Dear RP-ers,
Thank you to all the people who responded to my question about green body
fabrication. The answers were quite detailed, and I will post a summary after
having a chance to study them. If anyone else would like to throw in their views,
please feel free. See original posting below.
Best Regards,
Marshall Burns
marshall@ennex.com
*****************************************************************
***** ENNEX(TM) FABRICATION TECHNOLOGIES
***** Fabricating the Future(TM)
*****************************************************************
***** 10911 Weyburn Avenue, Suite 332, Los Angeles, U.S.A. 90024
***** Phone: +1 (310) 824-8700. Fax: +1 (310) 824-5185
***** E-mail: fabbers@ennex.com
***** World Wide Web: http://www.ennex.com
*****************************************************************
Marshall Burns wrote:
> Guy Allen Brady wrote:
>
> > Well, now, this is a nice surprise. I've been working on
> > Stereolithography of Ceramics for the past 2+ years. My suspensions are
> > 50vol% Alumina in a photocurable resin. There are two others groups (at
>
> Dear Allen and others,
>
> I wonder if I might ask a question that could spark some interesting
> technical debate.
>
> What are the relative pros and cons of the various techniques for
> fabricating green bodies of either ceramics or metals? The techniques that must
> be considered include direct fabrication of the green body:
> - Selective photocuring of a photopolymer/powder suspension (SLA)
> - Laser sintering of polymer-coated powders (SLS),
> - Extrusion of a polymer/powder paste (FDM),
> - Lamination of polymer/powder tapes (LOM),
> - and perhaps some other direct techniques.
> And one should also include indirect techniques of:
> - Fabricating a mold or master which is used to mold a powder system
> (old fashioned P/M as well as Keltool, etc.).
>
> What do people think about how these various techniques campare?
>
> Best Regards,
> Marshall Burns
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:40:46 EEST