In order to understand how long 3D printed metal parts are likely to last in the field, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is providing up to $10.3M to a team of engineers from the University Michigan, Texas A&M, the ASTM Additive Manufacturing Center of Excellence and in-situ AM process monitoring start-up, Addiguru.

More specifically, the team is examining the extent to which variations in the laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) process affect part durability.

“Depending on which model of LPBF printer you use, you might get different microstructures and different properties. The laser spot size and laser power levels might be different. The scanning strategies might be different. These things change the quality of the part,” said Veera Sundararaghavan in a press release. Sundararaghavan is a professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Michigan and principal investigator of the project.

The idea is to record the LPBF process for a variety of parts with optical and infrared cameras and use this information to create a digital twin of each one. By computationally modelling repeated stresses on the part, they hope to identify where and how quickly cracks will form. These fatigue models will also incorporate actual service data to enhance the accuracy of their predictions.

“To understand the lifespan of LPBF parts, we must push the current boundaries of the field and detect even the most critical defects that impact component performance,” said Mohsen Taheri Andani, assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Texas A&M University in the same release. “Through the PRIME [Predictive Real-Time Intelligence for Metal Endurance] project, we are doing exactly that—leveraging state-of-the-art monitoring and AI techniques to redefine what’s possible.”

Addiguru’s contribution to the project is a method for multisensory integration that includes acoustic monitoring to detect signs of porosity. According to the researchers, this combination of sensors will enable them to identify defects as small as 0.025mm.

“Multisensor data, combined with advanced analytics, will provide critical insights to part manufacturers,” said Shuchi “SK” Khurana, founder and CEO of Addiguru, also co-leading the print monitoring effort. “This project will enable a comprehensive, real-time assessment of part quality, helping manufacturers make informed go/no-go decisions with confidence.”

If successful, this project could provide vital information for manufacturers working with metal LPBF across a host of industries, from aerospace, to automotive, to medical devices.

The post DARPA provides $10M for project studying longevity of metal AM parts appeared first on Engineering.com.

1. GE LEAP fuel nozzle

Perhaps the best-known additive part in aerospace (or any industry), the fuel nozzle tip for the CFM International LEAP jet engine has now been in production for a decade, with GE Aviation shipping its 100,000^th nozzle in 2021. Each engine contains 18 or 19 fuel nozzles, depending on its configuration, each produced using laser powder bed fusion. What makes these components stand out is their consolidation of parts – from 20 separate pieces down to just one – as well as a 25% reduction in weight.

2. Honeywell #4/5 bearing housing

According to Honeywell, this has the unique distinction of being the first flight-critical engine part to be certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Installed on an in-service vehicle in 2020, the #4/5 bearing housing is a major structural component in the ATF3-6 turbofan engine used on the Dassault Falcon 20G. The original part was designed and certified in the 1960s and manufacture of the jets ended in the 1990s. That’s why Honeywell turned to additive manufacturing to produce replacement parts, reportedly shortening the lead time from two years to just two weeks.

3. Boeing aft galley brackets

Using its proprietary Rapid Plasma Deposition (RPD) technology, Norsk Titanium has been producing near net shape preforms and final machined components for both Airbus and Boeing. In the case of aft galley brackets specifically, these Ti-6AL-4V structural aircraft parts are FAA-certified, with seven installed on each Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This arguably makes them one of the most successful structural aerospace components produced with additive manufacturing.

4. Airbus spacer panels

While 3D printing technology shines most brightly in engine and structural components, its potential contributions to interior applications should not be discounted. One leading example comes from Airbus, which began installing AM spacer panels to fill end-gaps in rows of overhead storage compartments in 2018. According to the company, using a “bio-inspired” design and fused deposition modeling (FDM), the spacer panels are 15% lighter compared to equivalent components made with conventional production methods.

