Additive manufacturing's impact on subtractive manufacturing - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 72
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    709
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    581

    Default

    When I saw the Baxter robot at a trade show my first thought was "Now there is a real application for a 3D printer!" Robots like people handle tools. Having a premodeled end of arm attachment that you add the appropriate gripper to and then print it out and go would make a lot of sense. Boxing up bottles and need a different gripper when a different bottle comes along, just print it and go.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Alabama
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default

    Additive manufacturing is another technology, not unlike composite materials or CNC machines. It will probably not ever fully replace subtractive methods, it will be used with subtractive manufacturing and you will see more hybrid Additive/subtractive,metal/plastic/electronics combined machines. It will be another tool in the toolbox for producing a specific part if it is deemed beneficial by an engineer (or perhaps the savvy machinist) to use. Right now it is surrounded by hype and some people are being disappointed due to uneducated expectations, but it isn't going away so learn about it or at least be generally aware of it and how it is progressing.

  3. Likes Pete F liked this post
  4. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Alabama
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JNieman View Post
    This is absolute bull shit written by an idiot with no idea of how manufacturing and supply chains -actually- work. You should immediately burn whatever publication saw fit to trust the author enough to publish his vomit.

    I tried to write that as nicely as I could.

    Additive manufacturing is amazing and revolutionary because it opens up doors to design possibilities that didn't exist previously, and revised manufacturing methods for extremely high end components with critically engineered usage and high demands for both material quality as well as part geometry that subtractive and/or welding processes either could not do, or could only do at extremely higher cost, risk, and delivery time.

    While many homes may have an FDM or even DMLS machine in their home for many purposes, and while it -will- have an impact upon supply chains, it will not, ever, approach the condition you relayed in your original post. There are few absolutes in this world but that won't happen within the CENTURY let alone DECADE.

    Count up how many types of raw material it takes to make a dishwasher. Think about how big of a machine it would take to "print" a dishwasher, even if it could magically print it layer by layer in the already-assembled state. Now think about where you would store all that raw material. Now think about how big your current apartment or house is, and how much smaller it just got because of that machine and its requirements.

    Pure bullshit.

    No one in the industry is even GUESSING that it MIGHT happen. No one is even trying to! There are great articles written about AUGMENTING supply chains by placing printers for some components, to reduce storage space by having as-needed capacity, but it's nothing in the order of consumer products for the home. No one is even purporting the possibilities being close to printing entire complicated home appliances like dishwashers.

    Ludicrous.
    Pretty much sums up my views.

    Amazing technology which I actually like...I've had many injection molded prototypes done and it's been very useful for me but......

    The endless ridiculous bullshit completely grinds my gears.

    I had a big argument with a guy who claimed everything would be 3D printed in 5 years time.....I said, like even paper clips?...railroad track?

    I feel sorry for the machine dealers who have to deal with the nonsensical expectations.

    Rant over...LOL

    Alan

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, England
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RC99 View Post
    I think it will be a fair way away, but it will happen. I see they are now printing concrete structures.. Strength might be a bit dicky, but they are doing it..
    With the best possible conditions for depositing concrete it still needs re-enforcing as it has very poor strength in tension, if steel wasn't necessary for good structural integrity in buildings it wouldn't be used as it's expensive.
    They're 3d printing death traps!

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,348
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    128
    Likes (Received)
    1015

    Default

    There will be disruptive technology from now until we disappear of this little rock. The ability to predict what it will be accurately incidentally should be able to make you enough money that you can just sit in your 3D printed arm chair sipping a 3D printed soda while watch whatever you please on your VR machine.

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    71
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    36

    Default

    The real game changer is fast and automated transportation. Amazon shipping has gone from weeks, to days, to 24 hours and now to 4 hours in certain locations. Once self-driving cars become widespread the cost of shipping will become nearly irrelevant.

    Having individual replicators sitting idle for 95%+ of the day in every household is not efficient. Even if additive manufacturing were to replace traditional methods, products woulds still be made to order in factories and get shipped to their final destination.



    I don't even think addative manufacturing will become ubiquous either. Dedicated machinery will always be cheaper and more efficient than general purpose equipment. I don't think we will ever see a day where a 3d printer can produce 10,000,000 units more efficiently than injection moulding.

    Transportation, inventory, and warehouse management are where real progress is being made, and the progression is so natural people don't even realize its happening.

