3D Printed Support Markers for Autonomous Removal Precision

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current 3D printing technologies face challenges in automation, leading to high costs and inefficiencies due to manual pre- and post-processing steps, particularly in accurately and consistently removing support structures from 3D printed components, which results in slow and costly post-processing processes.

Innovation Solution

A method is introduced where markers are printed on 3D printed components or support structures during the printing process, allowing for autonomous identification and encoding of cutting paths using computer vision and machine learning, enabling accurate and consistent separation of support structures from the components.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If automated removal of support structures is performed using pre-programmed path trajectories, then automation is improved, but cutting precision deteriorates due to physical deformations causing inconsistent cuts

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveautomation of support structure removalVSAvoidcutting precision

Core Design Contradiction:

Extent of automationVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

Physical deformations (bending, lifting, cracking) are measured and recorded before the cutting operation takes place. These pre-measured deformation data are then used to compensate and adjust the cutting path trajectory, ensuring that cuts are made at the correct locations despite the deformations that occurred during printing.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

A sensing system detects the actual positions of support structure connection points on the printed component. This detected information is fed back to adjust the cutting path trajectory in real-time, allowing the automated cutting system to adapt to actual component deformations and maintain cutting precision.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Manufacturing precision

If manual methods are used to separate support structures, then cutting precision is maintained, but productivity deteriorates due to slow and costly post-processing

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecutting precisionVSAvoidpost-processing speed

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically detects support structure locations and generates cutting paths without requiring manual intervention. The sensing system and processing algorithms enable the post-processing operation to be self-sufficient, eliminating the need for manual inspection and path programming while maintaining precision.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual mechanical operations for detecting support locations and planning cut paths are replaced with an automated sensing system and computer-based trajectory generation. This substitution of mechanical/manual processes with automated systems maintains cutting precision while dramatically improving productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If support structures are removed without quality checks, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to lack of quality assurance

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvepost-processing speedVSAvoidquality assurance

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

A sensing system performs quality checks by detecting whether support structures have been completely removed and whether the component is free of defects. This quality information is fed back to determine whether the component passes or fails, providing automated quality assurance that maintains productivity while ensuring reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

4Adaptability or versatility

If 3D printing is used for high flexibility component production, then adaptability is improved, but manufacturing precision deteriorates due to physical deformations during printing

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedesign flexibilityVSAvoiddimensional accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

Physical deformations that occur during the 3D printing process are measured and recorded before subsequent processing operations. These pre-measured deformation data are used to compensate for dimensional inaccuracies in later steps, such as support structure removal and assembly operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

A sensing system detects the actual geometric features and deformations of the printed component. This detected information is fed back to adjust subsequent processing parameters and trajectories, compensating for printing-induced dimensional variations and maintaining overall manufacturing precision.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3936261B1Identification marker on a 3D printed component

Publication Date: 2022.06.01 ABB (SCHWEIZ) AG

Figure 1
Figure 2~4
Figure 5

AI summary

A system and method are described for post-processing a 3D printed component. For example, support structures for the 3D printed component may be removed during post-processing. In the system and method, a marker is placed on the 3D printed component or on a support structure attached to the 3D printed component. The marker may be printed while the 3D printed component and the support structures are printed by a 3D printer. After printing, the marker may then be sensed to determine one or more cutting paths between the 3D printed component and the support structures. The 3D printed component may then be autonomously separated from the support structures by cutting through the cutting path.