TPRIOR_Final_Dissertation

BEng Aerospace Engineering,
Astronautics and Space Technology
Thomas Daniel Prior
K1111289
Supervisor: Dr. Malcolm Claus
Submission date: 7th May 2015
Faculty: Science, Engineering and Computing (SEC)
Kingston University London

2
K1111289
Abstract
Within additive layer manufacturing (ALM), more commonly known as Three-
Dimensional (3-D) Printing, there are a variety of new and bright ideas as to
where this vastly untapped method of manufacture could take the boundaries of
technology. The applications of ALM are, at present time, quite small and not on
a commercial scale. Large, mass-produced products, which have the potential to
be fabricated within the constraints of a 3-D printer, are so far not making the
transition.
Since the start of the space age over half a century ago, the awe (and almost
obsession) for the betterment of society through the medium of space has not
subsided. Common household items, cars, mobile phones and plenty more are
becoming dependant on the advancements in the space industry, and this is no
different. ALM in space could be a very substantial rung on the ladder that is the
progression of the space age.
This Project is the continuation of “3-D printing for Space Applications” by Abdi
(2014), a former student at Kingston University (KU). This project will look to
improve and enhance the work that has already been completed.

3
K1111289
Table of Contents
1.1 Nomenclature .........................................................................................................6
1.2 Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................7
1.3 Aims..................................................................................................................................8
1.4 Project Tasks and Deliverables..............................................................................8
1.5 Project risks...................................................................................................................9
1.6 Project schedule........................................................................................................11
1.7 Project Significance .................................................................................................12
2.0 Literature review......................................................................................................13
2.1 Brief history of 3-D Printing...........................................................................................13
2.2 Method to 3-D Printing.....................................................................................................14
2.3 Different types of 3-D Printing ......................................................................................14
2.4 Materials................................................................................................................................16
2.4.1 Plastics.......................................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.2 Metals............................................................................................................................................ 16
2.5 3-D printed part on the International Space Station.............................................17
2.6 Abdi Dissertation (2014).................................................................................................18
3.0 Components and Fabricated Parts .....................................................................19
3.1 Topographic Model............................................................................................................19
3.1.1 Method.......................................................................................................................................... 19
3.1.2 Uses and Applications............................................................................................................ 20
3.1.2 Issues............................................................................................................................................. 20
3.2 CubeSat Structure...............................................................................................................20
3.2.1 Applications of a CubeSat ..................................................................................................... 22
3.2.2 Method.......................................................................................................................................... 22
4.0 Business Plan............................................................................................................. 22
4.1 Market Research.................................................................................................................23
4.1.1 Market Growth.......................................................................................................................... 23
4.1.2 Audience...................................................................................................................................... 24
4.1.3 Low cost ventures.................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.4 Precedence.................................................................................................................................. 26
4.2 Financial ................................................................................................................................26

4
K1111289
4.2.1 Cost Analysis.............................................................................................................................. 26
4.2.2 Investment.................................................................................................................................. 28
4.2.2.1 Sales......................................................................................................................................................... 28
4.2.2.2 Investment decision analysis........................................................................................................ 32
4.3 Business Factors .................................................................................................................34
4.3.1 Environmental Impact......................................................................................................... 35
................................................................................................................................................ 36
4.3.2 Technological advancements............................................................................................ 39
4.3.3 Political and legal ................................................................................................................ 40
4.3.4 Economic Impact................................................................................................................. 40
4.3.5 Social Impact......................................................................................................................... 41
4.4 Business Conclusion and Investment Decision ................................................41
5.0 Conclusion................................................................................................................... 42
5.1 Future Work.........................................................................................................................43
6.0 References................................................................................................................... 44
7.0 Bibliography............................................................................................................... 46
8.0 Appendix...................................................................................................................... 47
8.1 Price Comparisons.............................................................................................................47
8.2 Dissertation Poster............................................................................................................49

5
K1111289
Table of Figures
Figure 1 - Gantt chart .................................................................................................................. 11
Figure 2 - 3-D printer Example................................................................................................ 14
Figure 3 - First ever additively manufactured part off-Earth (Credit: NASA)....... 17
Figure 4 - STL file of Terrain Map made by Tom Prior .................................................. 19
Figure 5 - Ahmed Abdi Separated CubeSat parts ............................................................. 21
Figure 6 - Solidworks Part Created by Tom Prior............................................................ 21
Figure 7 - Finished Component (Image from Tom Prior)............................................. 22
Figure 8 - Market Growth Analysis – Canalys.................................................................... 23
Figure 9 - Precedence -Cardiff University purchase AM250........................................ 26
Figure 10 - Renishaw Pricing Quote...................................................................................... 29
Figure 11 - PESTLE analysis ..................................................................................................... 34
Figure 12 - Conventional fabrication vs. additively manufactured........................... 35
Figure 13 - Solid Billet Arm Environmental Impact........................................................ 36
Figure 14 - Lattice Arm environmental impact................................................................. 37
Figure 15 - Topologically Optimised Arm Environmental Impact ............................ 38
Figure 16 - Environmental Impact over product lifecycle for all fabricated
monitor arms.................................................................................................................................. 39
Table of Tables
Table 1 - Risk assessment framework.....................................................................................9
Table 2 - Risk Assessment......................................................................................................... 10
Table 3 - Cost Analysis Trade-off............................................................................................ 26
Table 4 - Gas Usage....................................................................................................................... 27
Table 5 – Purchase Estimates .................................................................................................. 30
Table 6 - Purchase estimates 2................................................................................................ 31
Table 7 - Investment decision analysis ................................................................................ 32
Table 8- Price Comparisons...................................................................................................... 49

6
K1111289
1.1 Nomenclature
Number Word Abbreviation
1 Additive Layer Manufacturing ALM
2 Kingston University KU
3 Three-Dimensional 3-D
4 Computer Aided Design CAD
5 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ABS
6 Selective Laser Sintering SLS
7 Fused Deposition Modelling FDM
8 Stereolithography SLA
9 Polylactic Acid PLA
10 StereoLitho File STL
11 Direct Metal Laser Sintering DMLS
12 National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
NASA
13 International Space Station ISS
14 Compound Annual Growth Rate CAGR
15 General Electric GE
16 Research and Development R&D
17 Aurora Labs AL
18 Cardiff University CU

7
K1111289
1.2 Acknowledgements
The Author of this report would like to express appreciation to Renishaw Ltd,
Kingston University Laboratory Team, and Dr. Malcolm Claus for the support
shown throughout this project.

