Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #466689 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-07-13 02:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 379 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-07-03 09:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. leongdentalsf@gmail.com - 2017-07-03 06:23 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. leongdentalsf@gmail.com - 2017-07-03 06:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:26 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-03 11:09 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-03 09:54 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-03 18:02 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-03 16:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-04 12:10 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-04 11:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-07-05 13:49 +1000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-04 21:31 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-07-05 16:03 +1000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 17:04 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 14:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 18:28 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 20:57 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-03 14:57 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 00:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 20:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 02:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-04 21:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-05 08:52 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 23:30 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:35 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 10:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-07 08:03 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:09 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 23:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:08 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-04 09:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-04 20:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:20 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-05 08:54 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 18:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 23:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-05 17:27 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-06 06:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 16:34 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 02:09 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 06:19 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-07 11:43 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-07-07 15:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-07 15:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-07-07 16:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-07 18:18 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-07-08 08:46 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-07-08 08:53 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-08 08:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-08 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-08 11:13 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-08 18:50 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-08 16:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-08 19:47 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-08 18:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-08 21:27 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 07:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-09 17:44 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:48 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 07:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 16:30 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 13:15 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 16:27 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:46 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 18:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 21:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 22:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-07-11 19:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 02:24 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 22:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 20:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-12 07:28 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-07-12 12:43 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2017-07-12 07:46 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 20:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 20:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:47 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 15:32 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 19:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 16:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 05:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-12 18:39 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 21:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-13 20:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:22 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-14 11:55 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-07-13 08:01 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:03 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:50 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 12:53 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 17:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 16:15 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-16 15:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 17:00 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 09:06 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:23 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 17:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-17 09:46 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:16 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-12 04:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 07:04 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:48 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 06:50 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 05:51 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 02:55 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 15:34 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 19:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 16:24 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:36 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 06:40 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-16 16:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:02 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:32 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-18 21:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:08 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 01:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 06:23 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 03:35 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 