MACHINE DESIGN & CAD-I

Additive Manufacturing vs Subtractive Manufacturing

NOVEMBER 27, 2019

MUHAMMAD ABDUL HANAN
BSME01173080
 Abstract
Manufacturing industries and investors are always willing to improve methods to lower price,
energy and extend their capability. Additive manufacturing, started in the 1960s, has since had a
rapid and constant growth, bringing to light novel techniques to enlarge manufacturing ability and
reinvent the wheel. At this stage, research and industry interest lie in defining where AM can swap
or create new manufacturing systems.
Traditional manufacturing refers to subtractive and long-established manufacturing methods,
quality assured and implemented in the commercial space.
This paper reviews the ability of AM and its current development to compete or add to established
traditional manufacturing regions. Literature reveals the capability of AM to fit into established
manufacturing regions for low and high production volume products.
The paper comparison focuses on the similarities, differences, advantages and disadvantages found
in AM vs SM studying the economic and quality management status of the industry today.

Introduction
The rapid proliferation of Additive Manufacturing (AM) in the last 50 years has seen the developing
manufacturing sector integrated into design and modelling as a rapid prototyping technique. AM
better known by the buzzword ‘3D printing’, uses revolutionary technology to create complex
shapes building a part up layer by layer.

Contrary to established Traditional or Subtractive Manufacturing (SM) techniques, whereby

material is either removed via machining, drilling or grinding techniques or casted into molds, AM
has a higher level of design freedom. The ability to fabricate complex parts in one machine and job,
has businesses determined to establish AM as a certified end-user product manufacturing
technique.

AM research and company integration of the technologies has progressed AM from rapid
prototyping to rapid tooling and now to a future in Direct Manufacturing. However, Business and
Manufacturers are divided on whether AM will reach this goal.

High value, low volume manufacturing industries such as Aerospace, have companies such as
General Electric (GE) Aviation predicting a new line of over 100,000 additive parts by 2020.
Alternatively, mass manufacturing industries such as the Foxconn Technology Group, feel “3D
printing is a gimmick”, despite 30 years of working with AM technologies.

AM has integrated numerous manufacturing techniques (powder bed fusion, directed energy
deposition, material extrusion, binder jetting, curing, lamination etc.), to develop an extensive
range of technologies of potential interest to industry. Several comprehensive AM technology
reviews have been documented in previous works for further explanation.

The drive behind the rapid advancement of AM technologies is due to the research focus on
developing low cost machines, increased material variability, and the complexity advantage to cater
to a wide range of applications. New strategies and technologies combine multiple materials
(including hard plastic and elastomers) within a print.
Additive Manufacturing
Additive producing processes build objects by adding material layer by layer, whereas subtractive
producing removes material to form elements. Although these approaches are basically totally
different, subtractive and additive producing processes are usually used aspect by aspect because
of their overlapping vary of applications.

It will at first be tough to grasp a way to create the foremost of every variety of technology to
optimize development and producing. Each have cases wherever it is sensible to use one approach
over the opposite, as an example, one method will be additional helpful for an exact production
volume, or at a selected stage of development.

PR OC ESS MA TER I A L S
Varieties of resin (thermoset plastics), high-
Stereolithographic (SLA) strength, rigid, flexible, elastic, heat-resistant,
castable (wax-like)

Selective laser sintering (SLS) Engineering thermoplastics, such as nylon

Standard thermoplastics, such as ABS, PLA,

Fused deposition modeling (FDM)
and their various blends

Material jetting Varieties of resin (thermosetting plastics)

Binder jetting Gypsum (full color), metals

Selective laser melting (SLM) or

Soft and hard metals
direct metal laser sintering (DMLS)

Electron beam melting (EBM) Soft and hard metals

Subtractive/Traditional Manufacturing
Subtractive producing is associate umbrella term for varied controlled machining and material
removal processes that begin with solid blocks, bars, rods of plastic, metal, or alternative materials
that square measure formed by removing material through cutting, boring, drilling, and grinding.

These processes square measure either performed manually or additional normally, driven by
laptop numerical management (CNC).

In CNC, a virtual model designed in CAD software system is input for the fabrication tool. Software
system simulation is combined with user input to get toolpaths that guide the cutter through the
half pure mathematics. These directions tell the machine the way to create necessary cuts, channels,
holes, and the other options that need material removal, taking into consideration speed of the
cutter and feed rate of the fabric. CNC tools manufacture components supported this computer-
aided producing (CAM) information, with very little or no human help or interaction.

Subtractive producing processes square measure usually accustomed produce components in

plastics or metals for prototyping, producing tooling, and end-use components. They’re ideal for
applications that need tight tolerances and geometries that square measure troublesome to mildew,
cast, or turn out with alternative ancient producing strategies.

