3D Printing: it may change everything, including spacecraft production.

[Robotbeat]

I think the most interesting "take" on 3D printing is the combination approaches being looked into, such as the "Hydra" here:
http://reprap.org/wiki/Hydra-MMM_Prototype

Such machines combine a 3D-printing function with a CNC-function where the printer does the general "form" and the CNC system then finalizes the detail for the final object.

Randy

Yeah, that is a neat approach.

One of the best parts of the whole "3D printer" sort of movement is that it gets a whole new generation in our country excited about machining and advanced manufacturing techniques, something that will be badly needed if we are to stay competitive in manufacturing while keeping wages high through high levels of automation.

[baldusi]

I think the most interesting "take" on 3D printing is the combination approaches being looked into, such as the "Hydra" here:
http://reprap.org/wiki/Hydra-MMM_Prototype

Such machines combine a 3D-printing function with a CNC-function where the printer does the general "form" and the CNC system then finalizes the detail for the final object.

Randy

Yeah, that is a neat approach.

One of the best parts of the whole "3D printer" sort of movement is that it gets a whole new generation in our country excited about machining and advanced manufacturing techniques, something that will be badly needed if we are to stay competitive in manufacturing while keeping wages high through high levels of automation.

My experience with a 4 axis CNC machine, is that once you use CNC, you need tool changer and 5 axis pallets. Else, you only increase the complexity of the part, but you improve very little the productivity (you might even hurt it). The beauty of 3D printer is exactly that: no tool changes and no fixture complications. Once you add a machining center, you're again in the old complication technology.
The other huge issue is that for 3D printing you only need to understand the limits on finish, minimum gauge, positioning, repeatability and minimum feature size. With machining, you have to understand feed speed, cutting edges and raking, coolant flow and positioning, fixture strategies and many more things. I would postulate that even threading is preferably done with a manual tap.

[jak42]

Is it possible to "print" a 3D part in ceramic or a ceramic-metal composite? If so, it might be possible to develop a thrust chamber with a ceramic liner or an all-ceramic thrust chamber.

[Downix]

Is it possible to "print" a 3D part in ceramic or a ceramic-metal composite? If so, it might be possible to develop a thrust chamber with a ceramic liner or an all-ceramic thrust chamber.

Yes, ceramics was one of the first things 3D printed in fact.

[sitharus]

Is it possible to "print" a 3D part in ceramic or a ceramic-metal composite? If so, it might be possible to develop a thrust chamber with a ceramic liner or an all-ceramic thrust chamber.

It certainly is for domestic purposes, see http://www.ponoko.com/make-and-sell/show-material/241-3d-printed-rainbow-ceramic for an example. I have no idea how well that'd scale to rocket engines though.

[kevin-rf]

Is it possible to "print" a 3D part in ceramic or a ceramic-metal composite? If so, it might be possible to develop a thrust chamber with a ceramic liner or an all-ceramic thrust chamber.

It certainly is for domestic purposes, see http://www.ponoko.com/make-and-sell/show-material/241-3d-printed-rainbow-ceramic for an example. I have no idea how well that'd scale to rocket engines though.

I suspect, a 3D printer technology needs to be developed that can print both ceramic and metal at the same time.

Don't 3D ceramic's need to be fired after printing? That might pose some issues for a ceramic/metal part.

[john smith 19]

However some materials will *never* work using these systems. Making a single crystal will *probably* require the ability precise positioning on an atom by atom basis which is pretty slow with an atomic force microscope (but just *maybe* someone can devise a really neat hack to make multi-atomic blocks and speed up the process  )

One option would be to print the part (in metal), and at same the time print the mold (in ceramic) around the part, melt the part, and through control of the cooling and insertion of a single seed crystal convert it into a mono-crystal.

Really, other than printers that print both metal and ceramic at the same time do not exist, it is no more complex than how current mono crystal parts are made. Of course saying production of mono crystal parts are simple to make is a bit of a stretch 

*Though I suspect the part surface finish would be a bit of an issue in applications that require mono crystal parts.

My point was that it would take an *additional* machine (in this case a fairly special furnace to generate a moving freezing front.

However if you're going to do something like this you can look at approaches that are not feasible with conventional casting and machining. For example an airfoil shell with cooling channels on venting onto it supported by network of closed cell metal "bubbles" like some chocolate bars, with different bubble sizes according to different stress levels within the blade.

I think one of the big lessons of learning to use this tech will be that the *economics* of additive Vs subtractive processes is different. Adding holes and air bubbles is *cheap* in this tech, expensive (or impossible) with more conventional approaches.

The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

[A_M_Swallow]

{snip}
The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

I suspect that finishing can be performed better by CNC machines since they can rotate and other wise move the part.  Having two machines on the Earth is not a problem but may double the mass that needs delivering to the Moon.

Painting of cars etc. is frequently performed using machines that look like heavy duty robotic arms.

[JohnFornaro]

Saw this in Alumni News:

[go4mars]

Saw this in Alumni News:

What an excellent educational tool! 

[Downix]

{snip}
The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

I suspect that finishing can be performed better by CNC machines since they can rotate and other wise move the part.  Having two machines on the Earth is not a problem but may double the mass that needs delivering to the Moon.