05:56 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 10:18 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-07-20 11:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 20:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 16:40 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-07-20 17:04 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-07-21 12:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 19:15 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-07-20 17:25 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-20 17:41 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 20:43 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 20:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-21 07:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 11:33 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:39 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 13:02 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:03 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 09:43 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-13 09:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:37 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 10:58 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:18 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-14 13:59 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:55 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 13:04 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:12 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 03:13 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 07:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 12:03 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 20:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. edward.ming.lee@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 19:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 04:00 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 12:59 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:13 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 01:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-20 03:15 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. edward.ming.lee@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 13:52 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 01:41 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 02:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:57 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 13:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:06 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 14:06 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 04:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:33 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 16:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 21:27 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 22:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:45 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. edward.ming.lee@gmail.com - 2017-07-16 10:35 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:09 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:46 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 22:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 21:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:38 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 17:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 20:26 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 20:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 22:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 00:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 04:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 06:34 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 16:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-19 00:00 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 02:42 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 02:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 08:00 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 09:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 17:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 02:24 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 02:30 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 13:21 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-14 09:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-14 12:04 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 12:05 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-16 10:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-19 02:15 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 10:46 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-10 06:48 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:59 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:28 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:32 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 19:38 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:55 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 12:25 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-07-11 13:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 19:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:33 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 03:29 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 01:22 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 05:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 00:40 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:53 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:56 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 23:06 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:47 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 22:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-07-07 13:41 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-05 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-04 20:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:15 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 06:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-07-03 18:35 -0800
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:38 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:13 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 08:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 10:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 22:15 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2017-07-10 10:43 +0300
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-10 06:55 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-10 21:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-07-10 21:03 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 15:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 13:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 15:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:01 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:26 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:40 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 17:22 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-10 16:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 19:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-13 20:17 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 21:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 15:47 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 20:53 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:05 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:25 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 15:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 20:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-07-12 17:53 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 11:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 04:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-07-13 02:57 -0700
