SIST EN 16602-70-80:2022
(Main)Space product assurance - Processing and quality assurance requirements for metallic powder bed fusion technologies for space applications
Space product assurance - Processing and quality assurance requirements for metallic powder bed fusion technologies for space applications
The scope includes metallic Powder Bed Fusion technologies for space applications.
A clear definition and implementation of quality monitoring and control means is mandatory and shall address the full end to end metallic PBF process, encompassing:
- Design / Simulation
- Materials management (Powder, shielding gases, other consumables, recycling, etc.)
- Processing
- Post Processing
- Testing
By developing a single standard which can be tailored in the Project definition phase, it will help the Space Industry in performing the following functions
related to metallic PBF technologies over the full end to end process:
(i) select and qualify metallic PBF processes for the appropriate application,
(ii) select and validate raw materials for the appropriate applications,
(iii) define monitoring and control means during production to ensure that metallic PBF parts are produced with the required quality,
(iv) define requirements for applying Non-Destructive Inspection methods for the different metallic PBF parts,
(v) define requirements to verify/qualify space parts produced by metallic PBF processes for the selected applications and associated environment,
(vi) define specific requirements for operators/inspectors/instructors certification,
(vii) define requirements for metallic PBF machines certification,
(viii) define requirements for metallic PBF Companies certification.
The Standard will be complemented with informative Annexes, listing guidelines and best practices on specific technical aspects.
Raumfahrtproduktsicherung - Verarbeitungs- und Qualitätssicherungsanforderungen für metallische Pulver-Bett-Fusions-Technologien für Weltraumanwendungen
Assurance produit des projets spatiaux - Exigences de traitement et d'assurance qualité pour les technologies de fusion sur lit de poudre métallique pour applications spatiales
La présente norme définit les exigences de traitement et d'assurance qualité pour les technologies de fusion sur lit de poudre destinées aux applications spatiales.
La présente norme spécifie un ensemble de phases propres aux technologies de fusion sur lit de poudre métallique qui doivent chacune être suivies lors de la définition, de la vérification et de la fabrication des pièces. De plus, elle décrit les exigences relatives au personnel d'exploitation et de supervision ainsi qu'aux installations et équipements.
La présente norme ne vise pas à prescrire des paramètres de procédé en rapport avec l'utilisation des technologies de fusion sur lit de poudre métallique.
Même si cette norme a été développée autour de techniques basées sur la fusion sur lit de poudre, ses principes peuvent également servir de référence pour d'autres procédés à base de métaux et de polymères. Il s'agit, entre autres, de la fabrication additive par arc électrique (WAAM, Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing), de la stéréolithographie (avec métaux), de la projection de liant, mais aussi du frittage sélectif par laser (SLS, Selective Laser Sintering), de la stéréolithographie (avec polymères) et de la modélisation par dépôt fondu (FDM, Fused Deposition Modelling).
Zagotavljanje kakovosti proizvodov v vesoljski tehniki - Zahteve za obdelavo in zagotavljanje kakovosti za fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu za uporabo v vesoljski tehniki
Področje uporabe vključuje fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu za uporabo v vesoljski tehniki.
Jasna opredelitev ter izvajanje spremljanja in nadzora kakovosti je obvezno. Dokument obravnava celoten postopek fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu, ki vključuje:
• projekt/simulacijo
• upravljanje z materiali (prah, zaščitni plini, drug potrošni material, recikliranje itd.)
• obdelavo
• naknadno obdelavo
• preskušanje
Z razvojem enotnega standarda, ki ga je mogoče prilagoditi v fazi opredelitve projekta, bo standard pomagal vesoljski industriji pri izvajanju naslednjih funkcij,
povezanih s celotnim postopkom fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu, kar vključuje:
(i) izbiro in preverjanje postopka fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu za ustrezno uporabo,
(ii) izbiro in potrditev surovin za ustrezno uporabo,
(iii) opredelitev načinov spremljanja in nadzora med proizvodnjo, da se zagotovi, da so deli, izdelani s fuzijsko tehnologijo kovinskega prahu, zahtevane kakovosti,
(iv) opredelitev zahtev za uporabo metod neporušitvenega preskušanja za različne dele, izdelane s fuzijsko tehnologijo kovinskega prahu,
(v) opredelitev zahtev za potrjevanje/preverjanje vesoljskih delov, izdelanih s postopki fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu, za izbrano uporabo in povezano okolje,
(vi) opredelitev posebnih zahtev za certificiranje upravljavcev/inšpektorjev/inštruktorjev,
(vii) opredelitev zahtev za certificiranje strojev za postopke fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu,
(vii) opredelitev zahtev za certificiranje podjetij za postopke fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu.
