Additive Mfg.

You are currently browsing the archive for the Additive Mfg. category.

15 June 2017: The Additive Manufacturing Metals met in St. Gallen, Switzerland, at the INSPIRE facility on 15 June, 2017 to discuss the development of the cluster and its deliverables. Below are the related documents and report for the meeting.


AM Clustering Workshop Report

IMS International Overview – AM meeting


25 July 2017: Meeting VIA WebEx. The primary aim of the meeting is to complete the discussion started in St Gallen about the role and scope of the IMS metal cluster activity, planning activities next 12 months and agreeing a vision for the cluster in the future.


-Review actions from previous meeting

-Scope of IMS metal cluster #2 activity

-Working with the other IMS clusters

-Links to other AM networking activities

-Activities over the next 12 months

-What information we can share and best method of sharing this information

-Potential to form an international AM database (Paula from Prodinet)

-Potential collaborative projects and vision for future of cluster

-Plan of meetings (including face to face meeting in 2018 – location/date)

-Plan for the meeting in Mexico > this may need to come earlier in the agenda


(Report Pending)

IMS Additive Manufacturing Cluster Report

Industrially Robust AM Chain

Prabir Chaudhury, Global Metals Technology Director Designate


The objective of the cluster is to develop an industrially robust Metal Additive Manufacturing (MAM) supply chain in order to establish MAM as a global mainstream manufacturing technology. Work will include development of cost effective and performance specific raw materials, testing and qualification protocols, generation of design properties database, enhancement of machine capabilities, and identification of NDT techniques and in-situ quality testing. This cluster will also examine (a) the opportunities in use of low cost powder via machine enhancement or by using novel processing techniques and (b) enhancement of MAM surfaces for net shape manufacturing. This cluster will involve users of the MAM technology and its supply chain from raw material to finished and qualified metal parts. This report is a short synopsis of the discussion in Barcelona on May 2nd and a tentative plan arising from the discussions. The intention of this report is to inform the members about the opportunities and scope of the Cluster to put together a comprehensive plan for future collaboration.

Cluster Formation: At the IMS meeting in Barcelona on May 2nd, the Industrially Robust AM Chain cluster was formed based on the review of exploitable results (ERs) from the AM enthusiasts around the globe and interests shown by participants at the workshop.  A total of 54 participants from US, EU, MX, and SA attended the workshop, 39 ERs were reviewed from three disciplines (Metal Parts, Polymer-Ceramic-Biomaterial Parts, and General Technologies), and 6 Clusters were established for further by the attendees. Industrially Robust AM Chain was one of the three in metals AM area. Interested participants from US, EU, SA, and MX joined together to form this cluster. Table below shows all the clusters formed and respective regional leads.


Cluster Name Champion Leads
Industrially Robust AM Chain Prabir Chaudhury (EXOVA) Jeff Grabowski (QuesTek) Paolo Calefati (BOREALIS) Hardus Greyling (CSIR) Cortez Dante (FRISA)
Metals for AM David Wimpenny (AMAZE) Luis Portoles (NANOTUND3D) Dimitri Dimitrov (S. UNIV) Villarreal Gilberto (SISAMEX)
Titanium Aero Structures AM Daniel Safranchik (AATID) Federico Sciammarella (NIU) David Gonzalez Fernández (FOFAM) Willie du Preez (CENT. UNIV)
BioAMplant/IAMI Dirk W. Grijpma (RAPIDOS) Dirk W. Grijpma (RAPIDOS) Gerrie Booysen (CENT. UNIV) Leopold Ruiz (UNAM-MADIT)
Assistive Tools for Extending AM Paula Queipo Rodríguez (FOFAM) Paula Queipo Rodríguez (FOFAM) Deon De Beer (NW UNIV) Hugo Medellin (UASLP)
AM Knowledge Based Decision Support for Industry Jens Pottebann Hans Van Toor (MANSYS)



Cluster Members: Seven teams from all regions of IMS made commitments to join this cluster and discuss the scope and immediate actions for the cluster. The seven teams are: Questek, Exova, AMAZE, Borealis, NDTLBM, FOFAM, and MANSYS. The following Table shows the names of the representatives from each team and their contact information:



