Selecting Either Layered Manufacturing

or CNC Machining to Build Your Prototype.

Lex Lennings
Delft Spline Systems
PO Box 2071
3500 GB Utrecht
The Netherlands
Tel +31 30 296 5957 Fax +31 30 296 2292
Email [email protected] Web www.spline.nl

Two fundamentally different methods are currently available for Rapid Prototyping: Layered
Manufacturing Technology (additive) and CNC milling (subtractive). In order to create a
prototype using RP, a designer will have to choose one of both methods. This paper gives
guidelines for choosing the most appropriate method.

First the available technologies are described for both methods, and the differences are
explained between 'traditional' CNC machining, and CNC machining for RP. After that both
methods are compared, and the strengths and weaknesses are presented. These (dis)advantages
then lead to finding preferred application areas for both CNC and LMT: most important
conclusions are that for styling block models CNC milling is best, where for fully functional
prototypes LMT based RP is best suited. These conclusions are illustrated using real-life
example projects.

1. Introduction.
The activity called 'Rapid Prototyping' originated only about 12 years ago, with the appearance of the
stereolithography system. This (then brandnew) process made a very large impact on the design
community. It was based on 3D CAD (which at that time slowly became generally accepted), and it was
announced as a "magical miracle process", involving unknown powers such as UV laser light and
photosensitive polymers. Obviously in fact the activity of rapidly creating a prototype was not new: still a
skilled craftsman can create a 3D foam model by hand (based on a 2D drawing) more rapidly than any
current Rapid Prototyping (RP) system. May this craftman's activity be called RP or not ?

Many authors do use a very limited definition of RP, and only include technologies that build a prototype
by stacking numerous thin layers (like the original stereolithography system). We will not use such a
limitation, as in our opinion it is an arbitrary limitation and does not make much sense. The important
aspect of RP as a black box is the automatic translation from 3D CAD model to physical model, and the
technology actually used is not important at all. We will define Rapid Prototyping as [Lennings, 1997]: "A
Process that Automatically creates a Physical Prototype from a 3D CAD-Model, in a Short period of
Time."

This definition makes a much broader theory of RP possible than only focusing on RP systems that are
currently available (though it excludes the skilled craftsman just mentioned). A theory that is in fact valid
for all fabrication processes: RP is just an automated fabrication process. In this theory we can see that
fundamentally three fabrication processes do exist: additive, subtractive and formative [Burns, 1993], see

1
figure 1. Additive or incremental processes build by attaching or fusing separate pieces of material, like in
masonry (bricklaying). Subtractive or decremental processes build by dividing a single piece of material
into separate parts, like in woodcarving. Formative or deforming processes change the shape of a single
piece of material, like in metal forging and in various moulding processes. Combinations are possible as
well, like spinning pottery on a potter's wheel (most examples come from [Burns, 1993]).

Figure 1. The three fundamental processes of fabrication (courtesy of

Marshall Burns, Ennex Corp, USA).

Applied to current Rapid Prototyping systems we can clearly distinguish between additive and subtractive
systems. The systems that stack thin layers are additive: starting with an empty space and adding material
until the geometry of the model is completely filled. We will refer to these systems as Layered
Manufacturing Technology (LMT) based, examples are Stereolithography, Selective Laser Sintering, etc.
CNC milling systems are subtractive, starting with a solid block and cutting off chips until only the
geometry of the model is left. Formative RP systems are not (yet) commercially available. Also in RP,
combined systems are present, like the LOM system that cuts and stacks layers of paper.

The development of LMT methods like Stereolithography has created the growing demand for Rapid
Prototyping. Still the advertised automatic translation from 3D CAD model to prototype using a laser
operation results in the perception of a magical miracle machine. This perception has obscured the fact that
most LMT machines are not so easy to use, requiring a skilled operator and manual postprocessing. On the
other hand CNC machining has suffered from the notion that it was supposed to be too complicated to be
called Rapid Prototyping, that it could not meet the 'Automatic' requirement. This may have been true in the
past [Wall, 1992], however, new developments in both software and machines have now emerged which
have made CNC a very competitive process for Rapid Prototyping.

