SpaceX press release on 3D printed valve flown on F9

[Prober]

It's going to be interesting if this technology reduces the cost of making engines so much that reusability is no longer all that attractive. A big machine spitting out Merlins at 100 grand each would change the numbers quite a bit.

Completely the opposite! 3D printing is not competitive with mass production, it's much too expensive per part.

too wide a statement

Let's not forget that in all the excitement that the other Aerospace Companies are using the technology.  Seems I saw the RL-10 parts being tested recently.

[QuantumG]

This was interesting: http://pencerw.com/feed/2014/1/6/dmls-pricing

[TrevorMonty]

It is earlier days for DMLS  printing, remember when laser printers were $10,000 in 80s.

[deruch]

I had been wondering about that. Don't they mean that a new test valve can now be produced two days after a design change rather than months later?

Not to be too blunt about it, but it's almost as easy as hitting the <PRINT> button.  Except you had better be very sure you've run your spell-checker, dotted all your 'i's and crossed all your 't's, and all the three-dimensional equivalents, because that print operation will take a long time and cost a lot more than printing something on paper.

Now for the real question: can you actually cancel a print job once it starts?  If so, why hasn't this technology been integrated in my inkjet?

[CuddlyRocket]

So, why the press release? Why not just quietly integrate this into your engine development and production and improve your reliability and and/or competitiveness without your competitors knowing how straight away?

SpaceX's reputation is that of using existing technology in a more cost-efficient manner. This seems to work but would be more problematical if the point is technological development; for instance, if there were to be a government-funded rocket-engine development part of whose justification is that of developing advanced technology.

No doubt there would be a competition for funds, and better politically to have a public reputation for actual, flight-tested hardware using advanced manufacturing techniques that most people think will be highly relevant in this area in the near future.

In other words, this is pre-positioning for any RD-180 replacement.

[cambrianera]

Small brackets manufactured in one day for A350 XWB
http://bloga350.blogspot.it/2014/03/small-brackets-manufactured-in-one-day.html
"For the A350 XWB aircraft, Airbus has already produced a variety of plastic and metal brackets, which material and structural properties have been tested and validated, and are now incorporated on the certification test prototypes."

[MP99]

Now for the real question: can you actually cancel a print job once it starts?  If so, why hasn't this technology been integrated in my inkjet?

Some do. Yours doesn't?

Cheers, Martin

[Okie_Steve]

Thinking about the quote below - I wondered at the time if they resolved it with 3D printing.

From: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1406/06spacexmanifest/#.U90JD-NdWzk

Speaking to reporters via a conference call in April, Musk identified one manufacturing glitch, saying a primary constraint driving SpaceX's schedule "all boils down to this one particular part -- an injector casting."

"We think we've resolved that particular issue, which should unlock quite a high rate of increased production," Musk said.

[Prober]

So, why the press release? Why not just quietly integrate this into your engine development and production and improve your reliability and and/or competitiveness without your competitors knowing how straight away?

It's positive PR for the troops to stoke them up, prior to a launch.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

So, why the press release? [...]

It's positive PR for the troops to stoke them up, prior to a launch.

I don't think the troops need any stoking! (and even if they did I'm not sure a PR is the way to do it)

It's a good question to ask why SpaceX are publicising this. There's bound to be some politics to it; maybe emphasising their innovation and capabilities is part of rebutting those who talk as if only NASA should be trusted to do things? And/or it's all part of a general public relations/marketing strategy for people to think of SpaceX as forward looking and the future and, by implication, their competitors as stagnant.

I guess another element just could be to encourage the launch industry to innovate (in a similar vein, but on a smaller scale, to the freeing up of Tesla's patents).

[RedLineTrain]

Probably a number of reasons, including showing technicians with skills in this area that SpaceX could use their talents.

[MP99]

Thinking about the quote below - I wondered at the time if they resolved it with 3D printing.

From: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1406/06spacexmanifest/#.U90JD-NdWzk

Speaking to reporters via a conference call in April, Musk identified one manufacturing glitch, saying a primary constraint driving SpaceX's schedule "all boils down to this one particular part -- an injector casting."

"We think we've resolved that particular issue, which should unlock quite a high rate of increased production," Musk said.

If that was the resolution, it obviously hasn't flown yet.

Cheers, Martin

[Jet Black]

I'm looking forward to a complete to-scale replica of a F9 in a bottle. (by making a really small printed F9, not a really massive bottle!)

[Robotbeat]

I'm looking forward to a complete to-scale replica of a F9 in a bottle. (by making a really small printed F9, not a really massive bottle!)

easy since f9 is so skinny!

[IanO]

I'm looking forward to a complete to-scale replica of a F9 in a bottle. (by making a really small printed F9, not a really massive bottle!)

My desire is an actual Falcon 9 1.1 Space Pencil, with proportionately sized rubber fairing pencil topper.