8
K1111289
1.3 Aims
There are 3 main aims in the project:
1. To design, manufacture a CubeSat structure using three-dimensional
techniques. Further study into 3-D printed models will be made.
2. A summary of how terrain mapping could be done using 3-D printing.
This could be done in tandem with another project, Asteroid Mining.
Research into how and if these two can work together.
3. Devise a business plan in to how a 3-D metal printer can be beneficial to
Kingston University.
1.4 Project Tasks and Deliverables
 Develop a Computer Aided Design (CAD) model using SolidWorks. This
will be then used as the design for the 3-D printer to manufacture.
 Use the KU 3-D printer to manufacture a designed component.
 Present final component at the end of the project.
 Create a business plan for a 3-D metal printer. This will require extensive
research in to 3-D metal printing, business concepts, business criteria and
market research. The outcome of the business plan is to try and present
the necessity of KU to acquire and possess a 3-D metal printer.
 Do market research by investigating other areas of Kingston University
and whether there is a requirement for a 3-D metal printer.
 Look in to 3-D terrain mapping and whether it can have a positive effect
on the space industry.
 Keep a logbook of progress for final assessment at the end of the project.
 A final report on all happenings during the project.

9
K1111289
 A poster artistically depicting the project from start to finish.
 A final presentation, talking to an audience of my peers and superiors
through my project, including problems and constraints I had, methods I
used and why my project was a success or a failure.
 Any CAD drawings that have been used throughout the project.
 CD/DVD containing all project material (CAD drawings, CubeSat or
manufactured parts, test results any computer simulations or modelling
undertaken).
1.5 Project risks
Presented in Table 1 is a framework through which risks for this project will be
evaluated. It ranks the likelihood of an event, against the potential consequence
that can be caused on the project. So, for example, if an event is unlikely to
happen but has a moderate potential consequence, then the rating is 2:3 and
rated as a ‘medium’ risk. The risks are also colour-coded for clarification
purposes.
A risk assessment is carried out to help forecast the projection of the project.
Without a risk assessment it is hard to know where the dangers within the
Likelihood Potential Consequence
Negligible Minor Moderate Major Extreme
5 Almost
certain
Medium High Very High Very
High
Very High
4 Likely Medium Medium High Very
High
Very High
3 Possible Low Medium Medium High Very High
2 Unlikely Low Low Medium High High
1 Rare Low Low Low Medium High
Table 1 - Risk assessment framework

10
K1111289
project are going to come from. Any potential risks are detected, evaluated and
mitigated using the framework provided.
Table 2 - Risk Assessment
Risk Likelihood Potential
consequence
Rating Risk mitigation
Loss of work 1 4 Medium Keep back up of files and save
regularly.
Lab
unavailability
3 3 Medium Could have multiple bookings for the
labs at any one time. Make sure
scheduling is done so that labs can
be booked well in advance
Materials
unavailability
2 3 Medium Keep schedule on track and pinpoint
materials needed early on.
Scheduling
and time and
management
4 3 High Create a Gantt chart so that a clear
schedule is easy to keep to.
Hardware
Failure
2 4 High The KU 3-D printer has a
history of malfunction, so this
risk needs to be highlighted.
Making sure that designs are
ready for printing in good time
so that if there is a failure,
there is time for the machine
to be fixed.

11
K1111289
1.6 Project schedule
A schedule is a pivotal part of any project. It helps with time management, and
gives a clear insight in to what needs to be done. It can also help any observer or
supervisor gauge the current progress of the project. This is made easier by the
use of a Gantt chart (Figure 1). Gantt charts use the following features to present
the progress:
 Use a bar to symbolise the duration of the specific task. The bar will start
on the first day of the task and finish on the projected finish of the task.
Any overrun tasks (lag) will be represented on the chart.
Figure 1 - Gantt chart

12
K1111289
 The bars are colour-coded to show progression. Green is completed,
turquoise is currently in progress and blue is yet to be started.
 Have a black line through the centre of the coloured bar to signify the
percentage of completion of the task
1.7 Project Significance
The up and coming technological emergence of additive manufacture is already
showing massive signs that it is the future of widespread manufacture. This
project will attempt to assess the current climate of 3-D printing and whether or
not now is the time to invest. This will be very helpful to Kingston University,
who are hoping to purchase one in the future and would like to devise a business
plan before doing so.

13
K1111289
2.0 Literature review
A literature review is conducted at the beginning of a report to enhance the
knowledge of the subject area. It also helps identify areas to research and
pinpoints topics that will be helpful to the report.
2.1 Brief history of 3-D Printing
 1984 – Charles Hull, the founder of 3D systems, invents the idea of Stereo-
lithography, a process of 3-D printing.
 1992 – The first 3-D printing machine was created by 3D systems LTD.
 2002 – A synthetic kidney was engineered by scientists and began a
leading institute in regenerative medicine to contemplate the fabrication
of working organs using 3-D printing methods.
 2006 – New method of 3-D printing was created named “Selective Laser
Sintering” (SLS). Thus making mass production of 3-D printed parts more
viable. In addition, a machine is developed that can print on multiple
materials at once.
 2008 – First human prosthesis is additively manufactured in the form of a
fully functional leg, complete with foot, knee and sockets. Also
successfully attached and walked upon.
 2009 – 3-D printed blood vessel, first to be artificially made.
 2011 – Engineers at the University of Southampton make the world’s first
3-D printed functional aircraft. Unmanned aircraft built in 7days at the
price of £5000. Also features elliptical wings that are difficult and
expensive to make using conventional fabrication methods.
 2011 – iMaterialize is the first company to 3-D print materials such as
Gold and Silver. Potential for jewellery companies to manufacture at
much lower cost.
 2014 – First off-earth 3-D printed part is manufactured aboard the
International Space Station