  8. Likes Scottl liked this post
  9. #27
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default

    The best way to think about this one is as follows:

    What happened with 2D print?

    It depends how you look at print, from a consumer standpoint, has inkjet and laser printing superseded offset lithography?

    __________________

    Well, if you look at the market from a novice perspective, it might be possible to argue that digital printers did put a big dent in commercial printers' markets. Office multifunction printers took a lot of the work away... but in truth the process of business correspondence moved to a weightless and digital format, and that's what changed the market. However, in terms of the volumes required for the areas where print is still used, the industrial processes are doing fine, but digital is used for proofing. Packaging, signage, books, tickets... many things are printed and the high-volume commercial systems are the most efficient. Litho and flexo are not going away at all.

    On a more sophisticated level, photolithography is doing fine, since that's *how you make microchips*. Offset lithographic printing of documents is still doing fine, but for a manufacturer the big market is now semiconductor production.

    Forming materials out of voxels is *always* going to be slower than carving a chunk of pre-formed material, even if you can move the laser beam / nozzle with incredible speed and accuracy, the practicalities of it are that subtractive cold-working will always be a shorter and easier path to take, especially if precision and consistency is the goal.

    __________

    So the market will change, not just due to the features of different types of machining, but because what people will want produced will change. The whole technological landscape will change.

    I would guarantee that the precision heavy-duty parts required for commercial high-volume additive machining will be achieved using subtractively machined parts — just like the lithographically produced microchips and photo-etched PCBs in a laser or inkjet printer rely on "old" print technology, the new machines of the future will rely on "oldschool" industrial precision machining. The materials employed will not just be steel and brass, they'll be a whole range of very difficult ceramics.

    _________

    However, certain default jobs and chunks of the market will disappear. Steel mould-making for injection moulding of plastics, that's a strong candidate for being replaced by precision rapid manufacturing.

    During the slow transition from technology approach, machining shops will employ both types of machines, but the quantities will change. I'd expect that in 25 years' time it'll be considered fairly normal to have an all-additive workflow in most machine shops, or combined additive-subtractive multifunction machines, just like many commercial printers today don't use lithography and instead employ a digital system.

  10. #28
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete F View Post
    I can't see why not. There are numerous concrete printers out there ... It just so happens that they're typically used to print something in the shape of a house, but upload a water tank to the same printer and that's what will pop out. Or a pool. Or a sewer pipe. Or a low load bridge. Etc etc. Clearly as the strength or other engineering requirements (for example porosity) increase, the likelihood of being able to successfully 3D print it decreases.

    Nevertheless, there's nothing to prevent 3D printing being used in conjunction with other technologies, so for example I will sometimes 3D print a part and subsequently also machine it, treating it a bit like one may treat a casting. There's no reason that steel and other traditional materials couldn't be incorporated in a concrete print, with the extruder tool path simply arranged so that it didn't collide with the steel.

    As a general rule if the medium is such that it can be made into some form of fluid and then extruded, then it can be printed using similar layer deposition technologies. That could be anything from chocolate and various other foods, to plastics, human cells, concrete, silicones, and so it goes on. In layman's terms, if you can imagine getting that material in a tube and being able to squeeze it out, you can print it "reasonably" easily.

    What some people who have never had exposure to this technology don't seem to appreciate, is that the majority of 3D printed parts are in fact hollow with a honeycomb or similar pattern reinforcement printed inside them. It makes the structure relatively rigid, while saving a lot in weight and materials. So when someone quacks on about t=something they clearly don't know about and claim they can make it on a Robodrill or whatever, well no, you can't. That's why 3D printed parts are increasingly being used in the aerospace industry, as the weight savings can be significant.
    This is quite correct. It's not a direct competitor for another process, the process has got completely different rules and a completely different approach to design and production. If you can injection mould it, it'll probably be easier to do the job the conventional way.

    I very much doubt that 3D printed SLS/SLM stainless steel screws will be cheaper or better than the ones we use today — but perhaps 3D print could reduce the number of screws that we use.

    In the example of a 3D printed concrete house, or a bath, or a sewer pipe... the point really is that they could all be printed as a single integrated object. The level of integration possible using additive and composite processes is the really big change, and the processes allow the production of complex forms that were previously impossible.

    Eliminating all those fixings and all the assembly can be a huge saving, in the case of buildings this could be a huge improvement, not just in terms of labour, but in terms of removing the potential for error and the difficulty of surveying & quality control.