Page 1 of 19 [1] 2 3 … 19 Next page →
| From | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400 |
| Subject | Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. |
| Message-ID | <ojdd7h$4li$1@dont-email.me> |
An article from 2015: 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 p.m. EST November 12, 2015 http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the home, an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, 3D-printed car. And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully 3D-printed automobile. This would revolutionize the industry, obviously. The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission. This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor: How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be accomplished by 3D-printing. Bob Clark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital launchers, to 'flying cars'. This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: Nanotech: from air to space. https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 09:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5hr6B.159800$qL3.83502@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #466689 |
On 07/03/2017 08:31 AM, Robert Clark wrote: > But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact > considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the > home, an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, > 3D-printed car. > And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully > 3D-printed automobile. For a hobbyist trying to design/build their own electric vehicle acquiring or fabricating the chassis is literally the least difficult part of the job. Why would you want to make it _more_ difficult > This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor: > > How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA Why bother, it's not like high performance electric motors are rare. > Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be > accomplished by 3D-printing. Insisting that every part of a homebrew EV also be 3D printed at home from one's personal 3D printer is a tits-on-a-bull project for turbodorks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | leongdentalsf@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 06:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a3814751-577f-4637-922a-22773c6a4650@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #466690 |
On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 6:04:10 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote: > On 07/03/2017 08:31 AM, Robert Clark wrote: > > > But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact > > considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the > > home, an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, > > 3D-printed car. > > And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully > > 3D-printed automobile. > > For a hobbyist trying to design/build their own electric vehicle > acquiring or fabricating the chassis is literally the least difficult > part of the job. Why would you want to make it _more_ difficult > > > This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor: > > > > How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA > > Why bother, it's not like high performance electric motors are rare. > > > Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be > > accomplished by 3D-printing. > > Insisting that every part of a homebrew EV also be 3D printed at home > from one's personal 3D printer is a tits-on-a-bull project for turbodorks. Yes, 3D printed aluminum would be too expensive and unreliable. Much cheaper to die cast.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | leongdentalsf@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 06:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e1b9b386-11f5-45ff-9b8d-7af83b62904c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #466689 |
On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 5:31:25 AM UTC-7, Robert Clark wrote: > An article from 2015: > > 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 > p.m. EST November 12, 2015 > http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ > > Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but > none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. > > This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its > high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. > > But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact > considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the home, > an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, 3D-printed > car. > And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully > 3D-printed automobile. > > This would revolutionize the industry, obviously. Yes, everybody should build their own car, DIY. > > The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission. Why would you need transmission? Tesla uses gear, no transmission. My Maxwell 2020 use wheel hub motors, no transmission and no gear.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-06 09:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ojldic$l4o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #466694 |
leongdentalsf@gmail.com wrote on 7/3/2017 9:20 AM: > On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 5:31:25 AM UTC-7, Robert Clark wrote: >> An article from 2015: >> >> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >> >> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >> >> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >> >> But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact >> considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the home, >> an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, 3D-printed >> car. >> And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully >> 3D-printed automobile. >> >> This would revolutionize the industry, obviously. > > Yes, everybody should build their own car, DIY. > >> >> The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission. > > Why would you need transmission? Tesla uses gear, no transmission. My Maxwell 2020 use wheel hub motors, no transmission and no gear. Gears are used so the engine and wheels can turn at different speeds and achieve optimum torque and performance for a given weight. The Tesla motor spins at a max rate over 10,000 RPM (don't recall the exact number) while the wheels turn at around 400 RPM at 60 MPH. At 400 RPM the motor wouldn't have much power. Also, mounting the motors in the hubs affects the sprung/unsprung weight ratio greatly impacting the ride quality. Hub motors are *not* the right way to build an electric vehicle unless it's a forklift maybe. I don't get your reference to a Maxwell 2020. Is that an imaginary car or do you mean a 1920 car? I couldn't find any mention of an electric Maxwell. The present Maxwell company only makes ultracapacitors. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 11:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IsSdnSw8ibuu8cfEnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #466689 |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: > An article from 2015: > > 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 > p.m. EST November 12, 2015 > http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ > > Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but > none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. > > This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its > high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. > [snip] > > Bob Clark > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize > 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital > launchers, to 'flying cars'. > This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: > > Nanotech: from air to space. > https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts http://www.geadditive.com/ -- Chisolm Republic of Texas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 09:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ggtklclmgt7eqprt47eg6s94ihhoklajkh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #466715 |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: > >> An article from 2015: >> >> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >> >> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >> >> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >> >[snip] >> >> Bob Clark >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >> >> Nanotech: from air to space. >> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? > >Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts > >http://www.geadditive.com/ But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball bearing. And additive is *slow*. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 18:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0emdnRn6dtyWUMfEnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #466728 |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm > <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >> >>> An article from 2015: >>> >>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>> >>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>> >>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>> >>[snip] >>> >>> Bob Clark >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>> >>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't > people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? > >> >>Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >> >>http://www.geadditive.com/ > > But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball > bearing. And additive is *slow*. 3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. -- Chisolm Republic of Texas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 16:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ielllctdcum0easccarel0ehnj2h1445bi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #466782 |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > >> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>> >>>> An article from 2015: >>>> >>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>> >>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>> >>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>> >>>[snip] >>>> >>>> Bob Clark >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>> >>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >> >>> >>>Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>> >>>http://www.geadditive.com/ >> >> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >> bearing. And additive is *slow*. > >3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. 3D fab the compressor, too? The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good mechanical and magnetic properties. > >Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo mode, more expensive than conventional processing. Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-04 12:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IuOdnaWSa-yBUcbEnZ2dnUU7-ImdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #466786 |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:44:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm > <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>>> >>>>> An article from 2015: >>>>> >>>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>>> >>>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>>> >>>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>>> >>>>[snip] >>>>> >>>>> Bob Clark >>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>>> >>>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >>> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >>> >>>> >>>>Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>>> >>>>http://www.geadditive.com/ >>> >>> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >>> bearing. And additive is *slow*. >> >>3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >>shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >>Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. > > 3D fab the compressor, too? > > The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something > like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good > mechanical and magnetic properties. > >> >>Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >>areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >>CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >>can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >>then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. > > Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo > mode, more expensive than conventional processing. > > Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. Anything but hype. The CFM Leap engine fuel nozzels are additive. GE is putting $400M into the turboprop for Cessna and many parts will be 3D. They say 3D is letting them consolidate 845 parts into just 11 components. Reduces overall complexity, inspection cost and maintaince cost. And they are predicting 20% less fuel burn. Not just GE. Siemens is working on 3D gas turbine blades. From their Feb 2017 presser "Siemens has achieved a breakthrough by finishing its first full load engine tests for gas turbine blades completely produced using Additive Manufacturing (AM) technology. The company successfully validated multiple AM printed turbine blades with a conventional blade design at full engine conditions. This means the components were tested at 13,000 revolutions per minute and temperatures beyond 1,250 degrees Celsius. Furthermore, Siemens tested a new blade design with a completely revised and improved internal cooling geometry manufactured using the AM technology." Additive will probably never replace stamped or many formed or cast parts but you never know. Years ago a billion transistors on a wafer was pure fantasy. -- Chisolm Republic of Texas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-04 11:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <97mnlc9c8deqkf28vl58k6k7645o4f7397@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #466864 |
