Additive manufacturing (AM) is becoming increasingly attractive for aerospace companies due to the fact of its increased ability to allow design freedom and reduce weight. Despite these benefits, AM comes with manufacturing constraints that limit design freedom and reduce the possibility of achieving advanced geometries that can be produced in a cost-efficient manner. To exploit the design freedom offered by AM while ensuring product manufacturability, a model-based design for an additive manufacturing (DfAM) method is presented. The method is based on the premise that lessons learned from testing and prototyping activities can be systematically captured and organized to support early design activities. To enable this outcome, the DfAM method extends a representation often used in early design, a function–means model, with the introduction of a new model construct—manufacturing constraints (Cm). The method was applied to the redesign, manufacturing, and testing of a flow connector for satellite applications. The results of this application—as well as the reflections of industrial practitioners—point to the benefits of the DfAM method in establishing a systematic, cost-efficient way of challenging the general AM design guidelines found in the literature and a means to redefine and update manufacturing constraints for specific design problems.

In recent years, reducing cost and lead time in product development and qualification has become decisive to stay competitive in the space industry. Introducing Additive Manufacturing (AM) could potentially be beneficial from this perspective, but high demands on product reliability and lack of knowledge about AM processes make implementation challenging. Traditional approaches to qualification are too expensive if AM is to be used for critical applications in the near future. One alternative approach is to consider qualification as a design factor in the early phases of product development, potentially reducing cost and lead time for development and qualification as products are designed to be qualified. The presented study has identified factors that drive qualification activities in the space industry and these “qualification drivers” serve as a baseline for a set of proposed strategies for developing “Design for Qualification” guidelines for AM components. The explicit aim of these guidelines is to develop products that can be qualified, as well as appropriate qualification logics. The presented results provide a knowledge-base for the future development of such guidelines.

For space manufacturers, additive manufacturing promises to dramatically reduce weight and costs by means of integral designs achieved through part consolidation. However, integrated designs hinder the ability to change and service components over time – actually increasing costs – which is instead enabled by highly modular designs. Finding the optimal trade-off between integral and modular designs in additive manufacturing is of critical importance. In this article, a product modularisation methodology is proposed for supporting such trade-offs. The methodology is based on combining function modelling with optimisation algorithms. It evaluates product design concepts with respect to product adaptability, component interface costs, manufacturing costs and cost of post-processing activities. The developed product modularisation methodology is derived from data collected through a series of workshops with industrial practitioners from three different manufacturer companies of space products. The implementation of the methodology is demonstrated in a case study featuring the redesign of a satellite antenna.

No abstract

This paper studied how the introduction of additive manufacturing (AM) in space applications impacts the design phases. Together with three manufacturers of space applications, the potential benefit as well as constraints are studied to identify design gaps. A literature survey is conducted to match the needs and following an analysis the impact on design practice is formulated. Results show the need to combine a wider design exploration capability, in combination with comparative modelling strategies.