3D Printing Head and Energy Emitter Distance Adjustment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing three-dimensional object printing methods face challenges in ensuring proper curing of ink on complex surfaces due to limitations in the distance and angle of energy emission, leading to incomplete curing and reduced image quality.

Innovation Solution

A method utilizing a head with a nozzle for ejecting liquid and an energy emitter for curing, where the head and energy emitter move in conjunction with a robot mechanism to perform distinct operations: ink ejection and energy emission with varying distances and angles, ensuring comprehensive curing.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If the energy emitter maintains a fixed distance and angle during printing, then the device structure is simple, but the curing is incomplete on complex surfaces

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecuring completenessVSAvoidmoving mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies the dynamics principle by making the energy emitter's position and angle variable during the printing process. The moving mechanism dynamically adjusts the distance and angle of the energy emitter relative to the workpiece surface, allowing the system to adapt to complex geometries and ensure complete curing across varying surface conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the printing process into multiple operations (first operation with liquid ejection and energy emission, second operation with only energy emission). This segmentation allows independent optimization of each operation's parameters, including the energy emitter's position and angle, to achieve complete curing while managing system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Adaptability or versatility

If the head and energy emitter move independently, then the positioning flexibility is high, but the coordination control becomes complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepositioning flexibilityVSAvoidcoordination control complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges the movement control of the head and energy emitter by coupling them on the same robot arm. This integration ensures that both components move together in a coordinated manner, maintaining their relative positions while adapting to complex workpiece geometries, thus achieving positioning flexibility without excessive coordination complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The robot arm serves multiple functions: it positions the head for liquid ejection, positions the energy emitter for curing, and coordinates their movements. This multi-functionality reduces the need for separate control systems for each component, simplifying the overall coordination control while maintaining high positioning flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Manufacturing precision

If the irradiation distance is kept constant, then the energy emission is stable, but the curing quality on varying surfaces deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecuring qualityVSAvoidoperation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by dynamically adjusting the irradiation distance of the energy emitter based on the workpiece surface geometry. The system modifies the distance parameter during the second operation to maintain optimal curing conditions on varying surfaces, thereby improving curing quality while managing operational complexity through automated control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Productivity

If liquid ejection and energy emission are performed simultaneously at the same position, then the printing efficiency is high, but the curing completeness on complex surfaces is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprinting efficiencyVSAvoidcuring completeness
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the printing process into two distinct operations: the first operation performs liquid ejection and energy emission concurrently at the same position for high efficiency, while the second operation performs only energy emission with adjusted positioning for complete curing. This segmentation allows the system to achieve both printing efficiency and curing completeness by optimizing each operation's parameters independently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

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 ensures thorough curing of ink on complex surfaces, enhancing image quality and preventing ink residue by adjusting irradiation distances and angles during the printing process.

Implementation Method 1

an energy emitter having an emission face from which energy for curing or solidifying the liquid ejected from the head is emitted

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCuring: Photopolymerisation

Data Source

PatentEP4112317B1Three-dimensional object printing method and apparatus
Publication Date: 2024.04.03 SEIKO EPSON CORP
  • EP4112317B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4112317B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4112317B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

A three-dimensional object printing method includes first operation of concurrently performing ejection of liquid toward a workpiece by a head, emission of energy toward the workpiece by an energy emitter, and relative movement of the head and the energy emitter with respect to the workpiece by a moving mechanism, and second operation, subsequent to the first operation, of concurrently performing emission of energy toward the workpiece by the energy emitter and relative movement of the head and the energy emitter with respect to the workpiece by the moving mechanism, without performing ejection of liquid toward the workpiece by the head. A first irradiation distance, which is a distance between the workpiece and an emission face in a direction of a line normal to the emission face during execution of the first operation, and a second irradiation distance, which is a distance between the workpiece and the emission face in a direction of a line normal to the emission face during execution of the second operation, are different from each other.