Additive Manufacturing Component Mesh Generation via Cutting Planes

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for generating component meshes in additive manufacturing are resource-intensive, inaccurate, and require manual intervention, especially when dealing with complex geometries, leading to slow and unreliable meshing processes.

Innovation Solution

A method that involves slicing an initial component mesh with cutting planes to divide initial mesh elements into resulting mesh elements, determining their positions and shapes, and using cutting codes to automate the process, reducing the need for manual operations and improving speed by minimizing floating-point operations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If automatic meshing algorithms are used to generate layered component meshes, then the meshing process can be automated, but the algorithms fail regularly and require manual intervention

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeshing automationVSAvoidmeshing reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The meshing process is segmented into distinct phases: generating an initial mesh from CAD data, slicing it with cutting planes to create layers, and automatically handling element divisions. This segmentation allows each phase to be optimized independently, improving overall reliability while maintaining automation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The method performs preliminary actions by first generating a complete initial component mesh before slicing it into layers. This preliminary mesh generation establishes a reliable foundation that can be systematically divided, preventing the failures that occur when attempting to generate layers directly through traditional automated algorithms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If manual operations are performed to modify mesh parameters, then meshing failures can be corrected, but the process becomes tedious and time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeshing reliabilityVSAvoidmeshing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-service through automated determination of element positions relative to cutting planes and automatic calculation of resulting element shapes. The computer automatically adjusts mesh parameters and generates cutting codes without human intervention, making the process both reliable and efficient.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The method systematically changes mesh parameters by introducing cutting planes at specific positions and automatically calculating how these affect element divisions. This parameter-driven approach replaces manual trial-and-error operations with automated, predictable parameter adjustments that are both reliable and fast.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of manufacture

If traditional meshing algorithms are used, then mesh generation can be performed, but the algorithms are resource-intensive and slow

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeshing capabilityVSAvoidmeshing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The method extracts and separates the meshing process into distinct operational steps: initial mesh generation, slicing with cutting planes, and element division calculation. By taking out the slicing operation as a separate, efficient process rather than integrating it into complex traditional algorithms, the overall meshing speed is dramatically improved while maintaining capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces traditional mechanical meshing algorithms with a computational approach using cutting planes and automated position determination. This substitution of computational methods for traditional algorithmic approaches reduces resource intensity and increases processing speed while maintaining mesh generation capability.

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

4Productivity

If the number of floating-point operations is reduced, then meshing speed increases, but calculation accuracy may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeshing speedVSAvoidmeshing accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The calculation process is segmented into discrete steps: determining element positions relative to cutting planes, calculating intersection points, and computing resulting element shapes. This segmentation allows precision to be maintained at each step while avoiding unnecessary floating-point operations, achieving both speed and accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS20220374567A1Method for generating a component mesh, use of a component mesh, computer program and computer-readable medium
Publication Date: 2022.11.24 SIEMENS IND SOFTWARE NV
  • US20220374567A1 patent drawing
  • US20220374567A1 patent drawing
  • US20220374567A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method is disclosed for generating a component mesh of a component that may be built-up layer by layer in an additive manufacturing build-up process. The method includes providing a three-dimensional initial component mesh composed of initial mesh elements of uniform shape which include initial mesh nodes and initial mesh edges extending between the initial mesh nodes; slicing the initial component mesh by at least one cutting plane such that initial mesh elements are divided into at least two resulting mesh elements, wherein at the intersection points of the at least one cutting plane with edges of initial mesh elements resulting mesh nodes are defined; determining the position of each initial mesh element with respect to each cutting plane and thus which initial mesh element is divided into resulting mesh elements and which is not; and determining the shape of each resulting mesh element.