Interesting study done on Laser Beam Powder Bed Fusion porosity. Is it safe to say every 3D methodology must deal with this issue?
Correct me if I am wrong but if and when Titomic's methodology NEEDS to mitigate this issue, is it safe to say, Isostatic is their go to process?
It seems obvious that whomever solves the porosity issue first and is the most effective, they will gain the most traction depending upon the
strictness of the finished product nearest to legacy methods to manufacture parts.
https://www.voxelmatters.com/titomic-applies-hot-isostatic-pressing-at-ansto/
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/researchers-offer-new-explanation-for-shrinkage-porosity-in-laser-beam-powder-bed-fusion-3d-printing-228662/
General Discussion, page-40
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 359 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add TTT (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
13.5¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $139.3M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 14.0¢ | 14.0¢ | 13.0¢ | $229.2K | 1.716M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 33023 | 13.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 13.5¢ | 99937 | 1 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 06/09/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| TTT (ASX) Chart |