The result is that there are now two RP methods available, LMT and CNC. Each of them having specific
strengths and weaknesses, each of them having a distinct application area within the total RP field. After
presenting the currently available technologies for both methods in sections 2 and 3, the (dis)advantages of
both methods will be reviewed in section 4. This leads to recognizing which method to use for which
application area (preferred application areas) in section 5, and finally some conclusions in section 6.

2. Layered Manufacturing Technologies for RP.

There is no need to give an in-depth presentation of the currently available Layered Manufacturing
Technologies and LMT based RP systems in this paper. Many other authors have done so already, for

2
instance [Pham, 1998], and [Wohlers, 1999]. Still a short overview can be given, including some
observations concerning current developments.

As already mentioned, the first LMT process that became commercially available was stereolithography
from 3D Systems, using a liquid polymer material which solidifies when hit by an UV laser. Still 3D
Systems is one of the largest system suppliers. Soon other processes were developed, some of them
variations on the stereolithography process, some of them applying a new technology. New processes that
have appeared in the past years are:

n Selective Laser Sintering from DTM Corp, applying a laser to locally 'sinter' layers of powder
n Fused Deposition Modelling from Stratasys, extruding very thin plastic filament to form layers
n Layered Object Manufacturing from Helisys, using 'prefabricated' paper layers, cut to size by a laser
n Multi Jet Modelling from 3D Systems, depositing small drops of material using inkjet heads
n Three Dimensional Printing from MIT (commercialized amongst others by ZCorp), also using inkjet
heads to deposit glue to locally bind layers of powder.

These newer technologies do offer advantages such as a wider choice of materials (including some
engineering plastics and even metals), more ease-of-use, and lower prices. During the past years also the
build speeds have significantly grown. These developments will continue, certainly leading to mass
production of RP systems in the near future, available at much lower prices than today. In my opinion
especially the inkjet based systems are promising as the technology used basically is very simple and suited
for a lowcost implementation.

3. CNC milling as an RP process.

The application of CNC milling as an RP technology still is new, and has been made possible by a number
of new developments. As these are not yet so well known, we will briefly describe some developments in
CNC machining that have made it a competitive technology for RP.

The basics of machining are very straightforward: cutting off small chips. Traditionally the cutting tool was
moved by manual control (rotating a wheel), after World War II new developments made Numerical
Control (punched tape) possible, and now for many years CNC (Computerized Numerical Control) has
become mature a technology. CNC milling has been used for prototype building in the past: involving large,
heavy and expensive machines, powerful, though very complicated, CAM software, and skilled CAM
operators. Surely not an automatic process, so not to be called Rapid Prototyping.

Figure 2. Examples of low-cost 3D CNC milling machines, perfectly suited for RP applications.
(sources Delft Spline Systems - left, and Minitech - right).

3
Since that time things have changed: both on the hardware side and on the software side. New hardware
developments resulted in small, light and very inexpensive CNC milling machines. Nowadays prices for a
3D CNC milling machine even start below USD 1,000 ! Such a machine (obviously with very limited
capabilities) is within the reach of any product designer. Many manufacturers now offer a large variety of
light CNC machines, including a fit for almost any application (figure 2). The heavier industrial machines
can of course also be used for RP purposes, offering advantages such as larger size, speed, stability,
power, etc. You can find machine prices ranging between USD 1,000 and 1,000,000 - for any specific
application a fit can be found.

A second important development in machining hardware is High Speed (HS) milling. Here the advantage is
not in price but in speed. Using a very high spindle speed being ca 40,000 to 80,000 rounds per minute
(rpm), the cutter can move much faster than on traditional machines (which run at ca 1,000 to 10,000
rpm). Advantages are that the cutting forces remain small, cooling is not needed as the chips take away the
heat and vibrations can be minimized. For HS milling both machine and controller need to be specifically
designed, making it possible to maintain a high feedrate while processing large numbers of movement
commands (a 'look-ahead' capability is needed) [Gunnink, 1998].

On the software side new developments have resulted in a new type of CAM software, specifically aimed at
the application of Rapid Prototyping. This in contrast to 'traditional' CAM-software which is aimed at
mould-makers, needing a high-end solution for perfect results. This traditional type of CAM-software needs
a trained CAM-specialist, who can correctly interpret and set the many parameters. He must also be able to
check the resulting toolpaths, as errors are possible that must be prevented by changing the parameter
settings. The new software is aimed at product designers, who do not know much about machining and do
not want to be bothered with such know-how either. CAM software for RP should work like a 'black-box',
making the prototype creation process as automatic as possible. This does solve the problem signalled in
[Wall, 1992]: at that moment the time needed to generate the CNC toolpaths was too long for real RP.
Obviously in this new software the number of parameters is limited (figure 3): the software is not meant to
compete with the numerous outstanding high-end CAM packages currently available.

Figure 3. Dialog box from DeskProto, a CAM software package for RP:
limited number of parameters, easy to understand (source Delft Spline Systems).

Other important characteristics of CAM software for RP are:

4
n The capability to import STL files: the standard filetype for RP, offering a much more stable geometry
transfer than IGES.
n The high speed of calculating the toolpaths: RP has to be Rapid.
n The low price: especially important for Concept Modellers. Do note that large price differences can be
seen for CAM software as well: prices range between ca USD 1,000 and 50,000)

Obviously the easy-to-use and lowcost CAM software for RP has a number of limitations when compared
to the 'high-end' CAM software for moldmakers. Differences in CAM software capabilities can be found in
the following areas:

n Tooling strategies. In the case of parallel toolpaths the distance between the toolpaths limits the
achieved accuracy. If combined with, for instance, waterline machining the exact geometry can be
machined (within the tolerances to be set for cusp height and chordal deviation). High-end CAM
software may also offer options like detection and removal of rest material at sharp inner corners,
optimizes start- and end-procedures for operations, and the use of machining features.
n Support of 2.5 D machining, which creates a model by combining a number of 2D contours, each at a
constant Z-level. Options like drilling holes on certain positions belong to this category as well. This
way of machining is very standard for mechanical applications.
n Number of axes supported. The basic CNC machine uses 3 controlled axes: X, Y and Z. More
elaborate machines may be equipped with a fourth axis (type 'barbecue' or rotation table), or with 5
axes where the tool can be rotated to approach the geometry from different directions.
n Capability to optimize the toolpaths for HS milling, by removing all angles (all subsequent movements
connected at a continuous tangent).

Combining these new developments of a light CNC milling machine and an easy-to use CAM software
package results in a Rapid Prototyping system that offers a number of special characteristics, and as we
will show, supplements the LMT based RP systems.

4. LMT versus CNC: advantages and disadvantages.

Each of the two available RP methods, LMT and CNC, has its specific strengths and weaknesses. In this
section the advantages for both methods will be listed, which will lead to indicating preferred application
areas within the total RP field. Only the advantages are listed, as in this comparison the advantages of the
one method will be the disadvantages of the other.

4.1 Advantages of LMT.

The list is not very long, however the advantages listed are very important indeed, giving LMT technology
a distinct place in the field.

n Design freedom.
Using LMT the design freedom is almost unlimited. Even hollow prototypes and functioning assemblies can
be produced in one run. CNC milling is at a disadvantage too for sharp inner corners. As tools are by
definition round, many sharp inner corners cannot be machined. See the illustrative example in figure 4.

n Complex geometry is just as easy.

The price of an LMT prototype is independent of its complexity. For CNC machining a dependence is
present: in the case of many details a small tool has to be used with a small toolpath distance, resulting in a
long production time.

