How long until we see 3D printed components in boat building?

As to pixel/3d representation, it is possible to do this somewhat. But what you need is are a pair of lightfield imagers arranged in stereoscopic mode and held there with precision mechanics. That costs money.

And from that you still only get a surface file for simple objects

the technology for putting this on a moving boat just isn't there today and won't be for at least 5 years. Kurzweil once said that most people overestimate what can be done in 5 years and underestimate what can be done in 10.

You guys are not up to speed on the technologies of mfg and are engaged in overestimated wishful thinking

 

errr - excuse me ! It was you who explained why it was economically viable for the Navy to "print their own" parts ?

 

I guess the US navy doesnt know what they are doing either

 

And a guy on a Navy ship can pick up the phone or shoot off an email to a qualified engineer who will not only help him design the part, but will insure that the part he makes is appropriate for the installation, structurally adequate, and is made from the proper materials and is not going to fail or be a hazard.

Do you think the average Joe in his garage or on a boat at sea is going to be willing to pay more than $100/hour to get a qualified engineer to look over his work and sign it off? Not in a zillion years. If you make something that isn't properly designed and analyzed to insure structural integrity, you are liable if it breaks and someone is hurt. If your insurance company knew you were doing this they would drop your policy like a hot potato.

If I were a manufacturer of one of these machines I would be very careful as to who I sold them to. If a part comes off of one of these machines and it fails, the blood sucking lawyers will be suing the manufacturer along with anybody else they can sue. While the part quality resulting from these very expensive machines is very good, all it will take is a batch of contaminated or a bit dirty material and the stuff coming out of the machine will be full of voids and defects. Keeping the metal powder clean is something that the typical person using one of these things won't understand or care about. All it will take is a small bit of dirt to create a stress concentration inside a part and you have a recipe for disaster.

Bottom line is that right now these machines are being used by knowledgeable manufacturing companies that are backed up by experienced professional engineers and they are having very good results. This is sort of like giving professional chefs excellent equipment and ingredients and have them produce a gourmet meal. Putting this kind of technology in the hands of every back yard hammer and chisel mechanic that thinks he knows what he is doing is much like giving a Cuisinart to a bachelor who can't break an egg and expecting the same gourmet dinner just because he has the same equipment. That simply isn't going to happen.

These machines will come down in price, and companies like mine will buy them and produce parts for prototypes and this will be great. And some machine shops may buy them and assuming they can keep the machine busy, make some money off of it, but I just don't see this becoming something as ubiquitous as a welder or a band saw that is in every garage.

 

Well, no - it takes clout to get approval to shoot an email off to an engineer if you are in the navy, especially if you are at sea - and most likely it will be to a contractor who will charge by the second, so its got to be very important. Not that it would make getting the handle of the broken officers mess fridge any quicker.


However, what the average guy in the Navy does have, are some brilliant engineers of all disciplines on board every decent sized boat, who would be more than happy to hook their laptop up, print a nylon fridge handle to replace the broken one, (maybe after getting it emailed from the fridge manufacturer) so that the beer doesn't go cold or the serum spoil, or print a washer for the toilet sink so that the place doesn't smell like a brothel after a week at sea, or start a diarrhea epidemic - about a million things that have no legal ramifications at all. - especially if the creator is a qualified person.


Each of these innocuous items would take weeks to procure from inventory, when the ship finally gets to port , and if they can be built at sea, why not.


Its just following in the footsteps of the navies of old, who would take all sorts of timber to sea as ballast, knowing their carpenters could repair a hull, block or spar as required.

 

It takes budget. It takes budget even to get time from that "brilliant engineer onboard". Because his Duty assignment assumes full loading and s/he's getting paid for that skill.

and that "Fridge MFG" who's fridge is Mil-Spec, is also going to charge "by the second" (actually they will charge it as a 'support incident' against the contracted "support services" budget so you need authorization to even send that email) for that file handle.

Now if you want that on your boat, you either
a) need to have the CAD skills yourself
b) have them in your paid crew (which adds AT LEAST a $70k annual premium to that crew member's salary).

So what Boat Manager is going to pay $70k/yr extra for the off chance to save $5k once every 3 years?

 

You need to meet a few real navy people - when you need something fixed, the mechanics and engineers and even general hands can do it with stuff they have to hand, like wire and wood, plastic and paint. You dont need a degree or any Cad expertise to run off basic part on these printers, and there are lots of things that dont have to be milspec.

At sea, if it needs fixing and can be - it gets fixed, like any commercial operation.

You have a strange view of how inflexible the modern Navy is, and you could do with an appreciation of the intelligence and resourcefulness of the guys doing the job.

 

jerry rigging is one thing. But 3D printing isn't Jerry rigging. Its the opposite. And while you don't need CAD expertise to run a part off on the printer, you DO need CAD expertise to design the part.

And even if you use a 3D scanner, you still have to "fixup" the scan as well as the broken section, and that requires CAD expertise.

And it requires time to do.

Now on the ships the navy installs such a device, it will staff that vessel so that there is CAD expertise on board. but given the costs of producing components that way, there still will be Ship's Stores

 

Baltic,

I am glad you are so sure that's necessary. But you might want to contact thingverse and let them know that their business model won't work. And the simplified design program they built to allow pretty much anyone to design something can't work.

It may. Be difficult to persuade them since they made a few million dollars doing exacally what you say can't be done. But you seem to have the tenacity to give it a shot.

 

Is there anything you need on a boat that could be made with that material?
I didn't look at everything on the web site, but it looks completely inappropriate for boat parts, unless you need trinkets to pass out to the natives.

 

Probably not much beyond nicknacks, but the same files can be sent to a DMLS machine and printed in 316 stainless.

 

A) thingverse is hardly offering anything serious for download. Its library has the same basic weakness a lot of OpenSource project have - great starts but lack of followthrough

B) their simplified design tool isn't going to let you design mission critical components. I hold out much more hope for the work the OneShape guys are doing - they are smarter and understand the domain space better (ok and they are friends)

C) I think Thingverse's business model is non-workable I don't believe they will be around in 3 years



And while those files can be sent to a DMLS machine - again is there anything there that is meaningful to a boat? (and that still begs the issue of the Oppty Cost of a $10k DMLS machine on a boat)

 

I will have to look into that book license expiration -that sucks!

Why are you counting opportunity cost of the 3D printer that can make anything and not counting the tooling cost that makes just one specific thing? The point is you pay say $10k up front and you expect a return based on the chance that you don't get payed back soon or ever. Yearly part costs are quite certain. What parts you are going to need is highly unpredictable, hence spending $10k on a tool that makes a specific part costs more than a tool that makes many parts.

You still assume that 3D printed parts cost more. Consider ALL of the costs including tooling and 3D printing is cheaper at boat volumes! Your entire argument assumes some fool spends $10k to $50k making a mold for every part in a boat and does not expect return on that investment. Lets go back to the the original question of the tread -A shop makes a dozen boats a year, they need a part for that boat -how should it be made? Molded, machined, or 3D printed? Obviously it is cheapest to 3D print! How many spares need to be warehoused? zero tools built & maintained ? zero The entire assumption of cheap parts in a warehouse next to an airport is a mistake.

 

Nonsense...

We are getting quotes on an aluminum housing for a small waterjet (think 5 inches by 12 inches) right now (I have quotes in hand) and after 3-5 pieces are made I am ahead if I tool for an aluminum casting as opposed to making the part by additive manufacturing...

If the part can be made by conventional sand casting technology you are way ahead by making it that way as opposed to additive manufacturing right now.

 

Sand casting with no machining to clean up afterword? How are you making the sand casting pastern? How many will be made per year?