Additive Manufacturing Fleet Monitoring for Build Anomaly Correction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current additive manufacturing technologies face challenges in diagnosing aborted or failed builds and identifying performance issues in additive manufacturing devices, requiring significant time and human labor. Additionally, finding the root cause of failures during a build is difficult and time-consuming, leading to unreliability and inefficiency in additive manufacturing machines and fleets.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a system and method for monitoring, analyzing, and adjusting additive manufacturing machines and processes. This involves using data from sensors and statistical process control to determine the health of machines and builds, identifying non-standard behaviors, and automatically adjusting parameters to improve build quality and reliability.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual diagnosis of failed builds is performed by experts, then diagnostic accuracy is improved, but time consumption and labor requirements increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvediagnostic accuracyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual expert diagnosis with an automated machine learning system that analyzes sensor data from additive manufacturing processes. The system uses trained models to automatically identify failed builds and determine root causes, substituting human expert analysis with computational algorithms that process manufacturing data in real-time.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables self-diagnosis of additive manufacturing failures through automated analysis of sensor data and comparison against learned patterns from historical builds. The machine learning models autonomously identify issues without requiring external expert intervention, allowing the system to self-diagnose problems and determine corrective actions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Measurement precision

If root cause analysis is performed manually during builds, then diagnostic thoroughness is improved, but the process becomes difficult and time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveroot cause identification accuracyVSAvoiddiagnostic process complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis by continuously monitoring sensor data during builds and comparing it against patterns learned from historical data. The machine learning models are pre-trained on extensive datasets of successful and failed builds, enabling the system to proactively identify potential issues and determine root causes before builds complete, rather than requiring post-build analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces complex manual root cause analysis with automated machine learning algorithms that process sensor data and identify causal factors. The system uses trained models to automatically determine root causes of failures, substituting the complex human analytical process with computational methods that can rapidly evaluate multiple potential causes simultaneously.

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

3Reliability

If no automated monitoring system is implemented, then system complexity is reduced, but build reliability and repeatability deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebuild reliabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements continuous feedback by monitoring sensor data during additive manufacturing builds and automatically comparing it against expected patterns from historical data. When deviations are detected, the machine learning models identify potential issues and can trigger alerts or automatic corrective actions, creating a closed-loop system that continuously improves build reliability through real-time feedback and adjustment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual quality assurance and reliability monitoring with automated machine learning systems that analyze sensor data and predict build outcomes. The system uses trained models to assess build quality in real-time, substituting human inspection and manual quality control processes with automated computational analysis that provides consistent, scalable reliability monitoring.

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

4Measurement precision

If extensive sensor data collection is implemented, then monitoring precision is improved, but data processing requirements and computational load increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemonitoring precisionVSAvoidcomputational energy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary processing by pre-training machine learning models on extensive historical datasets before deployment. Once trained, the models can rapidly analyze new sensor data with minimal computational overhead, as the heavy lifting of pattern recognition has already been performed during the training phase. This allows high-precision monitoring with reduced real-time computational energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements selective data processing by focusing computational resources on the most critical sensor data and features that have been identified as most predictive of build outcomes during training. Rather than processing all sensor data equally, the system prioritizes analysis of key parameters and features that contribute most to monitoring precision, reducing overall computational load while maintaining high accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20250144886A1Systems and methods to classify, report, and adjust behavior variation in additive manufacturing machine fleet
Publication Date: 2025.05.08 GE AVIO SRL
  • US20250144886A1 patent drawing
  • US20250144886A1 patent drawing
  • US20250144886A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Apparatus and associated methods to classify and adjust builds across additive manufacturing machine(s) are disclosed. An example apparatus includes learner circuitry to: process first data from a set of first builds to learn behavior; classify each build as a standard or non-standard build; model the learned behavior to form a standard reference behavior and a non-standard reference behavior, the standard reference behavior including first features and the non-standard reference behavior including second features; and output the standard reference behavior and the non-standard reference behavior to classify additional builds. The apparatus includes evaluator circuitry to: ingest second data for a second build; process the second data in comparison to the standard reference behavior and the non-standard reference behavior; classify the second build as a standard build or a non-standard build; and, when the second build is classified as a non-standard build, output a corrective action.