14
K1111289
2.2 Method to 3-D Printing
 A CAD model will be made using CAD software.
 The model will be uploaded to the ALM device (3-D printer).
 Then the printer will create the part using a very innovative method.
This method is:
1. A laser beam is sent down to solidify the necessary materials.
2. The elevator raises and lowers the platform to create the layers.
3. The materials in the vat are then created layer by layer.
The main characteristics of a 3-D printer that differentiates it from any
conventional fabrication machine, a lathe of instance, is that it tackles the part
layer by layer. The part is broken down in to numerous horizontal layers and
then fabricated part by part.
2.3 Different types of 3-D Printing
 Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) (type that is used in metal 3-D
printing) – A very powerful laser is beamed down, which then heats and
fuses powdered material layer by layer into the desired shape.
Advantages of this method are:
o The process is quick and efficient.
o There are very minimal curing requirements.
Figure 2 - 3-D printer Example

15
K1111289
o Can use a wide range of materials.
o Minimal structural support needed during fabrication.
Disadvantages of this method:
o Handling can be difficult, especially when exchanging materials in
the powder to other materials.
o The method can cause a rough finish on the exterior of the part,
not ideal for professionals.
 Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) – Heats the material to a semi-
liquid state and then deposits the material around a ‘scaffold’. Advantages
are:
o Low cost.
o Environmentally friendly, which is very important in the modern
world.
o The part is structurally resilient on the parallel plane to
manufacture.
o Ribbing, caused by a wobble in the material, is a possible
occurrence.
o The part is not as structurally resilient on the perpendicular place
to manufacture.
o The process can take a long time to finish.
 Stereolithography (SLA) – A powerful light source is beamed down into
the base of the printer that is filled with a highly photosensitive liquid.
Advantages are:
o A high level of accuracy.
o A good surface finish, more suitable for professional usage.
o Most famous method with the most heritage.
o The need for curing.
o The most expensive method.

16
K1111289
2.4 Materials
2.4.1 Plastics
Common materials used within a three-dimensional printer can include metals
such as: gold, silver, titanium and more. However, the most commonly used
material is Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) plastic.
There are an abundance of positives to using ABS, including:
 Bright, deep colours.
 Good surface finish.
 Great aesthetical features.
 Dimensionally stable.
Polylactic acid (PLA) is another plastic that is commonly used with a 3-D printer.
The main talking points of PLA are: it is biodegradable, it uses renewable items
such as cornstarch or sugarcane and it is very environmentally friendly.
ABS and PLA are both thermoplastics. Thermoplastics get their name because
when they are subjected to a heat source, they become malleable and can be
manipulated into different shapes. Once they are then left to cure they go back to
a solid state and therefore make for good, editable materials.
2.4.2 Metals
The main metals used for 3-D printing are:
 Stainless Steel.
 Titanium.
 Aluminium.
 Nickel Alloy.

17
K1111289
Metals are 3-D Printed using the DMLS (Direct Metal Laser Sintering) process. A
very fine metal powder is melted with a laser to produce the design layer by
layer. This process is relatively efficient, as any unused powder in the DMLS is
recycled and used for the next design. The main cause for concern with 3-D metal
printing is the cost. It costs substantially more to additively manufacture metal
structures than plastic ones. Although, the obvious implications of a metal
structure being much more reliable, valuable and sought-after could scare off
any potential suitors with the considerable price.
2.5 3-D printed part on the International Space Station
Figure 3 - First ever additively manufactured part off-Earth (Credit: NASA)
On November 24th 2014, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) and Made In Space INC were successful in additively manufacturing a
component outside of the Earth’s atmosphere. The 3-D printer, on-board the
International Space Station (ISS) created the casing for an extruder plate aboard
the spacecraft. This represents a massive step in the age of off-Earth
manufacturing. The extruder casing was a part chosen deliberately, with the
purpose of highlighting the fact that now, with this advancement in 3-D printing

18
K1111289
technology, a spacecraft could in simple terms; heal itself. If a part on a
spacecraft malfunctions or misbehaves, then a machine, such as a 3-D printer,
could create a better and more functional part, right there and then on the
spacecraft.
The Mission, named “3-D printing in zero gravity”, was sponsored by NASA and
developed by Made in Space INC. There were several aims to this mission:
 Manufacturing a part outside of the Earth’s atmosphere for the first time.
 Analysing ABS plastic and how it behaves in a microgravity environment.
 A large comparison between ALM in microgravity and on earth. Tests are
hard to complete on parabolic flights as print times for parts always last
longer than the microgravity period created during the flight.
 Investigating the feasibility of an ‘on-demand’ service for fabricating parts
in space. This could keep the itinerary down to the essential parts of a
mission, and remove the need for an abundance of contingency parts in
case of malfunction.
The results of this mission proved that the machine would in fact be successful in
a zero or microgravity environment, and that the printer was to be taken to the
ISS for testing.
2.6 Abdi Dissertation (2014)
The aim of this project was to design, three-dimensionally print and test 3
different components for spacecraft missions. These were a CubeSat, a fuel tank
and fins for the rocket. The project was, as a whole, slightly uninformative and
gave no definitive answers or insights into the desired aims. This project will
look to improve the quantity and quality of work done, in particular, the case of

19
K1111289
the business plan that was short and offered no real purpose. The project was
very restricted in the fact it was focused on tensile testing for the CubeSat. The
report had no real deliverables due to the disassembly of the CubeSat.
3.0 Components and Fabricated Parts
3.1 Topographic Model
Topographic Modelling, or Terrain Mapping, is a very useful feature for all types
of mission planning. Within space, a new and exciting use for Terrain Mapping is
the role in Asteroid Mining. Terrain Mapping is a huge technology that is made
possible by the space industry. Satellites can use state of the art cameras in
remote sensing missions to assess and photograph the planetary body. These
pictures are then fed through to computer software, such as TerrainScupltor,
Terrain tools® or jthatch.com, which can then use this data and produce a CAD
concept and finally, be manufactured in a 3-D printer.
Figure 4 - STL file of Terrain Map
3.1.1 Method
In Figure 4, there is a designed terrain map. The process of creating this map was
to gather the data from the website ‘jthatch.com’. This was then uploaded to
Solidworks, the choice of CAD software, and manipulated and edited to the
desired specification. Once this was completed, the necessary step to take is to