Painting of cars etc. is frequently performed using machines that look like heavy duty robotic arms.

The main issue of CNC machines in this case is that they are subtractive, not additive, so mass is sent which is not used, a big no-no for rocket launching. 

[baldusi]

{snip}
The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

I suspect that finishing can be performed better by CNC machines since they can rotate and other wise move the part.  Having two machines on the Earth is not a problem but may double the mass that needs delivering to the Moon.

Painting of cars etc. is frequently performed using machines that look like heavy duty robotic arms.

The main issue of CNC machines in this case is that they are subtractive, not additive, so mass is sent which is not used, a big no-no for rocket launching. 

If I'm not mistaken, the idea of in situ manufacturing is to use local materials. Else, you'd ship the finished part from Earth. A 3D printer for doing most of the work might still need some machining for critical dimensions. For example, even after drilling or borings, you still use a reamer and/or a cylindrical grinder for certain critical holes (like the inside of an air cylinder,). Or an aerodynamic surface, for example.
In fact, you might even use the 3d printer to "print" the stock for the CNC machine.

[Robotbeat]

{snip}
The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

I suspect that finishing can be performed better by CNC machines since they can rotate and other wise move the part.  Having two machines on the Earth is not a problem but may double the mass that needs delivering to the Moon.

Painting of cars etc. is frequently performed using machines that look like heavy duty robotic arms.

The main issue of CNC machines in this case is that they are subtractive, not additive, so mass is sent which is not used, a big no-no for rocket launching. 

If I'm not mistaken, the idea of in situ manufacturing is to use local materials. Else, you'd ship the finished part from Earth. A 3D printer for doing most of the work might still need some machining for critical dimensions. For example, even after drilling or borings, you still use a reamer and/or a cylindrical grinder for certain critical holes (like the inside of an air cylinder,). Or an aerodynamic surface, for example.
In fact, you might even use the 3d printer to "print" the stock for the CNC machine.

Right, that's the best of both worlds. Very little wasted material, but very fine detail.

[Moe Grills]

Right, that's the best of both worlds. Very little wasted material, but very fine detail.

Just to clarify, the excess material leftover in any 3-D printing work/manufacture will almost certainly be recycled.

BTW, what awesome potential there is for this revolutionary manufacturing system/method if it were to be done on the Lunar surface; since the Moon is rich in titanium, aluminum, silicon, etc.;
elements that can be extracted, refined (by means already discussed on other forum topics)  & made available for 3-D printing work to make items like?
Solar panels? construction girders & sheetmetal? storage cylinders?  etc.

[catdlr]

On YouTube From NASA Langley

Uploaded by NASALANGLEY on Oct 3, 2011
Three dimensional printers are amazing technology. NASA uses them to make parts - or as in this sped up video - models for wind tunnels and other uses.

[Jim]

Solar panels? construction girders & sheetmetal? storage cylinders?  etc.

No,

Semi conductors (solar cells)  have unique pproperties
Sheetmetal is easier to make right after refining the metal
storage cylinders - not for high pressure and use sheetmetal for large ones.

3D printing advantage is in small parts/components.

[Nascent Ascent]

3D printing is also very nice for rapid prototyping (hence the name).  It can also be helpful in custom tooling and fixtures.  Small non-structural parts are also viable.

[MP99]

{snip}
The 2nd question is can you use the system to build machines to post process you work or run parts through it again to do surface treatment (EG laser peening to improve surface strength) ?

Surface finish will likely be an issue as you trade raw material pellet size and heater head (hot element, laser etc) size for speed and resolution.

In this case post processing (EG electro-polishing) can make big improvements over the "raw" part.

I suspect that finishing can be performed better by CNC machines since they can rotate and other wise move the part.  Having two machines on the Earth is not a problem but may double the mass that needs delivering to the Moon.

Painting of cars etc. is frequently performed using machines that look like heavy duty robotic arms.

The main issue of CNC machines in this case is that they are subtractive, not additive, so mass is sent which is not used, a big no-no for rocket launching. 

If I'm not mistaken, the idea of in situ manufacturing is to use local materials. Else, you'd ship the finished part from Earth.

There's an advantage carrying raw materials from Earth over carrying multiple spare parts that you might never use.

cheers, Martin

[Prober]

Think this story fits here as 3D printing is talked about in the story.

$5,000 Kit to Send Your Own Rocket to the Moon


http://news.yahoo.com/5-000-kit-send-own-rocket-moon-215401381.html;_ylt=AkqLD1NdkcyYXg3VfDwA86wPLBIF;_ylu=X3oDMTNtdm9zZjJoBG1pdAMEcGtnA2FhYjU1NzE1LTc4NGYtMzU1Mi04YjljLWVmOTdhNjAzOTY0NgRwb3MDOQRzZWMDbG5fU3BhY2VBc3Ryb25vbXlfZ2FsBHZlcgM2YzY0OGJiMC0yMmIxLTExZTEtYmViNy02ZTFmMmE5ZGEzMWE-;_ylv=3

[caveman]

Maybe in the future, with the right advancements in organ printing, we can just send the printers to other planets or Moons, to first build the homes, then build the astronauts.  Like in the 5th Element movie.  I would post a movie clip of the girl's body reconstruction, but not sure if it is appropriate.