FprEN ISO/ASTM 52902
(Main)Additive manufacturing - Test artifacts - Geometric capability assessment of additive manufacturing systems (ISO/ASTM/FDIS 52902:2023)
Additive manufacturing - Test artifacts - Geometric capability assessment of additive manufacturing systems (ISO/ASTM/FDIS 52902:2023)
This document covers the general description of benchmarking test piece geometries, i.e. artefacts, along with quantitative and qualitative measurements to be taken on the benchmarking test piece(s) to assess the performance of additive manufacturing (AM) systems.
This performance assessment can serve the following two purposes:
— AM system capability evaluation;
— AM system calibration.
The benchmarking test piece(s) is (are) primarily used to quantitatively assess the geometric performance of an AM system. This document describes a suite of test geometries, each designed to investigate one or more specific performance metrics and several example configurations of these geometries into test build(s). It prescribes quantities and qualities of the test geometries to be measured but does not dictate specific measurement methods. Various user applications can require various grades of performance. This document discusses examples of feature configurations, as well as measurement uncertainty requirements, to demonstrate low- and high-grade examination and performance. This document does not discuss a specific procedure or machine settings for manufacturing a test piece.
Additive Fertigung - Testkörper - Geometrische Leistungsbewertung additiver Fertigungssysteme (ISO/ASTM/FDIS 52902:2023)
Dieses Dokument enthält die allgemeine Beschreibung von Prüfkörpergeometrien, d. h. Testkörper, mit dem Ziel des Benchmarkings, gemeinsam mit an dem/den Benchmarking-Prüfkörper(n) vorzunehmenden quantitativen und qualitativen Messungen zur Bewertung der Leistung additiver Fertigungssysteme (AM-Systeme).
Diese Leistungsbewertung kann den beiden folgenden Zwecken dienen:
der Fähigkeitsbewertung des AM-Systems;
der Kalibrierung des AM-Systems.
Der Hauptverwendungszweck der/des Benchmarking-Prüfkörper(s) ist die quantitative Bewertung der geometrischen Leistungsfähigkeit eines AM-Systems. Das Dokument beschreibt einen Satz von Prüfgeometrien, die jeweils für die Untersuchung einer oder mehrerer Leistungsmetriken ausgelegt sind, sowie mehrere Beispielkonfigurationen dieser Geometrien im/in Prüfkörper(n). Es gibt zu messende Quantitäten und Qualitäten der Prüfgeometrien vor, schreibt aber keine spezifischen Messverfahren vor. Verschiedene Nutzeranwendungen können verschiedene Leistungsniveaus erfordern. Zur Veranschaulichung von Untersuchungen und für den Nachweis der Leistungsfähigkeit auf niedrigem und hohem Niveau erörtert dieses Dokument Beispiele für Merkmalskonfigurationen sowie Anforderungen an die Messunsicherheit. Dieses Dokument behandelt keine spezifischen Verfahrensweisen oder Maschineneinstellungen für die Prüfkörperherstellung.
Fabrication additive - Pièces types d'essais - Évaluation de la capacité géométrique des systèmes de fabrication additive (ISO/ASTM/FDIS 52902:2023)
Le présent document couvre la description générale du benchmarking de géométries d’éprouvette, c’est-à-dire des pièces types, ainsi que les mesures quantitatives et qualitatives à appliquer à la ou aux éprouvettes de benchmarking afin d’évaluer les performances de systèmes de fabrication additive (FA).
Cette évaluation de performances peut servir aux deux fins suivantes:
— Évaluation de la capacité du système FA;
— Étalonnage du système FA.
La ou les éprouvettes de benchmarking sont utilisées principalement pour évaluer quantitativement les performances géométriques d’un système FA. Le présent document décrit une suite de géométries d’essai, chacune conçue pour examiner une ou plusieurs mesures de performances spécifiques, ainsi que plusieurs configurations d’exemple de ces géométries au sein d’une ou plusieurs éprouvettes. Il prescrit les quantités et qualités des géométries d’essai à mesurer, mais ne stipule pas de méthodes de mesure spécifiques. Différentes applications d’utilisateur peuvent exiger différents niveaux de performances. Le présent document donne des exemples de configurations de forme ainsi que des exigences d’incertitude de mesure afin de faire la démonstration d’un examen et de performances de niveau bas et élevé. Le présent document ne donne pas de mode opératoire ou de réglages de machine spécifiques pour la fabrication d’une éprouvette.
