Variable Bead Sizing Along Toolpaths for Accurate 3D Deposition

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In additive manufacturing, achieving uniform bead sizes during the deposition process is challenging, leading to issues of over- or under-deposition, which affects the geometrical accuracy of the printed layers.

Innovation Solution

A data processing system that varies bead sizes along toolpaths by generating pixel values representing smaller and larger bead sizes relative to a default size, using image processing techniques to adjust process parameters such as laser power and nozzle speed, thereby minimizing material deposition errors.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If a default bead size is used for all locations along the toolpath, then the manufacturing process is simple, but geometrical accuracy deteriorates due to over-depositing and under-depositing

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeometrical accuracyVSAvoidprocess complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by varying the bead size according to the local geometric characteristics of the toolpath. The system calculates a bead size image where each pixel value corresponds to a specific location along the toolpath, allowing the bead size to be locally optimized for each position rather than using a uniform default size throughout. This resolves the contradiction by improving geometrical accuracy through location-specific bead sizing while managing complexity through automated image processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements parameter changes by dynamically adjusting the bead size parameter along the toolpath based on the processed image data. The system transforms the geometric model into a bead size image where pixel values represent varying bead sizes, and then modifies the manufacturing parameters accordingly. This allows the system to adapt bead size to local requirements, improving geometrical accuracy while the automated parameter adjustment manages the complexity of the process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If bead size is varied along the toolpath, then geometrical accuracy improves, but the complexity of the manufacturing system increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeometrical accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex mechanical adjustment systems with an information processing approach. Instead of using complex mechanical mechanisms to physically adjust bead size along the toolpath, the system uses image processing and data transformation to calculate optimal bead sizes, then communicates these as control parameters to the manufacturing system. This substitution of mechanical complexity with computational processing resolves the contradiction by achieving variable bead sizing through software-based parameter control rather than complex mechanical adjustments.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a bead size image as an intermediary between the geometric model and the manufacturing process. The system first processes the geometric model into an image representation, then processes this image to determine bead size variations, and finally uses this information to control the manufacturing parameters. This intermediary image-based approach simplifies the overall system by providing a clear, processable representation that bridges the gap between design geometry and manufacturing execution, reducing system complexity while maintaining geometrical accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Manufacturing precision

If uniform bead size is used, then the manufacturing process is straightforward, but material deposition accuracy deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvematerial deposition accuracyVSAvoidprocess simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-calculating the optimal bead size for each location along the toolpath before the actual manufacturing process begins. The system processes the geometric model to create a bead size image that contains all the necessary information about where larger or smaller beads are needed. This preliminary calculation of deposition requirements allows the manufacturing process to proceed with high accuracy while maintaining relative simplicity, as the complex calculations are performed in advance rather than requiring real-time complex adjustments during manufacturing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP3563270B1System and method for providing variation in bead size to improve geometrical accuracy of deposited layers in an additive manufacturing process
Publication Date: 2021.09.08 SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC
  • EP3563270B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3563270B1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP3563270B1 patent drawingFigure 4~6

AI summary

A system (100) and method (1500) is provided for providing variation in bead size to improve geometrical accuracy of deposited layers in an additive manufacturing process. The system may include at least one processor (102) configured to receive a plurality of toolpaths (118) along which a 3D printer (120) deposits beads (128) of material (126) in a plurality of layers (130) in order to additively build up a product (132). Based on the toolpaths, the processor may determine an image (140, 400) for each layer and may process the images based on a default bead size (134) to determine a bead size image (152) for each layer comprised of pixels (154) having values (156) that specify bead size for locations along the toolpaths. The image processing produces pixel values for the bead size images that vary in magnitude at a plurality of different locations along the toolpaths in order to represent smaller and larger bead sizes relative to the default bead size, which smaller and larger bead sizes respectively minimize over-depositing and under-depositing of material by the 3D printer that would otherwise occur with the default bead size at these different locations along the toolpaths.