20
K1111289
convert the Solidworks Part file to a Stereolitho (STL) file. This is so the file can
be sent to the 3-D printer in the KU lab and then printed.
3.1.2 Uses and Applications
The main and intended use for the terrain map was to present the potential to
collaborate with Daniel Brewer, a fellow KU student, in order to model the
surface of an asteroid. Mr Brewer had been tasked with designing an asteroid
mining vehicle and for some of the aspects of the design, the terrain of the
asteroid must be factored and accounted for. Using previous or upcoming remote
sensing missions of the asteroid, the data can be utilised to create a topographic
model of the landing area for Mr Brewer’s designed vehicle.
3.1.2 Issues
As portrayed in the risk assessment (Table 2), there are multiple issues that can
go wrong and jeopardise a project. During the curing process of the
manufacturing, there was a malfunction, and the layering of the part did not
adhere and therefore did not achieve the sought after outcome. As per the risk
assessment, the part was designed and manufacture was attempted with time to
spare, to allow for potential mishaps or malfunction. Due to the many
possibilities for the failure, there was not sufficient time to explore and
troubleshoot them all. Therefore, a suitable replacement and alternative
component needed to be made.
3.2 CubeSat Structure
As an alternative component, the simple choice was to re-create the component
from the 2014 report, a 1U CubeSat. However, there were some modifications in
the design, size and method of manufacture. For instance, in Figure 5 the parts
from last year were 3-D printed separately and adhered at a later date.

21
K1111289
Figure 5 - Ahmed Abdi Separated CubeSat parts
Conversely, it was decided that in this project, the CubeSat would be created as
an already fully formed component. Also, the sizing was slightly scaled down, so
the formed component was a 0.7 scale of a 1U CubeSat. Below, in figures 6 and 7
is the depiction of the Solidworks file and the finished component.
Figure 6 - Solidworks Part
Created by Tom Prior

22
K1111289
Figure 7 - Finished Component
3.2.1 Applications of a CubeSat
The CubeSat market is growing exponentially. All reputable space agencies have
utilised them; more and more missions are beginning to involve them. The main
use of them thus far is for remote sensing missions of the Earth.
In this case, the only use of this will be for a classroom prop in order to teach
within the class.
3.2.2 Method
The Cube Sat was created using an almost identical method to the terrain map. A
SolidWorks drawing was made from scratch, although it was inspired by several
different concepts of CubeSat designs. This file was then saved as an STL file and
uploaded to the KU 3-D printer. Once printing was complete, the CubeSat was
put in a tank for curing purposes. Curing is performed by inserting the freshly
printed component into a liquid bath, in this case a sodium hydroxide solution,
and left to help the materials bind together and improve the surface finish. Once
the part is taken out of the curing tank, it is lightly heated to help dry, and is then
completed; ready for use.
4.0 Business Plan
The main deliverable of this project is a business plan for Kingston University to
purchase a metal 3-D printer. During this section, there will be many aspects of
the market, cost and potential sales opportunities discussed, followed by a
recommendation of investment by the author.

23
K1111289
4.1 Market Research
The purpose of market research is to gather data and information on current and
potential customers. This involves looking at a variety of aspects of the market
including:
 Market growth
 Cost analysis
 Target market audience
 Market Performance
The market research will be carried out on the market of 3-D printing as a whole;
however there will be some more magnified research on metal 3-D printing -
which is more relevant.
4.1.1 Market Growth
The growth within 3-D Printing is evident for all to see. Throughout the last few
years, established and esteemed companies have delved into the 3-D printing
market. Canalys, a market coverage company, provide some fantastic market
growth projections for the 3-D Printing market as a whole:
Figure 8 - Market Growth Analysis

24
K1111289
Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) is an indication as to how much the
business or market is growing within a certain time frame. The formula for
calculating CAGR is:
𝐶𝐴𝐺𝑅 = ((𝐸/𝐵)1/𝑁
) − 1
E = Ending Value
B = Beginning Value
N = Number of Years
Simply, the higher the value of CAGR, the more successful the business was at the
end of the time period, compared to the beginning.
The growth within businesses in the recent years has been substantial, most
notably: within the accomplished and esteemed business circle, General Electric
(GE). GE are the main proprietors in a joint venture company called ‘CFM
International’. CFM international manufactures the Leading Edge Propulsion
Aviation (LEAP) jet engine, which is a High-Bypass turbofan engine. A new
proposal has been made, and commissioned, to additively manufacture the
injectors for the LEAP engine. GE have a target of one hundred thousand
injectors to be made by the end of 2018, however, it is predicted that, with the
current 3-D printing fabrication capabilities, only a more modest 35000 injectors
will be in use by that year. Since the successful completion and insertion of a 3-D
printed injector in the LEAP engine, there has been a rapid rise in the 3-D
printing industry. Proposals for fuel nozzles and turbine blades among others
have now been made and the expansion doesn’t seem to be slowing down. Also
with CFM international, a huge 1 billion dollar investment has been made into
the Research and Development (R&D) area of the company, specifically to
concentrate on advancements within additive manufacture. GE have expanded
the 3-D printing into other projects which, again, highlights the growth within
the market.
4.1.2 Audience
The target market for 3-D printing is vast and could be used for almost anything.
However, 3-D metal printing has certain markets that will invest more heavily in
than others. These sectors include:

