PrintRite3D requires expertise to function as IPQA
Post# of 382
Posted On: 02/08/2014 7:36:21 PM
PrintRite3D requires expertise to function as IPQA.
Here is an article published a while back stating how PrintRite3D uses both acoustic and optical sensors.
http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/print-...l?page=all
If you listen closely to what Greg Morris states about data and how to delineate information his statements are directly from studies Sigma Labs performed:
http://www.b6sigma.com/uploads/media/aerospac...qa_by6.pdf
Page 4: IPQA in Practice
The method of data collecting, sorting, and setting parameters from raw data is an aspect of IPQA that requires knowledge of material properties. Without this knowledge, the large amount of data would be overwhelming and parameters cannot be determined. This is the limitation of IPQA. IPQA requires expert input from the manufacturing engineer or the quality engineer to ensure that the normal baseline signature established does indeed correspond to process conditions that are capable of making a good part.
Here is what Greg Morris says in the Youtube video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Rw63GIxnM
"So this becomes a very important and very big issue for us is what we call our “in process quality assurance”. So today’s equipment and today’s technology OEM’s are pushing for this. They want to have melt pool monitoring, they want to know what the atmosphere is, and all those things we do need. But what do you do with these gigabytes of data, how do you leverage and use that so that when you produce a component anywhere on that platform you know exactly what you have coming out the other end? "
There is no doubt process monitoring is needed. AM technology is gaining ground for its advantages in material savings and costs, reduction of production lead time, and free form fabrication. Nonetheless, a method of quality assurance is needed in order for these advantages to become a reality.
Here is an article published a while back stating how PrintRite3D uses both acoustic and optical sensors.
http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/print-...l?page=all
If you listen closely to what Greg Morris states about data and how to delineate information his statements are directly from studies Sigma Labs performed:
http://www.b6sigma.com/uploads/media/aerospac...qa_by6.pdf
Page 4: IPQA in Practice
The method of data collecting, sorting, and setting parameters from raw data is an aspect of IPQA that requires knowledge of material properties. Without this knowledge, the large amount of data would be overwhelming and parameters cannot be determined. This is the limitation of IPQA. IPQA requires expert input from the manufacturing engineer or the quality engineer to ensure that the normal baseline signature established does indeed correspond to process conditions that are capable of making a good part.
Here is what Greg Morris says in the Youtube video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Rw63GIxnM
"So this becomes a very important and very big issue for us is what we call our “in process quality assurance”. So today’s equipment and today’s technology OEM’s are pushing for this. They want to have melt pool monitoring, they want to know what the atmosphere is, and all those things we do need. But what do you do with these gigabytes of data, how do you leverage and use that so that when you produce a component anywhere on that platform you know exactly what you have coming out the other end? "
There is no doubt process monitoring is needed. AM technology is gaining ground for its advantages in material savings and costs, reduction of production lead time, and free form fabrication. Nonetheless, a method of quality assurance is needed in order for these advantages to become a reality.
(0)
(0)