www.3ders.org

Oct 25, 2018 | By Thomas

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office officially published a series of 46 newly granted patents for Apple Inc. this week. One of Apple's newly granted patents covers their invention relating to techniques for 3D printing three dimensional (3D) objects. More particularly, Apple filed a patent for a new method to print 3D models efficiently using triangular tessellation. The method, which divides the smooth surface into small triangles that approximate the shape of the original model, is shown to be more efficient than circular print head motions used in current 3D printers in terms of speed and/or material usage, according to Michael R. Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer at Apple Inc., Canada, and the sole inventor of the patent.

0

“In one embodiment, the triangles making up the triangular tessellations are fixed-size triangles. In another embodiment, the triangles making up the triangular tessellations are dynamically sized triangles. By way of example, small triangles could be used to form an object’s edges or other regions in which strength/support is needed. Larger triangles could be used to build-up or construct areas where strength/support is not as critical,” wrote Sweet in the patent.

The unique aspect of the patent is the infill design. The infill is a repetitive structure inside an object that is used to retain rigidity. Infill percentage and pattern influence print weight, material usage, strength, print time and sometimes decorative properties. Most infill involves shapes or squiggles inside an object in a uniform way to keep the structure from collapsing. However this traditional method often lead to cracking or brittleness in the finished product.

Apple’s new invention would change the shape of the internal infill to differently-sized triangles. The patent refers to these triangles as print tiles.

"Rather than using fixed-grid triangular patterns, additional optimizations may be achieved using triangular tessellations whose size and placement are determined dynamically," wrote Sweet. "An approach in accordance with this type of embodiment could, for example, use smaller print tiles in regions needing greater strength (e.g., such as near edges) and larger print tiles in regions where strength is not as important. In this way, material could be deposited in accordance with the needs of the particular design. Using a dynamic triangle tessellator (i.e. not a grid of fixed size triangles) would allow for further optimizations for providing greater strength in specific regions (such as near edges) and reduced material usage in less critical areas along the interior."

This system is also used on the surface of the print to approximate smooth surfaces.

“In one embodiment, the triangles making up the triangular tessellations are fixed-size triangles. In another embodiment, the triangles making up the triangular tessellations are dynamically sized triangles. By way of example, small triangles could be used to form an object’s edges or other regions in which strength/support is needed. Larger triangles could be used to build-up or construct areas where strength/support is not as critical,” wrote Sweet in the patent.

Sweet points out that convetional print-head pattern requires the 3D print head to constantly change direction, but this system permits the print-head mechanism to reach and maintain its maximum speed as it only moves forward to make the triangular shapes, and print-head directions may be maintained for even longer distances when a larger region is considered.

The full document for Sweet and Apple’s “Using triangular tessellation in 3D printing” patent (No. 10,105,905, granted October 23, 2018) can be found online here.

 

 

Posted in 3D Printing Technology

 

 

Maybe you also like:

• Mitsubishi Electric announces new Dot Forming AM technology for high-precision 3D metal shaping
• MX3D releases stunning images of world's first 3D printed steel bridge
• HP, NTU Singapore and NRF announce $84 million HP-NTU Digital Manufacturing Corporate Lab
• Novel 3D bioprinting tech could create artificial blood vessels, organ tissue
• SHINING 3D Launches AccuFab-D1 DLP 3D printer at Global Reseller & Partner Meeting 2018
• Titomic signs $1.8M Defence MoU with TAUV to 3D print next-generation soldier systems
• Fraunhofer IKTS researchers use FFF 3D printing to make harder 3D metal prints
• Tonkin Liu develops trachea stent prototype using architectural Shell Lace Structure
• New method developed to 3D print lithium-ion batteries in nearly any shape
• ESA’s MELT 3D printer designed for use in microgravity

   

Jin wrote at 11/3/2018 8:24:31 PM:

This just sounds like the higher-ups at Apple paid the USPTO a massive amount of cash for something that already existed when I first learned to 3d print in highschool in 2013. This just reeks of sketchy dealings

Ryn wrote at 10/31/2018 4:57:21 PM:

I dont get it. This looks exactly the same as a cubic subdivision infill. Cura has been using it for a while. That and the tetrahedral design I have seen in 3d software for decades. This doesng look like it will hold water. Maybe a tetrahedral preprocessor on a model?

Chris wrote at 10/30/2018 11:20:25 AM:

You will get an Apple 3D printer when they have further completed their self serving strategies to manipulate the tech, software, and marketing, in order to sell stolen ideas for $3000 a printer, with $300 cords, proprietary filament, cloud based slicers, and software updates that force you to buy new hardware when they decide. When they continue to gather sheep to line up for there ultimately inferior products you will line up around the corner. You will pay way too much, you will be locked in to the software and orientation they want you to be locked into, until you beg in any forum you can for the next available apple product to reword and rebrand opensource and otherwise already existing products. Why plan obsolescence when you can manipulate allowance.

Spinnetti wrote at 10/26/2018 10:56:29 PM:

Sounds good. When do we get a Apple 3d printer?

Ed Eaglehouse wrote at 10/26/2018 9:50:07 PM:

Tessellation has been an industry standard for decades. What makes this patentable?

Nath wrote at 10/25/2018 8:04:20 PM:

I don't understand what is patent-able here. What is the intellectual property being claimed? Using essentially ANY 3d design software (take Blender for example) a 3d object is already rendered using a series of small triangles. There is nothing new or innovative about that, it's just how rendering software achieves complex shapes simply. Is is just the infill pattern? Is that even a patentable thing? There are myriad infill patterns available to choose from distributed in free software for slicing 3d files (like Slic3r for example, or even Microsoft's free 3d Builder), and in many of those programs the infill pattern is manipulatable - you can make it however you want it to be. Finally - slicing is not 3d design, it's a step where you take a 3d design file and prepare it specifically for a specific 3d printer (think brand types and also traditional deposition printers vs delta style printers, etc. also think material - some printers print in PLA, some in ABS, etc. on down the really long line of material options up to and including mud for construction prints). Slicing isn't 3d design. Slicing is taking a finalized design and preparing it for a specific machine to print. And slicing is the step wherein infill is determined -not in the design stage. So in conclusion - what the heck did Apple just claim IP for? And what the heck did the USPTO grant them the ownership rights to? How can one patent an infill pattern? And how can one patent rendering in triangles (when other software developers have had this tech on the market for decades)? This makes no sense.

Leave a comment:

Your Name: