By Sean Fenske, Editor-in-Chief
Medtech innovation is an ever-changing field for designers and developers. Staying abreast of the latest and greatest technologies available for crafting cutting edge medical devices can be just as challenging as the ideation process itself. As such, it’s important for suppliers of such innovations to ensure the industry is informed of new capabilities and advancements.
A more recent addition to the list of fabrication techniques available to medtech designers is an additive manufacturing process called Resin Infused Powder Lithography (RIPL). This protocol uses metal to craft complex, yet incredibly small, parts for an array of healthcare applications. It compares favorably to metal injection molding (MIM) and CNC machining, but allows greater design flexibility at a lower net cost.
To help inform the industry of this process with a greater explanation of the benefits and function of RIPL, Adam Steege, CEO of Trio Labs Inc., addressed a number of questions in the following Q&A. He speaks to how it differs from other additive manufacturing processes, material options, the comparisons to other fabrication techniques, and more.
Sean Fenske: There are a number of options for metal additive manufacturing. What makes resin-infused powder lithography unique?
Adam Steege: RIPL allows you to directly print stainless steel parts with surface finish and tolerances on par with micro-CNC, but without the extra cost (e.g., setup, machine runtime, etc.) if the design is complex. This greater design freedom simplifies and streamlines innovation processes.
Also, unlike many print technologies that work with lasers, RIPL images and prints areas instead of a single point, which makes it viable for larger volumes, not just prototyping. This allows engineers and supply chain teams to consider having a single production tool for prototyping and production.
Fenske: How does the high tolerance/micro-size component capabilities compare to other metal additive manufacturing techniques?
Steege: Most metal printing processes run at around 50-micron resolution (0.002”). RIPL technology operates at 5-micron resolution (0.0002”). An order of magnitude improvement. This means Trio can produce features as small as 20 to 30 microns, which is impossible with nearly every other metal printing process. For microneedle applications in the drug delivery space (particularly hollow microneedle arrays), this capability is truly groundbreaking. For surgical applications, this translates to net shape parts with functional surface finishes without post-processing, which has never been an option before with metal printing.
Fenske: Are there special materials that need to be used with this process?
Steege: This process is a print-and-sinter process; we print a green part and sinter it using standard MIM [metal injection molding] sintering equipment. In addition, RIPL’s process can access the entire MIM materials portfolio. We’ve been able to achieve 99% density, which is better than what most MIM processes can achieve. Our materials portfolio roadmap is laid out.
Since we leverage MIM powders and furnaces, we’re able to achieve similar or better metallurgical and physical properties.
Fenske: How does this process compare to micro MIM or micro CNC machining?
Steege: MIM and CNC are great for certain geometries at certain production volumes; RIPL technology fills in the gaps and opens up a range of new possibilities. MIM runs into a few classic pitfalls, such as:
CNC can produce very precise parts, but complexity comes at a cost; every minute of machine time increases part cost. In contrast, RIPL technology makes it possible to produce complex parts economically—at high volume—without the design constraints of molding or machining, with the tolerances and surface finish engineers are accustomed to.
Fenske: What types of applications is this process being used for or where does it make the most sense?
Steege: We see a lot of interest for parts in the 2- to 5-mm size range for devices that need complex articulation mechanisms, which tend to be robotic surgical devices and steerable catheters. Often, these are parts where multiple processes were being used previously, and the tolerance stack-up from re-fixturing was a problem, as well as the cumulative cost of multiple processes. We’ve been able to produce net shape parts in a single process and eliminate these tolerance issues while reducing cost. In general, this process makes the most sense when a part is small and complex enough that CNC or MIM over constrain the design or drive cost up excessively.
Mind you, we aren’t just selling machines and hoping companies figure out how to take full advantage of RIPL. We provide a unique, custom service. Whether a contract manufacturer or medical device OEM approaches us with an idea for a part, we’re happy to help when RIPL is the right fit. We're already having conversations with R&D teams, product developers, and even supply chain managers, all asking us about the same type of solution—how they can get complex, incredibly small sized metal parts for medical device applications. We're eager to provide them with answers.
Fenske: What are the primary considerations designers should keep in mind when specifying this technology for component fabrication?
Steege: This is not just a prototyping tool. We can scale to volume production, and eliminate the need for re-sourcing and redesign when going through DV/V [design verification and validation] and commercial launch. This means designers can take full advantage of the flexibility this technology offers, without worrying about any rework later in the development process.
Fenske: Do you have any additional comments you’d like to share based on any of the topics we discussed or something you’d like to tell medical device manufacturers?
Steege: We built this technology for medtech engineers, because we are medtech engineers. We would love for the design and supply chain teams to come connect! We’re here to help! If readers use the code “MPOMag” and submit a request on our website, we will provide a free sample kit of parts.
