I would like for a single "space 3d printer" video to talk about whether or not a 3d printer in space requires supports. I'm guessing not if there's no gravity.
I wouldn't think that supports are needed, mainly support is used to support a hanging part of a print against the force of gravity (make it not fall off). The plastic sticks to itself so it could most likely print any complex design without the need of supports due to microgravity.
supports serve more than just one purpose: the first is to make overhangs more managable. most printers have to adhere to the 45 degree rule, where additional angle to overhangs means gravity pulls the melty plastic down and away from the nozzle making strings and poor adhesion, even causing print failure. on earth you can actually get quite a but beyond 45 degrees with some special techniques: lowering the printing temp, using a cure-quickening blower, running slowly, and finding the right balance between extrusion speed and travel speed. But the 45 degree rule is not entirely due to gravity, the other problem is that the plastic itself is only partially binding to the layer below it. the rest of the plastic has to cure in place, unsupported, with or without gravity. even in zero G, for instance, one would have a hard time printing at 90 degrees, as the outer-most perimeter won't be at all touching the layer under it. support makes this possible. but the other reason to use supports is even more important to complex prints: there may be components that begin to print halfway up the build area before they are even connected to the rest of the part;these bits need a stand to print off of before being connected. irrespective of gravity, supports would be required here.
@@chrismofer he he, wasn't expecting a reply from such and old comment! From all the videos I saw there was no cooling fan as I assume that would cause issues. Or maybe juts because they are using ABS.
Hello NASA. Just FYI, the aluminum foil that is wrapped around the hot-end is what's causing all of the extra stringing during travel-moves. The plastic that sticks to the foil stays molten and gets dragged around.
It's all about packing efficiency. Solid blocks of plastics and metals take up a lot less space than prefabbed parts. And replicators take up even less. :)
It's handy to 3D print things anywhere, but in space, you have to launch all the raw materials into orbit, unless you can mine materials from space capable of being made into 3D printable material, but of course, that would also require additional exotic equipment to refine and manufacture materials, and the ability to get to their locations and back, and no one can hear you scream when a print fails.
+HPS 400w Generally, yes. But as technology improves, so will the speed. Someone else (+Lewis Walker) said that "This is the first step towards being able to essentially print a lunar base from materials present in regolith", and I've never considered that idea, but yes! Imagine if they had 3D printers that were 10 times faster than what is available today, and with a much much larger format capability. They could bring the raw materials with them, _or mine them on the moon itself!_, and build far more impressive lunar bases with much less to bring with them. Huge savings in launch requirements while giving them a much more versatile mission. JW3HH
JustWasted3HoursHere never thought of that, by the way i cant get into my head how much distance does solar winds travel through space i mean its really incredibly huge
I was wondering when they'd finally make 3D printing in space. This is a big step! One day, maybe, we'll be able to mine materials from an asteroid and directly use them to print and assemble a space station!
She briefly talked about the mass of objects taken up to the station, and that it cost money to send them, but this doesn't reduce the mass we're sending, just the number of trips we have to make. These printers don't make things from nothing, nor do they transmute one matter into another, or energy into matter. Get to work on that, will ya? :-)
Also, when they save space they save fuel. A block of plastic probably takes up less space than a couple hundred petri dishes. So they can use a smaller, lighter rocket. Or put more into that rocket.
That supposes that they're going to be printing everything. I doubt NASA or anyone will be using 3D printed objects for things that need to withstand any strong amount of force. What's more likely is that they'll print utensils, containers, components to experiments, and other less significant things.
I can imagine a normal plastic extruding printer in space. But such dynamic objects (like the little black one with the gears) and metal parts are made with dust, molten together layer per layer with a laser beam right? (Like this: /watch?v=2GI9Bw48liY) How does one keep the dust from floating away in micro gravity? If such adynamical part is not made with such a dust printer, with what kind of printer is it made?
+Massimo O'Kissed A lot less than what they will save by not having to launch things from the earth's surface. This is the first step towards being able to essentially print a lunar base from materials present in regolith
2:36 "we would just upload a CAD drawing". It kills me when non-experts are interviewed and sound like idiots. Nomenclature is pretty important when discussing technical things. You upload an STL file, or 3D CAD file like STEP, or native solidworks. I don't know of a single 3d printer that can interpret a 2D drawing and start printing parts.