Standard bo dopolnjen z informativnimi dodatki, seznamom smernic in dobro prakso glede posebnih tehničnih vidikov.
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-marec-2022
Zagotavljanje kakovosti proizvodov v vesoljski tehniki - Zahteve za obdelavo in
zagotavljanje kakovosti za fuzijske tehnologije kovinskega prahu za uporabo v
vesoljski tehniki
Space product assurance - Processing and quality assurance requirements for metallic
powder bed fusion technologies for space applications
Raumfahrtproduktsicherung - Verarbeitungs- und Qualitätssicherungsanforderungen für
metallische Pulver-Bett-Fusions-Technologien für Weltraumanwendungen
Assurance produit des projets spatiaux - Exigences de traitement et d'assurance qualité
pour les technologies de fusion sur lit de poudre métallique pour applications spatiales
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 16602-70-80:2021
ICS:
03.120.99 Drugi standardi v zvezi s Other standards related to
kakovostjo quality
49.140 Vesoljski sistemi in operacije Space systems and
operations
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
EUROPEAN STANDARD EN 16602-70-80
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
December 2021
ICS 49.025.99; 49.140
English version
Space product assurance - Processing and quality
assurance requirements for metallic powder bed fusion
technologies for space applications
Assurance produit des projets spatiaux - Exigences de Raumfahrtproduktsicherung - Verarbeitungs- und
traitement et d'assurance qualité pour les technologies Qualitätssicherungsanforderungen für metallische
de fusion sur lit de poudre métallique pour Pulver-Bett-Fusions-Technologien für
applications spatiales Weltraumanwendungen
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 5 December 2021.
CEN and CENELEC members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for
giving this European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical
references concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre or to
any CEN and CENELEC member.
This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by
translation under the responsibility of a CEN and CENELEC member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC
Management Centre has the same status as the official versions.
CEN and CENELEC members are the national standards bodies and national electrotechnical committees of Austria, Belgium,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom.
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre:
Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2021 CEN/CENELEC All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means
Ref. No. EN 16602-70-80:2021 E
reserved worldwide for CEN national Members and for
CENELEC Members.
Table of contents
European Foreword . 9
Introduction . 10
1 Scope . 11
2 Normative references . 12
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms . 13
3.1 Terms from other standards .13
3.2 Terms specific to the present standard .13
3.3 Abbreviated terms. 14
3.4 Nomenclature .16
4 Principles . 17
4.1 General .17
5 General . 19
5.1 Referential axis definition .19
5.2 Safety classification of AM parts .19
5.2.1 Overview . 19
5.2.2 Definition of AM safety classes.20
5.2.3 Requirement .20
5.3 Multiple laser systems .20
5.4 Family of parts .21
5.4.1 Overview .21
5.4.2 Requirements .21
5.5 Acceptance criteria .21
6 AM definition phase . 22
6.1 Overview .22
6.2 Input for AM definition phase .22
6.2.1 Overview . 22
6.2.2 Requirement .22
6.3 Preliminary Manufacturing Concept Review (PMCR) . 23
7 Verification phase . 24
7.1 Overview .24
7.2 Establishment of pAMP .24
7.2.1 Feedstock .24
7.2.2 Establishment of work processing windows including post
processing .24
7.2.3 Preliminary Additive Manufacturing Procedure (pAMP) . 25
7.3 Verification on specimen- (AMP), and prototype-level (HFP) . 25
7.4 Additive Manufacturing Verification Plan (AMVP) . 26
7.4.1 Overview .26
7.4.2 Safety class 1.1, 1.2, and class 2 . 26
7.4.3 Safety class 3 .27
7.4.4 Reporting .28
