Guidelines for post processing oriented design of additive manufactured parts for use in topology optimization

According to ISO / ASTM 52900, additive manufacturing (AM) is defined as "the process of joining materials to make parts from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer, as opposed to conventional manufacturing including subtractive manufacturing technologies and formative manufacturing methodologies” [1]. This results in significant advantages over conventional manufacturing methodologies, such as the production of topologically optimized, complex structures, lower material consumption or shorter product development cycles. In order to be able to use these advantages, the possibilities and restrictions of the processes must be known. In particular, selective laser beam melting (SLM), in which a powdery metallic starting material is melted by means of a laser, requires a sound understanding of the process. For this purpose, design guidelines have been presented in various scientific papers. These design guidelines help to design a component in such a way that it can be manufactured successfully using additive manufacturing. These so-called “AMsuitable design guidelines” can be found among others at Adam, Kranz and Thomas [2,3,4,5]. In contrast to established manufacturing processes, the post-processing of additive components is divided into two steps. First, the AM immanent post processing, such as the removing of the component from the building platform or the removing of the remaining powder. These post-processing steps are in the following referred to “post-processing”. Secondly, the subsequent post-processing steps to improve the component properties, such as milling and turning or a stress-relief annealing. These are referred to as “finishing” and form the focus of this paper. With regard to a successful finishing of additively manufactured components, design guidelines must be taken into account that consider the finishing inherent restrictions and possibilities. In the following, these design guidelines are referred to “finishing suitable”. They can deviate significantly from those of conventionally manufactured components in the case of additively manufactured components. Although there are some investigations that deal with the post-processing of additively manufactured components [6,7], there are hardly any design guidelines that are suitable for finishing [8]. Therefore, knowledge about the finishing of additively manufactured components is based on experimental experience rather than on scientific knowledge. For this reason, design guidelines for a finishing suitable design must be methodically determined and quantified. These quantified design guidelines can be used for an automated design check on complex components like topology optimized geometries.