    Also, in the case of buildings, thermal conductivity and weight are huge issues which arbitrary-formed additive production can help hugely with by the inclusion of hollow structures.

    _______

    The biggest irony about everybody owning inkjet printers is that it's caused people to question "what am I printing". There are more inkjet printers out there sitting idle than prints being printed, and half the items being printed are aeroplane boarding passes.

    That's what's good about what will happen when everybody owns a printer capable of moderate quality thermoplastic parts. They'll realise that... they don't really want loads of disposable plastic crap, and plastic is pretty weak. Once people boil it down to necessity rather than impulse-buying, a lot of novelty stuff simply ceases to exist. Absolutely people will print little 3D models of their kids, and personalise their handbags. It's less likely that somebody will homebrew a knife handle, and even less likely that they'll do such a good job of it that it'll outperform a mass produced knife handle. Knowing people, a good 75% of the DIY homebrew knife handles will be shaped like a dragon, with flashing LED eyes that don't work, and shed plastic chippings into your food before falling apart and almost cutting your finger off. One in 100 DIYers will produce work of such ingenuity they'll end up pursuing manufacturing as a career, and they'll be only too glad to move up to the serious production tools, and employ serious production people. Kickstarter is good for business.

    We could do with a lot more of that in terms of people's production thinking if you ask me: "should I really be making this?" rather than "must turn over sales".

    Take the sale away... by giving everybody their own machine, and only the question remains. All those horrid promotional trinkets... people won't print them at home. They don't really want them in the first place.

    _________

    It'll change manufacturing a lot. The politics will change hugely, but it won't take professionalism out of it, or kill off the old processes. It'll just make life more complicated.

    In the 2D print world, expert designers exist, are in high demand, and produce work that can be got out of a machine. Easier said than done, requires expertise. The whole process is driven by expertise, and that's not something you can sell it bottles. Even though people can print at home, the majority of commercial print is produced in a facility staffed by professionals, designed by a professional, and sold in a finished form, the object's integrity and right to exist having been investigated at length. Screwing up half a million quid's worth of food packaging... only a fool would DIY that rather than pay a proper agency, there's no taking away the fact that's something that's a full-time job for teams of expert people to handle. There's no simplifying the process in the real world, and more convenient tools aren't necessarily more convenient (or cheaper) on a massive scale.

    However, you can definitely expect some wild-looking 3D printed perfume bottle caps. Wouldn't be surprised if those already exist.

    _________

    However, there's certainly a hell of a lot of atrocious cheapskate-bodged DIY stuff out there as a result of photoshop-hooligans, who complain to printers "yea... but it came out of my home machine how I want it... I just need 10,000 the same".

    Be prepared to see very expensive machinery bodged by idiots using cheese-like 3D printed parts. That's the real fear of "giving the client the tools", to be honest, cowboy behaviour spreads like the plague.

  11. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,805
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3335
    Likes (Received)
    3108

    Default

    Additive manufacturing is great for some types of prototypes and for things like custom prosthetics but it is neither fast nor conducive to good surface finish. I do not see it as ever replacing casting, molding, stamping, and machining on the scale predicted. As an example, injection molding can spit out precisely made plastic parts at a rate that a 3D printer could never match and with a much better finish.

    I think the professor has watched too many episodes of Star Trek and The Jetsons and is indulging in the kind of futurist fantasy that so many academics seem to fall prey to.

  12. Likes hanermo liked this post
  13. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,062
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    It Depends on tolerances / cost, just like manufacturing aka machining.

    1.
    As-is, the 3D printers are essentially useless.
    Basic reason is that resolution = power of three vs speed.

    So, a 5 cm cube object == 1 hour, at 0.1 mm resolution.
    Doing the same at 0.002 (5 times more) ==> 125 times more or 125 hours.

    2.
    Cost is high.
    Materials are somewhat expensive.
    A 3D printed object had material needs that are more complex than injection molded, today 10x higher.
    It is reasonable to expect costs to go down.

    3.
    Usability.
    Molded or machined/molded composites are 10-100x more accurate and strong.
    This is critical.

    An injection-molded plastic "widget" is typically 2-10 times more accurate, 10-20x better surface finish, at 10-50x less cost.
    At 5-10x more strength/cost, and 100-100x faster.
    THIS IS CRITICAL.

