A Philosophy of Design for Additive Manufacturing Inspired by Art, Physics and Engineering
A Philosophy of Design for Additive Manufacturing Inspired by Art, Physics and Engineering
With Francesco Leonardi of PUNTOZERO
PUNTOZERO is a design for additive manufacturing consultancy based in Italy founded by experts in they field of advanced engineering with experience honed in automotive, academia and service bureaus.
Co-founded by Francesco Leonardi, PUNTOZERO’s clients include leading motorsports, biomedical and manufacturing companies in Europe and around the world, using the latest generative design, lattice structures and simulation driven shape optimization tools and techniques.
Francesco discusses is philosophy of design for AM (DfAM), how art, music and nature inspires his approach along with how business, engineering and cultural constraints balance the realization of their client projects.
Q.
Can you tell us a little about PUNTOZERO and how it got started?
A.
Creating the future is challenging, fun, complex, and stimulating.
I see in additive technology both in concrete and digital terms an opportunity.
Every producible product is the result of balances and combinations where the main actors are technology, material, shape, and design concepts. This is certainly among the technologies the one which have the most variables, possibilities and therefore potentials among the widest, and at the same time a greater integration between the digital and the real world. That's why I founded Puntozero together with my partners.
I believe if the components produced in AM are used and not only prototyped we can truly benefit from the technology and what surrounds it. Puntozero evolves, is the complexity that wants to become simple advancement towards the future. Fundamental in the creation of this project was certainly the experience of engineering studies, from classical mechanics to courses directed towards additive manufacturing passing through materials and nanotechnology, but also crucial is the experience in this sector.
We all came from a service bureau, so we know the most different approaches to this technology, and we understand the problems which can go with that. This is why the team is created by people with different expertise and experiences who focus on one goal.
Q.
What are some of your favorite projects you can talk about?
A.
My favorite project is always the next one.
This year some projects are going to be sold on the mass market and independently from the specific one, which you know is practically impossible to talk about them, everyone is something incredible and something we are really proud of. One of my favorite things is that everyone is different from another and most of all from a completely different world. This excites me the most!
It is incredible to see how the same technology can be an opportunity for every sector in different ways and it is proof that DfAM enables not just the correct use of the technologies but also new ideas, business models, and a completely new approach to seeing things.
…stay tuned!
Q.
How does your design consultancy work, can you walk us through a ‘typical’ consulting process, and what is your business model?
A.
The word “typical” is not something common in Puntozero. On the other hand, it is also true that we are creating a type of consultancy that can help achieve the goals for each problem, consistently. Every sector seems to have different priorities, goals, problems, timing and budget.
To simplify at the moment, our service is quite simple and it is really similar to an engineer/design consultancy team. We speak directly to the potential customer about projects, ideas, product development or pure research and from there we start. Always have to be clear about the goals, the problems, and what are the minimum expected advantages that came from it. We advise the client on the best routes to reach the goal, model, design and development but it is also crucial to follow the client to those who are able to produce.
There will certainly be new developments that we are currently testing that may also change our business model, but this is our continuous evolution.
Q.
Given your company is focused on design for additive manufacturing, how do your clients know that an AM design is the answer to their engineering requirements?
A.
There are always different factors to meet engineering requirements, but also economic development or business objectives in general.
Recently, the perception of DfAM is changing, but it is not yet weighed with the same value as other factors when it comes to AM in general. It is true that many are introducing technologies and these are the first to see the future and the need for DfAM, both in development and in fully utilizing the technology. In general, we always try to have as much dialogue as possible with those who collaborate with us to spread points of view that, sometimes mixed with those of the customer, lead to the most stimulating projects.
Clients may come to our company with a specific need for AM design, or they may be considering AM as an option for a particular project. In either case, we works with the client to understand their engineering requirements and determine if AM is the best solution for their needs.
Then sometimes if we see a potential that is not obvious we tend to push towards R&D and taking little steps towards the goal without using classical path.
Q.
Once you identify a problem how do you determine which material and additive manufacturing process to design for, including which software tools?
A.
It is true that our work is to implement design techniques or experiences in the industry, but one of the core focus is to create methodologies. Everything comes to that, everything orbit around that.
With all the variables in play, methodologies are the only means that can lead to a consistent result. We have therefore developed some that allow us to have a selection of material, technology and design techniques.
Q.
Once you have a design/solution that meets the engineering requirements, how do you also ensure the solution meets the business case?
A.
Usually, we work on projects, and if these have to be produced, the economic objective is like a project constraint. This typically involves evaluating the cost, lead time, and overall feasibility. It remains a not simple issue to deal with generically, but when the objective is set sometimes we begin with this as a first step, which is the validation of the cost range rather than the functional achievement.