5. RapidFlight mobile drone production

No list of example AM applications in aerospace would be complete without mentioning unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), more commonly referred to as drones. The introduction of UAVs has transformed modern warfare, and the advancement of 3D printing technology has transformed UAVs. A recent example comes from UAV designer and manufacturer RapidFlight, which has designed mobile production systems (MPS) to mass produce drones wherever they’re needed. According to the company, a single MPS can produce 28 Group 3 aircraft per month, or much greater quantities of Group 1 or Group 2.

The post Top 5 examples of additive manufacturing in aerospace appeared first on Engineering.com.

Working as an aerospace engineer means having to navigate a labyrinth of procedures, rules, specifications, and certifications originating from government bodies as well as non-governmental institutions, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

What makes this task even more onerous is the continuous updating of these standards and certifications to keep pace with new developments in technology. Fortunately, there are deliberate efforts to inform the engineering community of these changes to ensure a healthy relationship between private enterprise and public safety.

FAA-EASA additive manufacturing workshops

Since 2015, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) have been hosting workshops with aerospace engineers, materials scientists and leaders in the aviation industry to promote technical discussions and knowledge sharing relating to the qualification and certification of parts made with additive manufacturing (AM).

While these began independently, in 2018 the two agencies came together to collaborate and take turns hosting each year. Today, these workshops include hundreds of attendees representing dozens of organizations from the aerospace industry, as well as researchers and regulators.

According to the EASA, what sets these events apart from other AM industry events, such as AMUG or RAPID + TCT, is their focus on both immediate regulatory issues and emerging technical issues. This is partly realised through the continuation of working groups from previous workshops throughout the year. For example, the 2025 FAA-EASA AM Workshop will see four working groups continue from the Workshop in 2024:

• WG1: Qualification of Additive Manufacturing (AM) Parts of No, or Low Criticality
• WG2: Fatigue and Damage Tolerance/NDE for Metal AM
• WG3: Machine Monitoring – Developing a Five-Year Plan to Allow EASA/FAA Acceptance
• WG4: Part Classification for AM

In addition to their own agendas, these working groups provide feedback to one another through debriefs and commentaries during the workshops. As an example, last year WG4 noted that the singling out of AM parts for classification in WG1’s debrief could hinder adoption by reinforcing the perception that using AM automatically results in taking on higher risk compared to traditional manufacturing technologies.

Examples of FAA and EASA efforts to certify 3D printed parts

While it’s certainly not the only channel through which these governmental bodies work towards certifying AM parts, the FAA-EASA AM Workshop offers considerable insight into this process. In the most recent meeting – in September 2024 – the Workshop reviewed EASA Certification Memorandum CM-S-008 Issue 04, which pertains to additive manufacturing in aerospace applications.

These documents are intended to clarify the EASA’s general positions on the specific initial airworthiness, validation, continuing airworthiness or organizational items. As such, they aim to provide guidance or complimentary information for compliance demonstration. While not intended to introduce new certification requirements or modify existing ones, they’re nevertheless useful for aerospace engineers working with leading edge technologies, including additive manufacturing.

In the case of CM-S0008 Issue 04, the document includes reference materials to other relevant standards, such as ASTM F3572-22, which covers part classifications for AM parts in aerospace applications, in addition to outlining EASA certification policies for the design, manufacture, maintenance and repair of AM aerospace parts.

Most recently, one tangible result of the FAA’s efforts to certify 3D printed aerospace parts can be found in GE’s new Catalyst turboprop engine, which was certified under the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 33, which pertains to airworthiness standards for aircraft engines. According to GE, the engine contains multiple components made with additive manufacturing and the certification itself involved more than 23 engines and 190 component tests.

Examples such as these demonstrate how complicated certifying 3D printed parts for airworthiness can be. Fortunately, while the pace of technological development can be a barrier to certification and re-certification, it can also make them more attainable.

This is encapsulated in one of the leading issues in recent FAA-EASA AM Workshops: the question of in-process monitoring for AM. While the consensus is that current machine monitoring technologies need further development before they can be used to qualify flight-worthy components, there is also general agreement that these will be an invaluable tool for supporting qualification as the technology matures.