    Strength/accuracy/cost makes 3D printed stuff a non-starter for 99%-90% (medium-future) of *commercial, profitable* stuff.

    We can make 3D printers that
    1. incorporate fused-metal inlays (strength),
    2. finish surfaces via laser (melt, fuse), or mechanical process like router or milling
    3. use variable-orifice nozzles for faster deposits (100 x faster is definitely possible)

    Example.
    A 3D printer/5-axis milling machine/laser fuser/baker/oven, with painter/powder coater, is not hard to do.
    Some blowing, cleaning, hazmat management,etc.
    It could make, imo, (future system I could conceivably make physically), a 1 micron resolution 5 cm cube in == 10-20 minutes (fast setting resin).(complexity).
    Cost of such system, approx 50k retail in production (100k qty) or 200k industrially (1k qty).
    A 50k injection molding system can produce equivalent objects 20x less cost.
    No-one will pay 10x more for MOST STUFF.

    ACID TEST:
    The 5 cm cube object will cost about 6-10$ to produce, bulk cost of supplies/machine.
    Injection molding the plastic, 0.10$ plus inserts/extra work, call it == 0.80$/finished unit (0.40 in qty).

    10-50x less.

    Example.
    3D printers are Very Good for Very Expensive specialty apps.
    Rocket nozzles, sintered metal, relatively slow (30 hours print), relatively valuable (50.000-200.000$ each).
    Intake manifold test unit, turbocharger, 10 hours, 5000$.

    And so-so for test, samples, likely to be good-to-very good, soon.

    Example.
    3D printers are likely to dominate some specialty apps.
    Custom organs.
    Tooth implants.
    Liver.
    Medical stuff one-per-lifetime, etc.
    Space stuff: print at mars- no factory available. Cost immaterial to survive.
    Etc.
    30-300 hours vs never is Really Fast.

    Some, few, things may actually get made with 3d printers in bulk, imo.
    None exist, today. Imo, afaik.
    I am a student a history, a futurologist, and a student of these things.
    I saw a lot of, participated-in, a lot, of moores law.

    As such, I have a high level of confidence *some things* will get 3d printed, for some reasons.
    With some type of printers.

    Later in time (3-5 years) I also expect, fully, a lot of things will get printed with high quality 3d printers.
    I may or might be participating in the making/producing of such printers.
    These would be things like submicron dots/sublimation/fused-materials, etc.
    Multiple-nozzles/variable-nozzles-multi-axis nozzles etc. None exist today, afaik.
    Soon after, near-nanoparticle stuff mostly overcoming the limitations, along with advanced sw.

  14. #31
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    I think the professor has watched too many episodes of Star Trek and The Jetsons and is indulging in the kind of futurist fantasy that so many academics seem to fall prey to.
    I dunno, I've been looking at this: http://gramaziokohler.arch.ethz.ch/w...chung/275.html



    That's pretty clever, right!

    Then just scale that up and use bigger rocks and thicker steel cables, and a crane/gantry + industrial robot arm instead of a forklift + small robot arm.

  15. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default

    What if instead of just displacing subtractive manufacturing, 3D printing actually has a place in assisting subtractive manufacturing and making it more efficient? Combined additive/subtractive metal machines may be obscenely expensive, but if you had a metal printer making the base form that could be post-machined for precision, machine shops would still be in business.

    Or just take a look at the people using 3D printing for soft jaws. It can increase throughput of small-run jobs significantly by letting the precision machines run production parts while a 3D printer kicks out the jigs and fixtures that don't need to be quite as strong or exact.

  16. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    6,079
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    238
    Likes (Received)
    4891

    Default

    How long would it take to print that soft jaw?
    Cad time has to be about the same, not sure on material cost, machine must cost at least $10/hr to let run in the corner by itself.
    Not thinking you can pour serious HP into the part being held by this but interesting.
    Bob

  17. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vifa View Post
    Hi,

    What do you guys think the scenario with additive manufacturing will be in 10 years ? - 20 years ?

    Will it eventually replace subtractive manufacturing ?

    A scenario described by a professor in an article I just read suggested that the inventory of every household in the future would consist of 3D printers. This would eventually stop mass production and close down sub suppliers, eliminate storage and transportation. Every family would be able to print new things from downloadable CAD drawings; a TV or perhaps a dishwasher. Discontinued or out of stock spareparts would be easy to print in a second.

    I am concerned about this scenario, no company or individual would every be able to protect their copyrighted products or ideas. The elimination of production facilities and physical shops would result in huge numbers of unemployed people.

    A new industrial revolution - a new great depression ?
    You have to ask three questions and find answers for them. Can it do the same thing faster, cheaper, and more accurately. if all three answers are yes it will take over. if only two maybe, if only one no.

    dee
    ;-D

  18. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    To event think that machining has any chance against 3d printing is ridiculous. What makes you think that manufacturers will want to pay your machinist wages, when they can hire someone with zero experience to load metal powder into a 3d printer and press a button to create perfect parts, with forms impossible to do with machining, all in one go without having to reposition it, in a reconfigurable machine that can print any other part, while with cnc you have to have all sorts of tooling and different drills? And that's if it so happens that you can make the part you want to make. What if you want to make a gun barrel? Guess what you're SOOL because neither your cnc mill
    or lathe that you paid 100k for can do it, you need a deep drilling machine with a deep drilling bit. You want to rifle that? guess what you need a rifling machine. Have you seen the size of the hammer forging machines? The price? All of that is about to be made obsolete by a single machine.

    CAN IT DO IT CHEAPER?

    Home - Aurora Labs 3D is selling a steel 3d printer for 30,000 usd which is cheaper than a lot of cnc machines. How much do cnc machines cost? They're so expensive the company's don't even post the price on their website.

    This machine prints in multi materials. There's 3d printers that print in tungsten carbide. This machine prints steel, titanium, and others. Other machines print kevlar and carbon fiber. People have printed pla and used it as an investment in lost investment casting.

    CAN IT DO IT MORE ACCURATELY?

    3D MicroPrint GmbH is printing at 5 microns. That is way more accurate than the 100 microns that cnc does. Post processing with sandblasting smooths out rough outer surfaces.

    CAN IT DO IT FASTER?

    Maybe not right now, But the fact is that printing makes the whole part all in one go, that it can create several parts all at once side by side, that it can create molds for casting. Also the technology is progressing extremely rapidly and speeds will undoubtedly increase. Theres machines that work with multiple lasers at the same time and print extremely fast.

    cnc machines are so heavy you can't even move them. In a few years machining will be an obsolete dinosaur.

  19. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jsmith3322 View Post
    that it can create molds for casting.
    Casting? you said casting? that is waaaay less advanced than CNC, obviously there is a crack in your logic ....if one has this magical thing why go back to the 19th century?

    You missed a huge point. i said if you can do the SAME thing...

    can you make a part that is the same size and the same precision and cost less. then you have a winner. do not pick a machine that can achieve different characteristics on different scales. a $30,000 CNC will have a work area of about 5+ cubic feet, and can hold 0.0005" or about 13 microns all day. and remove a hell of a of material per minute. will the 30K 3D printer be able to do the same part with the same precision faster and cheaper? Will a 1 micron precision 3D printer do 5 cubic feet and work as fast as the CNC and be only 30K? apples to apples, then you have answers, comparing one aspect of one system to another aspect of another system is meaningless, then you throw in the casting bit ...ay...

    Yes in an optimistic future all you have to do is feed dust to the printer, till then you may have to cast iron if you want a lot of parts fast and cheap. I am no futurist, but when i was 10 years old they promised colonies on the moon, and flying cars and personal robots...i am still looking for my own personal Sophia Loren or Elizabeth Taylor looking robot.

    dee
    ;-D

  20. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    19
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsipo View Post
    Casting? you said casting? that is waaaay less advanced than CNC, obviously there is a crack in your logic ....if one has this magical thing why go back to the 19th century?

    You missed a huge point. i said if you can do the SAME thing...

    can you make a part that is the same size and the same precision and cost less. then you have a winner. do not pick a machine that can achieve different characteristics on different scales. a $30,000 CNC will have a work area of about 5+ cubic feet, and can hold 0.0005" or about 13 microns all day. and remove a hell of a of material per minute. will the 30K 3D printer be able to do the same part with the same precision faster and cheaper? Will a 1 micron precision 3D printer do 5 cubic feet and work as fast as the CNC and be only 30K? apples to apples, then you have answers, comparing one aspect of one system to another aspect of another system is meaningless, then you throw in the casting bit ...ay...

