P14551 Multi-process 3D Printer Systems Design Review

1. P14551 Multi-process 3D Printer Systems Design Review Group Members: Jeremy Bennett Austin Chacosky Matt Demm Nick Hensel Chad Rossi Customer: Dr.Dennis Cormier Guide: John Kaemmerlen

2. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

3. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

4. Open Source & 3-D Printing • Open source licenses allow hobbyists to afford 3-D printers. • RepRap, Makerbot, Fab@Home, etc. • These printers are single process, usually FDM. Speaker: Matt

5. Benchmark System: Multi-Process 3-D Printing • Currently under development • Proprietary • Large Size • Uses Modular Process Heads • Expensive (~$150,000) • Open source version does not exist Speaker: Matt

6. Problem statement • Due to recent leaps open source technology, 3-D printing is set to take off in the coming years. Current open source machines can perform a single process, (e.g. laser sintering, thermoplastic extrusion, routing) leading for the need to buy and maintain multiple machines in order to prototype complex parts. Multi-process 3-D printers are capable of performing these processes, minimizing capital and maintenance expenses, while simultaneously unlocking the ability to produce multiple substrate parts such a printed circuit boards or other composite materials. Current multi-process printers are not open sourced and have costs well above what the average hobbyist can afford. • The goal of the project is to demonstrate a multi-process 3-D printer that is both designed as open source and at an appropriate price range to be marketed to the average hobbyist. This printer will incorporate an interface capable of supporting multiple process heads, which could additive or subtractive in nature, that will operate with minimum setup or training. (i.e. Plug-and-Play) Open sourced or low cost software will be used to control the printer. This project will create a platform that can be expanded upon by future MSD teams. Speaker: Jeremy

7. Customer Requirements Speaker: Austin

8. Engineering Requirements Speaker: Austin

9. Agenda • Background • SystemAnalysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

10. House of Quality Speaker: Austin

11. House of Quality Continued Speaker: Austin

12. House of Quality Continued • Key Engineering Requirements: • Quantity Subtractive Processes • Quantity Additive Processes • System Cost • Tool Head/Interface Dimensionality • Enclosure Dimensions • Human Interaction Time During Tool Change Speaker: Austin

13. House of Quality Speaker: Austin

14. Functional Decomposition Speaker: Nick

15. Speaker: Matt Process Benchmarking

16. Speaker: Matt Process Benchmarking

17. Printer Bench Marking Speaker: Matt

18. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

19. Morphological Chart Speaker: Jeremy

20. Morphological Chart • Concept 7 - “Gene Simmons” Selected Speaker: Jeremy

21. System Concepts Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4

22. System Concepts Cont. Concept 5 Concept 6 Concept 7 Concept 8

23. Pugh Chart Speaker: Nick

24. Selected Concept • Design “Gene Simmons” Selected • Simple Motion Control • Expandable • Secure Interface • Utilizes existing technology Speaker: Nick

25. Architecture Speaker: Nick

26. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

27. Engineering Analysis Speaker: Nick

28. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

29. Risk Assessment Speaker: Chad

30. Agenda • Background • System Analysis • Concept and Architecture Deviation • Engineering Analysis • Risk Assessment • Project & Test Plan

31. Test Plan • Objective • Test to compare dimensions in a user created CAD file to system performance output in order to compare system capabilities to engineering requirements • Description • Created a die by using additive process to create a 1x1x1 cube and subtractive process to create the dots and contour mill edges • Measure created part and compare to the CAD file • If automated dimensions are not equal to printed part, recalibrate machine and start again • Output parameters • X-Y resolution of printing • Precision • Timing Speaker: Chad

32. Project Schedule Speaker: Jeremy

33. Questions ?

34. Appendices • Video: • http://www.uqast.com/Nationalnano/Multi-Proto-Lab?goback=%2Egmp_1914824%2Egde_1914824_member_198149628#%21 • Benchmarking Site • http://www.3ders.org/pricecompare/3dprinters/?a=DIY%20kit&tab=Details

35. Appendices • File Links: • https://edge.rit.edu/edge/P14551/public/WorkingDocuments/System%20Level%20Design/P14551_MorphologicalChart_20130919.xlsx • https://edge.rit.edu/edge/P14551/public/WorkingDocuments/System%20Level%20Design/Benchmarking/P14551_HRMTBenchmarking_20130919.xlsx

36. Concept 1

37. Concept 2

38. Concept 3

39. Concept 4

40. Concept 5

41. Concept 6

42. Concept 7

43. Concept 8