Region Last Name First Name email Organization Role
EU Wimpenny David [email protected] MTC Chief Technologist
EU Calefati Paolo [email protected] Prima Industries Innovation Manager
EU Buining Henk [email protected] TNO
EU Valente Anna [email protected] SUPSI Head of Industrial Robotics Systems for Adv. Manufacturing
US Grabowski Jeff [email protected] QuesTek Innovations, LLC Applications Manager
US Chaudhury Prabir [email protected] Exova Technical Director
MX Cortez Dante [email protected] FRISA Manager
MX Tijerina Abraham [email protected] METALSA Manager
SA Greyling Hardus [email protected] CSIR National Laser Centre Manager: Com & Nat Programs


Cluster Discussion: The team of seven committed cluster members discussed the scope of this cluster and came up with the cluster name as Industrially Robust AM Chain. Then a cluster champion was selected and regional cluster leads were identified as shown above. The members decided to incorporate related ERs from the present members and discuss the scope of the cluster. The team also discussed focus on large structures versus small pars limited by the current mahines. It was decided to focus on both large strauctural and small parts in this cluster. Based on these discussions, the goals and objectives were identified as shown below in the order of AM chain from raw material to finished products:

  • Develop new AM alloys for specific performance requirements in various industries
  • Explore machine modifications to use low cost, such as non-spherical powder in powder-based AM processes
  • Develop AM materials property database for design engineers
  • Explore in-process and post processing surface finish enhancement opportunities
  • Develop testing and qualification protocols for process, machine, and product for various industries
  • Investigate in situ quality assurance opportunities
  • Explore Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) techniques for product acceptance.

Action Plan: Although the team discussed technical action plans at the cluster meeting, it is felt that first and foremost we need to focus on organistional action plan. Therefore, the action plans are divided into organizational and technical actions in the order of priority and execution.

Organizational Actions:

  • Develop the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for all partners to sign. This will be done by the regional leads by August, 15 2016.
  • Sign the MOA – All current patners by August 31
  • Recruit additional partners for the cluster from the AM supply chain including: AM alloy developers, powder and rod producers, AM machine developers, AM prototype and part manufacturers, AM product designers and users (OEMs), AM database developers, process and product analysis software developers, destructive and non-destructive testing laboratories, standards agencies, accreditation agencies, and others service providers. This work will be on-going and will be reported regularly at cluster meetings.
  • Coordinate technical actions with other cluster programs to avoid duplication and enhance complementary work.

Technical Actions:

  • Research current machine capabilities for use of low cost, non-spherical powders
  • Research current AM methods for production of large structures
  • Foster collaboration with international standards bodies.
  • Devlop a comprehensive technical program for funding from international sources covering the following issues globally:
    1. Develop new alloys for Aerospace, Energy, Gas and Oil, Automotive, and Medical sectors based on AM process characteristics
    2. Collaborate raw material suppliers for new AM alloys
    3. Develop AM material standards and specifications with international standards bodies
    4. Develop material properties database for engineering design and material and process selection
    5. Develop qualification protocols and standards for AM processes and mchines
    6. Develop protocols and standards for product testing and qualification
    7. Develop NDT methods for in-process and post processing quality assurance
    8. Develop in-process and post processing methods for surface enhancement
    9. Develop AM machines to use low cost raw materials.

Conclusion: Industrially Robust AM Chain cluster is established for international collaboration to rapidly develop AM industry supply chain and assist in global acceptance of AM as a mainsteam manufacturing process.

IMS – Additive Manufacturing Project Clustering

Those interested in the AM Project Cluster may access project summaries, exploitable results, and presentations here.

Download Page


IMS Workshop Summary

11 May, 2016



Abraham Tijerina, IMS Chairman

The IMS Project Clustering Platform facilitates on-going projects to share knowledge, provide broader solutions in less time, reduce research costs, and expand networks through building international coalitions to combine and coordinate project research activities. IMS selects a member region to lead each cluster, and the European Union volunteered to shepherd the Additive Manufacturing Project Cluster. Held in conjunction with the IMS World Manufacturing Forum, the workshop took place 2 May 2016 in Barcelona, Spain, and was facilitated by a local organizer and participant, Fundacio CIM.


