Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimization of the machining of metallic additive manufacturing supports: first methodological approach

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Metal additive manufacturing is an active field of innovation. However, for laser power bed fusion (LPBF), supports removal is a major constraint. In this technology, supports are strongly welded to the part to tightly maintain it, avoid distortion, and evacuate thermal load. Although supports are usually optimized for manual removal, machining is often necessary, which can affect post-processing productivity. This paper proposes a comprehensive methodological approach to optimize the selection of cutting parameters, cutting tools, and support structure for LPBF. The aim is to help additive manufacturers find supports that reduce machining costs in terms of time and cutting tool degradation, from among the numerous support designs available. This approach can also optimize the design of lattice structures used inside parts. Our results show that among the 11 designs tested, honeycomb and squared pattern grid supports are the most efficiently machined using the 8-teeth tangential milling of the 3 tools tested, with a good post-machined surface roughness and tools’ health. The method considers low magnification optical analysis and an accelerometer sensor, which is easy to use even for small- and medium-sized enterprises. This paper also proposes and analyzes a new kind of porous support using this method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the present article.

Code availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the present article.

References

  1. Levy GN, Schindel R, Kruth J-P (2003) Rapid manufacturing and rapid tooling with layer manufacturing (LM) technologies, state of the art and future perspectives. CIRP Ann 52(2):589–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kruth J-P, Mercelis P, Van Vaerenbergh J, Froyen L, Rombouts M (2005) Binding mechanisms in selective laser sintering and selective laser melting. Rapid Prototyp J 11(1):26–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B (2021) Additive manufacturing technologies, 3rd edn. Springer

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Pessard E, Mognol P, Hascoët J-Y, Gerometta C (2008) Complex cast parts with rapid tooling: rapid manufacturing point of view. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 39:898–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kranz J, Herzog D, Emmelmann C (2015) Design guidelines for laser additive manufacturing of lightweight structures in TiAl6V4. J Laser Appl 27(S1):S14001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kruth J-P, Froyen L, Vaerenbergh V, Mercelis P, Rombouts M, Lauwers B (2004) Selective laser melting of iron-based powder. J Mater Process Technol 149(1–3):616–622

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Meiners W, Wissenbach K, Poprawe R (1997) Direct selective laser sintering of steel powder, Proceedings of the LANE’97, vol 97, pp 615–622

  8. Das S, Beaman JJ (2004) Direct selective laser sintering of metals, US6676892

  9. Yap CY, Chua CK, Dong ZL, Liu ZH, Zhang DQ, Loh LE, Sing SL (2015) Review of selective laser melting: materials and applications. Appl Phys Rev 2:041101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. ISO/ASTM 52911–1:2019, Additive manufacturing - design - part 1: laser-based powder bed fusion of metals

  11. Jiang J, Xu X, Stringer J (2018) Support structures for additive manufacturing: a review. J Manuf Mater Process 2(4):64

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mazur M, Leary M, Sun S, Vcelka M, Shidid D, Brandt M (2016) Deformation and failure behavior of Ti-6Al-4V lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM). Int J Adv Manuf Technol 84:1391–1411

    Google Scholar 

  13. Maconachie T, Leary M, Lozanovski B, Zhang X, Qian M, Faruque O, Brandt M (2019) SLM lattice structures: properties, performance, applications and challenges. Mater Des 183:108137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hanks B, Berthel J, Frecker M, Simpson TW (2020) Mechanical properties of additively manufactured metal lattice structures: data review and design interface. Addit Manuf 35:101301

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bobbio LD, Qin S, Dunbar A, Michaleris P, Beese AM (2017) Characterization of the strength of support structures used in powder bed fusion additive manufacturing of Ti-6Al-4V. Addit Manuf 14:60–68

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Günaydın AC, Yıldız AR, Kaya N (2022) Multi-objective optimization of build orientation considering support structure volume and build time in laser powder bed fusion. Materials Testing 64(3):323–338

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Höller C, Hinterbuchner T, Schwemberger P, Zopf P, Pichler R, Haas F (2019) Direct Machining of selective laser melted components with optimized support structures. Procedia CIRP 81:375–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McConahaa M, Venugopala V, Ananda S (2020) Integration of machine tool accessibility of support structures with topology optimization for additive manufacturing, 48th SME North American Manufacturing Research Conference (NAMRC), vol. 47, pp 634–642