7.5 Prototype verification Plan (PVP) . 28
7.5.1 General . 28
7.5.2 Safety classes 1.1, 1.2, and 2 .28
7.5.3 Safety class 3 .30
7.5.4 Reporting .30
7.6 Re- verification of AM machines .30
7.6.1 Overview .30
7.6.2 Requirements .30
7.7 Machine pause .31
7.7.1 Overview .31
7.7.2 Requirements .31
7.8 Repair .31
7.9 Manufacturing supports .32
7.10 Parts cleaning .32
7.11 Documentation . 32
7.12 Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR) . 32
8 Hardware production. 33
8.1 Overview .33
8.2 Requirements for hardware production .33
8.2.1 General . 33
8.2.2 Process interruption .33
8.2.3 Manufacture of hardware and witness samples . 33
8.3 Testing of witness samples .34
8.3.1 Tensile testing .34
8.3.2 Full height blanks .34
8.3.3 Powder capture sample . 35
8.4 Inspection of hardware .35
8.4.1 Non-destructive techniques .35
8.5 Reporting .37
9 AM operation and supervision personnel . 38
9.1 Overview .38
9.2 AM supervisor .38
9.3 Qualification and certification of AM operators . 38
9.3.1 Laser based Powder Bed Fusion processes . 38
9.3.2 Electron Beam based Powder Bed Fusion processes . 39
9.4 Qualification and certification of personnel for NDT . 39
9.5 Safety of Personnel .39
10 Equipment and facilities . 40
10.1 Overview .40
10.2 Conditions for facilities .40
10.3 Laser based equipment calibration .40
10.4 Electron beam based equipment calibration . 40
10.4.1 Frequency .40
10.4.2 Calibration protocol description . 40
10.5 Maintenance and repair .41
10.5.1 Maintenance of laser based machines . 41
10.5.2 Maintenance of electron beam based machines . 42
10.5.3 Repair .43
10.6 Materials and consumables .44
10.6.1 Management of powder . 44
10.6.2 Tooling and features .44
10.6.3 Gases .44
10.6.4 Cleaning of machines .45
11 Quality assurance . 46
11.1 Configuration control .46
11.2 Maintenance of AM procedure .46
11.2.1 Overview . 46
11.2.2 Requirements .46
11.3 Statistical Process Control .46
11.3.1 Materials Properties Database (MPD) . 46
11.4 Quality control .47
11.4.1 Reference and witness samples. 47
11.4.2 Documentation of manufacturing . 47
11.4.3 Anomalies and non-conformances occurring during the AM
process . 47
11.5 Auditing .47
11.6 End Item Data Pack .47
12 Testing of AM materials and parts . 48
12.1 Overview .48
12.2 Powder capture sample .48
12.2.1 Overview . 48
12.2.2 Requirement .48
12.3 NDT for AM.48
12.4 Density testing .49
12.4.1 Overview .49
12.4.2 Requirements .50
12.5 Destructive testing .50
12.5.1 Metallography .50
12.5.2 Tensile testing .52
12.5.3 Fatigue testing .53
13 Powders . 54
13.1 Testing of powders .54
13.2 Procurement .55
13.3 Safe Handling .56
13.4 Storage .56
13.5 Loading .56
13.6 Recycling .56
13.7 Blending .57
13.8 Disposal .57
Annex A (normative) Preliminary Manufacturing Concept Review (PMCR) -
DRD . 58
A.1 DRD identification . 58
A.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 58
A.1.2 Purpose and objective .58
A.2 Expected response .58
A.2.1 Scope and content .58
A.2.2 Special remarks .58
Annex B (normative) Additive Manufacturing Procedure (AMP) - DRD . 59
B.1 DRD identification . 59
B.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 59
B.1.2 Purpose and objective .59
B.2 Expected response .59
B.2.1 Scope and content .59
B.2.2 Additional requirements for various AM processes . 60
B.2.3 Special remarks .61
Annex C (normative) AM verification plan (AMVP) - DRD . 62
C.1 DRD identification . 62
C.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 62
C.1.2 Purpose and objective .62
C.2 Expected response .62
C.2.1 Scope and content .62
C.2.2 Special remarks .62
Annex D (normative) AM Verification Report (AMVR) – DRD . 63
D.1 DRD identification . 63
D.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 63
D.1.2 Purpose and objective .63
D.2 Expected response .63
D.2.1 Scope and content .63
D.2.2 Special remarks .63
Annex E (normative) Hardware Fabrication Procedure (HFP) - DRD . 64
E.1 DRD identification . 64
E.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 64
E.1.2 Purpose and objective .64
E.2 Expected response .64
E.2.1 Scope and content .64