Aditivna proizvodnja - Preskusna telesa - Geometrijske zmogljivosti aditivnih proizvodnih sistemov (ISO/ASTM/FDIS 52902:2023)
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
01-februar-2022
Aditivna proizvodnja - Preskusna telesa - Geometrijske zmogljivosti aditivnih
proizvodnih sistemov (ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021)
Additive manufacturing - Test artifacts - Geometric capability assessment of additive
manufacturing systems (ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021)
Additive Fertigung - Testkörper - Geometrische Leistungsbewertung additiver
Fertigungssysteme (ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021)
Fabrication additive - Pièces types d'essais - Évaluation de la capacité géométrique des
systèmes de fabrication additive (ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021)
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: prEN ISO/ASTM 52902
ICS:
25.030 3D-tiskanje Additive manufacturing
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022 en,fr,de
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902
ISO/TC 261 Secretariat: DIN
Voting begins on: Voting terminates on:
2021-12-13 2022-03-07
Additive manufacturing — Test artifacts — Geometric
capability assessment of additive manufacturing systems
Fabrication additive — Pièces types d'essai — Évaluation de la capacité géométrique des systèmes de
fabrication additive
ICS: 25.030
This document is circulated as received from the committee secretariat.
THIS DOCUMENT IS A DRAFT CIRCULATED
FOR COMMENT AND APPROVAL. IT IS
ISO/CEN PARALLEL PROCESSING
THEREFORE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND MAY
NOT BE REFERRED TO AS AN INTERNATIONAL
STANDARD UNTIL PUBLISHED AS SUCH.
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL,
TECHNOLOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND
USER PURPOSES, DRAFT INTERNATIONAL
STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE TO
BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR
POTENTIAL TO BECOME STANDARDS TO
WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE MADE IN
Reference number
NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED
TO SUBMIT, WITH THEIR COMMENTS,
NOTIFICATION OF ANY RELEVANT PATENT
RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE AND TO
PROVIDE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION. © ISO/ASTM International 2021
---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO/ASTM International 2021
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester. In the United States, such requests should be sent to ASTM International.
ISO copyright office ASTM International
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, USA
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11 Phone: +610 832 9634
Fax: +610 832 9635
Email: copyright@iso.org Email: khooper@astm.org
Website: www.iso.org Website: www.astm.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Significance and use .1
4.1 General . 1
4.2 Comparing results from one machine . 2
5 General principles for producing test artefacts . 2
5.1 General . 2
5.2 Need to use feedstock conforming to a material specification . 2
5.3 Need to undertake artefact building according to a documented process
specification . 2
5.4 File formats and preparation . 2
5.5 Download files . 3
5.6 Discussion of file conversion . 3
5.7 AMF preferred (with conversion instructions/ resolutions) . 3
5.8 Need for test specification and test process . 3
5.9 Quantity of test artefacts . 3
5.10 Position and orientation of test artefacts . 3
5.11 Considerations for orientation . 3
5.12 Labelling . 4
5.13 Coverage . 4
5.14 Arrays . 4
5.15 Part consolidation . . 4
5.16 Supports and post processing . 4
6 General principles for measuring artefacts . 5
6.1 General . 5
6.2 Measure parts as built . 5
6.3 Measurement strategy . 5
6.4 Measurement uncertainty . 5
7 Artefact geometries . 6
7.1 General . 6
7.2 Accuracy . 6
7.2.1 Linear artefact . 6
7.2.2 Circular artefact . 7
7.2.3 Z-axis artefact . 9
7.3 Resolution . 11
7.3.1 Resolution pins. 11
7.3.2 Resolution holes .12
7.3.3 Resolution rib . 14
7.3.4 Resolution slot . 16
7.4 Surface texture . 18
7.4.1 Purpose . 18
7.4.2 Geometry . 18
7.4.3 Measurement . 19
7.4.4 Reporting . 20
7.4.5 Considerations . 20
7.5 Labelling . 21
7.5.1 Purpose . 21
7.5.2 Geometry . 21
7.5.3 Considerations . 22
Annex A (informative) Example artefact configurations .23
iii
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
Annex B (informative) Measurement techniques .26
Annex C (informative) Measurement procedures .30
Annex D (informative) List of specimen names and sizes.36
Bibliography .38
iv
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www.iso.org/patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
The committee responsible for this document is ISO/TC 261, Additive manufacturing, in cooperation
with ASTM Committee F42, Additive Manufacturing Technologies, on the basis of a partnership
agreement between ISO and ASTM International with the aim to create a common set of ISO/ASTM
standards on Additive Manufacturing.
