A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old July 16th 17, 11:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

In sci.physics Greg Goss wrote:
wrote:

Nothing from a 1988 Ford F150 would even "plug into" a Ford F150 bought today.

BTW, a current Ford F150 costs about the same (in adjusted dollars) as a
1988 Ford F150 and does not perform significantly differently.


Lug nuts. Maybe whole wheels. Antifreeze. Gasoline (so long as we
stay this side of 1972 or so.) Does Ford still use a different tranny
fluid than everyone else like they did in the seventies?

Are modern "power points" heat resistant enough to take an old
cigarette lighter?

Has the trailer ball hitch changed since WW2? I realize that "hidden
hitch" sockets are a newer idea, but the old trailers can still be
"plugged in". You might need an adapter for the lights on the
trailer.

The controls have stayed remarkably steady. You've got the PRNDL
tranny setting, probably using a lever identical to the one thirty
years ago. You've got the steering wheel and two pedals.


Try fixing a broken current Ford F150 with parts from a 1988 Ford F150
and see how far you get.


--
Jim Pennino
Ads
  #252  
Old July 16th 17, 11:16 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

In sci.physics Greg Goss wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:

Bull****. The technology in a PC today is quite different than that of
a PC made in 1988. Nothing in a PC from 1988 would even "plug into" a
PC bought today, except maybe the keyboard and mouse. And the PC today
is literally orders of magnitude faster.


The original mice I first saw plugged into a special jack on a card
that plugged into the PC. I had mine on a combo card with video. The
technology to allow a mouse to run on the low power in a serial
connection came later. And serial connectors vanished around Y2K. I
don't know how the data signals in the PS2 mouse connectors compared
to the 9 pin serial connectors.

Keyboards plugged into a large DIN connection. This was gradually
replaced by the smaller PS2 connection, then again with USB
connections.

I don't know if any desktop computers still provide PS2 connectors. I
don't think so.

I'm still using my 1994 laser printer. It plugs into a
centronics-parallel to USB adapter. I guess similar adapters are
available for serial ports and PS2 connectors.

Hmmm, come to think of it, the Centronics port was designed for the
1988 TRS-80 computer. A printer from that era would probably plug
through my adapter into any modern Windows computer. And at least the
MX-80 and its clones are probably still driver-supported.


Not quite.

The Centronics connector, also known as IEEE 1284, was designed by
Centronics in the 1970's as a general parallel port interface.


--
Jim Pennino
  #253  
Old July 16th 17, 11:21 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
John Larkin[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 15:32:10 -0600, Greg Goss wrote:

wrote:

Nothing from a 1988 Ford F150 would even "plug into" a Ford F150 bought today.

BTW, a current Ford F150 costs about the same (in adjusted dollars) as a
1988 Ford F150 and does not perform significantly differently.


Lug nuts. Maybe whole wheels. Antifreeze. Gasoline (so long as we
stay this side of 1972 or so.) Does Ford still use a different tranny
fluid than everyone else like they did in the seventies?

Are modern "power points" heat resistant enough to take an old
cigarette lighter?

Has the trailer ball hitch changed since WW2? I realize that "hidden
hitch" sockets are a newer idea, but the old trailers can still be
"plugged in". You might need an adapter for the lights on the
trailer.

The controls have stayed remarkably steady. You've got the PRNDL
tranny setting, probably using a lever identical to the one thirty
years ago. You've got the steering wheel and two pedals.


Crankshaft, pistons, rings, spark plugs, poppet valves, gears. Hasn't
changed much in over a century.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

  #254  
Old July 16th 17, 11:53 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

In sci.physics John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 15:32:10 -0600, Greg Goss wrote:

wrote:

Nothing from a 1988 Ford F150 would even "plug into" a Ford F150 bought today.

BTW, a current Ford F150 costs about the same (in adjusted dollars) as a
1988 Ford F150 and does not perform significantly differently.


Lug nuts. Maybe whole wheels. Antifreeze. Gasoline (so long as we
stay this side of 1972 or so.) Does Ford still use a different tranny
fluid than everyone else like they did in the seventies?

Are modern "power points" heat resistant enough to take an old
cigarette lighter?

Has the trailer ball hitch changed since WW2? I realize that "hidden
hitch" sockets are a newer idea, but the old trailers can still be
"plugged in". You might need an adapter for the lights on the
trailer.

The controls have stayed remarkably steady. You've got the PRNDL
tranny setting, probably using a lever identical to the one thirty
years ago. You've got the steering wheel and two pedals.


Crankshaft, pistons, rings, spark plugs, poppet valves, gears. Hasn't
changed much in over a century.


