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

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.

--
Jim Pennino

In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:

snip

From the way I interpret what Ehteshami is saying, it mirrors something I've
been thinking. You can imagine not just cars being fully 3D-printed, but
entire airplanes, tractors, construction vehicles, refrigerators, air
conditioners, and everything else called "durable goods". But this would
mean nearly all manufacturing jobs would be replaced by 3D-printing
machines. That is a major economic disruption.

Puerile nonsense.

3D printers make parts which need to be assembled into a finished item.

The list of materials that can not and can never be printed is huge.

How do you print a spring inside of something and under compression?

Not only that, but all these would become much cheaper. Would the companies
that produce them even be billion dollar companies anymore?

Someone is watch too much scifi.


--
Jim Pennino

In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:

snip

From the way I interpret what Ehteshami is saying, it mirrors something
I've
been thinking. You can imagine not just cars being fully 3D-printed, but
entire airplanes, tractors, construction vehicles, refrigerators, air
conditioners, and everything else called "durable goods". But this would
mean nearly all manufacturing jobs would be replaced by 3D-printing
machines. That is a major economic disruption.

Puerile nonsense.

3D printers make parts which need to be assembled into a finished item.

The list of materials that can not and can never be printed is huge.

How do you print a spring inside of something and under compression?

Not only that, but all these would become much cheaper. Would the
companies
that produce them even be billion dollar companies anymore?

Someone is watch too much scifi.



How do you interpret those two quotes of the head of GE's additive
manufacturing division?

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/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:
In sci.physics Robert Clark wrote:

snip

From the way I interpret what Ehteshami is saying, it mirrors something
I've
been thinking. You can imagine not just cars being fully 3D-printed, but
entire airplanes, tractors, construction vehicles, refrigerators, air
conditioners, and everything else called "durable goods". But this would
mean nearly all manufacturing jobs would be replaced by 3D-printing
machines. That is a major economic disruption.

Puerile nonsense.

3D printers make parts which need to be assembled into a finished item.

The list of materials that can not and can never be printed is huge.

How do you print a spring inside of something and under compression?

Not only that, but all these would become much cheaper. Would the
companies
that produce them even be billion dollar companies anymore?

Someone is watch too much scifi.



How do you interpret those two quotes of the head of GE's additive
manufacturing division?

That for some very particular applications, i.e. complex jet engines and
rocket engines, parts count can be reduced because in some applications
multiple parts can be replaced with one printed part.

This is something most people have know for a very long time.

How do you print a spring inside of something and under compression which
you would need to do to be able to 3D print a vehicle?


--
Jim Pennino

On 7/12/2017 12:45 PM, wrote:
In sci.physics Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...


I can see a few, very few, people printing junk jewelry, mostly teenage
girls.

Perhaps, but have you been to a craft store in the last 5 years?
They've been selling commercial 2d robotic cutters for many years that
are about the size of an ink-jet printer. The stupid thing shows
absolutely no sign of stopping even though the "cartridges" which
contain the cutting patterns are DRM protected and *very* expensive.
They are mostly used by people who like to do scrap books, but others
use them for making their own greeting cards and etc.

In those same craft stores is a large jewelery making section. Those
"memory bracelets" people make are a hot thing because "every item on it
represents a memory". In other words, these things are already highly
customized.

So, I wouldn't discount the notion that the crafts stores might start
selling very small 3d metal printers for making little dangling things
for jewelery (memory bracelets, necklace charms, and etc.) since this
would drop right into the market-space. They would only need to print
at most 3" x 3" x 3" to cover 99% of the jewelery market.

That same metal printer would sell "big league" at game stores where
custom cast characters for board games are already a huge market. In
other words Dungeons and Dragons, Warhammer 40k, and etc. Even if an
individual player wouldn't want one, every damn game store on the planet
would want at least a couple.

Jeff

By those standards black powder firearms will take over the firearms world.

I'm not saying there is not and will not be a bunch of niche users of
3D printing.

What I am saying is that 3D printing is not going to be the next industrial
revolution.



major limitation is, one cannot "print" higher melting temp material on
lower melting point material.

Serg io wrote:


major limitation is, one cannot "print" higher melting temp material on
lower melting point material.


And just what does that really limit?


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

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.

GE's only being able to mass produce a complex fuel nozzle by 3D-printing,
suggests the usefulness of 3D-printing for mass production is dependent on
the complexity of the part.

Desktop Metal claims their production system could 3D-print one hundred
small parts inches across in 4.5 hours, at a production cost of $4.25 each:

Desktop Metal Production System.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUOCiRktuCo

But what those parts could actually be sold for would be dependent on the
complexity of the part, which is reflected in the sale price of the part.
An example in this size range would be electric motors for radio controlled
airplanes and drones. Depending on power rating, these small electric
motors can still be priced in the hundreds of dollars range:

Brushless Motors Model Motors Brushless.
http://www.radicalrc.com/category/Mo...-Brushless-113

The highest power rated motors listed there are priced at $200, while still
being only inches across. So Desktop Metal 3D-printing 100 of these could
sell them for a total of $20,000, while their production cost for the 100
would be only $425.

This possibility, that the DM system could 3D-print the entire electric
motor, could be tested by anyone who owns a Desktop Metal Studio machine
due to be available this year for single part prototyping. If so, the
Desktop Metal Production machine could pay for itself in 2 days to anyone
who purchased it.



The Desktop Metal Production system could also 3D-print an electric car
motor that's at a comparable power rating to the Tesla electric motor, at
ca. 400 HP:

AM Racing AMR Dual Stack 250-90 AC Motor - Liquid Cooled, Permanent Magnet -
Remy
[AMR 250-90D]
Price: $18,488.00
http://www.evwest.com/catalog/produc...roducts_id=300

Judging from $425 production cost for a run within the full production
volume, this would likely be the comparable cost for a single large motor
taking up the full production volume.

That a complex expensive machine at a $18,000 sale price could be 3D-printed
at only a $400 production cost, would be evidence for the imminent
disruptive nature of 3D-printing to manufacturing and to its ability
radically reduce costs.

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/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"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.
Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing
parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of
things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no
one will effectively use a 3D printer at home.

Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future to
3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at
such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get faster,
more capable, capable of using more materials, etc.


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/

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.


--
Jim Pennino