Lorenzo Valles, European Commission

To start the process, the European Commission found seventeen on-going projects willing to share exploitable results with other IMS regions at a workshop. IMS searched its network to find twenty-two projects and industrial partners from Mexico (8), South Africa (10), and the United States (4) that expressed interest in the projects and would also offer exploitable results to share. Due to the high level of interest, the Additive Manufacturing theme was divided into three subthemes; metals, polymer-ceramics-biomaterials, and generic technologies. Through the IMS network, the thirty-nine projects shared their exploitable results and respective TRL levels with each other. Prior to the meeting, IMS asked the projects to rate their interests in other projects. When these interests were analyzed by IMS, several possible project clusters became apparent. Because some projects expressed interest in multiple projects, yet most were represented by only one person, a methodology was applied to the workshop to help participants narrow their choice to one project. Using a methodology and materials developed by the IMS team, the participants self-assembled into clusters, and each cluster then identified its members, leadership, goals and objectives, and work plan.


Workshop Support Team

Six clusters were formed as a result of the workshop collaborative process. Three were formed in the metals session, one in the polymers session, and two in the generic technologies session. The six clusters were given IMS standard MOA templates in case the cluster was able to commit to their work immediately. One cluster, “Titanium Aero Structures – AM (TAS-AM)”, signed the MOA and noted that there may be additional cooperation. Additionally, other clusters noted that their initial collaboration would build trust, and additional collaborations in more sensitive areas could develop.







Chair/facilitator: Andrea Gentili, EC RTD

Rapporteur: Mark Carlisle, IMS Regional Secretariat

Garth Williams, IMS Delegate

Picture4Participants in the metals session of the clustering workshop included sixteen metals-related projects as well as three from the “generic technologies” group.  The results of pre-workshop efforts to define and align areas of mutual collaborative interest held up well as the participants voted themselves (via a three-round process) into what turned out to be three working groups for the afternoon portion.  Once the participants became comfortable with the dot-voting process, the process proceeded quickly.

If there was a glitch, it was the fact that the group that coalesced around the AMAZE project did not include the AMAZE representative.  He eventually graciously agreed, however, to move back into that cluster.

The three working groups had quite different paces and group dynamics.  This was likely due in some degree to personalities, but almost certainly also because of the varying quality of “fit” of the projects within each group.

Picture5In the end, participants agreed to collaborate in three clusters: “Titanium Aero Structures – AM” (TAS-AM), “Metals for AM”, and “Industrially Robust AM Chain”.


Cluster 1: Industrially Robust AM Chain

EXOVA was selected by IMS as the central project where a possible cluster could form based on the feedback from our inquiry prior to the workshop.

Picture7Cluster formation process: Round 1 interest from Questek, Exova, FORMING, MedAERO, FRISA, REProMag, AATiD, NANOTUN3D, OXIGEN, NDTLBM, FOFAM, MANSYS.

Round 2 interest from Questek, Exova, FORMING, MedAERO, SISAMex, , OXIGEN, NDTLBM, FOFAM, MANSYS.

Round 3 commitments from Questek, Exova, AMAZE*, Borealis, NDTLBM, FOFAM, MANSYS.

IMS regions represented: EU, SA, US

In the end, the AMAZE representative graciously allowed himself to be pulled from this group by another coalition of projects interested in working with AMAZE. However, AMAZE may still join this cluster.



Cluster formed: Industrially Robust AM Chain

Champion: Prabir Chaudhury (Exova), [email protected]

Members will thrive to develop an industrially robust Metal Additive Manufacturing (MAM) supply chain in order to establish AM as a main stream manufacturing technology. Work will include development of cost effective and performance specific raw materials, properties database, machine capabilities, testing and qualification protocols, NDT techniques and in-situ quality testing. This cluster will involve users of the MAM technology and its supply chain from raw material to finished and qualified metal parts.

Cluster 2: Metals for AM 

Picture9AMAZE was selected by IMS as the central project where a possible cluster could form based on the feedback from our inquiry prior to the workshop.

