Search

The conventional manufacturing chain for technical ceramics is too expensive for the production of small series or unique parts with complex designs. Hybrid machines that combine additive and subtractive processes can be an interesting solution to overcome this technology lock-in. However, despite the great interest in hybrid machines for metallic parts, there is a lack of data in the literature when it comes to ceramics. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to closing this gap. It is the first to evaluate the achievable geometrical tolerances according to ISO 2768-2 as well as the surface textures of composite zirconia parts shaped sequentially by pellet additive manufacturing (PAM, from ceramic injection molding feedstock) and finish milling. The green parts were then debinded and sintered to analyze the influence of these steps. Compared to the initial green parts, the sintered parts exhibited shiny and smooth surfaces with sharp edges. Flatness, parallelism and perpendicularity all achieved an H (fine) class, while the surface textures were significantly improved, resulting in arithmetic roughness (Ra) below 1.6 µm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Additive manufacturing (AM) opens new possibilities of obtaining ceramic green parts with a tailored complex design at low cost. Meeting the requirements of highly demanding industries (aeronautical and biomedical, for example) is still challenging, even for machining. Hybrid machines can solve this problem by combining the advantages of both additive and subtractive processes. However, little information is currently available to determine the milling parameters of additively fabricated ceramic green parts. This article proposes a systematic approach to experimentally determine the cutting parameters of green AM zirconia parts. Three tools, one dedicated to thermoplastics, one to composites, and a universal tool, were tested. The tool--material couple standard (NF E 66-520-5) was followed. The lower cost and repeatable generation of smooth surfaces (Ra < 1.6 µm) without material pull-out were the main goals of the study. The universal tool showed few repeatable working points without material pull-out, while the two other tools gave satisfying results. The thermoplastic tool ensured repeatable results of Ra < 0.8 µm at a four times lower cost than the composite tool. Moreover, it exhibited a larger chip thickness range (from 0.003 mm to 0.036 mm). Nevertheless, it generated an uncut zone that must be considered when planning the milling operations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]