Try taking any of those from a 1988 Ford F150 and installing them on
a current Ford F150.


--
Jim Pennino
  #255  
Old July 17th 17, 12:33 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.electronics.design
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,199
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

Serg io wrote:

On 7/16/2017 1:16 AM, David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
wrote:
wrote in message ...

In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,

says...

In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"

wrote:
"David Mitchell" wrote in message
o.uk...

wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell
wrote:
wrote:

OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?

Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.

Could you be any more vague?

Yes. Yes I could.

Things. People will make things. All of the things.

I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal
computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll
only
need
a few major mainframes.

Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of
smart
phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and
facebook.

The original point was that the original "personal computers" were
hideously expensive, very hard to use, and didn't do a whole lot.
There
absolutely were a lot of people who said "I'll never need one of
those"
back in the early 1980s. Yet they can be found (in desktop or laptop
form) in the vast majority of houses in the US because the price
dropped, they became much easier to use, and they could do a lot more
(i.e. high speed Internet versus acoustic modems and BBSes),

Besides, smart phones prove the point AGAIN! When the original Apple
iPhone came out, it didn't have it's "killer app" which was the App
Store, so the orignal wasn't terribly functional. On top of that,
cell
data service at the time was slow, slow, slow, so even surfing the
Internet was painful with these new "smart phones". But again, the
majority of phones I see today are now "smart phones". They're
cheaper,
more functional (more apps), and the cell data networks are quite good
these days.

New technologies keep getting cheaper and more accessible for
individuals to use all the time! It's a pretty safe bet that the very
same thing will happen with 3D printing.

New technologies will not make aluminum or plastic cheaper.

So what? They don't need to be cheaper. People literally buy millions of
items made out of aluminum and plastic every day and throw them out, the
material is so cheap.

So the raw material for 3D printing is more expensive than the raw
material
for legacy fabrication methods and my response was to the two sentences
above mine. Try reading them before knee jerking.


Printing speed is limited by basic physics.

Such as? Seriously, you don't think new technologies and concepts are
possible? Heck, if nothing else, you can design printers with multiple
heads if you want to. Bam, you've nearly doubled printing speed for many
items.

As I have already said many times accuracy is directly related to layer
thickness and layer application delay is directly related to layer
"hardening" time.


We're nowhere near those limits yet.
"The BAAM was used to manufacture the first (almost) fully 3D printed
car, the Strati, for together with Local Motors. With a deposition rate
of up to 38 lbs of material per hour, it is possibly the fastest machine
currently on the market."


what is the material it is made from? Polyethylene?
Milk Bottle Plastic ?
crash safety ?
leave it out in the hot sun in Aridzona in the summer ??


Again, SpaceX 3-D prints rocket engine combustion chambers and
turbopump parts. I think it will stand up to Arizona in the summer if
it will stand up to rocket exhaust.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #257  
Old July 17th 17, 01:00 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,199
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 15:32:10 -0600, Greg Goss wrote:

wrote:

Nothing from a 1988 Ford F150 would even "plug into" a Ford F150 bought today.

BTW, a current Ford F150 costs about the same (in adjusted dollars) as a
1988 Ford F150 and does not perform significantly differently.


Lug nuts. Maybe whole wheels. Antifreeze. Gasoline (so long as we
stay this side of 1972 or so.) Does Ford still use a different tranny
fluid than everyone else like they did in the seventies?

Are modern "power points" heat resistant enough to take an old
cigarette lighter?

Has the trailer ball hitch changed since WW2? I realize that "hidden
hitch" sockets are a newer idea, but the old trailers can still be
"plugged in". You might need an adapter for the lights on the
trailer.

The controls have stayed remarkably steady. You've got the PRNDL
tranny setting, probably using a lever identical to the one thirty
years ago. You've got the steering wheel and two pedals.


Crankshaft, pistons, rings, spark plugs, poppet valves, gears. Hasn't
changed much in over a century.


Actually, other than cosmetics, the bulk of the change tends to be in
engines. Look at performance now vs performance then. My 1985
Corvette with a big V-8 did 0-60 is 6-ish seconds, a 15 second quarter
mile at 91 MPH, and had a top speed of 150 MPH. It was the fasted
mass produced car of its day. My current car (BMW 435i with a small
straight six) does 0-60 in 5.2 seconds or so, a 13.7 second quarter
mile at 102 MPH, and a governed top speed of 155 MPH. The BMW handily
beats the old 'Vette and it isn't even considered a performance car
these days.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #258  
Old July 17th 17, 06:02 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
David Mitchell[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 06:40:16 +0100, David Mitchell
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 06:36:41 +0100, David Mitchell
wrote:

wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:

OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?

Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.

Could you be any more vague?

Yes. Yes I could.

Things. People will make things. All of the things.

Great, yet another techno nerd weenie who spends way too much time watching
Star Trek reruns.

Bless. It's almost as though you imagine anyone give even the tinest of ****s
what you think.

It's almost as though you imagine I think puerile techno nerds represent
the average person.

I think you need to find a better insult - "techno nerd" is a bit tautologous -
and I've never made any particular claim to represent anyone.

How about pie-in-the-sky dreamer?

Like I've said before, most people can't be bothered to make things as
trivial as bread and biscuits.

Well, lots of people *do* make bread and biscuits; and a series about baking was
one of the most popular UK programs for some time.

Watching is not making.


True; but search for "The Great British Off effect".

"In the six years it has been on the air, “The Great British Bake Off” has
fundamentally changed the way the British regard baking, dessert-eating and even
their own culture of sweets. The “Bake Off Effect,” as it is known, has
manifested in a resurgence in home baking, a noticeable increase in the quality
of baked goods sold all over the country, and a growing number of people
pursuing careers as professional pastry chefs."

"The Mary Berry effect: How the Great British Bake Off revived the Women's Institute

WI membership reached 211,000 last year, its highest level since the 1970s
22,600 new members joined last year and 144 institutes were created
Organisation's chairman said Great British Bakeoff 'inspired' more women to
take up home baking"

"A recent survey from Waitrose revealed that baking is more popular than ever,
with 19 per cent of people saying they now bake at least once a week and nearly
half admitted to baking more than they did five years ago."


Irrelevant. My wife watches a lot (way too much ;-) of cooking shows
and also does a lot of baking but not once has she ever made anything
that was on the TeeVee. She does make biscuits, on special occasions,
but not bread.


Ah yes, your one anecdote easily trumps my three data points.
Seriously? That's your counter? One person?
Wait! I know two people who bake! I win!



As I keep, apparently, having to explain - I am talking about *mature*
fabrication technology - something capable of working with multiple materials,
and able to fabricate something at the push of a button more quickly than
driving to buy it, and more cheaply.

Not going to happen.


It would be good if you could back that up, rather than simply asserting it.


There is no need. There is no efficiency of scale. It's too much
work to design things and get them ready (and then the retries). Few
will put up with the bull****. No, I don't think people will download
designs for plastic jewelry and make it. Well, maybe a few 6
year-olds.


As I keep, apparently, having to explain - I am talking about *mature*
fabrication technology - something capable of working with multiple materials.

So, not just "plastic jewelry", as you must surely be able to appreciate.


We've noted that nearly all technology improves with time, as fabrication
technology has, and that prices always fall, and that as that of fabrication
technology has; and sales are increasing non-linearly, up to 400000 last year,
with projected sales of 1.2 million this year (search "3-D printer sales") -
which provides motication for their continued improvement and revenue to support it.

Irrelevant.


Entirely relevant to the point that mature technology is on the way; which was
the point you tried to refute.

  #259  
Old July 17th 17, 06:11 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
David Mitchell[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:
wrote in message ...

In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,

says...

In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
wrote:
"David Mitchell" wrote in message
o.uk...

wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell
wrote:
wrote:

OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?

Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.

Could you be any more vague?

Yes. Yes I could.

Things. People will make things. All of the things.

I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal
computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only
need
a few major mainframes.

Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of
smart
phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and
facebook.

The original point was that the original "personal computers" were
hideously expensive, very hard to use, and didn't do a whole lot. There
absolutely were a lot of people who said "I'll never need one of those"
back in the early 1980s. Yet they can be found (in desktop or laptop
form) in the vast majority of houses in the US because the price
dropped, they became much easier to use, and they could do a lot more
(i.e. high speed Internet versus acoustic modems and BBSes),

Besides, smart phones prove the point AGAIN! When the original Apple
iPhone came out, it didn't have it's "killer app" which was the App
Store, so the orignal wasn't terribly functional. On top of that, cell
data service at the time was slow, slow, slow, so even surfing the
Internet was painful with these new "smart phones". But again, the
majority of phones I see today are now "smart phones". They're cheaper,
more functional (more apps), and the cell data networks are quite good
these days.

New technologies keep getting cheaper and more accessible for
individuals to use all the time! It's a pretty safe bet that the very
same thing will happen with 3D printing.

New technologies will not make aluminum or plastic cheaper.