On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:10:52 -0500, Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:44:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > >> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm >> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> An article from 2015: >>>>>> >>>>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>>>> >>>>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>>>> >>>>>[snip] >>>>>> >>>>>> Bob Clark >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>>>> >>>>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >>>> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>>>> >>>>>http://www.geadditive.com/ >>>> >>>> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >>>> bearing. And additive is *slow*. >>> >>>3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >>>shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >>>Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. >> >> 3D fab the compressor, too? >> >> The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something >> like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good >> mechanical and magnetic properties. >> >>> >>>Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >>>areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >>>CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >>>can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >>>then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. >> >> Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo >> mode, more expensive than conventional processing. >> >> Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. > >Anything but hype. The CFM Leap engine fuel nozzels are additive. GE is putting >$400M into the turboprop for Cessna and many parts will be 3D. They say 3D is >letting them consolidate 845 parts into just 11 components. Reduces overall >complexity, inspection cost and maintaince cost. And they are predicting >20% less fuel burn. Additive manufacturing can't take credit for the improved fuel efficiency. 15-20% is the target for the new generation of engines, like GTF. One interesting thing about consolidating a lot of parts into one 3D printed part is that when anything wears out, you have to replace the whole thing. 3D printing *is* mostly hype. You're going to see a lot of 3D printers and fidget spinners and IoT-enabled lightbulbs at garage sales soon. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 13:49 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <3lZ6B.222600$wG1.54067@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #466877 |
On 05/07/17 04:12, John Larkin wrote: > On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:10:52 -0500, Joe Chisolm > <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:44:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> An article from 2015: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>>>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>>>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>>>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>>>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>>>>> >>>>>> [snip] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bob Clark >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>>>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>>>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>>>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>>>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >>>>> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.geadditive.com/ >>>>> >>>>> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >>>>> bearing. And additive is *slow*. >>>> >>>> 3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >>>> shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >>>> Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. >>> >>> 3D fab the compressor, too? >>> >>> The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something >>> like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good >>> mechanical and magnetic properties. >>> >>>> >>>> Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >>>> areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >>>> CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >>>> can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >>>> then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. >>> >>> Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo >>> mode, more expensive than conventional processing. >>> >>> Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. >> >> Anything but hype. The CFM Leap engine fuel nozzels are additive. GE is putting >> $400M into the turboprop for Cessna and many parts will be 3D. They say 3D is >> letting them consolidate 845 parts into just 11 components. Reduces overall >> complexity, inspection cost and maintaince cost. And they are predicting >> 20% less fuel burn. > > Additive manufacturing can't take credit for the improved fuel > efficiency. 15-20% is the target for the new generation of engines, > like GTF. > > One interesting thing about consolidating a lot of parts into one 3D > printed part is that when anything wears out, you have to replace the > whole thing. > > 3D printing *is* mostly hype. You're going to see a lot of 3D printers > and fidget spinners and IoT-enabled lightbulbs at garage sales soon. Rocketlab's entire combustion chamber is 3D printed, complete with detailed flow passages for cooling/fuel pre-heat. The specific channel geometry achieves significant performance advantages (weight reduction) and could not be manufactured using conventional methods. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab#Electron> Clifford Heath.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-04 21:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <jpqolct000i6sgjg8isi95pf96jn1v6si9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #466961 |
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:49:17 +1000, Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> wrote: >On 05/07/17 04:12, John Larkin wrote: >> On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:10:52 -0500, Joe Chisolm >> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:44:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> An article from 2015: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>>>>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>>>>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>>>>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>>>>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> [snip] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Bob Clark >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>>>>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>>>>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>>>>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>>>>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >>>>>> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.geadditive.