Once we have a complete understanding of the costs and lead times associated with the project, we work with the client to determine if the solution meets their business case. This may involve adjusting the design or solution to meet budget or lead time constraints or identifying potential cost savings or efficiencies.
Q.
What are some common themes you are seeing emerging from clients, what is driving adoption of additive manufacturing and the realization that design is key to success.
A.
More and more company are approaching the AM not just for experimenting but with a clear vision on it. On one side companies have competitors and the companies already with something produce in additive are pushing the other to do the same or better, on the other side, the increasing of AM products are opening the mind of expert in other sectors where new opportunities can perfectly help.
We can do a subdivision between economics, business innovation and performances. If the last is not something new, the first two themes are gain more practical interest compare to few years ago. Cost reduction, time to market, customization these are the themes that have always been discussed and where the technology of AM has always been highlighted for this.
Many times we are mistaken in thinking that the opportunity that technology makes available is automatically an advantage for those who use it.
Potential is not power. From this point of view, DfAM is successfully concretizing and therefore gaining interest but above all gaining the place it inevitably must have.
Q.
Do you also train a client’s employees on DfAM principles as you go through the process, such as feasibility studies, part/feature/performance consolidation, manufacturing constraints?
A.
Yes, at the moment the most proficient project are them with a partial sharing of the know-how.
They grow in AM thinking and we grow in understanding deeper every aspect of that specific sector. This become a strategic decision-making tool and a potential for the future.
Sometimes it is a transfer of information that is necessary for the clarity and transparency of choices and proposals towards the customer.
Q.
What are common misunderstandings clients have of DfAM and additive manufacturing in general on initial engagement?
A.
Which is a practice that does not serve or serves only for high levels of performance and quality. But technologies are not independent, they are not automatic.
Q.
What are some issues you see arise that block the adoption of additive manufacturing as a solution.
A.
Probably 3 main factors we face most of the time.
The first one refers banally to costs, sometimes still too niche to be applied to common products or still to difficult to englobe the technology inside an old business model.
The second one refers to the AM world infrastructure which, being composed of different players and suppliers, not everyone is on the same level. Many services have the know-how of how to produce but are not being structured as a production company.
Third, the evolution of DfAM where some acknowledge problem of classical engineering is not simple to resolve and add value to make AM sensible better even when the technology seems a perfect fit.
Then there are for sure other complication but they really depend on the approach to a project or about how big could be the production, for example quality control, materials, post-processing.
Q.
The design tools, additive manufacturing materials and processes are evolving relatively quickly, how do you stay up to date with the latest offerings?
A.
This is a difficult task, but I see this a priority for a company like Puntozero. Our company cannot afford to be slow.
We strive to have lean and repetitive moments dedicated to research not only in technologies and software but also in ways of sharing or collaborating with our customers.
We also collaborate with universities on pure research topics and testing of new technologies that are investigated, tested, and analyzed before being proposed to customers and implemented as soon as possible when our required standards are met.
Q.
What do you think a designer or engineer needs to understand DfAM potential and constraints?
A.
Absolutely. Knowing the potential of a technology or engineering technique would be like trying to define hot without cold, fast without slow. And since DfAM is a practice that aims to exploit a production technology, we must consider both the opportunities and limitations of them as well as materials, finishes and secondary processes.
This is where the theme that becomes more necessary than ever, and that is multidisciplinary, arises.
Q.
Finally, what most excites you about designing for additive manufacturing and what are you looking forward to in the future.
A.
I’ve always been attracted by what there is under the hood, the details. I always been in love to have different point of views and where all come from.
Isn't it true that when you look at a wonderful car you compare it to a work of art, or when you listen to a masterpiece we see a greater meaning?
Seeing art, physics, music and engineering close together is something that attracts me.
So there are in particular two things which attracted me the most.
The first is what will be the next step in design optimization and the evolution of everything that can be created, in an increasingly similar way to nature where we will find it almost impossible to make distinctions between artificial and natural, where each component evolved from the previous one will contribute to improving the whole.
It stimulates me to think that this approach could even lead us to evolve the "natural" more quickly. This can already be seen in part, think for example of a tree that grows while optimizing it will always have a time constraint, where during its journey it will have to make up for complications such as external variables but without ever changing its function.
Think of an optimized component in a controlled environment and imagine what levels of efficiency could be achieved. And this could be simple to imagine but what would be interesting will be around the whole idea of the optimization and how it will evolves.
Reach out to Francesco and the team at PUNTOZERO to learn how they can help with the design of high performance products to meet business requirements using DfAM.