The post Understanding FAA and EASA efforts to certify 3D printed parts appeared first on Engineering.com.

Take TRX Systems, one of this year’s small-sized Top Workplaces for Engineers. 

Meet TRX Systems

Located in Greenbelt, Maryland, TRX Systems was co-founded in 2004 by engineers from the University of Maryland. Since then, the company has grown to 50 employees, half of whom are degreed engineers. TRX delivers positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) systems for public safety and security personnel operating indoors and in GPS-denied areas. The company has nearly 50 U.S. patents — with more pending — focusing on collaborative structural and signal mapping, a navigation constraint engine for real-time historical processing, and sensor fusion for location and context determination.

Of particular note is TRX’s NEON technology, which includes a variety of GPS-denied positioning, navigation, and mapping products. NEON technology uses patented algorithms to fuse satellite-based PNT information with inputs from inertial sensors, map data and other sources for reliable position tracking. The company has shipped thousands of products powered by this technology to military, security and commercial users.

In March 2023, the U.S. Army awarded TRX a $402M production contract to deliver its DAPS GEN II systems — commercially branded as TRX DAPS II — after years of R&D as well as rigorous independent testing. Needless to say, for a company of 50 people, that’s an enormous success and a huge leap forward for TRX.

“We were competing against large defense contractors and respected research groups,” recalls Ben Funk, VP of engineering at TRX Systems. “But we won by remaining agile, innovative and customer focused. Winning an Army Program of Record as a business of our size was practically unheard of, so we’re incredibly proud of that.”

Engineering at TRX Systems

Designing and manufacturing PNT products requires a diverse set of engineering skills, as Funk explains. “A little more than half our team is software, about five are on the electrical team, and we have a few mechanical engineers as well,” he says. “We also have engineers on our sales and marketing teams, and our CEO and CTO are engineers as well.”

With a background in electrical engineering, Funk has been with TRX since the beginning as its first full-time employee. Working on electronics design and development, embedded software and sensors, Funk says it took a few years for TRX to establish itself as a business. Large enterprises are infamous for having daunting recruitment processes and layers of bureaucracy but, in many ways, adding headcount in engineering is even more of a challenge for a small business.

“We look for A+ players,” says Funk. “We want self-starters with creativity, adaptability and the potential to be leaders. We also look for skills or experience that complement our current capabilities, which could be technical skills or experience at a larger, more established company.”

Fortunately, TRX Systems is ideally located to recruit engineers with this unique combination of ambition, experience and skill. More than half of the employees at the company have degrees from the University of Maryland, and the company’s close proximity to Washington, D.C. and the Beltway means there are numerous defense contractors nearby. “It’s uncommon on the East Coast to find the type of talent that fits our work, but we’ve been successful in attracting them,” says Funk.

What it’s like to work at TRX Systems

TRX Systems employs design and manufacturing engineers with electrical, mechanical and software expertise, and the company values creativity and leadership potential. This is by no means uncommon for a small engineering firm, but the question is: What’s the best way to encourage those values? 

According to Funk, it comes down to the engineering workflow. “At the beginning of a project, we start with brainstorming sessions to bring in different perspectives,” he says. “We’ve found that applying constraints actually promotes creativity, and keeping the process collaborative, open and dynamic lets people build on each other’s ideas.”

While working on applications for the defense sector may seem intimidating, Funk emphasized that TRX makes the effort to provide a welcoming and inclusive environment. “Inclusion naturally results from hiring a broad range of people from different backgrounds and with different perspectives,” he says. “Diverse perspectives improve engineering design and development because they allow us to examine problems from multiple angles.”

Growth and support at TRX Systems

In addition to supporting its engineers in their day-to-day efforts, TRX also stands out in providing support for professional development and career growth. Funk says the company maintains a career progression pathway that clearly outlines the requirements for advancing to the next engineering level, pairing each engineer with a supervisor or mentor to set goals and timelines. TRX also reimburses the cost of the courses, advanced degrees, training and attendance at professional conferences and seminars that are essential to advancing one’s career as an engineer.