An STL file is a CAD file, and someone had to draw that file using solidworks or what-have-you. So what on earth (or in space) is wrong with calling it a ''CAD drawing''? Just because Solidworks makes a distinction between a"drawing" and a "part" file, doesn't mean that everyone else has to also.
They are speaking in a language that ordinary people can easily understand. Mentioning STL files etc would be unnecessary at this point. This is merely a general discussion on the topic
@Overspray Collector is saying CAD drawing completely wrong? Or CAD file? Computer aided design is pretty straight forward, and something that won't be easily mistaken for something else. You don't need to venture into the specific terms used by those only familiar to people that use 3D printing. It's already understood. If a 3d printing enthusiast or expert hears that then they wouldn't mind. It's not entirely correct, sure, but it isn't generally wrong; It's trivial at best.
1:26 "As we all know, in space, you have to wait for a [illegible] supply ships if you need a spare part. Or you have to fly a lot of spares, which takes considerable mass, which cost money."
I would like for a single "space 3d printer" video to talk about whether or not a 3d printer in space requires supports. I'm guessing not if there's no gravity.
I wouldn't think that supports are needed, mainly support is used to support a hanging part of a print against the force of gravity (make it not fall off). The plastic sticks to itself so it could most likely print any complex design without the need of supports due to microgravity.
supports serve more than just one purpose: the first is to make overhangs more managable. most printers have to adhere to the 45 degree rule, where additional angle to overhangs means gravity pulls the melty plastic down and away from the nozzle making strings and poor adhesion, even causing print failure. on earth you can actually get quite a but beyond 45 degrees with some special techniques: lowering the printing temp, using a cure-quickening blower, running slowly, and finding the right balance between extrusion speed and travel speed. But the 45 degree rule is not entirely due to gravity, the other problem is that the plastic itself is only partially binding to the layer below it. the rest of the plastic has to cure in place, unsupported, with or without gravity. even in zero G, for instance, one would have a hard time printing at 90 degrees, as the outer-most perimeter won't be at all touching the layer under it. support makes this possible.
but the other reason to use supports is even more important to complex prints: there may be components that begin to print halfway up the build area before they are even connected to the rest of the part;these bits need a stand to print off of before being connected. irrespective of gravity, supports would be required here.
@@chrismofer I am sure their slicer has some sort of "print overhangs" that uses some sort of mid-space extrusion cooling trick...
@@confuded yah 2 years more experienced I can say it probably bridges fine so I really don't know how much support if any is needed in microgravity.
@@chrismofer he he, wasn't expecting a reply from such and old comment!
From all the videos I saw there was no cooling fan as I assume that would cause issues. Or maybe juts because they are using ABS.
If your Going To mars Bring a 3-D Printer.
Hello NASA. Just FYI, the aluminum foil that is wrapped around the hot-end is what's causing all of the extra stringing during travel-moves. The plastic that sticks to the foil stays molten and gets dragged around.
It's all about packing efficiency. Solid blocks of plastics and metals take up a lot less space than prefabbed parts. And replicators take up even less. :)
2:25 1.5 hr for that cubesate case. That's faster than many commercially available 3D printers, right?
I thought so too, but it's pretty thin.
It must be great not to have to worry about overhangs since there is no gravity
I didn't hear her talk about that. At what time does she mention the mass?
I wander about Support materials. Bet it does some killer over-hangs
It's handy to 3D print things anywhere, but in space, you have to launch all the raw materials into orbit, unless you can mine materials from space capable of being made into 3D printable material, but of course, that would also require additional exotic equipment to refine and manufacture materials, and the ability to get to their locations and back, and no one can hear you scream when a print fails.
That's almost exactly what Werkheiser said at 6:20.
so warframe suddenly got a bit more real.
i've got a question: why can you print in space? i mean, shouldn't the molten plastic float around? or it just sticks like water to any surface?
+HPS 400w remember it is warm plastic, not liquid.
so its a very slow process right?
+HPS 400w Generally, yes. But as technology improves, so will the speed. Someone else (+Lewis Walker) said that "This is the first step towards being able to essentially print a lunar base from materials present in regolith", and I've never considered that idea, but yes! Imagine if they had 3D printers that were 10 times faster than what is available today, and with a much much larger format capability. They could bring the raw materials with them, _or mine them on the moon itself!_, and build far more impressive lunar bases with much less to bring with them. Huge savings in launch requirements while giving them a much more versatile mission.
