Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Next gen 3D metal printing

fabric8labs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 127 posts

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#11

Post by impossiblefork »

smitty1e wrote: post #2

> The electrochemical approach allows for micron-scale feature resolution, complex internal features, high-purity materials, and rapid scalability to support mass manufacturing. That just does not sound cheap. One envisions a cost-distributed 3D effort, with this used for certain critical parts.

I actually think it does.

I'm imagining a human-sized tank, continuously growing things by electroplating, slowly, slowly, but eventually making something quite big.

I find this concept very appealing. I don't quite understand how it though, because I have view of electroplating as something which is very different from this precise and presumably at least somewhat fast process.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#12

Post by xnx »

kbenson wrote: post #4

My understanding is that most current metal 3d printing yields items with significantly worse properties with respect to shear forces, because of how the molecules align compared to when it's melted together as a whole and cooled (or something like that, I can't find the research paper someone linked to me in the past here regarding that). Do we know if this is better with respect to that?

Would there still be a benefit to rapidly producing metal molds/forms for other materials?

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#13

Post by kube-system »

smitty1e wrote: post #2

> The electrochemical approach allows for micron-scale feature resolution, complex internal features, high-purity materials, and rapid scalability to support mass manufacturing. That just does not sound cheap. One envisions a cost-distributed 3D effort, with this used for certain critical parts.

It sounds a lot like semiconductor manufacturing, except electrochemical instead of photochemical.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#14

Post by Iulioh »

WheatMillington wrote: post #10
metal_am wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texture (the statistical arrangement of all the crystal lattice arrangements that make up a metal) can play a role on mechanical properties, but current metal AM is more than able to meet material standards. It's good to be careful with blanket statements because the most accurate answer is usually "it depends."

I agree we should avoid blanket statements, which is why your statement "current metal AM is more than able to meet material standards" is problematic. What standards? There is no generic "material standards" for all materials, and 3d metal printing is definitely inferior to MOST other manufacturing methods in MOST circumstances, in terms of mechanical properties.

I mean, we 3d print aerospace engine parts, is this "common sense" logic really true?

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#15

Post by KennyBlanken »

The headline (and thusfar only, it seems) application is a 3d metal printed waterblock with Asetek (the infamous AIO patent trolls, incidentally), with some hooplah about "quieter pumps" and better performance.

Arctic makes a line of AIO coolers which are among the lowest-cost, yet have industry-leading performance and can dissipate hundreds of watts with ease.

This just doesn't seem like an area that needs to be optimized. I could see certain applications like cooling high power RF stuff and lasers...but if this was the best they could do for their headline application, I'm a bit skeptical.

Either they're doing a poor job of commercializing it, it's got drawbacks that are deal-killers for a lot of industries, or something else...

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#16

Post by cjbgkagh »

smitty1e wrote: post #2

> The electrochemical approach allows for micron-scale feature resolution, complex internal features, high-purity materials, and rapid scalability to support mass manufacturing. That just does not sound cheap. One envisions a cost-distributed 3D effort, with this used for certain critical parts.

It’ll be like a resin printer, the hard part is the anode array which isn’t that hard, it seems that TFT screen manufacturers can make what’s needed and TFTs screens are really cheap.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#17

Post by esskay »

kbenson wrote: post #4

My understanding is that most current metal 3d printing yields items with significantly worse properties with respect to shear forces, because of how the molecules align compared to when it's melted together as a whole and cooled (or something like that, I can't find the research paper someone linked to me in the past here regarding that). Do we know if this is better with respect to that?

With some of the earlier ones that may have been the case as many were simply melting small blobs of metal and dropping them onto eachother. The newer ones act a lot more like a welder. It's why it's been possible to 3d print rocket components.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#18

Post by codetrotter »

Iulioh wrote: post #14
WheatMillington wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree we should avoid blanket statements, which is why your statement "current metal AM is more than able to meet material standards" is problematic. What standards? There is no generic "material standards" for all materials, and 3d metal printing is definitely inferior to MOST other manufacturing methods in MOST circumstances, in terms of mechanical properties.

I mean, we 3d print aerospace engine parts, is this "common sense" logic really true?

The 3D printing they do for aerospace engine parts is certainly very much different from how most metal 3d printing is done. Because the requirements are completely different, and the budgets that aerospace have available to them are insanely much bigger.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#19

Post by metal_am »

WheatMillington wrote: post #10
metal_am wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texture (the statistical arrangement of all the crystal lattice arrangements that make up a metal) can play a role on mechanical properties, but current metal AM is more than able to meet material standards. It's good to be careful with blanket statements because the most accurate answer is usually "it depends."

I agree we should avoid blanket statements, which is why your statement "current metal AM is more than able to meet material standards" is problematic. What standards? There is no generic "material standards" for all materials, and 3d metal printing is definitely inferior to MOST other manufacturing methods in MOST circumstances, in terms of mechanical properties.

A line has to be drawn somewhere because this is a rabbit hole. Without going into the specifics of ASTM standards, etc., there are metal AM parts flying today in both air and space. IMO, that counts as meeting standards.

Re: Next gen 3D metal printing

#20

Post by tombert »

I saw a video doing something like awhile ago [1], and I thought the idea of using electroplating made sense, but I know absolutely nothing about chemical engineering or material science.

It's interesting to see this idea in action, though with my limited experience with electroplating it seems like it'd be absurdly slow.

[1] https://youtu.be/W1d36wbx_yg

Post reply on HN