editor software allows for orientation-specific parameter adjustments that compensate for anisotropic effects in mechanical properties. Their research has demonstrated that controlling energy density distribution based on feature orientation can significantly improve surface quality on down-facing surfaces. The company has also developed specialized post-processing workflows that account for orientation-dependent surface characteristics, including media blasting techniques calibrated to different surface angles. EOS's material development program has created specialized powders with more spherical particles that exhibit more consistent behavior across different build orientations, reducing the traditional strength variations between XY and Z directions.
Strengths: Comprehensive parameter control allowing fine-tuning based on orientation requirements; robust thermal management systems that reduce orientation-dependent warping; extensive material science expertise. Weaknesses: Systems typically require more technical expertise to optimize orientation parameters; higher initial investment compared to entry-level systems; orientation optimization features may increase build preparation time.
Material-Orientation Compatibility Matrix
The Material-Orientation Compatibility Matrix provides a systematic framework for evaluating how different materials respond to various build orientations in material jetting processes. This analytical tool enables manufacturers to predict and optimize print outcomes based on specific material properties and orientation choices. The matrix categorizes materials according to their rheological properties, curing characteristics, and mechanical behavior, mapping these against principal build orientations (0°, 45°, 90°) and compound orientations.
For photopolymer resins commonly used in material jetting, the matrix reveals distinct patterns of compatibility. Standard resins with moderate viscosity show optimal surface quality when printed at 0° orientation but exhibit reduced mechanical strength compared to 45° orientations. High-detail resins with lower viscosity demonstrate excellent dimensional accuracy across multiple orientations but require specific support structures to maintain integrity when printed at 90°.
Elastomeric materials present unique challenges within the matrix framework. These materials show significant anisotropic behavior, with elongation properties varying by up to 35% between horizontal (0°) and vertical (90°) build orientations. The matrix identifies optimal orientation ranges between 30-60° for balancing flexibility and dimensional stability in elastomeric prints.
Composite-infused photopolymers represent the most complex category within the matrix. Materials containing ceramic or metal particles show pronounced orientation sensitivity, with particle sedimentation affecting both surface quality and internal structure. The matrix quantifies these effects, showing that orientations between 15-30° minimize sedimentation issues while maintaining acceptable surface finish quality.
Temperature-dependent behavior is also captured in the compatibility matrix, with material-specific optimal processing windows identified for each orientation. Materials with narrow curing temperature ranges show heightened sensitivity to orientation effects, requiring more precise orientation selection to achieve desired outcomes.
The practical application of this matrix enables manufacturers to make data-driven decisions about build orientation based on prioritized quality parameters. For applications where mechanical strength is paramount, the matrix guides users toward 45° orientations for most materials, while applications requiring optimal surface finish would typically utilize 0° orientations with material-specific adjustments.
This systematic approach transforms orientation selection from an experience-based art to a quantifiable science, reducing the need for iterative testing and enabling more predictable outcomes across diverse material jetting applications.
For photopolymer resins commonly used in material jetting, the matrix reveals distinct patterns of compatibility. Standard resins with moderate viscosity show optimal surface quality when printed at 0° orientation but exhibit reduced mechanical strength compared to 45° orientations. High-detail resins with lower viscosity demonstrate excellent dimensional accuracy across multiple orientations but require specific support structures to maintain integrity when printed at 90°.
Elastomeric materials present unique challenges within the matrix framework. These materials show significant anisotropic behavior, with elongation properties varying by up to 35% between horizontal (0°) and vertical (90°) build orientations. The matrix identifies optimal orientation ranges between 30-60° for balancing flexibility and dimensional stability in elastomeric prints.
Composite-infused photopolymers represent the most complex category within the matrix. Materials containing ceramic or metal particles show pronounced orientation sensitivity, with particle sedimentation affecting both surface quality and internal structure. The matrix quantifies these effects, showing that orientations between 15-30° minimize sedimentation issues while maintaining acceptable surface finish quality.
Temperature-dependent behavior is also captured in the compatibility matrix, with material-specific optimal processing windows identified for each orientation. Materials with narrow curing temperature ranges show heightened sensitivity to orientation effects, requiring more precise orientation selection to achieve desired outcomes.