5
n Ease of use.
In theory LMT systems have the advantage at this point, as there is no need to first make a block of
material in the correct dimensions and then fix it on to the machines working table. In practice most LMT
machines are not yet so easy to use. A large number of process parameters have to be correctly set: it may
take up to a few months before a new machine is actually operating. For most LMT processes some
(laborious) manual postprocessing is needed as well. The new generation of Concept Modellers using '3D
printing' technology achieves much better, promising real black-box 3D printers for the near future.

Figure 4 (left). Example of a geometry that cannot be created by CNC milling: note the staircase
inside the hollow Chess tower (manufactured by Stereolithography).

Figure 5 (right). Example of a model that cannot be created by LMT systems: this perfume bottle was
CNC milled in transparent perspex (solid) and then finished and textured (courtesy of design bureau
SDA, Hoofddorp, the Netherlands).

4.2 Advantages of CNC.

This list is longer than the list of LMT advantages. Some of these advantages however only apply to
specific application areas.

n Price of the system.

Prices of high-end LMT machines like a StereoLithography Apparatus will start at USD 100,000 (the total
investment being higher because of the training needed). Concept Modellers are cheaper, however still at
least USD 50,000. In contrast, a complete CNC system (software and machine) is available (far) under
USD 10,000.

n In-house system possible.

As any design bureau or department can afford a light CNC milling machine, in-house RP is now possible.
This will not only save time, it will also improve design quality, as the designers will use a local machine
more easily than an external service.

6
n Trouble-free operation.
As the process of removing material is not complicated, the chances of failure are low. This is in contrast to
the LMT processes, where small variations in, for instance, operating temperature and humidity may lead
to unusable results, for instance because of warping, delamination and shrinkage.

n Capable of handling incorrect STL files.

LMT systems need correct STL files, containing correct normal vectors for each triangle and describing a
solid geometry without cracks, gaps, orphan surfaces etc. CNC systems do not care much about such small
inconsistencies, and can even handle single surfaces without thickness (as used in the Concept phase of the
design process).

n Choice of materials.
Any material can be CNC milled. Obviously the light milling machines used for desktop prototyping have
limited capabilities (no metals), however the choice of materials is much larger than with LMT systems.
Using a material with specific properties is possible, like transparency (perspex, see figure 5), temperature
resistance, strength/stiffness, easy to finish, low cost (foam), etc.

n Large prototypes.
A desktop CNC milling machine will have maximum model dimensions comparable to those of an LMT
machine. However larger CNC machines are easily (externally) available and larger LMT machines (say 1
by 2 meters) are not.

n Free choice of accuracy.

LMT systems operate using an almost constant layer thickness. When using CNC milling the distance
between the toolpaths can be freely chosen, from for instance 0.01 mm (which will result in a very long
machining time) to 10 mm or larger. This free choice in accuracy means a choice in building speed as well,
opening the possibility to create 'quick and dirty' Concept Models.

n Easy transfer to production tooling.

For large series the production tooling will be created using CNC milling.

5. LMT versus CNC: preferred application areas.

The advantages mentioned above already indicate a few application areas where one of both methods is
preferred: LMT in case of a complex geometry (many small details), CNC in case of specific materials,
large prototypes and incomplete STL files. In order to present a more detailed indication we will use an
example design project: a handheld electrical hobby tool like a drilling machine.

The designers of this machine need prototypes for two different purposes: first to evaluate its appearance
and styling, and second to evaluate its functioning. These two purposes cannot easily be combined using
one prototype, so in most cases two different types of prototype are created: styling block models ('looks
like models') and functioning prototypes ('works like models'). Both types are needed during the complete
design process: two types of Concept Models as well as two types of Pre Production Prototypes.

A styling block model may well be solid, as only the outside that can be seen is important. For this type of
model CNC machining is preferred, because:

n A material can be used that is easy to finish (up to high gloss). In fact the result can be that good that it
is almost impossible to visually distinguish the finished presentation model (solid!) from the actual
product (figure 7).

