Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars.

Actually, other than cosmetics, the bulk of the change tends to be in engines. Look at performance now vs performance then. My 1985 Corvette with a big V-8 did 0-60 is 6-ish seconds, a 15 second quarter mile at 91 MPH, and had a top speed of 150 MPH. It was the fasted mass produced car of its day. My current car (BMW 435i with a small straight six) does 0-60 in 5.2 seconds or so, a 13.7 second quarter mile at 102 MPH, and a governed top speed of 155 MPH. The BMW handily beats the old 'Vette and it isn't even considered a performance car these days.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable  
 man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,  
 all progress depends on the unreasonable man." 
                                      --George Bernard Shaw
Reply to
Fred J. McCall
Loading thread data ...

Not really - for example, if we're not at the limits of layer hardening time, then we can use multiple print heads, multiplying the print rate. I thought that was apparent, apparently I needed to explain it.

Not the point, remember the whole "mature technology" thing? If we can do that *now*, imagine what we'll be able to do in 30 years time.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by ignoring those stats.

Reply to
David Mitchell

The PC/XT keyboard didn't work on the 286/AT machines because the baud rate was different. Heath/Zenith used a baud rate that wasn't compatible with either standard. I still have a couple keyboards with the XT/AT switch on the bottom.

The Centronics port was to allow use f existing printers that were built for minicomputers. There was a huge surplus market for both RS232 and Centronics used printers in the early Personal computer days.

--
Never piss off an Engineer! 

They don't get mad. 

They don't get even. 

They go for over unity! ;-)
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Mustangs - V8 1993 240HP gas mileage 18 on highway (I put a supercharger on this one to get to 330HP, too scary for the wife,

+others, a muscle car)

Now 2015 Mustang V8 makes 427Hp and gets good gas milage 26 on highway, and it is a nice ride, a sports car.

Reply to
Serg io

But we are at those limits as well as how fast we can lay down a layer without slopping it around.

Did you think the issue is how fast a stepper motor goes or how fast you can squeeze something out of a nozzle?

Yes, it is the whole point.

They get speed by using thick layers as there is no other way to do it. This results in a crap finish.

And this IS an industrial grade printer.

Obviously.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

I remember Rubylith, and Spice but spice was a simulator, and rubylith a layout tool... (?)

there is free spice on the internet for under 30 components.

and free tools from some fab houses for small cheap proto boards now too, under $50, gets you a board back

AND I remember laying out circuits for Motorola by hand using "dolls"

4:1 I think, ...

anybody ?

Hughes Aircraft Company is fantastic, they did SLQ-32 ! google that one...

Reply to
Serg io

First of all, there are other technologies, the second of the new printers I posted uses one of them.

Second, even something as simple as adding more print heads would multiply the printing speed, as I've explained twice now.

Simply not true, see my points above.

So? The first ordinary printers were "industrial", and now we have better ones in homes. What's your point?

And yet here you are, not explaining it. Perhaps you don't have one.

Reply to
David Mitchell

All the technologies squirt out something that has liquid properties and then is hardened somehow, all of them.

There are no Star Trek replicators where a complete object forms out of thin air.

What part of we are already at the limit of deposition rate is it you can not grasp?

Yes, it is true. Look at the pictures of the thing and read the companies own press releases.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

My 65YO wife's 2014 6-cylinder 300HP Mustang isn't too much for her. ;-)

She likes driving hers with her top down (and often skirt up). I worry about her scaring little children. ;-)

Reply to
krw

Apart from those which don't, such as laser sinterers, or those, such as the one I linked to, which hardens a resin with a laser.

No-one has ever claimed there are.

The part where you saying it makes it true: it's not. Unless you can prove me wrong, it's your claim after all, so feel free to provide evidence.

There were two links posted - I notice you're completely ignoring the second. There are also other kinds of 3-D printer, and different types will be invented. Can you honestly not see that, or are you just ignoring it, because you know you've lost this particular argument?

Reply to
David Mitchell

What part of "is hardened somehow" did you fail to understand?

You were by claiming there are "other technologies".

What do YOU think limits deposition rate, the speed of stepper motors?

I see you are ignoring the close up photo showing that what I said is true. And again, there is only one type of 3D printer; a machine that takes a material that has fluid properties and deposits it in thin layers which are then hardened.

It makes no difference if the material is thermoplastic that has been heated and then allowed to cool or micronized metal particles which are then sintered together with a laser or electron beam machine.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

The bit where you can't imagine 16 laser heads working together? Or that the technology mentioned above pumps fluid in at a rate of knots?

