Michael Schleicher | Semikron Danfoss: Your 3D printing process is perfect, but can your design software and data formats actually handle the complexity?
00:05:32 - 00:07:46
Other snippets from this talk
Summary of the clip:
Your 3D printing process is perfect, but can your design software and data formats actually handle the complexity?
To successfully commercialize additive electronics, the industry must look beyond materials and processes and tackle the critical challenges at the application and design levels. While 3D printing offers immense design freedom, it simultaneously creates a desperate need for clear design rules. Designers need to know the process limitations, both minimum and maximum feature sizes and tolerances, to create reliable and manufacturable products.
A significant bottleneck slowing adoption is the "chicken-and-egg" problem with design software. Innovators require advanced functionality in their CAD tools to design complex 3D electronic systems, but tool vendors are hesitant to invest in developing these niche features until a large, proven market exists. This stalemate means designers are often left without the proper tools to fully leverage the technology's potential.
This ecosystem challenge extends to data formats and the concept of the digital twin. There is no single, standardized data format that can encapsulate all the necessary information for a complex additive process—from material properties and tolerances to machine parameters and in-process testing requirements. Without a universal data standard, achieving a seamless and reliable design-to-manufacturing workflow for complex, multi-material systems remains a major hurdle.
In this short video, you can learn:
* Why application-level design rules are as critical as material properties.
* The "chicken-and-egg" problem stalling the development of advanced design tools.
* The critical need for standardized data formats to enable true digital twins.
📋 **Clip Abstract** This clip explores the critical ecosystem bottlenecks hindering the adoption of additive electronics, moving beyond the printing process itself. It highlights the urgent need for established design rules, more capable software tools, and standardized data formats to unlock the technology's full potential.
🔗 Link in comments 👇
#AdditiveDesignSoftware, #AdditiveDataFormats, #AdditiveDesignRules, #DigitalTwinIntegration, #AdditiveElectronics, #MultiMaterialElectronics
This is a highlight of the presentation:
More Highlights from the same talk.
00:10:14 - 00:12:53
How do you classify 3D printed electronics from simple 2D layers to complex 4D transforming structures?
How do you classify 3D printed electronics from simple 2D layers to complex 4D transforming structures?
A new classification system proposes five distinct classes to bring order to the complexity of additively manufactured electronics. Class 1 involves applying materials onto a flat carrier, such as inkjetting a solder mask on a PCB or dispensing conductive traces on a textile. Class 2 increases the complexity by moving to a pre-existing three-dimensional or uneven carrier, which requires non-contact deposition methods and presents greater challenges in process control and design.
The next levels move away from using a pre-existing carrier. Class 3 involves creating the entire 3D substrate from scratch, enabling the fabrication of structures like integrated antennas or twisted pairs that are impossible with traditional methods. Class 4 builds on this by not only printing the structure but also embedding passive or active components directly within it during the printing process, creating highly integrated and compact systems.
Finally, Class 5 represents the cutting edge: 4D printing. This involves printing a two-dimensional shape that is designed to transform into a specific three-dimensional structure when exposed to an external stimulus like heat or light. This entire classification framework was developed to help designers understand the complexity, select the right design tools, and drive the conversation around the need for new software functionalities and standardized data formats.
In this short video, you can learn:
* A 5-level classification system for additively manufactured electronics.
* The key differences between printing on a carrier vs. printing a structure from scratch.
* How this framework helps address challenges in design tools and data standards.
📋 **Clip Abstract** This clip introduces a five-class system to categorize additively manufactured electronics, ranging from simple 2D printing on flat surfaces to embedding components and 4D transforming structures. The goal is to provide a clear framework for designers and to highlight the need for advanced tools and standards.
🔗 Link in comments 👇
#AdditiveElectronicsClassification, #3DPrintedElectronics, #4DPrintedElectronics, #EmbeddedElectronics, #FlexibleElectronics, #WearableElectronics
00:07:58 - 00:09:42
What are the three fundamental ways you can manufacture a 3D electronic device?
What are the three fundamental ways you can manufacture a 3D electronic device?
The first and most common pathway to creating additively manufactured electronics is to start with an existing carrier. This carrier can be a traditional rigid PCB, a flexible foil, a textile, or a piece of plastic. Using various printing or dispensing techniques, you then apply the necessary functional materials—like conductive inks or dielectrics—onto the surface of this carrier and assemble any required components.
A second, more integrated approach is to build the entire device from scratch without any initial carrier. Using multi-material 3D printing processes, you can fabricate the structural body of the device while simultaneously embedding both conductive and non-conductive materials within it. This method allows for true three-dimensional circuitry and fully integrated electronic systems built in a single, continuous process.
The third option is a hybrid of the first two. In this scenario, you first 3D print a custom substrate, which can itself contain embedded features like channels or even simple conductive traces. This custom-printed object then serves as a specialized carrier for a second manufacturing stage, where additional, more complex electronic functionalities are printed or assembled onto its surfaces, combining the benefits of both approaches.
In this short video, you can learn:
* The "carrier-based" approach for adding electronics to existing surfaces.
* The "from-scratch" method for creating fully integrated 3D electronics.
* A hybrid strategy that combines 3D printed substrates with surface functionalization.
📋 **Clip Abstract** Discover the three core manufacturing strategies for creating 3D electronics. The clip explains the difference between printing on an existing carrier, building a device entirely from scratch, and a hybrid approach that uses a 3D-printed part as a custom substrate.
🔗 Link in comments 👇
#CarrierBasedElectronics, #MultiMaterial3DPrinting, #HybridElectronicsManufacturing, #3DElectronicsManufacturing, #AdditiveElectronics, #PrintedElectronics