Click here to learn more about Trio Labs >>>>>
Medtech innovation is an ever-changing field for designers and developers. Staying abreast of the latest and greatest technologies available for crafting cutting edge medical devices can be just as challenging as the ideation process itself. As such, it’s important for suppliers of such innovations to ensure the industry is informed of new capabilities and advancements.
A more recent addition to the list of fabrication techniques available to medtech designers is an additive manufacturing process called Resin Infused Powder Lithography (RIPL). This protocol uses metal to craft complex, yet incredibly small, parts for an array of healthcare applications. It compares favorably to metal injection molding (MIM) and CNC machining, but allows greater design flexibility at a lower net cost.
To help inform the industry of this process with a greater explanation of the benefits and function of RIPL, Adam Steege, CEO of Trio Labs Inc., addressed a number of questions in the following Q&A. He speaks to how it differs from other additive manufacturing processes, material options, the comparisons to other fabrication techniques, and more.
Sean Fenske: There are a number of options for metal additive manufacturing. What makes resin-infused powder lithography unique?
Adam Steege: RIPL allows you to directly print stainless steel parts with surface finish and tolerances on par with micro-CNC, but without the extra cost (e.g., setup, machine runtime, etc.) if the design is complex. This greater design freedom simplifies and streamlines innovation processes.
Also, unlike many print technologies that work with lasers, RIPL images and prints areas instead of a single point, which makes it viable for larger volumes, not just prototyping. This allows engineers and supply chain teams to consider having a single production tool for prototyping and production.
Fenske: How does the high tolerance/micro-size component capabilities compare to other metal additive manufacturing techniques?
Steege: Most metal printing processes run at around 50-micron resolution (0.002”). RIPL technology operates at 5-micron resolution (0.0002”). An order of magnitude improvement. This means Trio can produce features as small as 20 to 30 microns, which is impossible with nearly every other metal printing process. For microneedle applications in the drug delivery space (particularly hollow microneedle arrays), this capability is truly groundbreaking. For surgical applications, this translates to net shape parts with functional surface finishes without post-processing, which has never been an option before with metal printing.
Fenske: Are there special materials that need to be used with this process?
Steege: This process is a print-and-sinter process; we print a green part and sinter it using standard MIM [metal injection molding] sintering equipment. In addition, RIPL’s process can access the entire MIM materials portfolio. We’ve been able to achieve 99% density, which is better than what most MIM processes can achieve. Our materials portfolio roadmap is laid out.
- 17-4PH currently available
- 316L, 304L available by end of 2023
- Ti64 available by end of 2024
- Longer term targets: Nitinol and ceramics
Since we leverage MIM powders and furnaces, we’re able to achieve similar or better metallurgical and physical properties.
Fenske: How does this process compare to micro MIM or micro CNC machining?
Steege: MIM and CNC are great for certain geometries at certain production volumes; RIPL technology fills in the gaps and opens up a range of new possibilities. MIM runs into a few classic pitfalls, such as:
- Tooling cost and tooling lead time
- Molding constraints around design and quality (achievable tolerances and geometries)
CNC can produce very precise parts, but complexity comes at a cost; every minute of machine time increases part cost. In contrast, RIPL technology makes it possible to produce complex parts economically—at high volume—without the design constraints of molding or machining, with the tolerances and surface finish engineers are accustomed to.
Fenske: What types of applications is this process being used for or where does it make the most sense?
Steege: We see a lot of interest for parts in the 2- to 5-mm size range for devices that need complex articulation mechanisms, which tend to be robotic surgical devices and steerable catheters. Often, these are parts where multiple processes were being used previously, and the tolerance stack-up from re-fixturing was a problem, as well as the cumulative cost of multiple processes. We’ve been able to produce net shape parts in a single process and eliminate these tolerance issues while reducing cost. In general, this process makes the most sense when a part is small and complex enough that CNC or MIM over constrain the design or drive cost up excessively.
Mind you, we aren’t just selling machines and hoping companies figure out how to take full advantage of RIPL. We provide a unique, custom service. Whether a contract manufacturer or medical device OEM approaches us with an idea for a part, we’re happy to help when RIPL is the right fit. We're already having conversations with R&D teams, product developers, and even supply chain managers, all asking us about the same type of solution—how they can get complex, incredibly small sized metal parts for medical device applications. We're eager to provide them with answers.
Fenske: What are the primary considerations designers should keep in mind when specifying this technology for component fabrication?
Steege: This is not just a prototyping tool. We can scale to volume production, and eliminate the need for re-sourcing and redesign when going through DV/V [design verification and validation] and commercial launch. This means designers can take full advantage of the flexibility this technology offers, without worrying about any rework later in the development process.
Fenske: Do you have any additional comments you’d like to share based on any of the topics we discussed or something you’d like to tell medical device manufacturers?
Steege: We built this technology for medtech engineers, because we are medtech engineers. We would love for the design and supply chain teams to come connect! We’re here to help! If readers use the code “MPOMag” and submit a request on our website, we will provide a free sample kit of parts.
Click here to learn more about Trio Labs >>>>>