From: Scott Turner (scott@scicontech.com)
Date: Wed Sep 12 2007 - 02:22:37 EEST
I would have to agree with Tracy on this one. One of our two HiQ
systems here at SCICON is an upgraded Vanguard HS. There was clear
improvement in the "consistency" of mechanical properties we saw in
various builds over time. As we all know it is possible to vary the
physical properties of parts produced in an SLS process by simply
changing temperatures or scanning parameters, whether intentional or
not. What we have found is that with the HiQ we can now control these
properties very consistently from build to build. Better yet, we are
now able to get a very high degree of consistency in physical properties
from machine to machine on the first build. This has not only helped
our customers, but our bottom line as well.
Shane's unsolicited post seems a bit self serving for this forum?
My 2 cents,
Scott
________________________________
From: owner-rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi [mailto:owner-rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi] On
Behalf Of Taylor, Tracy L PWR
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:28 AM
To: rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi
Subject: RE: [rp-ml] Solid Freeform Fabrication Conference
Shane
Interesting....But I was under the impression that 3D Systems main goal
was to make the system more turnkey, improve the speed, and improve the
surface finish on the parts. It sounds like they accomplished their
primary goals. If you need a production system that will produce the
best mechanical properties maybe you should make that your primary goal.
Personally most of my experience is using nylon 11 and it's true that
the stock 3D algorithms are not optimized for mechanical properties.
With a bit of work they are quite capable machines in my opinion. With a
bit of tweaking I saw no difference between the Hi-Q and base Vanguard
HS machines running nylon 11. That's about all I can say without getting
myself in trouble.
Just curious if you had ever compared your EOS machines (Do you still
work for EOS?) to 3D Systems offerings with mechanical properties being
the goal.
Thanks for the post. When I have time I will check out the paper.
Tracy Taylor
Strategic Fabrication Center
Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Inc.
________________________________
From: owner-rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi [mailto:owner-rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi] On
Behalf Of Shane Collins
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:51 PM
To: rp-ml@rapid.lpt.fi
Subject: [rp-ml] Solid Freeform Fabrication Conference
Those who did not attend the Solid Freeform Fabrication Conference in
Austin, TX last month may have missed this paper. Clearly, there is a
big difference between prototyping and direct manufacturing.
8:50-9:15 Comparison of Material Properties and Microstructure of
Specimens Built Using the 3D Systems Vanguard HS and Vanguard
HiQ+HS SLS Systems
T.J. Silverman, A. Hall, B. South, W. Yong, J.H. Koo, University of
Texas-Austin
The HiQ upgrade to the 3D Systems Vanguard selective laser sintering
(SLS)
machine incorporates a revised thermal calibration system and new
control
software. The paper comparesthe tensile modulus, tensile strength,
elongation
at break, flexural modulus, Izod impact resistanceand microstructure of
two
batteries of standard specimens built from recycled Duraform PA (Nylon
12).
The first set is built on a Vanguard HS (High Speed) system and the
second on
the same system with the HiQ upgrade installed. A third set of specimens
is built
using fresh material to establish an independent baseline for the
material
properties of HiQ-processed Duraform PA. The upgrade reduces user
intervention, decreases total build time and improves surface finish.
However,
tensile, flexure and impact properties are all found to decline after
the upgrade is
installed.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 18:13:07 EET