ASTM F3674-24
Standard Practice for Additive Manufacturing – Part Grades for Automotive

Standard No.

ASTM F3674-24

Release Date

2024

Published By

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)  US  /  ASTM

Latest

ASTM F3674-24

Introduction

Analysis of the Standard's Core Framework

ASTM F3674-24 establishes a grading system for automotive additively manufactured instrument parts based on the consequences of failure, classifying parts into four grades: Grade A, B, C, and D. This system does not change the functional requirements of parts, but rather provides a unified risk measurement benchmark for downstream standards.

---

Technical Analysis of the Grading System

Grade	Failure Consequences Characteristics	Typical Application Scenarios	Process Control Requirements
Grade A	May cause personal injury or death or significant economic losses	Safety-critical structural components, pressure vessels	The highest level of process control
Grade B	Cause operation interruption or minor hazards	Non-load-bearing functional components, redundant systems	Medium process control
Grade C	Only cause minor inconvenience	Interior parts, non-structural coverings	Basic process control
Grade D	No actual use function	Display models, temporary tooling	Minimum control

---

Key Technical Points

1. Cognitive Engineering Organization (CEO) Responsibilities

The standard emphasizes the core role of the CEO in part grading, which requires comprehensive consideration of:

• Risk matrix assessment of failure probability and consequence severity
• Risk tolerance in specific application scenarios
• Conformity verification of industry regulatory requirements

2. Comparison with Aviation/Aerospace Standards

Compared to ASTM NASA-STD-6030 (Aerospace):

• In the automotive field, greater emphasis is placed on cost-benefit balance
• Failure consequence assessment focuses on public safety risks
• Allow a wider range of supplier autonomy

---

Implementation recommendations

1. Graded process construction: It is recommended that companies establish a three-party review mechanism covering design, process, and quality
2. Data accumulation: Collect historical failure cases to establish a graded decision support database
3. Dynamic management: Regularly review the applicability of graded parts as technology develops