3 ms·

Scratching head on what the long term goal of this experiment was... (more 3D printing PR?) Seems like using this manufacturing approach would be a very toug

Scratching head on what the long term goal of this experiment was... (more 3D printing PR?) Seems like using this manufacturing approach would be a very tough sell for any real mission. Only benefit of 3D printing at your destination is the ability to manufacture something that was overlooked, so contingency planning. (yea, yea, someday we'll mine the printable materials on site, right...) For just about any other item that you know you need, it would be much more weight-effective (the golden measure in launch considerations) to just build the part here on earth, where you can maximize specific density and specific strength using materials that 3D printing can't touch. Plus you aren't lugging around a heavy 3D printer + raw materials.

sophacles 12y ago
On an orbiting facility, like the space station, you get some other benefits... * assuming theres also a filament extruder package (more initial weight i know), you can recycle the printing material some number of times, meaning that you can just not ship a bunch of custom things with each subsequent experiment package. * Materials can be better packed. Weight is an issue, but so is volume. A roll of filament can produce a bunch of parts that no longer need to be designed and manufactured to withstand "unfolding" stresses - you can just make the awkward shape in situ. * Related to the previous point - some things can be manufactured with much less material - they never need to handle 1g environments, let alone the vibrations and higher g parts of launch. This means less material in a lot of situations. * I presume (if there isn't now) there will be "rough" launches to carry bulk materials, and "gentle" launches for delicate things and people. If there is a way to do "rough launches" cheaper, (higher g, higher vibration, more risk since there aren't humans or super expensive equipment on board) then you can provide more space on the "gentle" launches for the the delicate equipment. Further - with more space on "gentle launches" you get a better iteration time, you don't have to schedule space/weight for your 3d-printable parts as tightly. Basically - 3d printing in orbit provides a nice way to separate several logistical concerns, easing some of the expense and engineering needed per experiment in space.
TaylorAlexander 12y ago
The article points to the short term goal being just to learn how 3D printers behave in space. They mention printing things in space and then sending them to the ground for analysis. Long term, I think the goal would be to do metal printing in addition to plastic printing (most likely with separate machines). 3D printed plastic parts can do a lot - they aren't as weak as people make them out to be. The obvious advantages are that complex things can be made on site with zero labor required (besides occasional assembly of things that can't be printed assembled). It can be hard to speculate on what a general purpose tool will be most used for in the future, but I do think that there is something on-site printing offers that delivery from earth does not. As we send spacecraft beyond low earth orbit, sending from earth simply stops being an option. Hell, from what I recall of the movie a 3D printer onboard Apollo 13 could have salvaged the mission entirely. 3D printing isn't just about making things you forgot, but replacing things or making new things. Maybe people get to mars and realize there is an experiment they want to run that needs some little assembly they could print. I'm not able to predict what a 3D printer would be used for, but you can be damn sure I'd want the ability to fabricate parts locally if I was on a multi-year Mars mission. And that does seem to be our long term goal.
dshankar 12y ago
You could save weight of parts needed to be transported to space. Here's my reasoning: backups / spares There are an enormous number of backup parts on the ISS – there needs to be for any manned space vehicle – to fix systems that fail. Instead of wasting weight, fuel & money on lifting multiple spares to the ISS, one could 3D print them on demand. Not all spares will be needed simultaneously.

sophacles 12y ago

On an orbiting facility, like the space station, you get some other benefits... * assuming theres also a filament extruder package (more initial weight i know), you can recycle the printing material some number of times, meaning that you can just not ship a bunch of custom things with each subsequent experiment package. * Materials can be better packed. Weight is an issue, but so is volume. A roll of filament can produce a bunch of parts that no longer need to be designed and manufactured to withstand "unfolding" stresses - you can just make the awkward shape in situ. * Related to the previous point - some things can be manufactured with much less material - they never need to handle 1g environments, let alone the vibrations and higher g parts of launch. This means less material in a lot of situations. * I presume (if there isn't now) there will be "rough" launches to carry bulk materials, and "gentle" launches for delicate things and people. If there is a way to do "rough launches" cheaper, (higher g, higher vibration, more risk since there aren't humans or super expensive equipment on board) then you can provide more space on the "gentle" launches for the the delicate equipment. Further - with more space on "gentle launches" you get a better iteration time, you don't have to schedule space/weight for your 3d-printable parts as tightly. Basically - 3d printing in orbit provides a nice way to separate several logistical concerns, easing some of the expense and engineering needed per experiment in space.

TaylorAlexander 12y ago

The article points to the short term goal being just to learn how 3D printers behave in space. They mention printing things in space and then sending them to the ground for analysis. Long term, I think the goal would be to do metal printing in addition to plastic printing (most likely with separate machines). 3D printed plastic parts can do a lot - they aren't as weak as people make them out to be. The obvious advantages are that complex things can be made on site with zero labor required (besides occasional assembly of things that can't be printed assembled). It can be hard to speculate on what a general purpose tool will be most used for in the future, but I do think that there is something on-site printing offers that delivery from earth does not. As we send spacecraft beyond low earth orbit, sending from earth simply stops being an option. Hell, from what I recall of the movie a 3D printer onboard Apollo 13 could have salvaged the mission entirely. 3D printing isn't just about making things you forgot, but replacing things or making new things. Maybe people get to mars and realize there is an experiment they want to run that needs some little assembly they could print. I'm not able to predict what a 3D printer would be used for, but you can be damn sure I'd want the ability to fabricate parts locally if I was on a multi-year Mars mission. And that does seem to be our long term goal.

dshankar 12y ago

You could save weight of parts needed to be transported to space. Here's my reasoning: backups / spares There are an enormous number of backup parts on the ISS – there needs to be for any manned space vehicle – to fix systems that fail. Instead of wasting weight, fuel & money on lifting multiple spares to the ISS, one could 3D print them on demand. Not all spares will be needed simultaneously.