This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition (ISO/ASTM 52902:2019), which has been
technically revised.
The main changes compared to the previous edition are as follows:
— Addition of a test artefact for testing the performance of the Z-axis in an AM system.
— Changed dimensions in text and in drawing (Figure 3) of medium circular artefact such that the
description in the text matches the dimensions in the downloadable STEP file; Figure 3 was also re-
drawn to better depict the circular artefact geometry.
v
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
Additive manufacturing — Test artifacts — Geometric
capability assessment of additive manufacturing systems
1 Scope
This document covers the general description of benchmarking test piece geometries along with
quantitative and qualitative measurements to be taken on the benchmarking test piece(s) to assess the
performance of additive manufacturing (AM) systems.
This performance assessment can serve the following two purposes:
— AM system capability evaluation;
— AM system calibration.
The benchmarking test piece(s) is (are) primarily used to quantitatively assess the geometric
performance of an AM system. This document describes a suite of test geometries, each designed
to investigate one or more specific performance metrics and several example configurations of
these geometries into test piece(s). It prescribes quantities and qualities of the test geometries to be
measured but does not dictate specific measurement methods. Various user applications can require
various grades of performance. This document discusses examples of feature configurations, as
well as measurement uncertainty requirements, to demonstrate low- and high-grade examination
and performance. This document does not discuss a specific procedure or machine settings for
manufacturing a test piece.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ASME B46.1, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness and Lay)
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO/ASTM 52900 apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
4 Significance and use
4.1 General
Measurements and observations described in this document are used to assess the performance of an
AM system with a given system set-up and process parameters, in combination with a specific feedstock
material.
The primary characterization of the AM system obtained by this document is via geometric accuracy,
surface finish and minimum feature sizes of the benchmarking test piece(s).
1
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
4.2 Comparing results from one machine
The test piece(s) can be built and measured for example when the new machine is installed. The test
piece(s) may be used to periodically evaluate the performance or diagnose a fault in one AM system, for
example, after system maintenance or as defined by the requirements of a quality system.
The test piece(s) described in this test method may be used as a demonstration of capabilities for a
contract between a buyer and seller of AM parts or AM systems.
Data from the measurements described in this document can be used to gauge the impact of new
process parameters or material on the AM system performance.
Certain test geometries may be included with every build on a particular AM system to help establish
performance traceability. Depending on the needs of the end user, not all test artefacts need to be built,
and individual test artefacts can be built separately if required.
5 General principles for producing test artefacts
5.1 General
This clause outlines principles applicable for producing all of the test artefact geometries in this
document. Reporting requirements are previewed in connection with the production steps in this
clause, but more details about recording and reporting can be found with the individual artefact
descriptions given in Clause 7.
5.2 Need to use feedstock conforming to a material specification
In order to ensure repeatable results, the use of a quality feedstock material is needed. A feedstock
material specification should be selected or determined by the end user and the feedstock used for test
artefact trials should match said specification. For example, the specification may include the particulate
properties (particle size, size distribution, morphology) for powder feedstock, bulk properties (such as
flow) and chemical properties (such as chemical composition and level of contamination). Although the
details of the material specification shall not be disclosed (unless otherwise agreed between supplier
and purchaser), it should be documented by the producer and reported with a unique alphanumeric
designation as specified by ASTM F2971: 2013, Annex A1, element “B”. For powder-based processes, the
material specification should specifically address limitations of powder re-use and percent of virgin/
re-used powder.
5.3 Need to undertake artefact building according to a documented process
specification
The processing of the material in the AM system should be undertaken according to a documented
process specification/manufacturing plan, as specified by ASTM F2971: 2013, Annex A1, element “C”.
This may be a proprietary internal standard or external standard (subject to buyer/seller negotiations),
but the producer should document user-definable settings and conditions surrounding the building of
parts. For example, it should document the layer thickness, build strategies (e.g. scan path, tool path,
and/or scan parameters), temperatures, etc. used during the build. This process should be consistent
for all test artefacts produced within one build. These recommendations can be different for each use,
so the parameters in the process specification should be agreed between the vendor and end user.
5.4 File formats and preparation
The file formats used and steps of the digital file preparation including slice parameters should be
included in the process specification. Care shall be taken during the creation and transfer of data files
to avoid degradation of the model. Any discrepancy between these affects the outcome of tests on
the artefacts and for this reason, best practice for the control of the file formats and preparation is
discussed here.
2
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
5.5 Download files
The 3D digital models for standard test artefact geometries can be downloaded in *.step format at
https:// standards .iso .org/ iso/ 52902/ ed -1/ en. For a complete list of available files, please see Annex D.
