Using total specific cost indices to compare the cost performance of additive manufacturing for the medical devices domain

Abstract

The label additive manufacturing, also known as three-dimensional printing, serves as an umbrella term for a number of technologies designed to deposit product geometries directly from build materials and digital design information. However, as a relatively recent addition to the spectrum of manufacturing processes, the relationship between process type, system characteristics and cost performance is still broadly unclear for several technology types. To address this gap, the current research develops comprehensive and robust additive manufacturing cost models for two less-studied polymeric additive manufacturing technology variants, material jetting and mask projection stereolithography. Despite sharing the fundamental principle of photopolymerization, the operating processes of both systems are markedly different. This is reflected in the constructed cost models, which incorporate process maps to capture ancillary process elements, ensure efficient capacity utilisation through optimised build volume packing and approximate the expected cost impact of build failure. On this basis, this article estimates a set of specific cost indices reflecting the overall total cost performance of the investigated systems in an example application from the medical devices domain. Specific cost results range from £2.01 to £1.19/cm3 deposited on the Objet Connex 260 system and from £1.59 to £1.00/cm3 of material deposited on the Perfactory system. These results are discussed in the context of similar cost indices extracted from the empirical engineering literature. This article shows that next to increases in build speed, improvements in overall process automation and process stability are needed to enhance the commercial proposition of the investigated technology variants.

Influence of processing parameters on the density of 316L stainless steel parts manufactured through laser powder bed fusion

“…1,2 AM comprises different types of technologies which allow the production of parts from different materials, such as metals, polymers or ceramics, but all are based on the same layer-by-layer building principle that allows parts to have complex geometries which would be very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain by subtractive manufacturing (SM) technologies. 3,4 One of the technologies available for metal AM is laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), in which a bed of powder metal is selectively melted with a laser, according to the geometry of the layer of the part being produced. Then, another layer of powder is added, and the process is repeated until the final part is obtained.…”

Construction of lean-green coordinated development model from the perspective of personnel integration in manufacturing companies

“…The ideas and tools of lean and green manufacturing have been used in the operation and management of manufacturing companies, which has greatly promoted the efficiency and energy optimisation. 16–23…”

Water-based 3D inkjet printing of an oral pharmaceutical dosage form

“…It has been showed in the past that it is a highly programmable technology that is easily customised, making it ideal for personalisation (Fox et al, 2017). The productionisation of inkjet printing is at topic that has been investigated for medical devices by Baumers et al, 2018. The authors investigate factors that impact manufacturing of heavily regulated products including the risk of build failure and develop a cost model.…”

“…The authors investigate factors that impact manufacturing of heavily regulated products including the risk of build failure and develop a cost model. The authors notes that the results from this research are critical to inform future work on the viability of AM for it to be adapted by any industry (Baumers et al, 2018).…”