Cluster formation process:  Round 1 interest from DEDREF, AMAZE, RepAIR, BOREALIS, OXIGEN, Metalsa, NDTLBM.

Round 2 interest from DEDREF, SISAMex, NANOTUN3D, OXIGEN, NDTLBM.

Round 3 commitments from DEDREF, FORMING, SISAMex, NANOTUN3D, OXIGEN, (At the request of these committing projects, the AMAZE representative returned to this group.)

IMS regions represented: EU, SA, MX


Cluster formed: Metals for AM

Champion: David Wimpenny (MTC), [email protected]

Members will define and complete project template by the end of June, and will share Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE) assessments and exchange comments by the end of the year.


Cluster 3: TAS-AM  (Titanium Aero Structures AM)

AATiD was selected by IMS as the central project where a possible cluster could form based on the feedback from our inquiry prior to the workshop.

Picture11Cluster formation process:  Round 1 interest from Questek, FORMING, MedAERO, REProMag, RepAIR, AATiD, NANOTUN3D, OXIGEN, FOFAM.

Round 2 interest from Questek, FORMING, MedAERO, REProMag, RepAIR, AATiD, NANOTUN3D, FOFAM, MANSYS

Round 3 commitments from, NIU,MEDAERO, REProMag, RepAIR, AATiD, FOFAM

IMS regions represented: EU, SA, US

Cluster formed: TAS-AM  (Titanium Aero Structures AM)

Champion: Daniel Safranchik, Technion, [email protected]

Members will collect and consolidate existing Ti AM technology, with the goal of creating a “comprehensive multi-national specification guideline”.  This will include Ti material properties (throughout production), qualification/certification/testing, and AM technologies and processes.  Gaps will be identified and, if possible, addressed.  Members will investigate external funding opportunities and recruitment of additional collaborators. An MOA was signed and is on file.



Chair/facilitator: German Esteban, EC RTD

Rapporteur: Steve Ray, IMS Coach

The polymers session was a small, fairly homogeneous group that quickly found its central interest and experience in the area of bioactive materials used in medical applications, forming a single collaborative cluster. There was no issue of reconciling conflicting interests, but rather just the issue of capturing the many challenges surrounding the use of additive manufacturing artifacts in the human body. The point was made that the majority of sales in additive manufacturing today are for polymer-based products, which raised the question of why there were so many more attendees representing metals AM rather than the robust and growing polymers sector.

Picture13Seed project: RAPIDOS




Picture14Cluster 1: BioAMplant or IamI                                  

Champion: Dirk W. Grijpma, University of Twente (EU), [email protected]

Leaders from other regions:

Gerrie Booysen – South Africa, [email protected]

Leopoldo Ruiz-Huerta – Mexico, [email protected]

Members will collaborate on developing bioactive printable materials and additive manufacturing methods, either organic or inorganic, that are resorbable by either bone or soft tissue in the human body.



Chair/facilitator: Joaquim Minguella, Fundación Centre CIM, Spain

Rapporteur: David Romero, IMS Coach

Participants in the Generic AM technologies (including software, laser and new materials) session of the clustering workshop submitted thirteen projects, which merged into eleven projects for the workshop activities.Picture15

The results of pre-workshop efforts highlighted the following individual research and development lines as well as exploitable results: Skills-sets curricula for AM, Non-destructive testing for AM, DFX – Design for AM (DfAM), Materials characterization for AM, Occupational-health and Safety for AM, AM as an industrial manufacturing process, AM technologies characterization, CAD and CAE solutions for AM, Maturity Level of AM technologies, Supply Chain Management for AM, Control systems for AM, Optimization technologies for AM processes, and Hybrid approaches for additive and subtractive manufacturing machines.

Picture16During the workshop, to further define and align areas of mutual collaborative interest, participants held a three-round voting process that resulted in two working groups: (WG1) Assistive Tools for Extending Additive Manufacturing, led by the FOFAM project, with a strong focus on developing a toolkit (assistive tools) to support and facilitate the adoption of AM in industry, and (WG2) Additive Manufacturing Knowledge based Decision Support for Industry, led by the iBUS project, with the aim of enabling industry to have access to quality assurance and quality control for AM.

