2 ms·

I haven't but I guess the goal was to give a perspective of what it takes to design a normal part from 6000 series aluminum and see what has to happen to certif

I haven't but I guess the goal was to give a perspective of what it takes to design a normal part from 6000 series aluminum and see what has to happen to certify it. You can extrapolate from there. We didn't have 3D printing as an option back then and I don't think it makes any sense even today. Sure, for prototyping it is valuable but even then we would make prototypes from the actual process (CNC) because then we can test the mechanical properties. Most people think prototyping is holding the part in the hand and seeing how it looks. Perhaps if youre doing ergo work. If 3D printing can go through rigorous process of understanding variation, void forming, failure modes, repeatability and reproducibility tests, sure it can be used. My question is - why? Perhaps a part can be made so that it saves so much weight with its shape that is not easily machinable. Then it makes sense. There are so many hurdles. In some ways, 3D printed parts are considered "composite". It would need to go through some rigor as some of the theory/proceedings laid out in a book like this: https://www.amazon.com/ICAF-2019-Manufacturing-Proceedings-International/dp/3030215024 https://www.amazon.com/ICAF-2019-Manufacturing-Proceedings-I... It is very much under study and scrutiny.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bArray 6y ago
I suspect 3D printing aircraft parts becomes more viable my the day, especially as the materials, accuracy and reliability improve. I can appreciate that not _everything_ is a candidate for some form of printing, but I can imagine quite a few parts are. Some examples: 1. Highly specialized missions that require custom parts. The mission parameters themselves might be quite volatile, imagine some engineering team cooking up some mission critical sensors at the last moment to be used for this mission only. 2. Small incremental improvements that can be rolled out fleet wide. Usually these aircraft will have at least _some_ issues with the hardware, and the military answer is typically to write more SOPs. Instead they could 3D print a clip to stop that darned wire hitting the hot pipes when you open the panel. 3. Broken parts in remote locations could potentially be fixed whilst in those locations. You don't have to rely on some distribution network to fix your aircraft when you can build a patch and get it through one or more trips safely until a proper service. 4. The ability to semi-break away from the need of manufacturing.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

bArray 6y ago

I suspect 3D printing aircraft parts becomes more viable my the day, especially as the materials, accuracy and reliability improve. I can appreciate that not _everything_ is a candidate for some form of printing, but I can imagine quite a few parts are. Some examples: 1. Highly specialized missions that require custom parts. The mission parameters themselves might be quite volatile, imagine some engineering team cooking up some mission critical sensors at the last moment to be used for this mission only. 2. Small incremental improvements that can be rolled out fleet wide. Usually these aircraft will have at least _some_ issues with the hardware, and the military answer is typically to write more SOPs. Instead they could 3D print a clip to stop that darned wire hitting the hot pipes when you open the panel. 3. Broken parts in remote locations could potentially be fixed whilst in those locations. You don't have to rely on some distribution network to fix your aircraft when you can build a patch and get it through one or more trips safely until a proper service. 4. The ability to semi-break away from the need of manufacturing.