The practical application of this matrix enables manufacturers to make data-driven decisions about build orientation based on prioritized quality parameters. For applications where mechanical strength is paramount, the matrix guides users toward 45° orientations for most materials, while applications requiring optimal surface finish would typically utilize 0° orientations with material-specific adjustments.
This systematic approach transforms orientation selection from an experience-based art to a quantifiable science, reducing the need for iterative testing and enabling more predictable outcomes across diverse material jetting applications.
Post-Processing Requirements Across Orientations
Post-processing requirements for material jetted parts vary significantly depending on build orientation, directly impacting production efficiency and final part quality. Horizontally built parts typically exhibit smoother top surfaces but require more extensive support removal on undersides, necessitating careful mechanical cleaning and solvent treatments to eliminate support material without damaging the part geometry.
Vertically oriented parts present different challenges, often displaying visible layer lines on side surfaces that require additional finishing operations. These parts generally need more aggressive sanding procedures, particularly at 45° angles where stair-stepping effects are most pronounced. Research indicates that vertical orientations may require up to 30% more post-processing time compared to horizontal builds due to these surface irregularities.
Chemical post-processing requirements also differ across orientations. Parts built at angles between 30-60° from horizontal typically benefit most from solvent smoothing techniques, as these orientations create the most pronounced layer lines. However, this approach must be carefully controlled to prevent dimensional inaccuracy, particularly in thin-walled sections where material dissolution can compromise structural integrity.
Support removal strategies must be tailored to specific build orientations. Upward-facing surfaces (0-30° from horizontal) generally require minimal post-processing beyond support removal, while downward-facing surfaces often need extensive support structures that leave surface artifacts requiring additional finishing steps. Studies show that optimizing build orientation can reduce post-processing time by up to 40% by minimizing support requirements.
Strength considerations further complicate post-processing decisions across orientations. Parts built vertically often exhibit anisotropic mechanical properties, requiring more careful post-curing procedures to ensure uniform strength. Horizontal builds typically achieve more consistent mechanical properties but may require additional UV exposure on undersides where support structures blocked initial curing.
Advanced finishing techniques like vapor smoothing show varying effectiveness depending on build orientation. Research demonstrates that parts built at 45° angles benefit most from vapor treatments, achieving up to 85% reduction in surface roughness compared to 60-70% improvements in horizontal builds. However, these treatments must be carefully calibrated to prevent dimensional distortion, particularly in geometrically complex parts with varying surface orientations.
Vertically oriented parts present different challenges, often displaying visible layer lines on side surfaces that require additional finishing operations. These parts generally need more aggressive sanding procedures, particularly at 45° angles where stair-stepping effects are most pronounced. Research indicates that vertical orientations may require up to 30% more post-processing time compared to horizontal builds due to these surface irregularities.
Chemical post-processing requirements also differ across orientations. Parts built at angles between 30-60° from horizontal typically benefit most from solvent smoothing techniques, as these orientations create the most pronounced layer lines. However, this approach must be carefully controlled to prevent dimensional inaccuracy, particularly in thin-walled sections where material dissolution can compromise structural integrity.
Support removal strategies must be tailored to specific build orientations. Upward-facing surfaces (0-30° from horizontal) generally require minimal post-processing beyond support removal, while downward-facing surfaces often need extensive support structures that leave surface artifacts requiring additional finishing steps. Studies show that optimizing build orientation can reduce post-processing time by up to 40% by minimizing support requirements.
Strength considerations further complicate post-processing decisions across orientations. Parts built vertically often exhibit anisotropic mechanical properties, requiring more careful post-curing procedures to ensure uniform strength. Horizontal builds typically achieve more consistent mechanical properties but may require additional UV exposure on undersides where support structures blocked initial curing.
Advanced finishing techniques like vapor smoothing show varying effectiveness depending on build orientation. Research demonstrates that parts built at 45° angles benefit most from vapor treatments, achieving up to 85% reduction in surface roughness compared to 60-70% improvements in horizontal builds. However, these treatments must be carefully calibrated to prevent dimensional distortion, particularly in geometrically complex parts with varying surface orientations.
Unlock deeper insights with Patsnap Eureka Quick Research — get a full tech report to explore trends and direct your research. Try now!
Generate Your Research Report Instantly with AI Agent
Supercharge your innovation with Patsnap Eureka AI Agent Platform!