Dimensional variability characterization of additively manufactured lattice coupons

BACKGROUND: Additive manufacturing (AM), commonly called 3D Printing (3DP), for medical devices is growing in popularity due to the technology’s ability to create complex geometries and patient-matched products. However, due to the process variabilities which can exist between 3DP systems, manufacturer workflows, and digital conversions, there may be variabilities among 3DP parts or between design files and final manufactured products. The overall goal of this project is to determine the dimensional variability of commercially obtained 3DP titanium lattice-containing test coupons and compare it to the original design files. METHODS: This manuscript outlines the procedure used to measure dimensional variability of 3D Printed lattice coupons and analyze the differences in external dimensions and pore area when using laser and electron beam fabricated samples. The key dimensions measured were the bulk length, width, and depth using calipers. Strut thickness and pore area were assessed for the lattice components using optical imaging and µCT. RESULTS: Results show a difference in dimensional measurement between printed parts and the computer-designed files for all groups analyzed including the internal lattice dimensions. Measurements of laser manufactured coupons varied from the nominal by less than 0.2 mm and results show averages greater than the nominal value for length, width, and depth dimensions. Measurements of Electron Beam Melting coupons varied between 0.4 mm-0.7 mm from the nominal value and showed average lengths below the nominal dimension while the width and depths were greater than the nominal values. The length dimensions of Laser Powder Bed Fusion samples appeared to be impacted by hot isostatic press more than the width and depth dimension. When lattice relative density was varied, there appeared to be little impact on the external dimensional variability for the as-printed state. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, we can conclude that there are relevant variations between designed files and printed parts. However, we cannot currently state if these results are clinically relevant and further testing needs to be conducted to apply these results to real-world situations.