E.2.2 Special remarks .64
Annex F (normative) Hardware Production Report (HPR) - DRD . 65
F.1 DRD identification . 65
F.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 65
F.1.2 Purpose and objective .65
F.2 Expected response .65
F.2.1 Scope and content .65
F.2.2 Special remarks .65
Annex G (normative) Prototype Verification Plan (PVP) - DRD . 66
G.1 DRD identification . 66
G.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 66
G.1.2 Purpose and objective .66
G.2 Expected response .66
G.2.1 Scope and content .66
G.2.2 Special remarks .66
Annex H (normative) Prototype Verification Report (PVR) - DRD . 67
H.1 DRD identification . 67
H.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 67
H.1.2 Purpose and objective .67
H.2 Expected response .67
H.2.1 Scope and content .67
H.2.2 Special remarks .67
Annex I (normative) Powder Management Plan (PMP) - DRD . 68
I.1 DRD identification . 68
I.1.1 Requirement identification and source document . 68
I.1.2 Purpose and objective .68
I.2 Expected response .68
I.2.1 Scope and content .68
I.2.2 Special remarks .68
Annex J (informative) Template for auditing . 69
J.1.2 Special remarks .74
Annex K (informative) Example of a Materials Properties Database
(MPD) . 75
Bibliography . 76
Figures
Figure 4-1: Flow chart showing the steps required to establish a verified metallic
Powder Bed Fusion process and consequently to produce hardware . 18
Figure 5-1 Definition of coordinate system [source: EN ISO ASTM 52921:2016] . 19
Figure 12-1: Melt pool measurement concept [Image and concept: adopted from NASA
MSFC-SPEC-3717] .52
Tables
Table 5-1: Safety classes . 20
Table 7-1: Pre-verification test matrix .25
Table 7-2: Test methods for class 1.1, 1.2, and class 2 parts . 27
Table 7-3: Test methods for prototypes, and witness samples for safety classes 1.1,
1.2, and 2 .29
Table 7-4: Test methods for prototypes, and witness specimens for safety class 3 . 30
Table 8-1: Overview of witness samples to be produced with hardware . 33
Table 8-2: Overview of non-destructive tests for AM hardware . 36
Table J-1 : Audit template . 69
Table K-1 : Example of a Materials Properties Database . 75
European Foreword
This document (EN 16602-70-80:2021) has been prepared by Technical
Committee CEN-CENELEC/TC 5 “Space”, the secretariat of which is held by
DIN.
This standard (EN 16602-70-80:2021) originates from ECSS-Q-ST-70-80C.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either
by publication of an identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by June 2022,
and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at the latest by June 2022.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document
may be the subject of patent rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held
responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document has been prepared under a standardization request given to CEN
by the European Commission and the European Free Trade Association.
This document has been developed to cover specifically space systems and has
therefore precedence over any EN covering the same scope but with a wider
domain of applicability (e.g. : aerospace).
According to the CEN-CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards
organizations of the following countries are bound to implement this European
Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United
Kingdom.
Introduction
This Standard specifies the processing and quality assurance requirements for
the different types of Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) Additive Manufacturing
processes for Metallic Materials for space flight applications. It can also be used
for Additive Manufacturing activities on space related ground equipment and
development activities for flight hardware. The Standard covers all Powder Bed
Additive Manufacturing processes using Laser or Electron Beam as melting
source.
This standard may be tailored for the specific characteristic and constraints of a
space project in conformance with ECSS-S-ST-00.
