Skip to main content

Manufacturing and Security Challenges in 3D Printing

Abstract

As the manufacturing time, quality, and cost associated with additive manufacturing (AM) continue to improve, more and more businesses and consumers are adopting this technology. Some of the key benefits of AM include customizing products, localizing production and reducing logistics. Due to these and numerous other benefits, AM is enabling a globally distributed manufacturing process and supply chain spanning multiple parties, and hence raises concerns about the reliability of the manufactured product. In this work, we first present a brief overview of the potential risks that exist in the cyber-physical environment of additive manufacturing. We then evaluate the risks posed by two different classes of modifications to the AM process which are representative of the challenges that are unique to AM. The risks posed are examined through mechanical testing of objects with altered printing orientation and fine internal defects. Finite element analysis and ultrasonic inspection are also used to demonstrate the potential for decreased performance and for evading detection. The results highlight several scenarios, intentional or unintentional, that can affect the product quality and pose security challenges for the additive manufacturing supply chain.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Notes

  1. Though the term “3D printing” traditionally referred only to deposition methods, we are following the popular trend to equate this term with AM.

  2. Other formats are also available but *.STL format is currently by far the most widely used format.

References

  1. W. Gao, Y. Zhang, D. Ramanujan, K. Ramani, Y. Chen, C.B. Williams, C.C. Wang, Y.C. Shin, S. Zhang, and P.D. Zavattieri, Comput. Aided Des. 69, 65 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. D. Lehmhus, T. Wuest, S. Wellsandt, S. Bosse, T. Kaihara, K.-D. Thoben, and M. Busse, Sensors 15, 32079 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. S. Shaffer, K. Yang, J. Vargas, M.A.D. Prima, and W. Voit, Polymer 55, 5969 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. Das, and V.K. Balla, in Additive Manufacturing, ed. by A. Bandyopadhyay, S. Bose (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2015), pp. 297–326

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. S.-H. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell, S. Roundy, and P.K. Wright, Rapid Prototyp. J. 8, 248 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. J.P. Moore, and C.B. Williams, Rapid Prototyp. J. 21, 675 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. A.R. Torrado, C.M. Shemelya, J.D. English, Y. Lin, R.B. Wicker, and D.A. Roberson, Addit. Manuf. 6, 16 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. M. Sugavaneswaran and G. Arumaikkannu, Mater. Des. A 66, 29 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. O. Ivanova, C. Williams, and T. Campbell, Rapid Prototyp. J. 19, 353 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. N. Shamsaei, A. Yadollahi, L. Bian, and S.M. Thompson, Addit. Manuf. 8, 12 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. T. Childs, C. Hauser, and M. Badrossamay, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. B 219, 339 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. E. Louvis, P. Fox, and C.J. Sutcliffe, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 211, 275 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. M. Seifi, M. Dahar, R. Aman, O. Harrysson, J. Beuth, and J. Lewandowski, JOM 67, 597 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. H. Tang, M. Qian, N. Liu, X. Zhang, G. Yang, and J. Wang, JOM 67, 555 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. P. Mercelis and J.-P. Kruth, Rapid Prototyp. J. 12, 254 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Zhang, Q. Cai, and J. Liu, Mater. Manuf. Process. 27, 1267 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. D. Gu, Z. Wang, Y. Shen, Q. Li, and Y. Li, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255, 9230 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. O. Harrysson, D. Marcellin-Little, and T. Horn, JOM 67, 647 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. L.J. Wells, J.A. Camelio, C.B. Williams, and J. White, Manuf. Lett. 2, 74 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. J. Slotwinski, A. Cooke, and S. Moylan, NIST IR (2012), p. 7847

  21. J. Slotwinski and S. Moylan, NISTIR (2014), p. 8005

  22. B.P. Conner, G.P. Manogharan, A.N. Martof, L.M. Rodomsky, C.M. Rodomsky, D.C. Jordan, and J.W. Limperos, Addit. Manuf. 14, 64 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. ASTM E8–15a Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, Tech. Rep. (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2015)

  24. ASTM D638-14 Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014).

  25. J.F. Rodrguez, J.P. Thomas, and J.E. Renaud, Rapid Prototyp. J. 7, 148 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. B.E. Carroll, T.A. Palmer, and A.M. Beese, Acta Mater. 87, 309 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. S. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell, S. Roundy, and P.K. Wright, Rapid Prototyp. J. 8, 248 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. ASTM F2792–12a Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Tech. Rep. (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2012)

  29. M. Bogers, R. Hadar, and A. Bilberg, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 102, 225 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. L. Sturm, C. Williams, J. Camelio, J. White, and R. Parker, Proceedings of International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, TX, (August 4–6, 2014), pp. 951–963

  31. R. Karri, J. Rajendran, K. Rosenfeld, and M. Tehranipoor, Computer 43, 39 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. J. Rajendran, O. Sinanoglu, and R. Karri, Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE), Grenoble, France, (18–22 March, 2013), pp. 1259–1264

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Fei Chen and Dr. Khalid Shahin for assistance with this work. The NYU-TSE Vice Dean for Research, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship, Dr. Kurt Becker, is thanked for providing an institutional fellowship to Fei Chen to contribute to this project. The authors acknowledge the Global Research Initiative Grant from NYU Abu Dhabi to Drs. Gupta and Shahin. Useful discussion with Dr. Dirk Lehmhus of IFAM, Germany is acknowledged. Parts of this work are supported by the Office of Naval Research Grant N00014-10-1-0988. The views and conclusions contained in this work are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as presenting the official policies or position, either expressed or implied, of the ONR or the U.S. Government unless so designated by other authorized documents. The proprietary and trade names mentioned are owned by their parent companies. Mention of any machines or products does not imply endorsement by the authors or funding agencies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikhil Gupta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zeltmann, S.E., Gupta, N., Tsoutsos, N.G. et al. Manufacturing and Security Challenges in 3D Printing. JOM 68, 1872–1881 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-1937-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-1937-7

Keywords

  • Finite Element Analysis
  • Tool Path
  • Additive Manufacturing
  • Selective Laser Melting
  • Selective Laser Sinter