In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:
An article from 2015:
3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY
4:48
p.m. EST November 12, 2015
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...swim/75530830/
Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars,
but
none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine.
This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with
its
high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances.
But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact
considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the
home,
an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size,
3D-printed
car.
And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully
3D-printed automobile.
This would revolutionize the industry, obviously.
The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission.
This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor:
How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA
Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be
accomplished
by 3D-printing.
Bob Clark
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize
21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital
launchers, to 'flying cars'.
This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it:
Nanotech: from air to space.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/n...ce/x/13319568/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arm waving nonsense.
You need multiple 3D printers if you need to print with multiple materials.
Consumer 3D printers print small parts from cheap plastic and cost hundreds
of dollars.
Industrial 3D printers that print large parts with metals cost hundreds of
thousands of dollars and the printing material costs more than raw metal
stock.
3D printing is advantageous for parts with complex shapes that are
difficult
or impossible to make with other techniques but is disadvantageous for
most parts that ARE manufacturable with conventional techniques as they
can be made faster and cheaper.
3D printing makes PARTS that still need to be assembled.
3D printing an electric motor is just silly.
--
In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:
An article from 2015:
3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY
4:48
p.m. EST November 12, 2015
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...swim/75530830/
Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars,
but
none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine.
This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with
its
high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances.
But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact
considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the
home,
an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size,
3D-printed
car.
And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully
3D-printed automobile.
This would revolutionize the industry, obviously.
The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission.
This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor:
How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA
Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be
accomplished
by 3D-printing.
Bob Clark
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize
21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital
launchers, to 'flying cars'.
This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it:
Nanotech: from air to space.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/n...ce/x/13319568/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arm waving nonsense.
You need multiple 3D printers if you need to print with multiple materials.
Consumer 3D printers print small parts from cheap plastic and cost hundreds
of dollars.
Industrial 3D printers that print large parts with metals cost hundreds of
thousands of dollars and the printing material costs more than raw metal
stock.
3D printing is advantageous for parts with complex shapes that are
difficult
or impossible to make with other techniques but is disadvantageous for
most parts that ARE manufacturable with conventional techniques as they
can be made faster and cheaper.
3D printing makes PARTS that still need to be assembled.
3D printing an electric motor is just silly.
--
You are correct that metal 3D-printed parts by amateurs were only designed
by them, but had to be actually printed by one of the large 3D-printing
companies.
Still, that leaves open the possibility that a scale-model car could be
designed by amateurs to be fully 3D-printed by one of the large companies.
The largest of the professional, metal 3D-printers common now can 3D-print
parts about a foot across and cost about $250,000. So you can imagine a
3D-printer that can 3D-print parts, say, 10 feet across, would be 10^3 =
1,000 times larger in volume and mass, and perhaps a thousand times more
expensive, to $250 million.
An expensive proposition. But if it can be shown a scale-model car can be
fully 3D-printed then it might be worthwhile for a large industrial company
to invest in this when it would mean any car of any model could be
3D-printed on demand.
Bob Clark