The two working groups had different dynamics for developing their work and action plans, but both were able to present their plans and next steps at the closing session. WG1 was able to bring together the three IMS regions required to become an IMS AM cluster (with the signature of a MOU as next step).   WG2 will pursue the integration of other IMS regions into their cluster, so for now is considered a cluster in-formation.


Cluster 1: Assistive Tools for Extending Additive Manufacturing

DESIGN was selected by IMS as the central project where a possible cluster could form based on the feedback from our inquiry prior to the workshop.


Picture17Cluster formation process:  



Round 3 final interest was expressed from UASLP, CIATEQ, UANL, CAxMAN, CASSAMOBILE, DESIGN, NEXTFACTORY, VITRO, FOFAM.


IMS regions represented: EU, MX, SA


Cluster formed:  Assistive Tools for Extending Additive Manufacturing

Champion: Paula Queipo, FOFAM, [email protected]

Regional Leaders:

Deon De Beer – DESIGN

Paula Queipo – FOFAM

Hugo Medellin – UASLP

HIGHLIGHT: Technology packaging and transfer to Industry.


  • Extending AM technology and knowledge for market deployment.
  • Seamless integration at all levels (integration with conventional technology).
  • Broader applications.
  • New materials availability.
  • Competitive decentralized tools and services for enhancing AM take-up.
  • Interoperable services in a decentralized marketplace.
  • AM for society.
  • Enhancing AM capabilities for new markets.
  • Development of open accessible platforms.
  • Reduce cost of technologies and materials.


  • Technology and market pooling.
  • Integrate AM + Conventional technologies.
  • Design for AM education.
  • Predictable characteristics.
  • R&D of new processes and technologies for AM.
  • Technology packaging.
  • Manufacturability and design capabilities for AM.Picture19
  • Material localization.
  • Technological limits to broad applications.


  • Define collaborative projects/actions.
  • Exploring mechanisms of collaboration.
  • Link projects’ databases.
  • Mapping of AM capabilities and needs.


  • IMS Conference / Workshop.
  • Linking research communities.
  • Contact pool / project pool.
  • “AM-Motion” H2020 CSA tools / events to keep interaction.
  • Connecting existing / ongoing activities.
  • Web-base.


  • IMS
  • Regional leaders
  • Paula Queipo – FOFAM


  • September 2016
  • February 2017
  • End 2017


  • Best practices examples.
  • # Future actions.
  • Running web-base

Cluster 2: Additive Manufacturing Knowledge based Decision Support for Industry

CAXMAN was selected by IMS as the central project where a possible cluster could form based on the feedback from our inquiry prior to the workshop.

Picture20Cluster formation process:  



Round 3 final interest was expressed from iBUS, MANSYS, NDTLBM, CAxMAN.

IMS regions represented: EU



Cluster formed:  Additive Manufacturing Knowledge based Decision Support for Industry

CHAMPION: Jens Pottebann – iBUS (Interim)

[email protected]


Regional Leader:

Hans Van Toor – MANSYS (EU)


  • Interoperability along product lifecycle.
  • Enabling industry with access to quality assurance and quality control for additive manufacturing.
  • Quality assurance.
  • Cloud based system.
  • Rules for design from metrology.
  • Quality vs. Feasibility vs. Economics Trade-offs.
  • Decision Support Software (DSS).
  • AM + Supply Chain Management (SCM).


  • Investigate potential for integration of cloud-based systems.Picture21
  • Packaging exiting tools with cloud-based systems.


  • As a starting incentive to share knowledge.
  • Incentives for knowledge sharing by industry.
  • Codifying knowledge.


  • Explore common interests in the group.
  • Identify opportunities for collaboration.
  • Decide on formalizing collaboration (in terms of IMS clustering).


  • Discuss with FOFAM.
  • Discuss within consortia.
  • Utilize AM EU Consortium meetings.


  • Consortium leaders / representatives:

o   iBUS (EU)


o   CAxMAN (EU)

o   FOFAM (EU)


  • End of June (cp. CECIMO / AM platform events).


  • Develop a roadmap for the cluster.


  • Partner search in other IMS Regions.