From a broader perspective, the mission of TRX Systems also provides a sense of meaning and fulfillment, as Funk explains. “Everything we’ve worked on since I started my career at TRX has been meaningful,” he says. “We’ve always had a mission-driven focus, whether it’s helping first responders be located inside buildings, mapping indoor spaces to improve safety, or providing soldiers with critical information on the battlefield.”

What makes TRX Systems unique

When asked about what sets his company apart from other small engineering businesses, Funk answers without hesitation: “This is an easy one for me because it’s the feedback I always hear from new team members. Our culture is defined by openness and mission awareness across the organization. Everyone has access to everyone else, all the way up to the leadership team. Our CEO regularly presents updates on long-term R&D roadmaps, financial plans, and our competitive landscape. This ensures that our engineers, even as they become more specialized, always keep the big picture in mind.”

For more information, visit topworkplaces.com/company/trx-systems.

Is your company a Top Workplace for Engineers? Submit your nomination at topworkplaces.com/engineering-com.

The post TRX Systems ranks as a Top Workplace for Engineers in 2025 appeared first on Engineering.com.

The machine incorporates Stratasys’ ScanControl+ technology that’s designed to boost printing speeds by up to 50% without compromising precision. Stratasys claims that real-world performance benchmarks have shown ScanControl+ to improve time-to-part by 39% on average and by 44% or more on applications such as tooling molds, depending on the materials. Other features on the Neo800+ include Vacuum System Protection, Z-Stage Collision Detection, and real-time environmental monitoring.

“Engineered with precision and performance in mind, the Neo800+ is designed to meet the growing demands of industries like automotive and aerospace, where high-speed production and flawless part quality are critical,” said Rich Garrity, Chief Business Unit Officer for Stratasys in a press release.

The Neo800+ is optimized for ScanControl+ Ready Materials from Somos, including Somos WaterShed XC+, which was engineered specifically for the new machine. Based on Somos WaterShed XC 11122, the resin is designed to produce optically clear parts with a smooth finish.

“The improved speed has allowed us to increase throughput and maintain open capacity as well as offer quicker turnaround times to our customers,” said Sean Schoonmaker, director of operations at Stratasys Direct Manufacturing in the same press release. “We’re seeing sharper detailed features and consistent accuracy well within our standard tolerances.”

Stratasys officially announced the Neo800+ at the Additive Manufacturer’s User Group (AMUG) Conference in Chicago, IL.

The post Stratasys launches new high-speed stereolithography 3D printer at AMUG appeared first on Engineering.com.

“The trouble is: the build platform is too small.”

“I do automotive applications in additive.” / “That’s awesome! What are you working on?”

“So, what do you guys think the solution is?” / “To what? GD&T?”

Snippets of conversation as I move through the crowd. (That last one got a big laugh.) It only takes a few minutes of mingling to realize that the rumors I’ve been hearing about the Additive Manufacturing Users Group (AMUG) Conference are true: this is an industry event for making lasting connections and having deep conversations.

This year, it’s being held at the Hilton Chicago, kicking off in The Grand Ballroom that’s played host to towering figures of history. (The elevator info screen informs me that it was the venue for a dinner honoring Charles Lindbergh when it first opened in 1927.) Last night, it was the venue for AMUG Bingo, one of the numerous networking activities for which this event is known. That was how I met John and Sam, two interns from The Mayo Clinic in Florida, both first-time attendees (like me), who paid out of their own pockets to come. By their own accounts, it’s been well worth the price of admission thus far.

The reoccurring theme in almost every conversation I’ve had is that AMUG is unique as an industry event, and that sentiment has been validated in myriad ways. On the expo floor, the usual suspects are present: 3D Systems, Nikon-SLM, Stratasys, but their neighbours are companies that wouldn’t be anywhere near their enormous booths at other shows: Aalberts Surface Technologies, HBD Additive Europe, trinckle 3D.