    Yes in an optimistic future all you have to do is feed dust to the printer, till then you may have to cast iron if you want a lot of parts fast and cheap. I am no futurist, but when i was 10 years old they promised colonies on the moon, and flying cars and personal robots...i am still looking for my own personal Sophia Loren or Elizabeth Taylor looking robot.

    dee
    ;-D


    It's so funny watching the machinists panic. You're already barely making ends meet as it is.

    Investment casting is used routinely in industry.


    The 3d printer CAN make the SAME thing. The CNC can't, because the cnc is subject to HUMAN ERROR.



    The cnc is a lot more expensive because it requires machinists wages to keep running.

    The 3d printer is cheaper because it requires no machinists. Also cnc requires SEVERAL machines which take a lot of floorspace and even more machinists to run. Not to mention the logistical problems of machines so heavy they can't be moved except by forklift.

    The 3d printer doesnt create with the SAME precision as cnc, it has MUCH BETTER precision of 5 microns. You saying that cnc has 0.0005" is bs. cnc tolerance is .002 inches at the very most. That's 50 micron and that's with very specialized machines. Read this so you actually get some education: http://www2.mae.ufl.edu/designlab/La...Tolerances.pdf

    I just destroyed you logically. Keep saying that the world is flat machinist, that's not going to change the reality of things.

  21. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jsmith3322 View Post
    It's so funny watching the machinists panic. You're already barely making ends meet as it is.

    Investment casting is used routinely in industry.


    The 3d printer CAN make the SAME thing. The CNC can't, because the cnc is subject to HUMAN ERROR.



    The cnc is a lot more expensive because it requires machinists wages to keep running.

    The 3d printer is cheaper because it requires no machinists.

    The 3d printer doesnt create with the SAME precision as cnc, it has MUCH BETTER precision of 5 microns. You saying that cnc has 0.0005" is bs. cnc tolerance is .002 inches at the very most. That's 50 micron and that's with very specialized machines. Read this so you actually get some education: http://www2.mae.ufl.edu/designlab/La...Tolerances.pdf
    I am not a machinist...i do not panic, you sound like a marketeer for a 3d printer company.

    just let you know.

    dee
    ;-D

  22. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    AZ, USA
    Posts
    6
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by McCoop View Post
    What if instead of just displacing subtractive manufacturing, 3D printing actually has a place in assisting subtractive manufacturing and making it more efficient? Combined additive/subtractive metal machines may be obscenely expensive, but if you had a metal printer making the base form that could be post-machined for precision, machine shops would still be in business.

    Or just take a look at the people using 3D printing for soft jaws. It can increase throughput of small-run jobs significantly by letting the precision machines run production parts while a 3D printer kicks out the jigs and fixtures that don't need to be quite as strong or exact.
    Hey, that story is about me...
    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    How long would it take to print that soft jaw?
    Cad time has to be about the same, not sure on material cost, machine must cost at least $10/hr to let run in the corner by itself.
    Not thinking you can pour serious HP into the part being held by this but interesting.
    Bob
    5-6 hours if i remember correctly. The main benefit of a nylon soft jaw is that you really have no chance of scratching an otherwise finished part.

  23. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1353
    Likes (Received)
    2710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    How long would it take to print that soft jaw?
    Cad time has to be about the same, not sure on material cost, machine must cost at least $10/hr to let run in the corner by itself.
    Not thinking you can pour serious HP into the part being held by this but interesting.
    Bob
    Fixture components is actually one situation where I keep an eye on things to see when it'll make sense to use some type of additive machine to make them. We do a lot of low volume weird parts. We have a couple different size 5 axis trunnion VMCs and a 5axis profiling machine with multi-axis head and a mill-turn machine that pretty well covers all the oddball shit we would have to make.

    But we still sometimes have to deal with holding weird-ass parts with weird-ass geometry in order to make an oddly located feature that's otherwise unreachable in those machines, or at least, may be on the '6th side' that's blocked in the vise/chuck/jig plate/fixture. I could have a FDM/FFF/DMLS machine make the mating jaw/fixture base before the material shows up after ordering. A quick check against the model via the Romer Arm and bang.

    If you open up to DMLS, you get to play with all sorts of quite-hard nylons and plastics that'll take a decent bit of HP - but you're right, you would probably have to keep the cutting forces down, which isn't too big of a deal. Especially if it's only doing a few last ops with the bulk of the work being done traditionally.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •