Reader Response Draft #3 (Edited)
The webpage
“Guide to Stereolithography” from Formlabs (2015) introduces the
Stereolithography (SLA) technology. Stereolithography, also referred to as vat
photopolymerization or more simply resin 3D printing, is an additive
manufacturing technique that uses a focused light source to polymerize a
photoinitiated liquid resin into a solid. The SLA may be classified as the most
widely used Rapid Prototyping (RP) method largely because it has many
advantages when compared with other 3D printing methods. Advantages such as
higher precision and resolution (like 1 μm for MicroSLA and 10 μm for SLA as
compared to 100 μm for Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) another type of 3D
printing technology) and complex internal structures in the made parts (Gardan,
2015). Yet, like any other technology, it has its shortcomings, which will be
presented later. The main disadvantages include the very limited range of
photopolymerisable materials available, their relatively high price and
possibly the requirement of additional steps after the fabrication process, to
enhance the physical characteristics or extract excess uncured materials.
(Martinez et al., 2018). As such, the Stereolithography (SLA) Resin 3D Printer
is able to produce durable prototypes and its cost-benefit ratio is high, increasing
its marketability.
The
Stereolithography (SLA) process’s ability to quickly transform Computer Aided
Drawings (CAD) models into functional prototypes within a few hours makes it
very effective for Rapid Prototyping (RP) applications. This method is
achievable by using a focused light source to cure the liquid resin, layer by
layer onto an inverted board, then turning it into a solid (Kushwaha et al.,
2022). Parts and prototypes printed by SLA are robust and are able to withstand
continuous friction forces over time. Due to its printing process, the resin
particles are compactly packed, creating isotropy, which means that materials
are uniform in all directions. As a result, the parts are durable and
long-lasting, thus lowering the maintenance costs of parts (Hague et al.,
2004). Such characteristics encourage users to opt for SLA for applications requiring
reliability and precision, enhancing its market competitiveness.
When compared
to Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA)’s ability to
achieve superior surface finishes stands out as a key differentiator. As FDM
utilises a layer-by-layer ‘hot glue gun’ method that will produce layer lines
upon close inspection of the printed part. In FDM, layers of melted
thermoplastic are fused to produce a 3D shape by being extruded onto a build
platform (FDM vs SLA - 3D Printing Process Breakdown, 2024). These parts would
then need extra post-processing in order to achieve a surface finish which is
acceptable, which would lead to a higher production cost (FDM vs. SLA vs. SLS:
3D Printing Technology Comparison, 2024). Comparing it with FDM 3D printer
parts, SLA 3D printer parts are almost identical to injection-moulded polymers.
Their exceptional surface smoothness makes them perfect for final design review
prototypes and end-use products—even in the consumer goods sector, where
smoothness and surface finish are critical. This level of smoothness strengthens
SLA’s appeal for industries priortizing aesthetic and functional precision.
In contrast,
one downside of parts printed by the SLA printers is that they tend to be
vulnerable to corrosion. As these 3D printed parts are frequently in
environments with corrosive chemicals present and will thus erode the parts and
lose its quality. To counter this problem, industries will use a procedure
called plating to achieve corrosion resistance and shield it from the corrosive
environment. Plating is achieved by using a plating bath and depositing metal
onto the 3D-printed part. This is an additional requirement to attain corrosion
resistance, adding time and expenses to the manufacturing process (Kushwaha et
al., 2022).
To conclude, Stereolithography
(SLA)’s ability to produce parts with exceptional resolution, precision and
surface finish underscores its value as a leading 3D printing technology for
Rapid Prototyping and beyond. It makes it superior to other methods such as the
Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) in many aspects. Despite the higher costs and
need for additional post-processing steps, the durability of SLA printed parts
enhances their marketability and application in various industries. However,
its printed parts face challenges such as material limitations and
vulnerability to corrosion. Overall, SLA’s advantages in producing detailed and
robust prototypes outweigh its higher costs and therefore provide a high
cost-benefit ratio. This makes SLA an indispensable tool in various industries demanding
precision and quality.
Edited 29/11/2024
References
Formlabs. (2015). Guide to stereolithography (SLA) 3D
printing. Formlabs. https://formlabs.com/asia/blog/ultimate-guide-to-stereolithography-sla-3d-printing/
Gardan, J. (2015). Additive manufacturing technologies:
State of the art and trends. International Journal of Production Research,
54(10), 3118–3132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1115909
Robles Martinez, P., Basit, A. W., & Gaisford, S.
(2018). The history, developments, and opportunities of stereolithography. In
A. Basit & S. Gaisford (Eds.), 3D printing of pharmaceuticals: AAPS
advances in the pharmaceutical sciences series (Vol. 31, pp. 1–26).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90755-0_4
Kushwaha, A. K., Rahman, M. H., Hart, D., Hughes, B.,
Saldana, D. A., Zollars, C., Rajak, D. K., & Menezes, P. L. (2022).
Fundamentals of stereolithography: Techniques, properties, and applications. In
Tribology of additively manufactured materials (pp. 87–106). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-821328-5.00003-2
Formlabs. (2024). FDM vs. SLA vs. SLS: 3D printing
technology comparison. Formlabs. https://formlabs.com/asia/blog/fdm-vs-sla-vs-sls-how-to-choose-the-right-3d-printing-technology/
Markforged. (2024). FDM vs SLA - 3D printing process
breakdown. Markforged. https://markforged.com/resources/blog/fdm-vs-sla
Hague, R., Mansour, S., Saleh, N., & Harris, R. (2004).
Materials analysis of stereolithography resins for use in rapid manufacturing. Journal
of Materials Science, 39(7), 2457–2464. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jmsc.0000020010.73768.4a
Comments
Post a Comment