25
K1111289
 Aerospace
 Automotive
 Dental
 Medical
 Jewellery
The biggest step forward, perhaps not in quantity, but in funding is through the
aerospace market. Aerospace has always been a very affluent and cost-heavy
industry, and 3-D printing could help decrease costs of manufacture. High
profile businesses such as GE have found this extremely useful. The substantial
cost of fabrication that occurs within the jurisdiction of GE can be significantly
lowered using 3-D printing, and although there will be some other costs
triggered, such as higher R&D investment and high start-up costs. Consequently,
the long-term investment is, in reference to the Canalys estimates, seen as a good
and beneficial one.
4.1.3 Low cost ventures
3-D printing may be reducing cost for fabrication, but there are still substantially
high start-up costs. This includes buying the 3-D printer itself, which, for top-end
standard can cost up to £1million per printer. One of the main deterrents for
companies to make the transition to additive manufacture is the huge initial
investment, however there could be a solution. Aurora Labs (AL) are currently in
the process of creating an affordable metal 3-D printer capable of mass
production. The 3-D printers, called S1, S2 and S2+, use a new and unexplained
method of 3-D printing called ‘Acute Angle Printing’. AL have started a
Kickstarter fund with the aim of being able to release the printer for as low as
$4000. This price would only apply to funders towards the projects, with prices
of the final model believed to be above $100,000. Other ventures, such as
MatterFab, have created very capable printers at a sub $100,000 prices, well
below the current market prices. These companies show promise that the initial
investment for additive manufacture can become affordable and even more
investment-worthy.

26
K1111289
4.1.4 Precedence
Precedence of a university purchasing a metal 3-D printer does exist. It shows
that other universities have seen the investment as worthwhile and beneficial, so
this can work as a case study.
Figure 9 - Precedence -Cardiff University purchase AM250
Cardiff University (CU) have been using 3-D printing technology for a number of
years, and they have now added the Renishaw AM250 metal laser melting to the
list of printers owned.
The AM250 costs approximately £340,000. CU have used their 3-D printing
equipment to manufacture for the Ariane rocket family, among others. This
shows a huge sales potential, for such a reputable company.
4.2 Financial
4.2.1 Cost Analysis
Within a cost analysis, the initial, future and potential costs are evaluated.
A simple cost analysis was performed, and table 3 shows a sample of a trade-off
between the printers. A full trade-off will be put in the appendix.
Name Size
(Inches)
Build
(Inches)
Resolution
(Microns)
Precision
(Microns)
Price (£)
X1-LAB 38 x 28 x
42
1.5 x 2.3 x
1.3
100 64 95,000
Optomec
Lens MR-7
118.8 x 59
x 98.4
11.8 x 11.8
x 11.8
25 25 255,000
Renishaw
AM250
66.9 x 31.5
x79.7
9.8 x 9.8 x
11.8
25 70 340,000
EOS M 400 256 x 236 x
130
15.8 x 15.8
x 15.8
16 90 990,000
Table 3 - Cost Analysis Trade-off

27
K1111289
Table 3 shows the purchase price of a 3-D printer, although there are many other
costs involved and to be considered, such as:
 Operating costs – The cost of keeping the 3-D printer fully operational
and up to the standard required.
 Depreciation – The time period where effectively the residual value of the
3-D printer becomes zero. This is regarded as five years.
 Running costs – Day-to-day costs to run the machine. Cleaning, staff and
power costs all fall under this category.
 Miscellaneous costs – All unexpected costs that can, and probably will,
occur.
Under operating costs, the lasers cause the highest amount of expenditure. The
laser head may need to be changed on a yearly basis and this can be up to £1000.
Renishaw
Initial fill (Litres) 400
Number of builds per year 150
Start-up usage (Litres) 60,000
Gas usage per hour (Litres) 50
Hours run per Year 4000
Total gas usage (Litres) 260,000
Cost per litre (based on bottled
gas costs)
£0.003
Cost of gas per annum £780.00
Table 4 - Gas Usage
Also, the gas that is used for the laser (usually Argon) needs to be replaced, as
each build can use up to 50 litres of gas per hour. Based on a modest usage of 3
average sized builds a week, equalling approximately 50 hours, there will be a
usage of 62400 litres of Argon. Using the cost per litre displayed in table 4, 0.003
per litre, and the start-up usage, it costs approximately £800 per year to supply
the printer with necessary amount of gas.
Due to the increased knowledge gained within this report from Renishaw, it is
suggested that the Renishaw AM250 be the chosen machine, should the
investment be deemed worthy.

28
K1111289
4.2.2 Investment
4.2.2.1 Sales
Renishaw are a company that facilitate the use of 3-D metal printing. Companies
that may not wish to part with the large amount of money to buy their own 3-D
printer can use Renishaw to purchase 3-D printed parts at low cost. Also,
Renishaw are renowned for their environmental regard, shown in their low
power consumption and low gas consumption.

29
K1111289
Figure 10 - Renishaw Pricing Quote
Figure 10 shows a pricing quote from Renishaw. This has the potential to be a
pricing structure to adhere to from a sales point of view.

30
K1111289
KU (£)
Number of parts made per year (3 per week as
an estimate) 156
Price to buy each part from Renishaw 261
Cost to buy from Renishaw each year 40716
Inflation of price based on average of last 12
months rates (0.4%) year 1 40879
Total cost to buy from Renishaw 205215
Table 5 – Purchase Estimates with 3 parts a week
In Table 5, purchase estimates have been made. These are based on the
assumption that 3 builds would be made a week, and have similar stature,
material and detail as the part shown in Figure 10. The price calculated to
purchase for 5 years would be approximately £205,000.
Also, there are discounted rates for creating more parts at once. Another quote,
as can be seen in the appendix 8.1, shows that 4 parts made at once can actually
halve the cost to just 130 pounds per part. This could present a more savings, as
shown in Table 6.
Depending on the logistics and demand, the 5-year purchase order could be as
low as £140,000.

31
K1111289
KU (£)
Number of parts made per year (4 per week as an
estimate) 208
Price to buy each part from Renishaw 130
Cost to buy from Renishaw each year 27040
Inflation of price based on average of last 12 months
rates (0.4%) year 1 27148
rates (0.4%) year 2 27257
rates (0.4%) year 3 27366
rates (0.4%) year 4 27475
Cost to buy from Renishaw 136286
Table 6 - Purchase estimates with 4 parts a week
With these purchase orders, they can then be compared with the cost of owning
a 3-D printer and the accompanying financial implications. Based on this
purchasing data displayed in Table 5, it can be assumed that maybe, if the output
was doubled, then the figure of £205,000 could be the sale figure with KU
creating an average of 3 models per week for external companies. These
companies could include aerospace giants, smaller companies looking to
manufacture on a small scale or even other universities. Using all the
aforementioned incomes and expenditures, an investment decision analysis can
take place, and results of which will be highlighted in Table 7.