JW3HH
JustWasted3HoursHere never thought of that, by the way i cant get into my head how much distance does solar winds travel through space i mean its really incredibly huge
it is. think if we could harness that energy and use it to power ships, or even cities.
i thought a 3d printer wasnt suposed to be on the station till like next year or something when space ex brings one up
I was wondering when they'd finally make 3D printing in space. This is a big step! One day, maybe, we'll be able to mine materials from an asteroid and directly use them to print and assemble a space station!
dont they have to carry the material anyway to space ?
She briefly talked about the mass of objects taken up to the station, and that it cost money to send them, but this doesn't reduce the mass we're sending, just the number of trips we have to make. These printers don't make things from nothing, nor do they transmute one matter into another, or energy into matter. Get to work on that, will ya? :-)
I wonder what they will do with failed models. What do you think?
Recycle them if they are plastic.The problem is that there is not much data over recycled filament. They are NASA they can make it happen.
Plastic filament is hard to manufacture at a small scale.
They did it anyways
3dprintingindustry.com/news/nasas-refabricator-recycling-3d-printer-makes-space-place-green-materials-120801/
Also, when they save space they save fuel. A block of plastic probably takes up less space than a couple hundred petri dishes. So they can use a smaller, lighter rocket. Or put more into that rocket.
Realy cool
Can it print reentry tiles and o ring seals before the explosions?
Unfortunately no. So far this only prints abs plastic, maybe soon they can print air seals but that would take different filament.
The first thing this printer should do is to print itself.
+Milan Milosavljevic There's a 3D printer out there that's designed to replicate itself. Google "RepRap"
Aaron Lowe they aren't replicated at 100 %.
That supposes that they're going to be printing everything. I doubt NASA or anyone will be using 3D printed objects for things that need to withstand any strong amount of force. What's more likely is that they'll print utensils, containers, components to experiments, and other less significant things.
Of course, it is almost the same..........FACTS are FACTS! She can't make the stuff up to make it sound different!
I can imagine a normal plastic extruding printer in space.
But such dynamic objects (like the little black one with the gears) and metal parts are made with dust, molten together layer per layer with a laser beam right? (Like this: /watch?v=2GI9Bw48liY)
How does one keep the dust from floating away in micro gravity?
If such adynamical part is not made with such a dust printer, with what kind of printer is it made?
I wonder how much money NASA managed to spend on a $300 3D printer...
+Massimo O'Kissed A lot less than what they will save by not having to launch things from the earth's surface. This is the first step towards being able to essentially print a lunar base from materials present in regolith
Surely. NASA isn't going to limit itself to some silly "only printed objects on he ISS" rule. That would be daft. Sounds like we're in agreement here.
if they figure out a way to use debris from space, asteroids or something as input material for the printer then i'll rename myself to nostradamus
3d print space habitats on the moon or on mars..
holy shit, i suggested this years ago. Go me i guess
2:36 "we would just upload a CAD drawing". It kills me when non-experts are interviewed and sound like idiots. Nomenclature is pretty important when discussing technical things. You upload an STL file, or 3D CAD file like STEP, or native solidworks. I don't know of a single 3d printer that can interpret a 2D drawing and start printing parts.
An STL file is a CAD file, and someone had to draw that file using solidworks or what-have-you. So what on earth (or in space) is wrong with calling it a ''CAD drawing''? Just because Solidworks makes a distinction between a"drawing" and a "part" file, doesn't mean that everyone else has to also.
They are speaking in a language that ordinary people can easily understand. Mentioning STL files etc would be unnecessary at this point. This is merely a general discussion on the topic
@Overspray Collector is saying CAD drawing completely wrong? Or CAD file? Computer aided design is pretty straight forward, and something that won't be easily mistaken for something else. You don't need to venture into the specific terms used by those only familiar to people that use 3D printing. It's already understood. If a 3d printing enthusiast or expert hears that then they wouldn't mind. It's not entirely correct, sure, but it isn't generally wrong; It's trivial at best.
1:26
"As we all know, in space, you have to wait for a [illegible] supply ships if you need a spare part. Or you have to fly a lot of spares, which takes considerable mass, which cost money."
😍😍😍😍😍😍
Superr
Vavvv
in space, on the station, on orbit, astronots, microgravity blah blah blah bullshit!!!!!!!
omfg the voice is killing my ears