PR OC ESS MA TER I A L S
HARD TH ERM OPL ASTICS,
C N C MA C HI NI NG ( TUR NI NG ,
THERM OSET P LA STICS, SOF T
DR I L LI N G , B ORI NG , MI L LI NG ,
M ETALS, HARD M ETALS
R EA MI NG )
( IN DU STRIAL M ACHIN ES )
EL EC TR I CA L DISC HA R G E
HARD M ETALS
MA C HI NI NG ( EDM)
THERM OPLA STIC S, W OOD ,
L A SER C UTTI NG ACRY LIC, FABRIC S, M E TALS
( IN DU STRIAL M ACHIN ES )
PLASTICS, HA RD AN D SOF T
W A TER J ET C UT TI NG M ETALS, STON E, G LASS ,
COM POSITES
 Advantages of AM over SM
Save Time
By utilizing additive producing, you'll be able to get to plug faster by avoiding wasting valuable time
anticipating retooling. If transforming the look is critical, changes will merely be created to the CAD
file and programmed into the 3D printer.

Since Associate in nursing engineer at ProtoCAM will get you a quote in as very little as 2 business
hours, it slow to plug is reduced even further.

Conserve Money
Because retooling is not sensible, you avoid having to acquire the pricey changes to associate in
Nursing production line that retooling will need. This suggests that you just will order one 3D model
at a fraction of what it'd value mistreatment ancient producing, and at ProtoCAM, your worth per
object solely decreases with every further item ordered per print.

Reduce Waste
Unlike ancient producing ways which might lead to various waste which will not be properly
recycled, the sole material that's consumed via additive producing is that the actual material used
for the end-product.

At ProtoCAM, we’re continuously trying to find new ways that to form our producing and shipping
method “greener,” which has introducing product like Expandos, that area unit a recycled
cardboard material we tend to use rather than packing peanuts.

Produce Innovation
With additive producing, you gain the flexibility to form elements that merely can’t be created by
ancient suggests that. Elements will be written with multiple integrated elements, created to dead
work alongside alternative 3D written comes, and embrace gradients of color.

Advances in 3D printable materials implies that the trade will currently print in innumerable new
materials, among the additional ancient organic compound and metal materials. The result's that
stunning, complex, and sturdy finish product will be created through industrial additive producing.

Mix that with the advanced finishing processes offered at ProtoCAM, and your dead rendered
additive factory-made half are going to be presentation-ready at a fraction of the time, cost, and
waste of ancient producing
 Conclusion
This paper reviewed the capability of AM and its current development to compete or add to
established traditional manufacturing technologies. These regions primarily focused on the effect
of production volume, customizability and complexity to determine whether AM or conventional
manufacturing methods on a product type to be fit for purpose. It was concluded that current cost
models for high production volumes are better suited for tradition manufacturing methods,
however the higher the complexity or customization required AM is better suited. Production
volume is an independently important factor, whilst customization and complexity are
interchangeable in terms of impact. The paper comparison also focused on the similarities,
differences, advantages and disadvantages found in AM vs SM studying the economic,
environmental and quality management status of the industry today. AM offers flexibility, which
enables manufacturers to create an optimal design for lean production. AM has created the
opportunity for supply chain simplification and has been successfully been implemented for ‘single
unit and very low-volume production’ in several sectors. AM machines offer production flexibility
but is still a considerably expensive investment compared to traditional manufacturing machines.
AM is cost effective for low-volume/small batch manufacturing with continued centralized
manufacturing rather than distributed manufacturing. The clear advantage for AM vs SM, in terms
of environmental impact, is the reduced wastage of material and resource efficiency. Key
requirements for the penetration of AM in the future into the wider commercial market, include
high process stability, a database containing properties of AM-materials, On-line quality control
processes, continuous certification and provision of design rules. To ensure manufacturers neither
underprepare nor over-invest in QA technologies it is important to evaluate the level of QA required
for each part printed utilizing AM technologies.

Reference
[1] Gao, W., et al., The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in
engineering. Computer-Aided Design, 2015. 69: p. 65-89.
[2] Conner, B.P., et al., Making sense of 3-D printing: Creating a map of additive
manufacturing products and services. Additive Manufacturing, 2014. 1: p. 64-76.
[3] Gausemeier, J., et al., Thinking ahead the Future of Additive Manufacturing–. Future
Applications, 2011.
[4] Gibson, I., D.W. Rosen, and B. Stucker, Additive manufacturing technologies. Vol. 238.
2010: Springer.
[5] Mueller, B., Additive manufacturing technologies–Rapid prototyping to direct digital
manufacturing. Assembly Automation, 2012.