Don't be silly. Neither traditional laser sintering, nor the other technology I cited "squirt out something that has liquid properties" unless by "squirt" you mean "pump" into a tank.

They are very different to a movable head which deposits material in a 3-D pattern.

Yes; and we're nowhere near the limits of those, the deposition rate FOR THAT KIND OF 3-D PRINTER, and multiple printer heads would solve that because, hardening time is not at its upper bound yet.

True for that kind of printer, at the moment, and you're still ignoring the other kinds of technology. It's getting embarrassing.

Just not true. FFS neither of the other two kinds of fabricator I mentioned work in that way. Read the article!

Reply to
David Mitchell

Since you are such a dense littlt twit, I will type slowly so that you may understand.

A 3D printer consists of 3 primary system:

1: The postioning system.

This is the part of the machine that moves the deposition system, what ever it may be, around.

This system is decended from XY protters and NC machinery, technology that is over a half century old and fully matured shortly after the microprocessor became commercially available over 40 years ago.

2: The deposition system.

This is the part of the machine that deposits the material being printed, whatever it may be.

All deposition depend on the material having liquid properties, at least for some time.

For thermoplastic printers the solid plastic is melted in the deposition system and applied through a nozzle.

For metal printers, the solid metal is in a micronized form such that it can be forced through a nozzle of some sort. The metal powder may or may not have a carrier material added to make the process easier.

There is no way to "print" a material other than to squirt it in very small quantities (assuming one desires some sort of accuracy) out of a small oriface of some sort.

The accuracy of the final printed product is directly related to how small an amount of material can be deposited at one time.

3: The hardening system.

This is the part of the machine that hardens the the printed material.

For a thermoplastic machine this may consist of nothing more than allowing air flow around the printed such that a given print pass can cool before the next print pass is applied.

For a metal machine, there are several hardening methods, such as laser and electron beam sintering.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

Since you're still ignoring the system I cited, let me explain *it* to you: polymers are pumped into a tank, a laser scans it, hardening it in places.

Note there's no moving "deposition system", just a moving "hardening system".

Obviously, the speed of operation depends on the rate at which polymer is pumped in, and the rate at which the top layer is scanned and hardened.

This depends on the intensity of the laser, and the number of lasers, in theory you could have dozens.

This would, obviously, make it faster than a single head; which is already the fastest 3-D printer in the world.

Not necessary in the above; but carry on.

Note that this doesn't have to be particularly accurate if you are tracking the deposition system with a laser, which *is* precise, so you're not squirting a fine trickle, you're firehosing it out, at the highest speed it can be hardened; with multiple heads, if you want.

As you can see from the above, this just isn't true.

As you can see from the above, this just isn't true.

Reply to
David Mitchell

The the hardening system is moving and not the deposition system is a minor nit.

See:

formatting link

Nothing particularly new or Earth shaking and it also just prints plastic.

You certainly are a naive nob.

What do you think positions the hardner?

Christ you are a naive nob.

The level has to be controlled rather carefully.

Yeah, I forgot about the print in a bucket techniques.

Change the above to "deposited or hardened" and the problem is fixed.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

Not at all, since it's your claim that "we are already at the limit of deposition rate" which you assert imposes limits on the process.

"10 to 100 times faster"

and it also just prints plastic.

"The entire polymer family". Plastics do have quite a lot of useful properties. Apparently they're the future.

Just watch the video:

formatting link
The laser scans the surface of the material, from below. Four lasers would be four times as fast.

I know you won't have heard of it; but there's this thing called adaptive control; and you can use it to raise and lower the plate below which the material comes so it's at precisely the right height above the surface you're building on. I know, right?!

It's also very fast, obviously, even when I first started working in embedded systems 35 years ago, we could drive a hydraulic chisel over a surface at

5cm/second with sufficient accuracy using an 8-bit processor running at 16MHz.

Things have rather improved since then.

Nice to see you actually learn something.

Reply to
David Mitchell

And again a quarter century later. I'm assuming that he was semi-quoting a 1967 movie.

--
We are geeks.  Resistance is voltage over current.
Reply to
Greg Goss

I.e. you don't know. $2 buys 10 units at that price. I find it a bit hard to believe it would take 10 units to melt such a small amount of ali, but I haven't calculated it either.

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

Last time I checked it didn't take 3GWh to melt a few dozen ali cans. What are you thinking of building with that much, a national fleet of buses?

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

Jim rolls out invalid arguments even after they've been thoroughly debunked. Some people are just like that.

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.