It might be surprising that RAPID + TCT has one of the largest booths here, especially since that show kicks off next week, but what better place to promote next year’s show in Boston? Even AMUG’s president, Shannon VanDeren, acknowledged “the white elephant in the room” of so many competing industry events happening so closely together (not to mention a laundry list of other challenges), but it’s clear from speaking with exhibitors that AMUG is in a class of its own.

“We’re at RAPID too, but this is the big show for us,” says Lori from Tech Met Inc., a Pittsburgh-based chemical milling company that offers post-processing for metal AM. “This is where we meet most of our customers.”

“Obviously, Formnext is our biggest show,” says Felix from German software provider trinckle 3D. “But the conversations here are different.”

And yet, for all that sets it apart, AMUG still offers a window into the state of the additive manufacturing industry. Michael of California-based 3D printing service bureau and software developer, Incept3D, explained how his company has gone from utilizing a few, large Stratasys machines to dozens of smaller units from companies like Bambu Lab: “We used to sell ten parts for $300 a piece. Now we sell 500 parts for $10 a piece.”

The industry is evolving, and that’s encapsulated by a comment from Roy at powder metal supplier, Linde AMT: “Seeing a laser working in a PBF machine isn’t as exciting as it used to be, but seeing 16 or 20 L-PBF machines all humming away together is really exciting.”

I’ll be at AMUG all week. Stay tuned for more updates.

The post AMUG 2025 – First Impressions appeared first on Engineering.com.

According to the company, with a UL94 V-0 flammability rating at 2.0mm, FR provides superior heat resistance, durability, and ease of processing—making it suitable for industries that require fire-retardant materials for micro-scale 3D printing applications.

Other notable points of FR include:

• Heat Deflection Temperature (HDT): 160°C (@0.45MPa, ASTM D648-07)
• Mechanical Properties: Tensile strength of 68 MPa, Flexural strength of 120 MPa, and impact strength of 18J/m
• Handling and Processing: FR does not need to be heated before use and remains non-solid at room temperature
• Compatibility: Optimized for use with BMF’s microArch S140, S240, S350, and D1025 printers.
• Color Options: Transparent Yellow or Black

BMF designed FR for product components requiring flame retardancy and high-performance thermal resistance, including

• Brackets, Baffles, and Circuit Board Housings
• Consumer Goods and Precision Electronics
• Aerospace and Transportation
• Micromechanics and Advanced Manufacturing

“At BMF, we’re committed to pushing the boundaries of what’s possible with micro 3D printing,” John Kawola, CEO of Boston Micro Fabrication told engineering.com. “Adding a flame-retardant material to our portfolio gives engineers and designers the ability to 3D print complex, high-resolution parts that also meet critical flame-resistance standards. It’s an important addition for applications where both detail and durability matter.”

The post Boston Micro Fabrication introduces flame retardant material for micro 3D printing appeared first on Engineering.com.

It’s not enough for repairing a vital component to be less expensive than manufacturing a new one—the repaired component must also demonstrate performance that’s up to the rigorous standards of one of the most highly regulated industries there is.

For this reason, aerospace engineers may be understandably wary of employing new technologies, such as additive manufacturing (AM) in repair applications, but there is one 3D printing technology that shows particular promise when it comes to repairing aerospace components.

What is directed energy deposition (DED)?

Directed energy deposition (DED) is one of the seven process categories of additive manufacturing according to ISO/ASTM 52900:2021. In contrast to powder bed fusion (PBF), in which a laser or electron beam selectively fuses regions within a powder bed, DED deposits molten material from a powder or wire feedstock in conjunction with the application of the laser or electron beam used to melt it.

While DED has the advantage of being able to produce fully dense parts with highly controllable microstructural features, especially compared with powder bed fusion, DED also has relatively poor resolution and surface finish compared to PBF. As a result, DED is often combined with machining processes to achieve tighter tolerances and better surface finishes. As with additive manufacturing processes more generally, DED faces trade-offs between faster build times through higher deposition rates and lower resolution.