5.6 Discussion of file conversion
When a CAD model is converted to AMF, STL (or any intermediate file format), sufficient fidelity shall
be maintained to ensure that the test artefact produced from it fairly reflects the capabilities of the
AM system under assessment. The file conversion tolerance selected should ensure that the maximum
deviation of the data from the nominal CAD model is less than one quarter and, based on good
measurement practice, ideally less than one tenth of the expected accuracy of the AM system being
assessed. Currently, most additive manufacturing equipment cannot produce features with a resolution
better than 10 µm, therefore CAD models are saved to STL/AMF ensuring at least a 2,5 µm accuracy
or better. This is only general guidance and should be confirmed for the specific output system. It is
recommended that users check the maximum deviation and record the conversion parameters used, as
well as any maximum deviation (chord height and angular tolerance).
Files should not be scaled up or down either during conversion or afterward. Machine correction
factors (e.g. offsets, axis scaling, etc.) may be used and should be documented as part of the process
specification.
5.7 AMF preferred (with conversion instructions/ resolutions)
The AMF file format as defined by ISO/ASTM 52915 is the preferred model format for test artefact
geometry representation due to its ability to store high fidelity geometry with embedded units in an
intermediate file format.
5.8 Need for test specification and test process
This document forms the basis for the general Test Plan/Specification described in ASTM F2971: 2013,
Annex A1, element “D”, but specifics about its implementation need recording to accurately document
the Test Process (element “E” in Annex A1), used for producing the parts as discussed in Clause 6.
5.9 Quantity of test artefacts
For a complete test of machine performance, two things dictate the quantity of the test artefacts
produced. First, the Test Specification / Test Process shall ensure a quantity of samples, typically no
less than five, so that statistically significant measurements can be made. Second, sufficient coverage
(see 5.13) of the build platform needs to be made to account for variations in performance between
build locations. Fewer test artefacts with less complete coverage may be used for spot checks or limited
demonstrations, such as the example detailed in Annex A. The number of artefacts shall be agreed upon
between the buyer and seller and shall permit to perform at least 5 mesurements.
5.10 Position and orientation of test artefacts
As per ASTM F2971: 2013, Annex A1, element “F”, it is recommended to report results in combination
with the test artefacts’ build position and orientations according to the convention set forth in ISO/
ASTM 52921.
5.11 Considerations for orientation
Since these test artefacts are intended to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of additive building
techniques, there will be failed build geometries. It is worth considering which features are likely to
fail and place them in a position that minimizes the risk that this leads to an outright failure of the
features/parts/artefacts in the rest of the build. For example, in a powder bed process, it can be
advisable to position parts that are more likely to fail at a higher level in the overall build to reduce the
3
© ISO/ASTM International 2021 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------
oSIST prEN ISO/ASTM 52902:2022
ISO/ASTM DIS 52902:2021(E)
risk that failed parts or sections of parts impinge on other components in the build or the AM machine
mechanism.
5.12 Labelling
It can be useful to add labels to parts to identify respective artefact orientations and positions in the
build. Labelling is summarized in 7.5.
5.13 Coverage
It is important that test artefacts be made with sufficient coverage of the build volume to get
representative data for where real parts are made. Coverage evaluates variability throughout the build
volume. This is best practice for all AM processes and is especially critical for processes that have a
“sweet spot” (for example, some galvanometric laser beam steering systems give more repeatable
results in the centre of the platform). The artefact distribution should span at least 80 % of the
machine’s build platform area. If build location effects are known or deemed irrelevant for the trial
being performed, then a single build location may be selected and used, as agreed between vendor and
user.
Long artefacts, which reach across the extents of the build volume, can be necessary to detect
corrections that are not linear or are periodic in nature.
5.14 Arrays
Geometry should not be scaled (since this affects the measurement outputs) but may be patterned in an
array to give larger coverage areas. See an example in Figure 2.
5.15 Part consolidation
When arrays of parts are needed for better coverage, it can be most practical to build a single combined
part instead of trying to build arrays of adjacent individual parts. This can be achieved by consolidating
adjacent AMF or STL files prior to slicing and other file preparation steps.
As AM most commonly is a layered process (in Z-direction) and often based on pixels (in X/Y-direction),
the exact position of the part in the build can affect the test significantly. This is especially true of
artefacts testing machine resolution. A minor translation of the part can influence rounding off issues
influencing whether a specific layer or pixel will build or not. This can be caused during prepara
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.