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >>>>>> bearing. And additive is *slow*. >>>>> >>>>> 3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >>>>> shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >>>>> Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. >>>> >>>> 3D fab the compressor, too? >>>> >>>> The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something >>>> like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good >>>> mechanical and magnetic properties. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >>>>> areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >>>>> CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >>>>> can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >>>>> then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. >>>> >>>> Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo >>>> mode, more expensive than conventional processing. >>>> >>>> Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. >>> >>> Anything but hype. The CFM Leap engine fuel nozzels are additive. GE is putting >>> $400M into the turboprop for Cessna and many parts will be 3D. They say 3D is >>> letting them consolidate 845 parts into just 11 components. Reduces overall >>> complexity, inspection cost and maintaince cost. And they are predicting >>> 20% less fuel burn. >> >> Additive manufacturing can't take credit for the improved fuel >> efficiency. 15-20% is the target for the new generation of engines, >> like GTF. >> >> One interesting thing about consolidating a lot of parts into one 3D >> printed part is that when anything wears out, you have to replace the >> whole thing. >> >> 3D printing *is* mostly hype. You're going to see a lot of 3D printers >> and fidget spinners and IoT-enabled lightbulbs at garage sales soon. > >Rocketlab's entire combustion chamber is 3D printed, complete >with detailed flow passages for cooling/fuel pre-heat. The >specific channel geometry achieves significant performance >advantages (weight reduction) and could not be manufactured >using conventional methods. > ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab#Electron> > >Clifford Heath. They have been in business for 11 years and haven't launched anything into orbit. So the technology is still speculative. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 16:03 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fj%6B.154861$0o4.6009@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #466965 |
On 05/07/17 14:31, John Larkin wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:49:17 +1000, Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> > wrote: > >> On 05/07/17 04:12, John Larkin wrote: >>> On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:10:52 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:44:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:02:35 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 09:54:51 -0700, John Larkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 11:09:23 -0500, Joe Chisolm >>>>>>> <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:31:17 -0400, Robert Clark wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> An article from 2015: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 >>>>>>>>> p.m. EST November 12, 2015 >>>>>>>>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but >>>>>>>>> none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its >>>>>>>>> high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [snip] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bob Clark >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize >>>>>>>>> 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital >>>>>>>>> launchers, to 'flying cars'. >>>>>>>>> This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nanotech: from air to space. >>>>>>>>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ >>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nanotech was the hot wave of the future 10 or 15 years ago. Aren't >>>>>>> people tired of buckyballs and nanotubes and graphene yet? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Similar principle as 3d printing, GE Additive is making jet engine parts >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.geadditive.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But you couldn't 3D print a copper coil or a supermagnet or a ball >>>>>>> bearing. And additive is *slow*. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3D printers are a part of the process. They give you the ability to generate >>>>>> shapes that cannot be easily machined and that opens up a lot of new possibilities. >>>>>> Possibly an air bearing to replace the ball bearing. >>>>> >>>>> 3D fab the compressor, too? >>>>> >>>>> The bulk of an electric motor is made of stacked stampings, something >>>>> like grain-oriented silicon steel. That's cheap to make and has good >>>>> mechanical and magnetic properties. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Granted jet engines are low volume high dollar items but with bigger build >>>>>> areas you can print multiple copies of the same part at the same time. Most >>>>>> CNC cannot do that. You CNC build 1 part at a time but rather fast. If I >>>>>> can print 10 parts at the same time on the same machine at < 10x the CNC time >>>>>> then I'm ahead of the game and I get complex shapes the CNC cannot do. >>>>> >>>>> Probably 100x the machining time. So far, additive is mostly demo >>>>> mode, more expensive than conventional processing. >>>>> >>>>> Additive fab is fine, but it's mostly hype now. >>>> >>>> Anything but hype. The CFM Leap engine fuel nozzels are additive. GE is putting >>>> $400M into the turboprop for Cessna and many parts will be 3D. They say 3D is >>>> letting them consolidate 845 parts into just 11 components. Reduces overall >>>> complexity, inspection cost and maintaince cost. And they are predicting >>>> 20% less fuel burn. >>> >>> Additive manufacturing can't take credit for the improved fuel >>> efficiency. 15-20% is the target for the new generation of engines, >>> like GTF. >>> >>> One interesting thing about consolidating a lot of parts into one 3D >>> printed part is that when anything wears out, you have to replace the >>> whole thing. >>> >>> 3D printing *is* mostly hype. You're going to see a lot of 3D printers >>> and fidget spinners and IoT-enabled lightbulbs at garage sales soon. >> >> Rocketlab's entire combustion chamber is 3D printed, complete >> with detailed flow passages for cooling/fuel pre-heat. The >> specific channel geometry achieves significant performance >> advantages (weight reduction) and could not be manufactured >> using conventional methods. >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab#Electron> >> >> Clifford Heath. > > They have been in business for 11 years and haven't launched anything > into orbit. So the technology is still speculative. They launched two weeks ago, and only narrowly missed orbit. The engines have had many successful stationary tests, the design seems pretty solid. They're targeting a price and payload configuration that hasn't been done before, is all. On an NZ budget, not a NASA one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 17:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <b2aq2e-5d6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #466689 |