So what? They don't need to be cheaper. People literally buy millions of
items made out of aluminum and plastic every day and throw them out, the
material is so cheap.

So the raw material for 3D printing is more expensive than the raw material
for legacy fabrication methods and my response was to the two sentences
above mine. Try reading them before knee jerking.

Printing speed is limited by basic physics.

Such as? Seriously, you don't think new technologies and concepts are
possible? Heck, if nothing else, you can design printers with multiple
heads if you want to. Bam, you've nearly doubled printing speed for many
items.

As I have already said many times accuracy is directly related to layer
thickness and layer application delay is directly related to layer
"hardening" time.


We're nowhere near those limits yet.


The whooshing sound you hear is the point and all it's details going
over you head.


Not really - for example, if we're not at the limits of layer hardening time,
then we can use multiple print heads, multiplying the print rate.
I thought that was apparent, apparently I needed to explain it.


"The BAAM was used to manufacture the first (almost) fully 3D printed car, the
Strati, for together with Local Motors. With a deposition rate of up to 38 lbs
of material per hour, it is possibly the fastest machine currently on the market."


The Strati is little more than a $30,000 golf cart and the finish is an
abomination.


Not the point, remember the whole "mature technology" thing?
If we can do that *now*, imagine what we'll be able to do in 30 years time.


The industry for both consumer and industrial 3D printers is tiny and
few people do.


Sales of 400,000 last year, projected sales of 1.2 million this one. Also
appears to be non-linear.

But that it's tiny now is irrelevant. How many people had early telephones? Or
TV sets?


Do you understand the difference between hobby and professional?


I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by ignoring those stats.

  #260  
Old July 17th 17, 02:46 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.electronics.design
Michael A. Terrell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

Jeff Findley wrote:

Bull****. The technology in a PC today is quite different than that of
a PC made in 1988. Nothing in a PC from 1988 would even "plug into" a
PC bought today, except maybe the keyboard and mouse. And the PC today
is literally orders of magnitude faster.


The original mice I first saw plugged into a special jack on a card
that plugged into the PC. I had mine on a combo card with video. The
technology to allow a mouse to run on the low power in a serial
connection came later. And serial connectors vanished around Y2K. I
don't know how the data signals in the PS2 mouse connectors compared
to the 9 pin serial connectors.

Keyboards plugged into a large DIN connection. This was gradually
replaced by the smaller PS2 connection, then again with USB
connections.

I don't know if any desktop computers still provide PS2 connectors. I
don't think so.


Some desktop computers I've seen recently still have the smaller PS2
connectors for a keyboard and mouse. All of our "professional" machines
at work have them. For example, the HP Z240 Desktop "tower" computer
has them. All you need to go from the old DIN keyboard connection to a
PS2 keyboard connector is a simple, non-active, adapter. Ought to cost
about $0.99 on eBay.



The PC/XT keyboard didn't work on the 286/AT machines because the
baud rate was different. Heath/Zenith used a baud rate that wasn't
compatible with either standard. I still have a couple keyboards with
the XT/AT switch on the bottom.


I'm still using my 1994 laser printer. It plugs into a
centronics-parallel to USB adapter. I guess similar adapters are
available for serial ports and PS2 connectors.


Not sure any active adapters do that, but some older mice would work
with either with a passive adapter. At any rate, you can buy USB to
serial port adapters. I have one. It works well.

Hmmm, come to think of it, the Centronics port was designed for the
1988 TRS-80 computer. A printer from that era would probably plug
through my adapter into any modern Windows computer. And at least the MX-80 and its clones are probably still driver-supported.



The Centronics port was to allow use f existing printers that were
built for minicomputers. There was a huge surplus market for both RS232
and Centronics used printers in the early Personal computer days.


Software drivers are tricky, but yes the USB adapter will allow the
electronics to communicate.

Jeff



--
Never **** off an Engineer!

They don't get mad.

They don't get even.

They go for over unity! ;-)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The future of electric cars FredKartoffel Amateur Astronomy 103 June 21st 16 04:48 PM
Cars Only Need a 20 HP motor(electric) G=EMC^2TreBert Misc 3 March 6th 15 12:08 AM
3D Printed Rocket William Mook[_2_] Policy 8 January 17th 14 11:24 AM
better way of seeing noise before image is printed? Jason Albertson Amateur Astronomy 24 March 7th 07 05:46 AM
other planets that have lightning bolts-- do they have plate tectonics ?? do the experiment with electric motor and also Faradays first electric motor is this the Oersted experiment writ large on the size of continental plates a_plutonium Astronomy Misc 4 September 16th 06 01:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.