[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/diy/ - Do It Yourself

Search:


View post   

>> No.788844 [View]
File: 28 KB, 600x404, ManufacturingPlasticDuckBreakevenChart_600x404.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
788844

>>788787
>>So is there any reason to buy a 3d printer over an injection molding machine?
There are two big reasons:
1. when you need to do a low production run, like 1000 or less parts
2. when you need parts with geometry that can't be made any other way.

Injection molding isn't inherently better than 3d printing and vice versa. They are both tools for getting the job done and it really depends on what the job is.

>> No.788829 [View]
File: 13 KB, 456x317, composite-turbo-inlet-duct.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
788829

>>788091
The semicircular thing in front of the fish is an obstacle that leaves an oscillating vortex wake, this oscillating vortex wake makes the fish swim. There's more about how this happens here: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~glauder/reprints_unzipped/BealEtAl2006.pdf

>>788375
>>The issue in my case is more that my printer is shit and will take forever printing something with more than 50% infill
Even with 50% infill 3d printed parts can be pretty strong. Especially if the forces you apply to them are in the plane they were printed. You should do an estimate of how much force your fish is really going to be under and see if you really need more than 50% infill or fiberglass(start with the torque your servos can apply).

After reading more about this specific fish robot(see: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6181603)), you could probably get away with really really low infill percent. A large hollow with honey comb on the inside can be pretty strong. And looking back, you really don't want a solid structure, because then you'll have to add a huge amount of ballast to make your fish neutrally buoyant.

Now if you must do fiberglass, one thing you can do is us your 3d print as a core, that is you wrap your 3d print in fiberglass and not bother removing it. Although if you use PLA, you can use the chemicals here to dissolve it: http://ifeelbeta.de/index.php/support/support-full-disclosure

Not sure if any of these things will damage fiberglass resin though. Pic related, a part made by a similar process, wrap dissolvable print in composite, cure, dissolve stuff, done

>> No.787892 [View]
File: 1.55 MB, 480x416, deadfish[1_.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
787892

>>787820
>>as a 3d printout is not really reliable
You aren't using a Z-corp machine are you? If yes, then you should be very concerned about structural stability, because z-corp prints are about as strong as chocolate.

If you are using an FDM machine and you are worried about the parts being strong enough set infill to 100%, it will use a lot of filament, but you will end up with pretty strong parts.

Though honestly, how much force are your parts going to experience in a fish robot? Now if you are worried about surface finish and not structural integrity there's solvent polish:
http://blog.reprap.org/2013/02/vapor-treating-abs-rp-parts.html

You can also just sand it you know?

Oh and don't use PLA, it is prone to rotting when wet.

Video related, a dead fish swimming upstream.

>> No.786093 [View]
File: 61 KB, 690x518, peltonturbine_preview_featured.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
786093

Here's files for a pelton wheel OP:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:16579

>>786081
Finally! I guess I am a real tripfag now!

>> No.786080 [View]

>>783338
Here's a manual on how to build one:
https://www.engineeringforchange.org/static/content/Energy/S00070/5%20Gallon%20Bucket%20Build%20Manual.pdf

but the best way for an amateur to make the turbine is to 3d print one. No really.

>> No.769232 [View]
File: 808 KB, 700x467, concrete printer.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
769232

>>769080

You need concrete pump and a fucking huge cartesian robot. As far as concrete composition goes look up contour crafting.
Here's some stuff on contour crafting, the best concrete 3d printing method out there.
http://contourcrafting.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/mega1.pdf

But for your case, you should keep it simple getting the settings tuned and writing software to control it should be the fun part.

>> No.759027 [View]
File: 862 KB, 1197x755, single crystal ebsd.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
759027

>>758978
here's the EBSD map showing where the grains are.


Although this technique probably isn't as economical as printing single crystal molds. We can print molds good enough to cast single crystal turbine blades so who really needs to directly print single crystals?

>> No.758977 [View]
File: 159 KB, 720x540, 3d printed single crystal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
758977

>>758976
>>758976
We can 3d print single crystals:
www.midwestsampe.org/content/files/events/dpmworkshop2012/Suman_Das_Presentation_DPM_Workshop_Nov_13-14_2012_Final.pdf

Pic related

>> No.758964 [View]
File: 67 KB, 450x189, jet turbine blade.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
758964

>>758743
>>758759
>>758772
I present to you a jet turbine blade, it has a weird S-shaped channel in it that's really difficult to make. Just making molds requires a huge number of steps.

Except not any more. 3d printers have been demonstrated capable of printing the mold in one step.