In sci.physics Robert Clark <rgregoryclark@gmspambloackail.com> wrote: > An article from 2015: > > 3-D-printed car could hit streets next year. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY 4:48 > p.m. EST November 12, 2015 > http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/11/10/3d-printed-car-local-motors-swim/75530830/ > > Several companies have come out with what they call "3D-printed" cars, but > none have 3D-printed the most important part, the engine. > > This would be difficult to do with an internal combustion engine, with its > high temperatures, multiple moving parts, and high tolerances. > > But it shouldn't be too difficult with an electric engine. In fact > considering there are now miniature 3D-printers on the market for the home, > an amateur could be the first to produce an entire, scale-size, 3D-printed > car. > And then it could be scaled up to produce a full-size, working, fully > 3D-printed automobile. > > This would revolutionize the industry, obviously. > > The two most difficult parts would be the engine and the transmission. > > This video shows how you can make your own simple electric motor: > > How to Make an Electric Motor at Home - YouTube. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p2QTE26VOA > > Looking at the steps in the video, it appears they could all be accomplished > by 3D-printing. > > > Bob Clark > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize > 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital > launchers, to 'flying cars'. > This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: > > Nanotech: from air to space. > https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arm waving nonsense. You need multiple 3D printers if you need to print with multiple materials. Consumer 3D printers print small parts from cheap plastic and cost hundreds of dollars. Industrial 3D printers that print large parts with metals cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and the printing material costs more than raw metal stock. 3D printing is advantageous for parts with complex shapes that are difficult or impossible to make with other techniques but is disadvantageous for most parts that ARE manufacturable with conventional techniques as they can be made faster and cheaper. 3D printing makes PARTS that still need to be assembled. 3D printing an electric motor is just silly. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 14:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33c4512ea53f49f9989982@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #466730 |
In article <b2aq2e-5d6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > Arm waving nonsense. > > You need multiple 3D printers if you need to print with multiple materials. > > Consumer 3D printers print small parts from cheap plastic and cost hundreds > of dollars. > > Industrial 3D printers that print large parts with metals cost hundreds of > thousands of dollars and the printing material costs more than raw metal > stock. > > 3D printing is advantageous for parts with complex shapes that are difficult > or impossible to make with other techniques but is disadvantageous for > most parts that ARE manufacturable with conventional techniques as they > can be made faster and cheaper. > > 3D printing makes PARTS that still need to be assembled. > > 3D printing an electric motor is just silly. > I'm generally in agreement with all of the above. That motor which was 3D printed is a toy. That toy motor is far simpler than a stepper motor, so any thought of 3D printers printing other 3D printers is just a fantasy at this point. Today's "state of the art" of 3D printing does not make it a panacea for manufacturing. Furthermore, 3D printing with locally produced (non- earth) materials is decades away. But progress is being made in the field. GE is working on producing a 3D printer capable of printing 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter parts. This is coming from its aircraft engine division. 3D printing is a very hot topic these days. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 18:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mueq2e-6t6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #466735 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <b2aq2e-5d6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> Arm waving nonsense. >> >> You need multiple 3D printers if you need to print with multiple materials. >> >> Consumer 3D printers print small parts from cheap plastic and cost hundreds >> of dollars. >> >> Industrial 3D printers that print large parts with metals cost hundreds of >> thousands of dollars and the printing material costs more than raw metal >> stock. >> >> 3D printing is advantageous for parts with complex shapes that are difficult >> or impossible to make with other techniques but is disadvantageous for >> most parts that ARE manufacturable with conventional techniques as they >> can be made faster and cheaper. >> >> 3D printing makes PARTS that still need to be assembled. >> >> 3D printing an electric motor is just silly. >> > > I'm generally in agreement with all of the above. That motor which was > 3D printed is a toy. That toy motor is far simpler than a stepper > motor, so any thought of 3D printers printing other 3D printers is just > a fantasy at this point. > > Today's "state of the art" of 3D printing does not make it a panacea for > manufacturing. Furthermore, 3D printing with locally produced (non- > earth) materials is decades away. 3D printing requires special raw stock manufactured just for 3D printing no matter what the print material is. 3D printing is slow and expensive compared to any other method of making parts so only become economical if the part in question is so complex that 3D printing it is cheaper than any other method. The cost and speed of 3D printing will obviously never match that of stamping out sheet metal, casting, or NC machining. > But progress is being made in the field. GE is working on producing a > 3D printer capable of printing 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter parts. This > is coming from its aircraft engine division. 3D printing is a very hot > topic these days. Yes, for very complex parts that would otherwise have to be made in pieces then somehow assempled. > > Jeff -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 16:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33c46fcdc289aa9b989984@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #466736 |