How does DED enable aerospace repairs?

By depositing new material directly onto the surface of a damaged part, DED enables engineers to repair components that would be prohibitively costly to replace. Many aerospace components – for example, those found in engines and made from expensive, high-strength alloys such as Ti6Al4V or Inconel – fit this description.

The repair process using DED can be broken down into ten steps:

1. 3D scanning the damaged part
2. Comparing the part’s nominal and scanned geometry
3. Evaluating and preparing the damaged surface
4. Material characterization and process parameter optimization
5. Tool path definition via CAM software
6. Repair via DED
7. Machining
8. 3D scanning the repaired part
9. Comparing the part’s nominal and scanned geometry
10. Repeat steps 6-9 as needed

Why should you use DED to repair aerospace components?

While there are similar but simpler methods for repairing damaged components, such as tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding, these introduce considerably more heat in the repaired component, leading to higher residual stresses and distortions. Other methods, such as plasma transferred arc welding (PTAW) and electron beam welding (EBW), introduce less heat but also require complex and expensive equipment to implement.

What makes DED well suited for repairs is the combination of lower heat (hence less distortion) and higher precision, combined with mechanical performance of repaired components that is comparable to bulk material in terms of yield strength and ultimate tensile strength, though elongation still tends to be lower.

What are some examples of using DED for repair in aerospace?

Jet engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce uses CMSX-4, a single-crystal nickel superalloy as the base material for its turbine blades. The company has reportedly explored using IN718-RAM3 (another nickel superalloy with a proprietary composite additive) with 3% reinforcement material with directed energy deposition to repair the blades rather than replacing them.

In 2014, engineers at Purdue University used an Optomec LENS 750 to repair a damaged turbine blade made from 316L stainless steel. According to the researchers, the accuracy of the repaired blade was within 0.03mm of nominal geometry and tensile tests comparing undamaged and repaired samples showed 793 MPa and 815 MPa, respectively.

More recently, researchers at Tokyo University of Science have developed a numerical method for DED simulation that automatically generates metal powder deposition elements and predicts processing conditions, temperature distribution, deformation state and residual stress distribution. Their findings showed that residual stresses in deposited layers of repair parts were significantly lower than those resulting from more conventional repair processes.

The post Repairing aerospace components with directed energy deposition appeared first on Engineering.com.

According to the company, the H2D use a combination of overhead and toolhead cameras to maintain 0.3mm positioning accuracy, with a machine vision encoder that provides 50µm motion accuracy across the entire build volume. The dual-nozzle 3D printer head incorporates a hotend capable of 350˚C while the 350x250x235mm³ build volume can be heat to 65˚C, making it suitable for some engineering-grade plastics, including carbon- or glass-fiber reinforced materials.

The extruder uses a permanent magnet brushless servo motor to control torque, speed and position, as well as real-time monitoring of extrusion pressure and automatic detection of partial nozzle clogs. In addition, Bambu Labs claims that its proprietary dual-nozzle calibration technology automatically handles the X/Y offset calibration between nozzles while an “AI-backed” macro lens camera monitors the extrusion tip for material accumulation, filament deviations and extrusion failures.

The optional Automatic Material System (AMS) comes in two versions: AMS 2 Pro includes a drying function and electromagnetic vents to switch between drying and storage mode; AMS HT is designed for engineering filaments with a max drying temperatures of 85˚C and a filament bypass path designed to reduce feed resistance for fiber-reinforced rigid filaments and soft TPU.

For laser cutting and engraving, the H2D can be fitted with a 10W or 40W laser module along with an air assist pump for cooling, laser-safe windows, five flame sensors, “AI camera fire detection” capabilities and an emergency stop button.

The base model H2D, which includes a build plate, spool holder and accessory box is $1,899 while the H2D AMS Combo, which includes the AMS 2 Pro, is $2,199. Adding the 10W or 40W laser modules and their associated safety accessories adds $600 or $1,300, respectively, to the H2D AMS Combo’s price tag.

“The H2D represents the culmination of our vision to fundamentally transform how designers, engineers, and makers approach personal manufacturing,” said Bambu Lab CEO, Ye Tao. “We’ve built the H2D with the goal to excel at every capability it offers, eliminating the traditional ‘jack of all trades, master of none’ compromise that has plagued this product category.”

The post Bambu Lab’s newest 3D printer aims to be a personal manufacturing hub appeared first on Engineering.com.

In this context, polyether ether ketone (PEEK), polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and polyetherimide (also known as PEI or ULTEM) are particularly notable for their excellent mechanical and chemical resistance properties, which are retained under high temperatures. In fact, the relatively high heat resistance of these thermoplastics is both a benefit for aerospace applications and a challenge for 3D printing, especially when comparing them to other standard plastics, such as polylactic acid (PLA) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS).

3D printed PEEK parts for aerospace

PEEK has several key properties that make it appealing for aerospace applications. These include its high strength-to-weight ratio, thermal resistance, chemical and corrosion resistance and low outgassing. The latter is particularly critical for spacecraft and satellite applications. In addition, PEEK meets the flame, smoke and toxicity (FST) requirements for the FAA and EASA.

With the advancement of 3D printing technologies, there are now several options for 3D printing PEEK aerospace components. Some fused filament fabrication (FFF) machines can process PEEK, though these need high temperature extruders capable of operating at 400˚C, as well as heated platforms and build chambers. Selective laser sintering (SLS) can produce parts from PEEK powder, and has the advantages over FFF of not requiring supports and operating at higher resolutions, though these also come at a higher cost.

Additive manufacturing with PEKK for aerospace

Like PEEK, PEKK offers a high strength-to-weight ratio, with some suppliers claiming that PEKK parts can be as strong as aluminum at less than half the weight. PEKK also has excellent wear and chemical resistance, in addition to being easier to 3D print than PEEK due to the former’s lower crystallization rate. This makes it less prone to cooling issues, such as warping. PEKK also meets the FAA and EASA FST requirements for use in commercial and military aircraft.

Although 3D printing PEKK parts with FFF requires a lower extruder temperature (340 – 360˚C), it still requires a heated platform and build chamber. PEKK can also be 3D printed using SLS, with some suppliers offering PEKK powders with carbon fiber compounded in to improve performance.

3D printing ULTEM for aerospace

Introduced to the market by General Electric in 1982, Ultem has similar characteristics to PEEK but with a lower impact strength and narrower temperature range. However, it’s also less expensive, with some copolymers, such as ULTEM 9085 CG (certified grade), meeting the FST requirements of the FAA and EASA. Other ULTEM copolymers incorporate recycled scrap or residue and are certified as renewable.

ULTEM 9085 is specifically designed for 3D printing processes, specifically FFF, though the material is sensitive to moisture, which can affect both extrusioTn and the properties of the printed part. Advice on the optimal nozzle temperature for extruding ULTEM varies but there is experimental evidence that resins and composites need a temperature range of 375 – 420˚C for best results.

3D printing thermoplastic aerospace components

Depending on the required material properties, PEEK, PEKK and ULTEM can be used to 3D print a variety of aerospace components. Examples include cabin interior parts (brackets, panel fasteners and ventilation ducts), structural components for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or satellites, electrical insulation (wire clamps and connectors); and fluid and pneumatic systems (fuel line supports, valve housings).

Deciding which material is the best option for your particular application will depend primarily on your budget and thermal/mechanical requirements. In any case, the ever-present demand to reduce weight without compromising safety for the sake of fuel efficiency means that the market for additive manufacturing of thermoplastics like PEEK, PEKK and ULTEM will continue to grow.

The post Why aerospace needs 3D printed thermoplastics like PEEK, PEKK and ULTEM appeared first on Engineering.com.