Now on cutting tools, we can print tungsten carbide. We're also getting to the point where we can print tungsten carbide here and steel there and go between them, so tools are less resistant to fracture. It's just not worth it right now.

Source on printing carbide:
http://utwired.engr.utexas.edu/lff/symposium/proceedingsarchive/pubs/manuscripts/2010/2010-18-ott.pdf

>> No.734157 [View]

>>732553
>>Why does the 3d print need to be super high quality? the layer resolution is about 40 microns.

The layer resolution is often a lie in practice.

>>734130
You need higher resolution than that
>>734131
The resolution's pretty fucking good though

>> No.732493 [View]

>>732363
holy fuck OP this is a stupid idea, and by stupid I mean stupid enough it might just work. 3d printers with the required resolution(stereolithography) are like $2000 cheaper than the process. Shit OP, if you can get this to work, you could destroy the whole industry of orthodontics. Well at least I want you to try this, because it could be so damn disruptive!

>>Whats a good cheap pourable plastic or resin for this initial impression?
you can buy the same damn stuff dentists use for like $12 bux: http://www.instructables.com/id/Make-teeth-mold-for-Halloween-Teeth/

>>I considered 3d printing the retainers
aw hell no! Especially if you use stereolithography, that stuff is nasty! Dude, the retainers for invisalign are just vacuum formed plastic(or thermoformed which is vacuum forming with more pressure). Vacuum forming is something you can do in your garage. You 3d print the teeth how you want them to be and vacuum form something over them for best results use dental grade plastic, which is cheap!
http://www.keystoneind.com/en/thermal_plastics/crown_bridge_material.html

This stuff here goes through the process of making retainers so you can steal from that:
http://www.slideshare.net/indiandentalacademy/bobby-invisalign

The scanning part is going to be tough, getting a scanner with enough resolution to scan teeth is not going to be cheap. The 3d modeling won't be as easy as you think. Make sure to look up the patents.

All in all, even if you have to buy an expensive 3d scanner, a 3d printer, and stereolithography resin, you might still be able to accomplish it for less than the cost of invisalign!

>> No.723561 [View]

>>720917
the HP machine uses the same inkjets from a 2d printer that costs ~$500. If they wanted the consumer market, they could make the machine cheap enough for it. Heck, you could probably make one yourself, all you need is a printer with a page wide inkjet, a really bright lamp, and a powder management system.

>>720973
>>$250K objet machine
The HP machine doesn't use UV curing resin, so they don't need special high viscosity print heads which cost a ton

>>720896
>>had a brand new $12000 printer decide to slam the carriage into the inner wall of the printer and destroy itself
3d printers can do this too, even the big expensive ones. You should never ever, ever print really thin layers on an LS machine as these tend curl up and will destroy the powder recoating system.

Now HP is most definitely going to put chips in their ink cartridges like they do now, to prevent you from refilling them, but there are ways to bypass this. The ink should be pretty much the same as that used in regular printers and the powder you should be able to buy online.


This is the beginning of the end of diy 3d printers, the moment HP decides to make a machine for the consumer market, it's all over.

>> No.720452 [View]

>>720444
beta versions are going out to early adopters in 2015.

>> No.720437 [View]
File: 115 KB, 960x540, hp-3d-printing-multi-jet-fusion-2014-10-29-04.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
720437

>>718917
>PS: any of y'all buying the dremel 3d printer when it comes out in a week?

It's already obsolete. HP just made almost every 3d printer out there obsolete a couple of days ago.

>> No.667358 [View]

>>666927
are you sure your positioning system can achieve that accuracy?

>>667344
Sure, if you can live with accuracy less than 0.01 mm. Though you will have to do the math to see what you can get.

Why are you use a pump to control your liquid level? Photopolymer is nasty!

Honestly, you're going to have a hard enough time as is correcting for polymerization shrinkage and other weird effects.

>> No.661073 [View]
File: 234 KB, 1200x800, highres garage machine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
661073

>>661067
oops wrong pic related

>> No.661067 [View]
File: 15 KB, 410x262, dlp 3d printer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
661067

>>660484
>>hobby level stereolithography printing
If you mean printing stuff with resin, that's already a thing, you can modify a projector and make a very good stereolithography set up.

Because of the way patents are, you might even better building one yourself than buying one.

As far as powder sintering type processes go, I'm doubtful that it will be possible to get good prints with by DIYing them.

Sintering stuff is hard as sintering scales with T^4, meaning very small temperature differences can cause big problems. Not to mention you need a heated build chamber and an inert gas atmosphere to print.

A company back in 2009ish tried to make a home version of a powder sintering machine, but failed miserably. Interestingly though it didn't use a laser and instead used a really bright lightbulb, so it might be worth looking into again...

Pic related was run on a garage machine

>> No.660546 [View]
File: 56 KB, 624x350, Boeing-pipe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
660546

>>652462
The most practical things I have seen 3d printed are widgets for airplanes. Little plastic parts that do things like channel air for air conditioning and hold wires in place.

It's cheaper to print them than to make them with injection molding. Plus with additive manufacturing they can be made lighter than if they were to be made by injection molding.

Because airplanes tend to have a lot of these 'widgets' in them, doing so saves millions of dollars worth of fuel over the aircraft's lifetime

>> No.638996 [View]
File: 324 KB, 724x544, 3d printed turbine blade mold.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
638996

>>638943
well when you do a full lifecycle assessment you find something interesting:
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/life-cycle-analysis-of-electric-car-shows-battery-has-only-minor-impact.html

But I am 3dprintingfag, not electriccardouche, so what do I know?

>>637904
There are also new research fabbers being made capable of making precision investment casting molds for jet turbine blades.

If one's smart enough, it shouldn't be too hard to diy one.

>> No.637633 [View]
File: 109 KB, 1024x665, 3d printed carbon fiber.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
637633

>>636929
>> 3d printed car is that much closer if graphene printers ever go commercial.
Graphene is already 3d printed commercially. And by graphene, they really just mean little bits of graphite embedded in plastic. It makes the plastic slightly stronger and slightly conductive.

It's mostly done for the slightly conductive part so that one can make electrostatic charge dissipation elements for airplanes(and to get a nice black color)

What one really needs is for graphite 3d printing to go commercial, as in 3d printing of carbon fiber composites

>>636929
>>636947

batteries(80%)+electric motors(90%) are already more efficient than gasoline engines(25%), HOWEVER, they are less energy dense than gasoline.

And if you take powerplants into account(yes even coal with powerplants), in some cases, electric vehicles can be greener than gasoline powered vehicles.

Again, this is in some cases, not all cases.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/automobiles/how-green-are-electric-cars-depends-on-where-you-plug-in.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

>>636970
hopefully he's referring to ion propulsion, otherwise....

>> No.636059 [View]
File: 27 KB, 340x255, 3d printed turbine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
636059

>>636022
You can do it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pghZG1Neyc0

Though there are more fun possibilities offered by printing a jet turbine motor.

In fact, right now, we're getting pretty close to making molds for jet turbine blades via 3d printing

>> No.635702 [View]

>>635698
This is less steps than the post processing for professional 3d printed parts.

>>635689
Now do they need to look pretty, be strong, or fit together?

And if you're just going to spray them with plasti-dip why do you need to smooth them with acetone?

>> No.635695 [View]

>>635692
The question is what customized goods does the consumer actually want?

>> No.635694 [View]
File: 29 KB, 616x411, 3d printed airplane parts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
635694

>>635257
>>How hard is it to set up a 3d printer and start making things with it?
Well as the saying goes in the industry, "it ain't a microwave oven"

'3d printers,' even professional ones, require constant upkeep and recalibration to keep them working. Even more so for cheap 3d printers. $500 is considered cheap.

>>635337
>>3D printers are not for manufacturing, they are for prototyping
Well the true 3d printers that use the Z-corp patented '3d printing process,' are.

Most other additive manufacturing systems like FDM, laser sintering(don't call it selective), stereolithography are used to manufacture parts that actually go in things(mostly laser sintering though).

Most airplanes and UAS's have some 3d printed whatsits and thingamabobs in them nowadays, because it's cheaper to print them than to mold them and assemble them. You can also make them lighter, which is a big deal for airplanes, because every bit of weight you remove is money in the bank.


But, it's only cheaper because they typically don't produce many airplanes. Additive manufacturing really excels at producing small volumes of high value components. If you have a high resolution 3d printer, it can even make sense to sell large volumes of small objects.


Now to answer your question OP, what do you want to manufacturer? Is it something that you aren't making much of, but has high value? Is it for a niche market? Is it something small for a niche market? If yes, then it's probably worth it.

People have made money selling products made on hobbyist 3d printers, but they have been for very niche markets. The best example I can think of is a kinect mount, it's a small plastic widget that makes a kinect mountable to a robot.

Also, avoid products that could present liability issues.Your beer mug is a bad idea, because 3d printed plastic isn't quite food safe.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]