NASA's 3D Printed Rocket Engine Passes Extreme Stress Tests - Polidicks

[QUOTE]NASA first attempt at using 3D-printed parts for rocket engines has passed its biggest, and hottest, test yet. The largest 3D-printed rocket part built to date, a rocket engine injector, survived a major hot-fire test. The injector generated 10 times more thrust than any injector made by 3D printing before, the space agency announced. A [URL="http://www.space.com/22548-3d-printed-rocket-injector-survives-hot-fire-test-video.html"]NASA video of the 3D-printed rocket part test[/URL] shows the engine blazing to life at the agency's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville Ala.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.space.com/22568-3d-printed-rocket-engine-test-video.html"]SOURCE[/URL] 3D Printers are fantastic, Oak Ridge National Lab has Titanium Sintering Printers that do some truly fantastic work.

Note: turn your volume down before watching the video

too bad those things are like million dollar printers, imagine when this tech becomes commonplace, id bet automakers would start printing parts of cars out in the factory instead of having a seperate factory to make this crap

Wouldn't a 3D printer at that scale just be an automated factory?

Homebuilders. Making 3d printed homes lol

[QUOTE=Sableye;42027279]too bad those things are like million dollar printers, imagine when this tech becomes commonplace, id bet automakers would start printing parts of cars out in the factory instead of having a seperate factory to make this crap[/QUOTE] Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;42027462]Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.[/QUOTE] I imagine it'd be cool if a mechanic could download the 3d file for the exact piece they needed on the spot. no matter how custom.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;42027395]Wouldn't a 3D printer at that scale just be an automated factory?[/QUOTE] Essentially, a few friends of mine intern at ORNL (Oak Ridge Nat'l Lab) and they have two commercial sized 8 feet x 8 feet x 3 feet printers (For one of the stronger plastics)

[QUOTE=katbug;42027479]I imagine it'd be cool if a mechanic could download the 3d file for the exact piece they needed on the spot. no matter how custom.[/QUOTE] But...CNC mills already exist. And unless they're printing steel or aluminum it probably wouldn't be of much use.

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;42027462]Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.[/QUOTE] I wonder if you could make really sharp blades in such a way...

[QUOTE=zzaacckk;42027174]Note: turn your volume down before watching the video[/QUOTE] Why oh why couldn't I have read this before clicking the link to watch the fucking video.... I think I may have permanent hearing damage now, jesus fucking christ that shit was loud as hell.

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;42027462]Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.[/QUOTE] It's more likely it would be convinience for personal/company use. Sure a 400€ printer and another 20€ to print something that would cost 18€ to buy and ship, but it would be more practical to just print it and have it ready in 5 minutes as oppossed to a few days.

Actually one of the main points of using a 3D printer is the fact that additive manufacturing produces minimal waste if any, so you'd actually be saving money if you were manufacturing things on your own before you got the printer. And if you give it a decade we'll likely have solved most of the issues with printing metals, plus on top of that we can already print biological networks like capillaries and stuff.

- snip -

I don't get it, how doesn't it melt?

[QUOTE=qwerty000;42030859]I don't get it, how doesn't it melt?[/QUOTE] The same reason a standard rocket doesn't melt.

Now we only need space factories and asteroid mining companies

[QUOTE=bravehat;42030908]The same reason a standard rocket doesn't melt.[/QUOTE] Aren't 3D printers produce things made of plastic, or my knowledge is outdated?

[QUOTE=qwerty000;42031365]Aren't 3D printers produce things made of plastic, or my knowledge is outdated?[/QUOTE] those are additive 3d printers - they melt something down and then pour it out in the shape these are SLS - selective laser sintering - printers, which sinter very fine powder layer by layer into whatever object you want. SLS is a lot more accurate and strong, and it works on metals whatnot because you don't heat them up to their melting point, just to their sintering point

There's also the "print something out in weaker material, make a mold around it, pour molten metal or whatever into the mold" method.

So... How long until we have replicators like in Star Trek?

[QUOTE=kaine123;42036006]So... How long until we have replicators like in Star Trek?[/QUOTE] Star Trek replicators simply turn pure energy into whatever object. It's not 3d printing so much as it is energy matter conversion

[QUOTE=Kyle902;42039453]Star Trek replicators simply turn pure energy into whatever object. It's not 3d printing so much as it is energy matter conversion[/QUOTE] So a couple of years, right?

[QUOTE=bravehat;42039465]So a couple of years, right?[/QUOTE] 4 - 5 probably. How hard can it be

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;42027462]Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.[/QUOTE] If they're 3d printing parts made of metal then using that technique [i]should[/i] actually make it stronger, when you weld 2 pieces of metal together the weld becomes the strongest part of the metal.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;42027395]Wouldn't a 3D printer at that scale just be an automated factory?[/QUOTE] It's just the fuel injector if I'm not mistaken, not an entire rocket engine.

[QUOTE=Eltro102;42031431]those are additive 3d printers - they melt something down and then pour it out in the shape these are SLS - selective laser sintering - printers, which sinter very fine powder layer by layer into whatever object you want. SLS is a lot more accurate and strong, and it works on metals whatnot because you don't heat them up to their melting point, just to their sintering point[/QUOTE] I'm just imagining a online tutorial of 3D printers in the future, and someone says. "Just right click the 3D printer icon, press properties, then go to 'Substances' and change 'plastic' into 'metal'. "

Just for everyone's notice, this isn't a 3D printed rocket engine as the title suggests, but only the injector (which is just a small part of the engine). Although, it's quite cool.

something to keep in mind about 3D printers: they're additive, not subtractive. Instead of having to take material out of a block to make something, and generating a fair amount of waste, they simply take input and make it into an object. Money is saved on materials I mean, it doesn't pay for the printer, but it is one advantage. and being able to make structures that are impossible with subtractive processes without having to use two piece molds or assemble parts

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;42027462]Due to the very nature of 3D printing, unless very significant advances occur it will always be cheaper and faster to build a machine to stamp metal and weld it together (unless you're making a one of a kind part, some part with funky geometry or prototype). I mean, you're printing material in layers and melting it / burning it / letting it dry onto the previous layer. It's probably not going to be as strong as something forged or stamped in a single piece for the weight, just easier to fashion unique and complicated parts at the expense of time.[/QUOTE] The concept of manufacturing stuff in orbit however is rather efficient once the infrastructure is established. One of the main reasons space travel is so expensive is simply the immense quantity of fuel required to break earth's gravity with a large rocket (a rocket that also needs to be tough and heavy enough to survive the trip up) [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-rocket_spacelaunch"]If a large part of that equation could be removed[/URL] and building materials simply sent up in raw form, cheaper and more fruitful operations in space would be a more practical reality as lightweight spacecraft and structures could simply be printed and assembled in orbit without fear of bursting apart on the way through the atmosphere.