Composites Tooling Solutions Webinar Dan Campbell | Aurora Flight - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Cost-Effective Additive Manufactured Tooling for Composites Tooling Solutions Webinar

Dan Campbell | Aurora Flight Sciences Research Group Lead Timothy Schniepp | Stratasys Leader, Tooling Solutions 2 STRATASYS / THE 3D PRINTING SOLUTIONS COMPANY

Cost-Effective Additive Manufactured Tooling for Composites Aurora Flight Sciences Dan Campbell Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 3

Outline • Background and Previous Work: Additive for Composite Tooling • Evaluation Tool for Air Force Research Laboratory • Design Requirements and Considerations • Evaluation Results • Conclusion and Recommendation • Thoughts on Tool Repairability Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 4

Background and Previous Work: Additive for Composite Tooling Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 5

Large Multi-Piece Additive Tools Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 6

Sub-Scale DARPA X-Plane Structure Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 7

Design Requirements and Considerations for Additive Tooling The results presented were sponsored by the Air Force Research Laboratory under contract F48650-11-D- 5703, titled " Low Cost, Fast Response Tooling" Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 8

Baseline Tool Geometry and Requirements • Female tool of complex curvature • Tool must withstand multiple cycles of 350 ° F at autoclave 1.5 x 1.5 ” Inspection pressures (90 psi). Pocket • Tool tolerance requirement of +/- 0.015 inches • Tool surface roughness requirement of 125 µin 15.5” 27” 16” Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 9

Technical Approach Our development approach took advantage of the low-cost and fast manufacturing process associated with additive manufacturing: Low Cost – Design – Print – Scan – Autoclave – Scan Fast Manufacturing – Repeat 8 tools were printed, measured and tested: – Tool #001 Block tool design. Full size, sub-section. – Tool #002 Block tool design. Full size, sub-section. – Tool #003 Block tool design. Full size, sub-section. – Tool #004 Shell tool design. Full size, sub section. – Tool #005 Shell tool design. Full size, sub section. – Tool #006 Shell tool design. Full size, full section. – Tool #007 Shell tool design. Full size, full section. – Tool #008 Shell tool design. Full size, full section. Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 10

Manufacturing Equipment and Tooling Material Fortus 900mc™ – in service since 2008 ULTEM™ 1010 Resin Unfilled – commercially available since 2015 * ULTEM 1010 Resin Filled (or similar high temp polymer) not evaluated, but an attractive option for this application once commercially available ULTEM 1010 Resin ULTEM™ is a registered trademark of SABIC or affiliates or subsidiaries. Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 11

Cost Model Definition Part Cost = Material usage * $/cubic inch + # of hours * $/hr Machine Type $ / Hr Material Type Cost $ / Cu-in Fortus 400mc™ ABS- M30™ $5.27 $3.80 The majority the tool’s cost is the cost of ASA $3.80 Fortus 900mc $14.05 material. The machine cost is the cost to FDM Nylon 12 $4.30 the owner, wherein Aurora assumes PC $4.30 amortization over five years at a 80% PC- ISO™ $4.30 utilization rate. PC-ABS $4.30 PPSF $7.45 If the tool required post processing, labor ULTEM 9085 resin $7.45 cost was added in at $110/hr and surface ULTEM 1010 resin $7.45 film material cost at $4.68/sq ft. SR20 $4.13 SR30™ $3.91 Aurora’s Fortus 900mc Cost Breakdown SR100™ $4.89 • $11.41/hr capital cost S110 $4.89 • $1.53/hr warranty & repair cost S1 $7.45 • $1.20/hr electrical cost PC-BASS $4.30 PPSF-BASS $7.45 Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 12

Tool Design Methodology Shell Tool Baseline, Block Tool • Requires less material, thus • Surface bag, table-top bag, lower cost and print times or envelope bag • Easer to size and design tool, • Requires more material, thus less structural analysis required higher cost and print times • Risk of bag bridging and folding tool • Envelope bag required Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 13

Bagging Methods Table Bag Envelope Bag Surface Bag Envelope bagging preferred: • Does not require a completely sealed surface • Less labor intensive (no or minimal pleats) • Easily possible due to lightweight nature of tools • Care must be taken to not bridge the bag when applying vacuum Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 14

Surface Preparation – Film Application • The preferred approach for this program was using an adhesive- backed fluoropolymer film. • Application was a mature process that achieved repeatable and reliable results. • The process initially exceeded surface roughness requirements before cure, however print- through was observed after subsequent cures. This could be remedied with a thicker film or fiberglass reinforced film. Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 15

Metrology Collection • Tolerances – CMM Laser Scan • Surface Roughness – Profilometer, record worst value, Ra value • Print Time – Calculated from the tool path file • Mass – Calculated from tool path file and validated via calibrated scale • Surface prep time – Timed, assume no learning curve Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 16

Tool Design, Fabrication and Test Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 17

Tool Evaluation Progression Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 18

Cost and Build Time Evolution 9 $12,000 build days 8 $10,000 tool cost ($) 7 1 6 $8,000 Tool Build Time 5 Tool Cost $6,000 4 2 3 3 $4,000 5 2 7 8 4 6 $2,000 1 0 $- Tool 1 to 2 = material removed Tool 3 to 4 = block design to shell design + larger tip size Tool 4 to 5 = single-piece to multi-piece tool Tool 5 to 6 = multi-piece to single-piece tool Tool 6 to 7 = addition of stabilizing wall during print Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 19

Tool # 007 Printed stability wall allows us to achieve tolerance requirement. Full Size Tool: $4,507, 2.4 day build Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 20

Tool # 008 The Final Tool Tooltec – surface film ULTEM 1010 resin tool ASA support base (not to be cured) Full Size Tool: $4,507, 2.4 day build Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 21

Additive for Composite Tooling Using mature and commercially available equipment (Stratasys Fortus 900MC) and material (Stratasys ULTEM1010 resin), and following AFRL’s provided tool geometry, a tool was delivered with the following properties. – $4,507 total cost to machine owner – 57.5 hours to build (no machining required) – One-hour of surface prep (includes application of film, aka Tooltec) – 16.5 lb tool weight – 31 µin max surface roughness, Ra (this number was measured before the first cure cycle) – +/- .030” tolerances – Multiple 350 ° F, 90 psi cure cycles completed successfully Tooling Using FDM and ULTEM 1010 Resin is Viable for 350 °F, 90 psi Processing Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 22

Additive Tooling Recommendations • Shell tool designs over a traditional block tool designs. • Use unfilled ULTEM 1010 resin material if its coefficient of thermal expansion is tolerable or the tool may be designed to accommodate the expansion. • Use a solid geometry for the shell tool design. If it’s a unique tool design that benefits from sparse-fill, hexagram core geometry is recommended, however FEA and/or testing may be required. • Ideally build with a large tip size paired with thicker Tooltec surface film to achieve an acceptable surface finish and surface seal. • Epoxy repairs recommended using Hysol-9394 epoxy. When repairing complex, compounded surfaces, a matched, printed pressure caul is useful. • Leverage the design freedom additive provides and incorporate additional features if possible (thermocouple pathways/mounting, shop aids, etc.) It’s important to take advantage of the design freedom that traditional manufacturing methods do not allow for. Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 23

Reference - Tool Repairability Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 24

Tool Repair Evaluation Distribution A – AFRL Public Relations Case Number: 88ABW-2017-1554 25

Stratasys Composite Tooling Solutions 26