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

wrote:

In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:

Besides, millions of people "make their own stuff" every day, although it's
primarly digital content these days.


Otherwise know as trash, SPAM, and utter nonsense.


Well, that's certainly true in your case.


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

wrote:

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.

Hook it to the right controller and it is. I saw a youtube of someone
printing a kid's playcastle using a concrete pump device of some kind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ5Elbvvr1M

--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

wrote:


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?

No, but most are chrome.

I haven't bought a chrome one in a long time. These days they all
have an outer plastic layer. The only chrome you see is less than an
inch around the slots/
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

"Robert Clark" wrote:

I was estimating that size of the engine based on cited high horsepower for
the Tesla cars. But I was surprised the mass and volume required for the
Tesla electric motor is much smaller than a comparable gasoline engine. This
video makes a comparison of a Tesla electric motor to a typical gas engine.
The power to weight ratio is 10 times better for the Tesla electric motor(!)


I haven't been following the Tesla and similar modern electric cars.
I seem to recall that twenty years ago, they were predicting that the
big advantage of electric cars would be motors IN the wheels and no
transmission at all. Did anyone ever go that route?

(My Ford hybrid has two electric motors and the gas engine. I am
having trouble finding a good overview of the transmission, but it
seems to be based on a differential concept.)
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

On 7/9/2017 11:49 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
"Robert Clark" wrote:

"Robert Clark" wrote:

...

Separate print heads assumes an inkjet model. These deposition
methods
do not have print heads. they lay down a layer of powder and then
melt it
where it needs to form the image.


The Desktop Metal system is more akin to inkjet printing and does
not use
powders:

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


Uh, Bob? The video says it uses powders.


Bound into solid rods with a binder similar to the solid rods used for
plastic 3D-printing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fused_deposition_modeling


Bob, go watch your original video. Much about powder spreaders.
Nothing about solid rods.



Ok, sorry. There is a difference between the Desktop Metal Studio system
and the Desktop Metal Production system. Their studio system is meant to
be used in an office setting and both the metal powder and the binder
are combined together into solid rods. DM's chief technology officer
makes the point this was done for safety reasons to be used for
prototyping in an office setting:

Metal additive manufacturing--using a desktop 3D printer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZehOWpZPITk

DM's production system however is for rapid, volume production and is
meant for an industrial, factory setting and the binder and the metal
powder are laid down separately.

Bob Clark



video is excellent!

On 7/9/2017 2:48 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:

Besides, millions of people "make their own stuff" every day, although it's
primarly digital content these days.


Otherwise know as trash, SPAM, and utter nonsense.


Well, that's certainly true in your case.



his case has not gone to trial yet.

In sci.physics Greg Goss wrote:
wrote:


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?

No, but most are chrome.

I haven't bought a chrome one in a long time. These days they all
have an outer plastic layer. The only chrome you see is less than an
inch around the slots/

In the link I gave above, most of the toasters shown are in fact chrome.

most adjective

1 greatest in quantity, extent, or degree1 greatest in quantity, extent, or degree

2 the majority of


--
Jim Pennino

wrote:

In sci.physics Greg Goss wrote:
wrote:


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?

No, but most are chrome.

I haven't bought a chrome one in a long time. These days they all
have an outer plastic layer. The only chrome you see is less than an
inch around the slots/

In the link I gave above, most of the toasters shown are in fact chrome.


Anecdote is not the singular of data. Looking at sites that actually
sell toasters, most of them appear to be black with chrome trim.


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

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.

What do you think the manufacturing cost of fabrication is?
- Feedstock, most of which is, and can be, recycled,

Cost recovery for most materials is trivial.

- Power, minimal,

For 3D metal printing, lots of power.

- Cost of the unit, divided by its expected lifetime, multiplied by time to print?

Babble.

Not really, it's called amortisation, in this case of the cost of the fabricator.
"The process of reducing, or accounting for, an amount over a period according
to a plan."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amortization



These are all very small.

For techniques such as molding, yes.

And for mature fabrication technology.

I'm looking at a mature fabrication economy - when you don't buy most things
you fabricate them.

Pure fantasy.

Name-calling isn't particularly useful in a discussion.

It is not name calling, it is my opinion of the concept of people fabricating
their own things.

I'd justify my claim (that most people will be fabricating most things) by
noting that when almost any technology becomes cheap enough, it becomes
ubiquitous, and I'd cite computers, automobiles and printers as examples.

Milling machines, drill presses and lathes are quite cheap, especially when
compared to metal 3D printers, and are available at your local Harbor Freight
store.

How many people do you know that own any of the above?

Apples and oranges, they are nowhere as flexible as mature fabricator technology
would be, nor as easy to use.

Obviously you have never seen a N/C milling machine in action nor payed
for raw stock.

*paid

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Even making bread is more difficult than simply selecting a file, loading
feedstock and pressing a button.

Obviously you have never seen a real 3D printer in action nor have you
ever made bread.

Done both; what's your point?
As I keep having to explain, I'm talking about *mature* fabrication technology.


Besides, millions of people "make their own stuff" every day, although it's
primarly digital content these days.

Otherwise know as trash, SPAM, and utter nonsense.

Irrelevant.

On 10.7.17 07:15, Greg Goss wrote:
"Robert Clark" wrote:

I was estimating that size of the engine based on cited high horsepower for
the Tesla cars. But I was surprised the mass and volume required for the
Tesla electric motor is much smaller than a comparable gasoline engine. This
video makes a comparison of a Tesla electric motor to a typical gas engine.
The power to weight ratio is 10 times better for the Tesla electric motor(!)


I haven't been following the Tesla and similar modern electric cars.
I seem to recall that twenty years ago, they were predicting that the
big advantage of electric cars would be motors IN the wheels and no
transmission at all. Did anyone ever go that route?

The problem with the motors in the wheels is that it is going to
be a bumpy ride becaus of the large mass outside of spring suspension.

(My Ford hybrid has two electric motors and the gas engine. I am
having trouble finding a good overview of the transmission, but it
seems to be based on a differential concept.)

So has my Lexus. It is similar to the Toyota Prius scheme,
which is pretty well described in the Net.

However, Ford may have patent problems with Toyota, or they
may hava a licensing agreement.

--

-TV