32
K1111289
4.2.2.2 Investment decision analysis
A total initial investment of £340,000 is counteracted by an annual return of
approximately £27,000 in sales. These are based on the following assumptions:
 Sales pricing structure is similar to that of Renishaw in Figure 10.
Investment
decision making
year 0 year 1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5
Cost of Renishaw
AM250 (chosen
printer)
-340,000 0 0 0 0 0
Running Costs 0 -1500 -1500 -1500 -1500 -1500
Operating Costs 0 -2000 -2000 -2000 -2000 -2000
Miscellaneous
Costs
0 -1000 -1000 -1000 -1000 -1000
Residual Value
(value the printer
could potentially
be sold for)
306000 244800 183600 122400 61200 0
Sales
potential/revenue
0 27144 27253 27362 27471 27581
Net total of
revenue - costs
-340,000 22,644 22,753 22,862 22,971 23,081
Opening balance 0 -340,000 -317,356 -294,603 -271,742 -248,771
Closing balance -340,000 -317,356 -294,603 -271,742 -248,771 -225,690
Total profit made
after initial
investment
114,310
Total cost of
machine after 5
years
-225,690
Table 7 - Investment decision analysis

33
K1111289
 3 models created on average per week every year for external companies
and a maximum of 2 for internal projects within KU.
 Depreciation of the printer lasts 5 years.
 Parts are ordered one at a time.
 All costs are estimates and could be more or less depending on
unforeseen circumstances.
 There are no additional costs like promotional or advertising costs to be
considered.
As can be seen in Table 7, the total amount of money that will be spent after 5
years is £225,000. This compares to maximum value £205,000 and minimum
value of £130,000 if the parts were ordered from Renishaw. There are plenty of
talking points to this, summarised as:
 The £225,000 value may be higher, this could be a suitable figure to pay in
order to have the facilities enabling university to create what is required
when it is required and not having to rely on external companies.
 Although the final figures are relatively similar, the initial investment
value is a substantial amount, and could potentially be financially
crippling depending on budget.
 Sales are not guaranteed, and could fluctuate up or down depending on
supply and demand.
 No values include material cost, as materials could be far and wide in
terms of value, E.g. Gold and Steel, so estimating would be futile. This
means again, that the price of purchasing would be greater than the
stated value.
 There could be more suitable or acceptable printers to choose from, other
than the Renishaw AM250. For example, a cheaper printer would reduce
the huge initial investment or a more advanced printer could significantly
improve the revenue stream.
 The printer could be sold before the depreciation period for the values
stated, this could potentially be a good form of income if the sales do not
meet the desired amount. Also, the depreciation is valued at 5 years,

34
K1111289
although the machine can definitely keep working past that stage.
However, whether a business will continue to purchase is another matter.
Ultimately, even if the sales do diminish, if the printer still works, the
internal projects can still be made for years to come.
4.3 Business Factors
In this section, the possible factors than can affect a business will be discussed.
These range between:
 Environmental – The impact a 3-D printer can have on the environment
and why that is an issue for the business.
 Technological – The issues with the ever-growing knowledge within the
technology.
 Political and legal – The political and legal issues that must be considered
and abided by.
 Economic – The effect on the economy that 3-D printers can have.
 Social – How 3-D printing affects people and the social community.
This is commonly known as a PESTLE analysis
Figure 11 - PESTLE analysis
Political
Economical
Social
Technological
Legal
Environmental

35
K1111289
4.3.1 Environmental Impact
The factors effecting big business are plentiful, not least environmental. The
environment is becoming a big factor in how all businesses are run in the
modern world. To acknowledge this, the following figures will outline the
environmental impact 3-D metal printers can have.
Figure 12 - Conventional fabrication vs. additively manufactured
Figure 11 shows 3 different components: monitor arms. As shown, arm number
1 (far left) is made from solid billet, and will be made using conventional
fabrication methods. Arm numbers 2 and 3 will be made using additive
manufacture techniques. The first piece of data seen is the difference in weight
between all 3 arms. Additive manufacture gives the creative freedom needed to
manufacture parts at a low weight, but keeping the factor of safety high, and
therefore keep the structural strength as high as a solid part.

36
K1111289
Figure 13 - Solid Billet Arm Environmental Impact
Figure 12 indicates the C02 output from the solid billet from the point of the view
of the suppliers. The output from: collecting and creating the materials ready
from machining, the manufacturing process in machines and the distribution to
customers. As can be seen, the amount of CO2 is high for the materials, although
appears low for manufacture and distribution. To find out, comparisons can be
made from Figure 13.

37
K1111289
Figure 14 - Lattice Arm environmental impact
Now comparisons can be made, it is clear to see that the lattice structure is much
more environmentally friendly than the solid billet. Although the lattice
structure does emit more CO2 during manufacture, the distribution and
particular the materials output is a lot higher.

38
K1111289
Figure 15 - Topologically Optimised Arm Environmental Impact
As can be expected from looking at Figure 11, the topologically optimised arm
with a higher mass will have a higher CO2 output than the lattice. Although, for
the advantages of having an optimised part, the negligibly higher CO2 levels
produced can probably be allowed, especially as they are still considerably lower
than the solid billet CO2 levels.