In article <mueq2e-6t6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > 3D printing requires special raw stock manufactured just for 3D printing > no matter what the print material is. > > 3D printing is slow and expensive compared to any other method of making > parts so only become economical if the part in question is so complex that > 3D printing it is cheaper than any other method. Actually if the 3D printed part replaces many other parts (e.g. SuperDraco engines) then it's faster to print than it is to manufacture and assemble all those other parts. But that does fall under your "so complex" exception because in that case it is cheaper to print than try to use other manufacturing techniques. In aerospace, think things like liquid fueled rocket engine combustion chambers with lots of tiny internal cooling passages. Those are a p.i.t.a. to make using conventional manufacturing techniques, but a breeze to 3D print. > The cost and speed of 3D printing will obviously never match that of > stamping out sheet metal, casting, or NC machining. For "trivial" parts, that is true. I installed a new garage door at home a few weeks ago. Lots of stamped sheet metal parts there, even the hinges. > > But progress is being made in the field. GE is working on producing a > > 3D printer capable of printing 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter parts. This > > is coming from its aircraft engine division. 3D printing is a very hot > > topic these days. > > Yes, for very complex parts that would otherwise have to be made in > pieces then somehow assempled. Exactly. Also, the other option that 3D printing opens up is more shape optimized parts. These things are optimized so that "useless" mass is simply gone from the design. They tend to look "organic" rather than "machined" due to their complex shapes. I've heard this called "light-weighting" parts from management types. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 20:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slnq2e-pn7.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #466753 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <mueq2e-6t6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> 3D printing requires special raw stock manufactured just for 3D printing >> no matter what the print material is. >> >> 3D printing is slow and expensive compared to any other method of making >> parts so only become economical if the part in question is so complex that >> 3D printing it is cheaper than any other method. > > Actually if the 3D printed part replaces many other parts (e.g. > SuperDraco engines) then it's faster to print than it is to manufacture > and assemble all those other parts. But that does fall under your "so > complex" exception because in that case it is cheaper to print than try > to use other manufacturing techniques. > > In aerospace, think things like liquid fueled rocket engine combustion > chambers with lots of tiny internal cooling passages. Those are a > p.i.t.a. to make using conventional manufacturing techniques, but a > breeze to 3D print. And the total market for such things is a tiny fraction of all things manufactured, or even of all 4 slice toasters manufactured. >> The cost and speed of 3D printing will obviously never match that of >> stamping out sheet metal, casting, or NC machining. > > For "trivial" parts, that is true. I installed a new garage door at > home a few weeks ago. Lots of stamped sheet metal parts there, even the > hinges. My estimate is that for all things manufactured parts that can be made cheaper and faster by conventional means amount to about 99.99%. >> > But progress is being made in the field. GE is working on producing a >> > 3D printer capable of printing 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter parts. This >> > is coming from its aircraft engine division. 3D printing is a very hot >> > topic these days. >> >> Yes, for very complex parts that would otherwise have to be made in >> pieces then somehow assempled. > > Exactly. > > Also, the other option that 3D printing opens up is more shape optimized > parts. These things are optimized so that "useless" mass is simply gone > from the design. They tend to look "organic" rather than "machined" due > to their complex shapes. I've heard this called "light-weighting" parts > from management types. And about the only place where weight matters that much is in things that fly and in that case useless mass is already gone from the design without the expense of 3D printing. Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. > Jeff -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-03 14:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <27845476-3ede-4588-b4c6-1eb704c5d5c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #466761 |
On Monday, 3 July 2017 22:01:11 UTC+1, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > > In article <mueq2e-6t6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > > says... > >> 3D printing requires special raw stock manufactured just for 3D printing > >> no matter what the print material is. current ones do. Hopefully that'll change. Feed it your washed broken dustpan, it'll see how stiff the plastic is and at what temp it softens, work out what plastics it could be and print something suitable from your wish list. It most likely will happen. > >> 3D printing is slow and expensive compared to any other method of making > >> parts so only become economical if the part in question is so complex that > >> 3D printing it is cheaper than any other method. > > > > Actually if the 3D printed part replaces many other parts (e.g. > > SuperDraco engines) then it's faster to print than it is to manufacture > > and assemble all those other parts. But that does fall under your "so > > complex" exception because in that case it is cheaper to print than try > > to use other manufacturing techniques. > > > > In aerospace, think things like liquid fueled rocket engine combustion > > chambers with lots of tiny internal cooling passages. Those are a > > p.i.t.a. to make using conventional manufacturing techniques, but a > > breeze to 3D print. > > And the total market for such things is a tiny fraction of all things > manufactured, or even of all 4 slice toasters manufactured. Today it is, because bent sheet has been around so long. Imagine having a 3D printer at home that produces all your plastic goods. You never need buy plastic item again. Doesn't matter that it takes all night to produce one item. > >> The cost and speed of 3D printing will obviously never match that of > >> stamping out sheet metal, casting, or NC machining. > > > > For "trivial" parts, that is true. I installed a new garage door at > > home a few weeks ago. Lots of stamped sheet metal parts there, even the > > hinges. > > My estimate is that for all things manufactured parts that can be made > cheaper and faster by conventional means amount to about 99.99%. ...Today > >> > But progress is being made in the field. GE is working on producing a > >> > 3D printer capable of printing 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter parts. This > >> > is coming from its aircraft engine division. 3D printing is a very hot > >> > topic these days. > >> > >> Yes, for very complex parts that would otherwise have to be made in > >> pieces then somehow assempled. > > > > Exactly. > > > > Also, the other option that 3D printing opens up is more shape optimized > > parts. These things are optimized so that "useless" mass is simply gone > > from the design. They tend to look "organic" rather than "machined" due > > to their complex shapes. I've heard this called "light-weighting" parts > > from management types. > > And about the only place where weight matters that much is in things > that fly and in that case useless mass is already gone from the design > without the expense of 3D printing. It matters everywhere because material is cost > Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? > > 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. > > Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. It sounds like you've not seen 3D printed houses, done in hours each. Now there's another mass market for it. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 19 [1] 2 3 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design
csiph-web