  19. Qiu K, Ming W, Shen L, Chen QM (2017) Study on the cutting force in machining of aluminum honeycomb core material. Compos Struct 164:58–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bram M, Kempmann C, Laptev A, Stöver D, Weinert K (2003) Investigations on the machining of sintered titanium foams utilizing face milling and peripheral grinding. Adv Eng Mater 5(6):441–447

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tripathi V, Armstrong A, Gong X, Manogharan G, Simpson T, De Meter E (2018) Milling of Inconel 718 block supports fabricated using laser power bed fusion. J Manuf Process 34:740–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. De Meter E, Chow KH, Marsh E (2019) Methodology of using PAAW and the underlying support network of an L-PBF part to facilitate machining. Procedia Manuf 34:463–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hintze W, Schötz R, Mehnen J, Köttner L, Möller C (2018) Helical milling of bore holes in Ti6Al4V parts produced by selective laser melting with simultaneous support structure removal. Procedia Manuf 18:89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hintze W, von Wenserski R, Junghans S, Möller C (2020) Finish machining of Ti6Al4V SLM components under consideration of thin walls and support structure removal. Procedia Manuf 48:485–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cao Q, Bai Y, Zhang J, Shi Z, Fuh JYH, Wang H (2020) Removability of 316L stainless steel cone and block support structures fabricated by selective laser melting (SLM). Mater Des 191:108691

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cao Q, Shi Z, Bai Y, Zhang J, Zhao C, Fuh JYH, Wang H (2021) A novel method to improve the removability of cone support structures in selective laser melting of 316L stainless steel. J Alloy Compd 854:157133

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Benoist V, Arnaud L, Baili M (2020) A new method of design for additive manufacturing including machining constraints. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 111:25–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Barrett RA, Etienne T, Duddy C, Harrison NM (2017) Residual stress prediction in a powder bed fusion manufactured Ti6Al4V hip stem. AIP Conf Proc 1896:040018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1983) A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures, Proc. of the 7th International Symposium on Ballistics, The Hague, pp 541–547

  30. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strain, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilson-Heida AE, Beese AM (2019) Fracture of laser powder bed fusion additively manufactured Ti–6Al–4V under multiaxial loading: calibration and comparison of fracture models. Mater Sci Eng A 761:137967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang Y, Outeiro JC, Mabrouki T (2015) On the selection of Johnson-Cook constitutive model parameters for Ti-6Al-4V using three types of numerical models of orthogonal cutting. Procedia CIRP 31:112–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rakotomalala R, Joyot P, Touratier M (1993) Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian thermomechanical finite-element model of material cutting. Commun Numer Methods Eng 9(12):975–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pantalé O, Bacaria J-L, Dalverny O, Rakotomalala R, Caperaa S (2004) 2D and 3D numerical models of metal cutting with damage effects. Comput Methods Appl Mech Engrg 193(39–41):4383–4399

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. Egaña A, Rech J, Arrazola PJ (2012) Characterization of friction and heat partition coefficients during machining of a TiAl6V4 titanium alloy and a cemented carbide. Tribol Trans 55(5):665–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the technical service of Cousso and Mr. J.-P. Garreau for their technical and financial assistance, as well as Mr. E. Gervais from Horn company for his help in selecting cutting tools and cutting conditions.

Funding

“Région Occitanie” provided financial support to the CEF3D Mutualized Structure Research platform. This work was carried out within the technical service of Cousso.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mécapole Occitanie, Avenue du Cassou de Herre, 32110, Nogaro, France

    Vincent Benoist

  2. Laboratoire Génie de Production (LGP), Univ. de Toulouse, INP-ENIT, 65016, Tarbes, France

    Vincent Benoist, Maher Baili & Lionel Arnaud

Authors
  1. Vincent Benoist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maher Baili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lionel Arnaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study, conception, and design.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maher Baili.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benoist, V., Baili, M. & Arnaud, L. Optimization of the machining of metallic additive manufacturing supports: first methodological approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 131, 675–687 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11529-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11529-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation