Bambu is a good one to start off with. It's known for being able to just press print without dealing with a ton of technical details. That being said, the A1 that I got for free has had most parts of its print head replaced and it still doesn't print anything well except PLA, unless I buy Bambu branded filament. My new H2S just works. It prints nearly any filament I feed it. Print failures are almost always due to design, orientation, etc (aka my fault) but they are far and few between. Maintenance has become a thing of the past and I'm buying way less supplies for it (print plates, nozzles, etc).
What have you solved with a 3D printer?
- Thread starter degas
- Start date
jssailem
SBO Weather and Forecasting Forum Jim & John
- Oct 22, 2014
- 24,853
I have a brother-in-law who discovered a 3D printer and an excellent docent (engineer) at his local library. Now he is printing replacement parts for sewing machines he repairs. Who knew?
I am really tempted to get into this. But (a) I have a large shop with welding and machining capabilities and (b) I''m low on things I need to make. The other thing I find intriguing is the process of deciding the best way to make a thing. It used to be a fundamental part of the design process, and even with 3D printing, it still is.
post 1. Could have been made from scrap with a bandsaw, drill press, and sander in a few minutes. Too easy.
post 2. Interesting. The original was cast. A replacement would have been either cut, drilled, and bent from 1/4-inch aluminum, or possibly TIG welded from aluminum or stainless. Not difficult or time consuming. Alternatively, something could just be sourced. Not a common 3D machine, either.
post 3. Didn't come up for me.
Post 4. A few minutes with an end mill and a milling table (milling machine or drill press). Easy.
Post 5. Neat. Obviously, you could source that. I actually use bicycle water bottle holders, since we don't use cups much. If I wanted something cool and custom, I'd probably TIG something from some rod and tubing. Clamps are actually pretty fast to fabricate. I can't think of a simple way to add a name.
post 6. I fabricated a similar holder for a tablet on my last boat. Some bending, welding, and machining. An after-dinner project, similar complexity. I made a bird-blocker from 11 ga aluminum using a bending brake; looked factory made. I like the door latch, a good 3D project, but I'm not sure I like it as well as the simple hook/grommet my last boat came with; more secure in rough weather.
Post 18 could be cut from scrap in minutes.
Post 19 I could cut from GRP angle scrap.
The ones that puzzle me have concerns about UV resistance or strength. For example, a pulley is MADE to be turned. With a mandrel on a lathe or drill press with a lathe attachment, a smoother, more precise version can be turned in minutes from the correct material.
---
Every tool has a limited number of tricks. The old-school result was shop full of tools and a skill set for each. Lots of space and $$, which is a downside for the hobbyist. I have used 3D a few times at work, but only for odd prototypes of things that were going to be made from plastic.
I wonder if the old saw applies? "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Some of the projects on this thread are very cool and point in a new direction. Some, on the other hand, are clearly not nails. The trick has always been to design a part with both materials and fabrication methods in mind. A solution should not be forced by what is at hand.
But I'm going to keep following these threads. Someday I will find some "maker" interest that cannot otherwise be satisfied.
(The factory knob, broken down by foot traffic and UV after 30 years. A 3D-printed replacement would not be as strong or UV-resistant as the original. The turned replacements are several times stronger and will last even longer. The bearing surfaces are smooth. Once the jigs were set up, these literally took less than 2 minutes each, all steps included. They're a bit dirty in the photo, since I dropped them in a bucket. On the boat, cleaned up, they look better than factory. Machines are easy to set up for duplication. Of course, I could have printed them. That would have taken days. I could also have sourced them, which from a point of view, would be smarter. Maybe--a large number of the correct knob was ~ $250, and my cost was only time.)
My most recent plastic projects might provide some food for thought.
3D printing wouldn't help. Heat molding is better.
DIY Outboard Shift-Lever Extension - Practical Sailor
3D printing could be a good answer, but probably not better. Molded from composite and high-volume production would be best.
DIY Wrench For 6- and 8-Inch Screw-Out Plastic Deck Plates - Practical Sailor
Recently, I got two pairs of orthotics via 3D printing.
3D printing wouldn't help. Heat molding is better.
DIY Outboard Shift-Lever Extension - Practical Sailor
3D printing could be a good answer, but probably not better. Molded from composite and high-volume production would be best.
DIY Wrench For 6- and 8-Inch Screw-Out Plastic Deck Plates - Practical Sailor
Recently, I got two pairs of orthotics via 3D printing.
- It should hold the promise of reduced cost for multiple copies, but they charged the same price for the second pair, just a week later! They required a second appointment, even though all they did was ask if I liked the first pair. No fitting, they just pressed "reprint." No wonder insurance is high. Without insurance, they would have charged $450 for a simple reprint. BS.
- A few weeks later, I decided they needed minor adjustments. This is common, as they break in. They could not, because the manufacturing process did not allow that. So I have two pairs that are pretty good but not right. Additionally, because of the way the covering is a molded part, rather than a glued-on layer, it cannot be replaced when worn. Because the printed foam is structurally inferior to the foam they used before, they will not last as long.
As I posted #2, I'll speak to that first. I don't know if the original parts were cast, they may have been I've not concerned myself with that. They were originally made from a copper based alloy - I also haven't concerned myself with figuring out which specific alloy. However, the originals were definitely not strong enough as many had broken the hook off.
These would have been a bit difficult to manufacture - for sure casting would have been the easier manufacturing method. I also looked extensively for a replacement commercially available but it was not possible to find an exact copy - more critically for me was the hole placement for the attachment screws. Blanks where I could drill the holes were not available. If I'd had my forge set up, I could have forged replacements in 316 stainless but that process would have been fairly labor intensive with the final required polishing and passivation they would have needed.
Hence, the simplest method to manufacture these was through 3D printing. For sure, printing in Ti6Al4V is not your typical home machine.
3D printing is an interesting manufacturing process. On a commercial scale it is really only viable when certain design constraints are met. There is also a "run size" window that needs to be met. Put another way, once the number of parts exceeds a certain number, there are other manufacturing processes that usually are less expensive. Think injection molding plastic parts where 10's of thousands or more parts are being produced. There are some unique cases where a part can't be made by conventional manufacturing but can be made through 3D printing.
It is still going to be quite some time before the full scope of where 3D printing is commercially viable will be known. It's a big circle that needs to be filled: understanding the manufacturing strengths and weaknesses; plus especially getting enough design engineers knowing when it's best applied and where it's best to begin designs using it.
It's still an immature manufacturing process.
dj
It is interesting in that 3D printing is "additive" rather than subtractive.
A machinist will start with a block of metal and mill/turn/drill away at it until the part is revealed. He will thread and press parts together. A welder will add material until he has what he seeks. A fabricator will weld, machine, bond, laminate, and anything else that efficiently gets him where he is headed! In the future, fabricators will all have 3D printers as one more tool in the arsenal.
A machinist will start with a block of metal and mill/turn/drill away at it until the part is revealed. He will thread and press parts together. A welder will add material until he has what he seeks. A fabricator will weld, machine, bond, laminate, and anything else that efficiently gets him where he is headed! In the future, fabricators will all have 3D printers as one more tool in the arsenal.
When dealing with expensive alloys, the material cost savings through the "additive" process vs removing and throwing away the removed material can be part of the equation of competitive advantage. Not commonly the case, but for some alloy systems it can be.
Threading and pressing parts together, unless needed for assembly into a larger object, can also be an area where additive may provide an advantage - all the machining for the threading and pressing may possibly be achieved through a monolithic additively produced part.
What gets really fun is when you can produce a part through additive manufacturing that cannot be produced any other way.
With your orthotics example above, I'm a bit surprised they couldn't "tweek" the design. I'm guessing that the unit they use has a closed architecture and they aren't able to access the build files as you would imagine they should. The point of use 3D machines in medical are kind of a whole world unto themselves.
One of the huge advantages of 3D is when working in an environment where your product and process requires being "validated". That process involves testing output product and there is really no better way to produce multiple iterations of a design, test, tweek, retest, (as many times as needed) then validate for production. This whole subject is way beyond this thread....
dj
Did you use a Cad program to draw the clutch handle to input into your 3d printer? Or does Raymarine publish detail Cad drawings of their wheel pilot parts?
The other advantage of 3D should be files sharing; like sharing plans, but one step higher. For example, if my second example in post 24 had included a print file, then anyone could push a few buttons, although that project is dead simple by several different mechanical means. But it is the idea of sharing.
But many of the projects in the thread were fundamentally one-off, or at best, very-few off. Not all of them. The knobs I turned would fit most F-24: however, the dealers do sell something that works and the 3D versions that I have read of didn't hold up well underfoot, so probably not much interest, and a full set is a LOT of printing.
I have another project in mind (a companionway seat), but that won't be a print candidate; probably just boring carpentry. Wood is actually a pretty good structural material thanks to millions of years of unforgiving field testing in trees. Light, stiff, and not so hard that it will chip anything. Cheap and dead easy to work.
But many of the projects in the thread were fundamentally one-off, or at best, very-few off. Not all of them. The knobs I turned would fit most F-24: however, the dealers do sell something that works and the 3D versions that I have read of didn't hold up well underfoot, so probably not much interest, and a full set is a LOT of printing.
I have another project in mind (a companionway seat), but that won't be a print candidate; probably just boring carpentry. Wood is actually a pretty good structural material thanks to millions of years of unforgiving field testing in trees. Light, stiff, and not so hard that it will chip anything. Cheap and dead easy to work.
jssailem
SBO Weather and Forecasting Forum Jim & John
- Oct 22, 2014
- 24,853
Good Question, @heritage. I gave a clutch to Rick of I3dGear. He produced a CAD drawing. We discussed my observations of the clutch function. He produced a clutch. I took it to test. It was an improvement, but it still jumps off the hold-nob in rough water (conditions that produce rudder movement - like a following sea or 1-meter waves). Not sure there is a solution that will work. It needs a lock that can be easily released when you need to take manual control. I have made it work with a rubber band.
Within the realm of 3D printing polymers, yes file sharing is quite straight forward.
However, once you go into the world of 3D printing metals, that's not so easy. Think about how much smoke you generate when welding. There are a lot of machine specific aspects of how they handle the smoke. Then, are you using a LASER or E-beam 3D printer (the two most common)? If a LASER, what are your optics? Gaussian? Top Hat? Other? There are a number of other variables within the machines themselves that become much more critical to a successful output.
There are companies out there now that are "job shops". Bring your desired product to them, they will build the parts you want. Not many of them that I know of yet, but they are coming. I think your small job shops will more likely start using those kinds of services before investing in the equipment.
I've always thought a business that can produce parts that are no longer available could make a business of manufacturing those old parts using 3D printing. You sure couldn't do it with traditional manufacturing techniques.
dj