Scope
This Standard defines requirements for processing and quality assurance of
powder bed fusion technologies for space applications.
Within this standard a set of phases are specified, each to be followed when
defining, verifying and manufacturing parts using metallic powder bed fusion
technologies. In addition, requirements for operating and supervision personnel
and equipment facilities are described.
This Standard does not aim to prescribe process parameters relevant to the
fabrication using metallic powder bed fusion technologies.
Although this standard is developed for powder bed fusion based techniques, its
principles can also be used as a reference for other metal-based and polymer-
based processes. These include Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM),
Stereolithography (with metals), Binder Jetting, but also Selective Laser Sintering
(SLS), Stereolithography (with polymers), Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM),
and others.
Normative references
The following normative documents contain provisions which, through
reference in this text, constitute provisions of this ECSS Standard. For dated
references, subsequent amendments to, or revision of any of these publications
do not apply. However, parties to agreements based on this ECSS Standard are
encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the more recent editions of
the normative documents indicated below. For undated references, the latest
edition of the publication referred to applies.
EN reference Reference in text Title
EN 16601-00-01 ECSS-S-ST-00-01 ECSS system – Glossary of terms
EN 16603-32 ECSS-E-ST-32 Space engineering - Structural general requirements
EN 16602-10-09 ECSS-Q-ST-10-09 Space product assurance - Nonconformance control
system
EN 16602-20 ECSS-Q-ST-20 Space product assurance - Quality assurance
EN 16602-70 ECSS-Q-ST-70 Space product assurance - Materials, mechanical
parts and processes
EN 16602-70-15 ECSS-Q-ST-70-15 Space product assurance - Non-destructive testing
EN 16602-70-45 ECSS-Q-ST-70-45 Space product assurance -Mechanical testing of
metallic materials
EN 2003-009:2007 Aerospace series - Test methods - Titanium and
titanium alloys - Part 009: Determination of surface
contamination
EN ISO ASTM Standard terminology for additive manufacturing -
52921:2016 Coordinate systems and test methodologies
ISO 2859-1:1999 Sampling procedures for inspection by attributes,
Part 1: Sampling schemes indexed by acceptance
quality limit (AQL) for lot-by-lot inspection
ISO ASTM 52941:2020 Additive manufacturing - System performance and
reliability - Acceptance tests for laser metal powder-
bed fusion machines for metallic materials for
aerospace application
ISO ASTM 52942:2020 Additive manufacturing - Qualification principles -
Qualifying machine operators of laser metal powder
bed fusion machines and equipment used in
aerospace applications
Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms
3.1 Terms from other standards
a. For the purpose of this Standard, the terms and definitions from ECSS-S-
ST-00-01 apply.
b. For the purpose of this Standard, the terms and definitions from ECSS-E-
ST-32 apply, in particular for the following term:
1. structure
3.2 Terms specific to the present standard
3.2.1 as built
condition of a part or material sample that did not receive any treatment after
completion of the AM build job
3.2.2 build job configuration
design of the part, its location, the number of the part(s) and witness specimens,
in addition to supporting strategy in the build volume
3.2.3 build job
single complete operation of the powder bed fusion process to create objects in
the powder bed
NOTE Multiple objects are commonly created during a
build job.
[adopted from NASA MSFC 3717]
3.2.4 structural part
declaration by the design authority of an application to be structural or non-
structural
NOTE The term “structural design” is defined in clause
3.2.44 of ECSS-E-ST-32 and can give some
guidelines on how to declare an application
structural or non-structural.
3.2.5 fatigue critical part
declaration by the design authority of a part to be fatigue critical or not
NOTE Typical cases are where fatigue loads are a
significant factor in the design and verification
process.
3.2.6 post process operations
action(s) performed after completion of the build job
3.2.7 powder lot
one quantity of powder manufactured in one continuous operation
3.2.8 powder batch
some quantity of a powder lot
NOTE When a large quantity of powder is procured
(from the same powder lot), the powder lot is
often split into different batches. Different
batches can be blended, but they all originate
from the same powder lot.
