4 ms·
The press release isn't even right, powdered metal rapid prototyping has been around for a while. This specific method or material may be new but it certainly i
by krschultz 17y ago
The press release isn't even right, powdered metal rapid prototyping has been around for a while. This specific method or material may be new but it certainly isn't the first non-polymer 3D printer.
Anyone who thinks car parts will be made this doesn't understand the process. Thinking of it as a computer, rapid prototyping have a cost that is basically O(n). Molding/stamping have a cost that is O(1) + O(n), where the O(1) cost is HUGE and the O(n) part is tiny. At some point the mold/stamp makes a lot more sense. Cars are one application where this will NEVER EVER make sense - except for non functional prototypes.
- TrevorJ 17y agoOr single-run custom parts. Great if you need something that is no longer being made or isn't readily available. Just as you say, there are advantages of molding/stamping, but it all depends on the situation.
- krschultz 17y agoThats true, but think of the typical situation where you need a custom part - to replace a broken one. I have a car from 1961 and one of the pieces I've had trouble replacing is the king pin (i.e. the pin that the front tires rotate around on a rear wheel drive car). It wasn't designed strong enough so it breaks commonly. They are not made anymore and it is difficult to replace. This technique wouldn't help me one bit because if cast steel didn't do it, then powdered steel sure isn't. On the other hand the jewelery idea is probably a good one, strength properties don't matter too much. You are right that it is all about the situation, but I see too many people that think 3D printing is somehow going to revolutionize the manufacture of physical things, its not. It may work in really specific instances, but thats about it, and if I had to buy 1 manufacturing machine for my home/business it would be a CNC controlled mill not a 3D printer.
- jlangenauer 17y agoTrue, but take the example of pipe spooling. For those of you who have never built a process plant or oil refinery, the piping in the plant is almost always fabricated off-site by specialist piping fabricators, who assemble "spools" from individual piping components like flanges, pipe and elbows. The size of these spools are usually limited by the transport envelope - i.e. how big a spool can be transported (say in a 40ft container). Every spool is different, so it is quite labor-intensive to prepare the individual components, weld them together, check all the welds (via x-ray, or ultrasonic testing), and them ship the spool to site. Being able to "print" a spool from a big bath of steel powder could potentially reduce costs significantly. (Consider also, the benefits of being able to use custom-made parts in the piping spools: while a pipe carrying water might only require a standard thickness of elbow, a pipe carrying an erosive slurry would require a much thicker section of metal on the outside of the bends, where the slurry tends to wear away the pipe. The way this is currently dealt with is by making the _entire_ pipeline (not just the elbow) out of thicker materials). This will be a long-time coming, as the current standards for process plant pipe (based on piping made of sections and fittings welded together) are extremely well proven, and exceptionally safe. But in 20 or 30 years......