3D Printer Calibration Using Test-Page Sensor Fingerprints

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional additive manufacturing machines require time-consuming and operator-dependent recalibration due to machine degradation and environmental disturbances, leading to variations in laser power and sensor readings, which affect the quality of produced parts.

Innovation Solution

An automatic calibration system that generates a nominal machine-specific fingerprint by recording baseline sensor data and uses a test-page CAD file to compare with current sensor data, allowing for the estimation of operational drift and adjustment of calibration parameters to maintain product quality tolerances.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If conventional manual recalibration is performed, then machine calibration accuracy is improved, but recalibration time and operational downtime increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecalibration accuracyVSAvoidrecalibration time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs automatic self-calibration by comparing current sensor readings with stored baseline data from a test-page object, eliminating the need for manual operator intervention. The control system automatically detects drift and adjusts calibration parameters, allowing the machine to recalibrate itself during routine operations without requiring dedicated recalibration time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Baseline sensor data is collected and stored during an initial calibration phase when the machine is in nominal condition. This preliminary data serves as a reference for future automatic comparisons, enabling rapid recalibration by simply comparing current readings against the pre-stored baseline rather than performing full manual recalibration each time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Manufacturing precision

If frequent manual recalibration is performed to maintain quality tolerances, then product quality consistency is improved, but labor costs and operational complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduct quality consistencyVSAvoidrecalibration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously monitors sensor readings during production and automatically compares them against baseline data. When drift exceeds predetermined thresholds, the system generates alerts and can automatically adjust calibration parameters. This closed-loop feedback mechanism maintains product quality consistency by detecting and correcting calibration drift in real-time without requiring frequent manual recalibration cycles.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical recalibration process is replaced with an automated electronic system that uses sensor data comparison and control algorithm execution. The control system automatically processes sensor readings, compares them with baseline data, calculates calibration adjustments, and applies corrections without human intervention, significantly reducing labor costs and operational complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Manufacturing precision

If operator-dependent recalibration is used, then calibration can be performed, but operator variation and expertise requirements affect calibration quality

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecalibration qualityVSAvoidoperator dependency
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The calibration system operates autonomously by automatically collecting sensor data, comparing it with baseline values, detecting drift, and applying corrections without operator involvement. This eliminates operator dependency entirely, ensuring consistent calibration quality regardless of operator expertise or variation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The human operator's manual calibration actions are replaced with an automated control system that executes calibration algorithms based on sensor data analysis. This substitution eliminates variability introduced by different operators and ensures repeatable, consistent calibration results through standardized automated procedures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach reduces recalibration time and labor, eliminates the need for frequent manual recalibration, and ensures consistent product quality by automatically updating calibration files, thereby minimizing downtime and maintenance costs.

Implementation Method 1

an energy beam 136 generated by a source such as a laser 120

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectLaser: Laser

Implementation Method 2

melting the material together to create a solid structure

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMelting: Melting

Implementation Method 3

sintering or melting a powder material

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectSintering: Sintering

Implementation Method 4

readings provided by a sensor (a photodiode (PD) or an avalanche photodiode (APD))

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPhotoelectric Effect: Photoelectric Effect

Data Source

PatentEP3850447B1Additive manufacturing machine calibration based on a test-page based object
Publication Date: 2024.08.21 GENERAL ELECTRIC CO
  • EP3850447B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3850447B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3850447B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

A method of calibrating an additive manufacturing machine includes obtaining a model for the additive manufacturing machine, obtaining a baseline sensor data set for a particular additive manufacturing machine, creating a machine-specific nominal fingerprint for the particular additive manufacturing machine with controllable variation for one or more process inputs, producing on the particular additive manufacturing machine a test-page based object, obtaining a current sensor data set of the test-page based object on the particular additive manufacturing machine, estimating a scaling factor or a bias for each of the one or more process inputs from the current data set, and updating a calibration file for the particular additive machine if the estimated scaling error or bias are greater than a respective predetermined tolerance. A system for implementing the method and a non-transitory computer-readable medium are also disclosed.