3.2.9 re-verification
repetition of a verification program or parts of it
NOTE The conditions are specified in clause 7.6.
3.2.10 end-to-end manufacturing process
process of producing AM parts, including any pre- and post-processing
3.2.11 overlap zone
part of the build volume of an AM machine, where sub-volumes of parts are built
by two or more lasers or electron beams
3.2.12 evenly distributed in the build volume
distributed such that locations in the x-y plane, but also in z-direction up to the
maximum height of the part to be built are covered
3.2.13 manufacturing supports
mechanical connections to limit parts distortion and to allow heat transfer during
manufacturing
3.3 Abbreviated terms
For the purpose of this Standard, the abbreviated terms and symbols from ECSS-
S-ST-00-01 and the following apply:
Abbreviation Meaning
additive manufacturing
AM
additive manufacturing procedure
AMP
additive manufacturing verification plan
AMVP
additive manufacturing verification report
AMVR
acceptance quality level
AQL
American Society for Testing and Materials
ASTM
Abbreviation Meaning
critical design review
CDR
certificate of compliance
CoC
de-ionised
DI
document requirements definition
DRD
Electron Beam Powder Bed Fusion
E-PBF
European Cooperation for Space Standardization
ECSS
energy-dispersive spectrometry
EDS
end item data pack
EIDP
extra low interstitials
ELI
flight model
FM
ultimate tensile strength
Ftu
yield strength
Fty
general support technology program
GSTP
hardware fabrication procedure
HFP
hot isostatic pressing
HIP
hardware production
HP
hardware production report
HPR
isopropyl alcohol
IPA
International Organisation for Standardisation
ISO
leak before burst
LBB
Laser Powder Bed Fusion
L-PBF
Metallic Materials Properties Development and
MMPDS
Standardization
molecular contamination
MOC
metal powder bed fusion
mPBF
materials properties database
MPD
manufacturing readiness review
MRR
nonconformance report
NCR
non-destructive testing
NDT
original equipment manufacturer
OEM
particulate contamination
PAC
preliminary additive manufacturing procedure
pAMP
powder bed fusion
PBF
preliminary hardware fabrication procedure
pHFP
preliminary manufacturing concept review
PMCR
prototype verification plan
PVP
Abbreviation Meaning
prototype verification report
PVR
request for approval
RFA
request for waiver
RFW
scanning electron microscope
SEM
statistical process control
SPC
x-ray computed tomography
X-Ray CT
3.4 Nomenclature
The following nomenclature applies throughout this document:
a. The word “shall” is used in this Standard to express requirements. All the
requirements are expressed with the word “shall”.
b. The word “should” is used in this Standard to express recommendations.
All the recommendations are expressed with the word “should”.
NOTE It is expected that, during tailoring,
recommendations in this document are either
converted into requirements or tailored out.
c. The words “may” and “need not” are used in this Standard to express
positive and negative permissions, respectively. All the positive
permissions are expressed with the word “may”. All the negative
permissions are expressed with the words “need not”.
d. The word “can” is used in this Standard to express capabilities or
possibilities, and therefore, if not accompanied by one of the previous
words, it implies descriptive text.
NOTE In ECSS “may” and “can” have completely
different meanings: “may” is normative
(permission), and “can” is descriptive.
e. The present and past tenses are used in this Standard to express statements
of fact, and therefore they imply descriptive text.
Principles
4.1 General
Producing parts through metallic Powder Bed Fusion technologies occurs
frequently during the manufacture of parts for space applications.
This Standard specifies the necessary requirements to perform metallic Powder
Bed Fusion processes for space applications (see Figure 4-1). Firstly, it is
comprised of three phases, as they typically occur during the development of
additively produced space hardware:
1. Within the AM definition phase, hardware requirements are
reviewed and compared with AM manufacturing constraints,
allowing for an early assessment of the feasibility of the envisaged
AM project. At this stage, it is clarified, whether or not an existing,
verified AMP is applicable for the intended application. If this is the
case, the verification on specimen level in point 2 is not repeated,
but the verification on part level is then the next step.