39
K1111289
Figure 16 - Environmental Impact over product lifecycle for all fabricated monitor arms
Figure 15 conclusively shows the total output of CO2 from beginning to end for
each monitor arm.
The main outcome from these figures is that additive manufacture shows not
only is it positive for the environment, but also so much more cost efficient. As
previously mentioned, DMLS is the method used for metal 3-D printing and this
is a relatively efficient process: with the unused powder being used again for the
next design. This is beneficial when creating the lattice structure, as lots of
material is saved, as opposed to the solid billet.
Every business has a social obligation to be ‘green’. Political pressure as well as
the general public has the environment as a top priority and every business
should be seen as compliant.
4.3.2 Technological advancements
When investing, particularly in something as technologically complex as a 3-D
printer, advancements in the technology can happen and must be taken in to

40
K1111289
consideration. Once the 3-D printer is purchased, the technology will continue to
be researched and developed, and can ultimately lead to the purchased printer
becoming antiquated and obsolete. This can have a windfall of effects:
 Sales can suffer due to customers purchasing from companies with more
up-to-date technology. This can range from details such as a better
surface quality finish, to cheaper methods of manufacture.
 Re-sale of the printer may become almost impossible, with better options
on the market and similar prices.
 The 3-D printing market can become much larger, making it easy to
research, forecast and invest.
4.3.3 Political and legal
Political and legal issues are normally constraints that are implicated for safety
of the general public. Misuse of the 3-D printers will possibly be controlled by the
government: monitoring the production and distribution and assigning serial
numbers to identify who owns the machine. Misuse could include:
 Production of regulated goods. Recently, a working fire-arm was created
within a 3-D printer, therefore creating an extremely potent legal issue.
 Production of counterfeit products. In the same way a counterfeit
banknote can be made with relative ease from a laser jet printer, it can be
quite simple to create non-legitimate items using the 3-D printer, so this
is an issue that must be addressed.
 Copyright issues. Creating non-legitimate items using the 3-D printer can
be relatively simple; an issue that must be addressed.
Due to all these issues, regulations are likely to be commonplace and plentiful.
4.3.4 Economic Impact
3-D printings can have multiple effects on the economy. The main causes of these
effects would be:
 Traditional manufacturing will become less common and eventually seize,
therefore eliminating jobs.
 Imports will be reduced, and distribution costs will go down.

41
K1111289
 Will reverse the effect of globalisation.
4.3.5 Social Impact
The influence of 3-D printing on the social sector is increasing at an exponential
rate. As explained in the legal section, copyrighting is an issue, but theoretically
in the modern age of social media, 3-D printing designs can be shared and
manufactured. Also, the futuristic allure of 3-D printing makes it a very
interesting subject for people of all ages and educational backgrounds to
investigate.
A major issue would be the IT literacy required to operate 3-D printers, and the
high technological content that goes in to designing and manufacturing.
4.4 Business Conclusion and Investment Decision
Based on all the information gathered in this business plan, the investment
decision is not as simple as yes or no. However, a recap on the points learned:
 Cardiff University have found it necessary and worthy of investment, so
there is precedence and therefore a reason to believe that success is
possible and a justification for KU to do the same.
 By 2018, the 3-D printing market is forecast to be 4 times larger than it
currently is; a total of approximately $16 billion.
 High profile companies such as General Electric are investing heavily in
additive manufacture. Including purchasing 3-D Printers, purchasing 3-D
printed parts from external companies and funding Research and
Development.
 High aerospace market investment in additive manufacture
 Aurora Labs among others trying to cut huge initial costs with new
technology and funding programs.
 Renishaw pricing structure, that can be applied to sales as an estimation
 Costs of running 3-D printer including:

42
K1111289
o Operating costs
o Running costs
o Depreciation
o Miscellaneous costs
 The cost of purchasing the Renishaw AM250 with a sales option or
without.
 The cost of purchasing 3-D printed parts from Renishaw instead of
purchasing the printer.
 The gas usage of a metal 3-D printer.
 The political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental
issues surrounding a 3-D printer.
Overall, looking especially at the low price of purchasing the parts straight form
Renishaw, it is of the author’s opinion that investment would not be worthwhile
form a financial standpoint. Although, if finance was not too much of an issue,
there are many positives to owning a 3-D printer and maybe worth the sum
calculated in the report.
5.0 Conclusion
Overall the project on a whole met the deliverables required. However, there
were some alterations along the way, and compared to the planning report the
project has diverted away from the initial aims. The report has been very
informative of 3-D printing, whilst being concise and to the point.
The business plan has all the important informative information, and as the main
deliverable has accounted for the main part of the report. It adequately covered
the main issues regarding purchase, financial figures and extended information
on the market of 3-D printing.
The component handed in was supposed to be a topographic model, but due to
machinery malfunction, the component handed in is now a 3-D printed CubeSat.

43
K1111289
5.1 Future Work
Further work could be done on the manufacturing part, and creating the
topographic model to help Mr Brewer in his project. Troubleshooting the design
or manufacturing fault could lead to a successful fabrication. Also more work can
be done in the case of how the 3-D printing of CubeSats could be a significant
step in space manufacture.

44
K1111289
6.0 References
i. Palo Alto, Canalys. (2014). 3D printing market to grow to US$16.2 billion
in 2018. Available: http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/3d-printing-
market-grow-us162-billion-2018 [Last accessed 23rd February 2015]
ii. Unknown (2011). Brief History of 3-D printing. Available:
http://individual.troweprice.com/staticFiles/Retail/Shared/PDFs/3D_Pri
nting_Infographic_FINAL.pdf. [ Last accessed 5th October 2014]
iii. Chilson, L. (2013). The Difference between ABS and PLA for 3D Printing.
Available: http://www.protoparadigm.com/news-updates/the-difference-
between-abs-and-pla-for-3d-printing/. [Last accessed 9th November
2014]
iv. 3D alchemy. (2012). 3D Printing in Metals. DMLS.. Available:
http://www.3d-alchemy.co.uk/3d-printing-metals.html. [Last accessed
9th November 2015]
v. Wall, M. (2014), Space Station's 3D Printer Makes 1st Part. 2014.
Available: http://www.space.com/27861-3d-printer-space-station-first-
part.html. [Last accessed 11 December 2014]
vi. Abdi, A (2014,) 3-D printing for Space Applications.
vii. Head in the clouds. (Unknown). PESTLE analysis. Available:
https://sites.google.com/site/headinthecloudsconsultancy/pestle-
analysis. [Last accessed 15th march 2015]
viii. Scottish Government. (2008). The risk management of HAI: A Methodology
for NHS Scotland. Available:
http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2008/11/24160623/3. [Last accessed
10th October 2014]
ix. Unknown. (Unknown). What is 3D printing?. Available:
http://3dprinting.com/what-is-3d-printing/.m [Last accessed 9th
November 2014]
x. http://jthatch.com/terrain2stl/ [Last Accessed April 12th 2015]
xi. Phil Hudson. Kingston University StudySpace, lecture - Investment
decision making [Last accessed 28TH April]
xii. Molitch-Hou, M . (2014). Cardiff University Purchases Renishaw AM250
for Metal 3D Printing. Available:
http://3dprintingindustry.com/2014/11/04/cardiff-university-renishaw-
am250-metal-3d-printing/. [Last accessed 28th April]