7
n The resulting model is firm and can easily be touched by lots of people (as in a consumers panel)
without being damaged.
n The outside geometry is easy to machine, showing freeform surfaces that can be reached by the tool (no
undercuts, as the production technology will be injection moulding). Such a model can be machined in
two separate halves, which are very easy to fix on to the milling machine (see figure 6).
n For consumer goods the outside geometry is most important, and so very early in the design process
concept styling models are needed, which can be machined very easily in foam.

Figure 6 (left). A styling block model of a handheld tool (in fact one half) being milled in tooling board
(courtesy of design bureau IDE, Belmont, Switzerland).
Figure 7 (right). A CNC milled presentation model of a heat gun, after finishing, which is almost
impossible to distinguish from the final product (courtesy of Brandes & Meurs Industrial Design, and
Skil Europe, both from the Netherlands.).

A functioning prototype has to meet completely different requirements. This prototype has to function, so
it must be possible to assemble all inside parts like motor, switches, electrical wires etc. A thin walled shell
model of the housing is needed, including all inner construction details like stiffening ribs and attachment
points for other parts. For this type of model LMT systems are preferred, because of the complicated inside
geometry: see figure 8. Such a LMT model is great for assembling the total product and using it (in the
example to actually drill holes), in order to evaluate both the assembly of the product and it's functioning.
The prototype however does not look perfect - it does not need to.

Obviously this general rule has its exceptions. In some cases it is still needed to create a prototype of the
thin-walled housing by CNC milling, for instance if during the functional tests the prototype will become
warm (LMT prototypes do not like that). Machining this type of geometry is indeed possible, also on a low-
cost CNC based RP system. However, to do so a trained operator is needed and it will cost a lot of time.
This type of model building may thus, in fact, not be called Rapid Prototyping.

Other preferred application areas do result from a specific advantage of one of the two technologies. For
instance medical prototyping, where models of bone structures are built based on CT scan geometry
information. This type of geometry is so complicated, for instance a human skull, that CNC milling is
absolutely inappropriate (too many small details and inaccessible regions). Examples of application areas
better suited for CNC are large sized prototypes, rough Concept Models ('quick, dirty and cheap', based on
incomplete CAD data), ergonomics models (to be gripped, or sat on) and Rapid Tooling (in aluminum).

8
Figure 8. A thin walled housing of a drilling machine, created on an SLS machine to assemble a
functioning prototype (courtesy of Mareco bv, Venlo, the Netherlands).

6. Conclusions.
We have shown that CNC milling is a competing technology for Rapid Prototyping. A broad range of CNC
based solutions is available, from low-cost to high-end, varying both in price and in capabilities. When
comparing CNC to LMT, the major LMT advantage is the 'unlimited' design freedom, the main CNC
advantages are a low investment, free choice of material and large sizes possible. As a result we have
shown that generally speaking for styling block models and concept models CNC based RP is best, where
for fully functional prototypes LMT based RP is the best option. This applies both in Concept Modelling
as in Pre Production Prototyping.

References
Burns, M.
"Automated fabrication: improving productivity in manufacturing."
Prentice Hall, 1993.

Gunnink, J.W.
"Multi-Axis High Speed Milling, how to Speed up Prototyping & Tooling processes by using STL technology."
Proceedings TCT Conference 1998, Nottingham, Oct 1998, pp 43-65. Rapid News Publications plc, London, 1998.

Lennings, A.F. (1997)

"CNC offers RP on the Desktop."
Prototyping Technology International, 1997 annual report, pp 297-301. UK&International Press, Dorking, UK, 1997, ISSN 1367-2436.

Pham, D.T. and Gault, R.S.

"A Comparison of Rapid Prototyping Technologies."
Int Jrnl of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Vol 38 No 10-11 (1998), pp 1257-1287.

Wall, M.B. et al
"Evaluating Prototyping Technologies for Product Design."
Research in Engineering Design, 1992 No. 3, 163-177.

Wohlers, T.
Rapid Prototyping & Tooling State of the Industry: 1999 Worldwide Progress Report.
Wohlers Associates, Inc., Fort Collins, 1999