2. The aim of the verification phase is to verify the AM end-to-end
process through a dedicated test campaign on specimen and part
level. The verification on specimen-level results in the approved
AMP. The HFP then summarises this two-stage verification on
prototype-level and constitutes the basis for any hardware
production. The intent of the AMP is to describe the intrinsic
material properties and can therefore also be used for other designs.
3. In the hardware production phase, the hardware is produced
according to the HFP. The success of manufacturing and inspection
is described in the HPR.
Additive Manufacturing processes are considered critical (see the definition of a
critical process in ECSS-Q-ST-70) and many factors are known to have a
substantial influence on the properties of the final product. Therefore, after the
here above described development phases, three clauses, namely clause 9 “AM
operation and supervision personnel”, 10 “Equipment and facilities”, and 11
“Quality assurance” address the suitability of operating and supervision
personnel, the applied equipment and facilities and define quality assurance
requirements.
Figure 4-1: Flow chart showing the steps required to establish a verified metallic
Powder Bed Fusion process and consequently to produce hardware
General
5.1 Referential axis definition
The standard axis shall be specified in accordance with EN ISO ASTM
52921:2016.
The gas flow over the powder bed as well as the recoating direction shall
be specified, using the referential axis definition.
The Z-axis shall be perpendicular to the build platform, as specified in
Figure 5-1.
The X-axis shall be perpendicular to the z axis and parallel to the front side
of the machine.
The positive direction shall be left to right, as specified in Figure 5-1.
The positive Y-axis shall be perpendicular to the Z and X-axis front to back.
Figure 5-1 Definition of coordinate system [source: EN ISO ASTM 52921:2016]
5.2 Safety classification of AM parts
5.2.1 Overview
Additively manufactured parts for space applications are classified into four
classes according to their function and requirements using safety categories (see
clause 5.2.2).
Different considerations are made for the classification.
For example, loaded parts subjected to a maximum Von Mises stress > 50 % of
the yield strength (Fty in tensile) or > 25 % of the ultimate strength (Ftu in tensile)
of the material, or if in human spaceflight and subjected to fracture control, are
likely considered structural in this context.
Another example is pressurized hardware designed primarily for the storage of
pressurized fluid with an energy level greater than or equal to 19310 Joule, or
with an internal pressure greater than or equal to 0,69 MPa, or which can create
a hazard (if released) are also likely considered structural. Items with an energy
level below 19310 Joule can still be considered as structural, unless for instance
verified as Leak Before Burst (LBB), to mitigate the risk of catastrophic rupture
(see ECSS-E-ST-32-01), although those are sometimes still considered safety
critical, even if not fracture critical.
5.2.2 Definition of AM safety classes
5.2.2.1 Safety Class 1.1 parts
Are considered critical and structural. Failure of a Class 1.1 part results in a
loss of spacecraft, major components, loss of life, or loss of control of the
spacecraft.
5.2.2.2 Safety Class 1.2 parts
Are critical, but non-structural. Failure of a Class 1.2 part results in loss of
spacecraft, major components, loss of life, or loss of control of the spacecraft.
5.2.2.3 Safety Class 2 parts
Are non-critical but structural. Their failure can reduce the efficiency of the
system but not cause the loss of the spacecraft.
5.2.2.4 Safety Class 3 parts
Are non-critical and non-structural and are contained so that failure does not
affect other flight elements. These parts require minimal integrity verification,
the controls are mainly visual.
5.2.3 Requirement
The customer and the design authority shall agree on a safety class for the
intended product, as specified in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1: Safety classes
Structural Non-structural
Class 1.1 Class 1.2
Critical
Class 2 Class 3
Non-critical
5.3 Multiple laser systems
If AM systems with multiple lasers are used, means to test the overlap
zone(s) of lasers shall be implemented.
If AM machines with multiple interacting lasers are used, all laser
interaction areas, including the overlap zone(s) shall be assessed by
testing.
NOTE The intention is to build test specimens, which
are built by two lasers to assess the interface zone
of these.
5.4 Family of parts
5.4.1 Overview
The intention of this clause is to allow for design modifications, of a previously
verified design, which are not expected to have an impact on the manufacturing
stability nor on the final pr
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...