45
K1111289
xiii. Renishaw. stephen.crownshaw@renishaw.com. Pricing Enquiry. [9th
February 2015]
xiv. Aniwaa. (Unknown). Compare 3D Printers. Available:
http://www.aniwaa.com/3d-printers/compare-3d-printers/. [Last
accessed 9th February 2015]

46
K1111289
7.0 Bibliography
i. Abdi, A (2014,) 3-D printing for Space Applications.
ii. Zaccaria, O (2014) Investigation into the Design and Operation of Pulse
Jet Engines
iii. ESA. (2014). Ten ways 3D printing could change space. Available:
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Engineering_Technology/Ten_
ways_3D_printing_could_change_space. [Last accessed 10th January
2015]
iv. Nevius, D (2013), Lunar 3D Printing
v. Naval Postgraduate School (2010), Direct Manufacturing of CubeSat Using
3-D Digital Printer and determination of Its Mechanical Properties
vi. Dr. Jackson, R (unknown), Horizon 2020, NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND
OPPURTUNITIES IN 3D PRINTING

47
K1111289
8.0 Appendix
8.1 Price Comparisons
Price Comparisons Metal 3-D printers
Name Size
(Inches)
Build
(Inches)
Resolutio
n
(Microns)
Precision
(Microns
)
Price
(1000'
s £)
Arcam A2 72.8 x 35.4
x 86.6
7.9 x 7.9 x
13.8
13 N/A 545
Arcam A2x 72.8 x 35.4
x 86.6
7.9 x 7.9 x
15
13 N/A 625
Arcam A2xx 72.8 x 35.4
x 86.6
13.8 x
13.8 x 15
13 N/A 705
Arcam Q10 72.8 x 35.4
x 86.6
7.9 x 7.9 x
7.1
100 N/A 320
Realizer SLM 35.4 x 31.5
x94.5
4.9 x 4.9 x
3.9
20 N/A 165
Realizer SLM250 70.9 x 39.4
x 86.6
9.8 x 9.8 x
9.8
20 N/A 250
Matsuura Lumex 100 x 72 x
82
9.8 x 9.8 x
11.8
25 25 640
BeAm VI LF 4000 79.1 x 26.9
x107.1
37.4 x
35.4 x
19.7
100 N/A 350
BeAm VH LF 4000 174.6 x
40.3 x
137.8
25.6 x
27.6 x
19.7
20 N/A 545
Concept Laser MLAB
cusing
25.7 x 72.2
x 37.6
3.5 x 3.5 x
3.1
20 N/A 230
Concept Laser M3
Linear
108.7 x
78.4 x 85.8
13.8 x
13.8 x
11.8
20 N/A 350

48
K1111289
Concept Laser M2
Cusing
99.6 x 64.2
x 92.5
9.8 x 9.8 x
9.8
20 N/A 295
Concept Laser M1
Cusing
92.9 x 60.2
x 90.5
9.8 x 9.8 x
9.8
20 N/A 230
Phenix Systems PXL 94.5 x 86.6
x 94.5
9.8 x 9.8 x
11.8
20 100 320
Phenix Systems PXM 47.2 x 59 x
76.8
5.5 x 5.5 x
3.9
20 100 190
Phenix Systems PXS 47.2 x 30.3
x 76.8
3.9 x 3.9 x
3.1
100 100 100
BeAm VC LF 500 59 x 27.6 x
39.4
15.8 x
15.8 x 7.9
20 N/A 225
SLM solutions SLM
250 HL
65 x 94.5 x
39.4
9.8 x 9.8 x
11.8
20 150 190
SLM solutions SLM
280 HL
70.9 x 94.5
x 39.3
11 x 11 x
13.8
20 200 260
SLM solutions SLM
125 HL
53.1 x 94.5
x 31.5
4.9 x 4.9 x
4.9
50 140 130
Ex-One M-Point 128.7 x
100 x
112.6
31.5 x
19.7 x
15.7
100 70 130
Ex-One M-Flex 66 x 50.3 x
61.1
15.7 x 9.8
x 9.8
100 664 190
X1- Lab 38 x 28 x
42
1.5 x 2.3 x
1.3
25 64 95
Optomec Lens 450 39.3 x 39.3
x 59
3.9 x 3.9 x
3.9
25 25 193
Optomec Lens 850R 118.1 x
118.1 x
118.1
35.4 x 59
x 35.4
25 25 835
Renishaw AM250 66.9 x 31.5
x 79.7
9.8 x 9.8 x
11.8
20 70 340

49
K1111289
SLM solutions SLM
500 HL
118.1 x
98.4 x 43.3
19.7 x 11
x 12.8
20 180 320
Realizer SLM50 31.5 x 27.6
x 19.7
2.7 x 2.7 x
1.6
100 N/A 105
Envision 3D
Bioplotter Developer
Series
38.4 x 24.5
x 30.4
5.9 x5.9 x
5.5
28 70 120
Optomec Lens MR-7 118.8 x 59
x 98.4
11.8 x
11.8 x
11.8
25 25 255
EOS INT 760 189 x 189
x 118
27.6 x 15
x 22.9
60 N/A 550
EOS M 400 256 x 236
x 130
15.8 x
15.8 x
15.8
16 90 990
Table 8- Price Comparisons
8.2 Dissertation Poster

TPRIOR_Final_Dissertation

More Related Content

What's hot (6)

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to TPRIOR_Final_Dissertation (20)

TPRIOR_Final_Dissertation