|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On 7/6/2017 4:01 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
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/ * GACK! A DC motor with commutator! How gross. The working part of the engine should be exactly like the armature in the Tesla car: design is same as armature in an AC shaded pole fan motor. That design would not be too difficult for a 3Dprinter. --- Do you have any references for how the Tesla car electric motor looks/works? Bob Clark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bg5mjPANck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMQjcukphpA |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 8:31:23 AM UTC-4, 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. Difficult, but not impossible. NASA has done 3-d printing of rocket combustion chambers. 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. Electric motor is MUCH more difficult. You must deal with close tolerance of TWO very different materials. All of the wires consist of a metallic core and a thin insulator sheath. 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: [] Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be accomplished by 3D-printing. not the wiring! (at lease not by the 3-d printers available today) Sorry, but your dream will have to wait. ed --- Here's a video of showing the operation of a gas engine: EXACTLY how a car engine works - 3D animation ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfTX88Sv4I8 It's complex in its construction and operation. It requires high temperatures and high pressures. Moreover, the multiple pistons moving at high speed within the cylinders require tight tolerances. The DC electric engine I linked in the first post in this thread is significantly simpler. Actually, the Tesla uses an AC electric motor, just a little more complicated in its construction, but it has an advantage in not needing permanent magnets. Another advantage of the electric cars both using DC and AC motors is that they don't need a multi-gear transmissions. This is also a significant simplification. Here's a video describing the electric motor of the Tesla and its single speed transmission: How does an Electric Car work ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SAxXUIre28 About the copper wire winding, ideally, you would want the entire car to be 3D-printed, but you could have most of the electric motor be 3D printed and the copper wire windings placed separately. For the "binder jetting method" of metal 3D-printing, most similar to the method amateurs use for plastic 3D-printing, it would be difficult to create also the wire windings at the same time as the electric motor. The reason is it requires an additional step of heating at high temperature and the wire insulation would melt. Perhaps there could be used high temperature ceramic coating for the wires. Other methods for 3D-metal printing such as electron beam and laser deposition do not require this extra step of furnace heating so should be able to do the copper wire winding, assuming the 3D-printer has the capability of rapidly switching out the material being deposited between metal and plastic as needed, or perhaps using separate print heads for each material. For instance, if you imagine a horizontal slice through the electric motor. You would have wire insulation, then the copper wire, then insulation, then copper wire, and this pattern would be repeated, then you would have the core, then the insulation, copper pattern repeated again. A 3D-printing method that could rapidly switch between depositing metal and plastic insulation material should be able to do this. 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/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
"Robert Clark" wrote:
On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 8:31:23 AM UTC-4, 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. Difficult, but not impossible. NASA has done 3-d printing of rocket combustion chambers. Cite? I don't believe that's true. -- "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 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 23:30:45 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:12:48 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:08:21 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: In sci.physics John Larkin wrote: There is one very successful additive manufacturing process: casting. Because it is fast and cheap. Good, fast, cheap - choose any two. It's obvious where the Chimp lives... Are you saying that castings are not good? I'm saying what I said. I was trying to help you make some sense of your nonsense but I guess there wasn't any to make. I'm sorry you're stupid and have never designed anything in the real world, but I can't fix you. So's your old man. (what a loser!) |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:34:29 -0000, wrote:
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote: wrote: In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote: wrote: Does anyone care about a shape optimized 4 slice toaster or filing cabinet? Yes. I do. If any significant number of items in your house are fabricated, it makes sense to use as few raw materials as possible, so, for example, it would make sense to honeycomb the inside of a knife handle, since it would still be strong enough, and would allow you to keep a gram or two of material "in the pot" for other projects. Ditto everything you make. Nonsense; the items in one's house are based on price not how elegantly it was produced. It makes no sense to honeycomb the inside of a knife handle as it would add no functionality and just increase the price. What price? The manufacturing cost which increases the retail sales price at the store. Manufacturing cost and sales price are only loosely correlated. It would reduce both the time to fabricate and feedstock used, albeit at the cost of slightly more complex software. Or you could injection mold it, as most knife handles are, for a fraction of the manufacturing cost of the honyecomb nonsense. Or you could stamp the whole thing out of metal for a fraction of the cost of the honyecomb nonsense. They form the only metric which makes sense when talking about fabricating objects. The only metric which makes sense for fabricating objects is the loaded manufacturing cost. Yes but not because of sales price, rather profit. So, by that metric, they're cheaper. If an injection molded handle costs a fraction of a cent while the honeycomb handle costs several cents, which is cheaper? Not the one with the better ad agency. ;-) |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:28:43 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not that big a part of an aircrafts weight. From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can even reach 7%. That's significant in aerospace. Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to understand the domain. 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite content. An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of composite materials in their construction. Note the word "most". How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other than camper shells and ski boats. Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in the real world. Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence? "composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials" I disagree that you have included his entire thought. Given his sphere of knowledge of the use of composites, which he calls out as "camper shells and ski boats", he's obviously trailer trash. So, because camper shells and ski boats are made out of composites, he's trailer trash. Got it. Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete pump is a 3-D printer, too. So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for having your head up and locked. Seems like someone insulted your binkie. Every time we see the Chimp around here he is arguing a stupid position adamantly. Perhaps you and he should get a room? You should look in a mirror, kid. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 05:06:49 -0000, wrote:
In sci.physics wrote: On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 01:22:40 -0000, wrote: In sci.physics wrote: On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 18:12:47 -0000, wrote: In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... Also, the other option that 3D printing opens up is more shape optimized parts. These things are optimized so that "useless" mass is simply gone from the design. They tend to look "organic" rather than "machined" due to their complex shapes. I've heard this called "light-weighting" parts from management types. And about the only place where weight matters that much is in things that fly and in that case useless mass is already gone from the design without the expense of 3D printing. True, the big dumb cylindrical pressure vessel may not apply but, that's not the entire aircraft. If the "mass were already gone from the design" then GE would not be pouring literally millions of dollars into developing a one meter cubed 3D printer presumably for printing aircraft engine parts. Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not that big a part of an aircrafts weight. Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to understand the domain. 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite content. An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of composite materials in their construction. Note the word "most". I can say that shape optimization coupled with 3D printing is one of the "bleeding edge" topics in my industry. It's really no secret, you can surely Google hundreds of articles on the topic. I really can't go into further details, but my profession is in writing engineering software, so I ought to know. Whoopee. It is still niche. Does anyone care about a shape optimized 4 slice toaster or filing cabinet? Marketing types certainly do. Consumers have always bought toasters based on their looks. After all, the thousands of different designs all do the same thing. And all look about the same. Not so much: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/437412182539227477/ For any given era they look pretty much the same to me. https://www.google.com/search?q=toas...w=1327&bih=868 You'd argue that every color is the same? The fact is that marketing differentiates their product from the competition by making stuff *look* different. Similar, sure, but that's the way fashion goes. A few years ago every car looked pretty much the same but that's not the same "same" as it is now. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:28:43 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not that big a part of an aircrafts weight. From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can even reach 7%. That's significant in aerospace. Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to understand the domain. 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite content. An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of composite materials in their construction. Note the word "most". How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other than camper shells and ski boats. Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in the real world. Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence? "composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials" I disagree that you have included his entire thought. Given his sphere of knowledge of the use of composites, which he calls out as "camper shells and ski boats", he's obviously trailer trash. So, because camper shells and ski boats are made out of composites, he's trailer trash. Got it. Wow, you're just remarkably stupid. Because those are the only things he can find that are made out of composites he's trailer trash. Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete pump is a 3-D printer, too. So are you disagreeing that concrete is a composite? Why do you think there is a connection between 'composite' and '3-D printer'? If you don't, were you just compelled to say something stupid? So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for having your head up and locked. Seems like someone insulted your binkie. Every time we see the Chimp around here he is arguing a stupid position adamantly. Perhaps you and he should get a room? You should look in a mirror, kid. You should pull your head out of your ass, old and moldering one. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.
In sci.physics wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:34:29 -0000, wrote: In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote: wrote: In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote: wrote: Does anyone care about a shape optimized 4 slice toaster or filing cabinet? Yes. I do. If any significant number of items in your house are fabricated, it makes sense to use as few raw materials as possible, so, for example, it would make sense to honeycomb the inside of a knife handle, since it would still be strong enough, and would allow you to keep a gram or two of material "in the pot" for other projects. Ditto everything you make. Nonsense; the items in one's house are based on price not how elegantly it was produced. It makes no sense to honeycomb the inside of a knife handle as it would add no functionality and just increase the price. What price? The manufacturing cost which increases the retail sales price at the store. Manufacturing cost and sales price are only loosely correlated. For government projects mainly but not for consumer products. It would reduce both the time to fabricate and feedstock used, albeit at the cost of slightly more complex software. Or you could injection mold it, as most knife handles are, for a fraction of the manufacturing cost of the honyecomb nonsense. Or you could stamp the whole thing out of metal for a fraction of the cost of the honyecomb nonsense. They form the only metric which makes sense when talking about fabricating objects. The only metric which makes sense for fabricating objects is the loaded manufacturing cost. Yes but not because of sales price, rather profit. profit = sales price - loaded manufacturing cost So, by that metric, they're cheaper. If an injection molded handle costs a fraction of a cent while the honeycomb handle costs several cents, which is cheaper? Not the one with the better ad agency. ;-) -- Jim Pennino |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |