3D Printing in MTU

[garak45]

So I am working on 3D printing for my Traveller Republik universe. Not much info out there, so I am gonna have to "wing it". Any HELPFUL comments are welcome. Here is what I have so far:

3D Assembly Fabricators

TL9
Basic 3D Printers
Early medical 3D fabbers (non-vascular)
Toolmaker


TL11
Pharma fabbers (fast 3)
Extensive medical fabbers (full range)
Basic industrial grade fabbers (up to medium sized building)
Basic Machine Shop fabbers in heavy use


TL14 (The Golden Era of Fabbers)
Multiforge (up to car size)
FashionPlate (delievery 1 hour)
Foodies (high-end and varied) for ships, housing, public areas in widespread use
Skyscraper-sized construction with fabbers
Ships Lockers fabbers become widely used


TL16


TL17
All food fabbers become molecular assemblers (nanotech)
Starship-sized construction with "fabbers"


TL18
Minion Maker (3D nano-assemblers that makes "minions"ets with low animal intelligence and short life spans)
Organic construction with fabbers (including spacecraft)


TL20
Advanced Minion Maker (perfect bioengineering, pets with higher intelligence and longer life spans)


Several worlds I work with are up to TL22, so I have to come up with somes for tech in this range. It can be difficult, I am trying my best. Again, comments are welcome. Cheers, Maxx

 

[Spartan159]

Interesting. I have to admit that my knowledge of 3D printing is next to zero, I'm not much help here. Just what can and can not be done with these? I would guess that you also need a supply of raw materials.

 

[BlackBat242]

Right now, aerospace companies, including MROs (Maintenance & Repair Operations), are using 3D printing to make parts that go in aircraft... including commercial airliners.

For example:
SIAEC Plans Singapore Additive-Manufacturing JV for Aircraft Parts

http://www.mro-network.com/

MOU will see the maintenance specialist team up with 3D printing company Stratasys.

Chris Kjelgaard | Apr 07, 2017

Singapore-based aircraft MRO provider SIA Engineering Company Limited (SIAEC) has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with 3D-printing and additive-manufacturing specialist Stratasys Ltd. to establish a strategic partnership specialising in additive manufacturing.

The new partnership aims to accelerate adoption of 3D-printed production parts for commercial aviation, by combining Stratasys' expertise in additive manufacturing—which includes experience in aerospace-industry additive manufacturing—with SIAEC's MRO services to provide airline customers with parts for scheduled maintenance and for on-demand requirements.

Under the MOU, the parties will look at creating a joint venture, which when established would be majority-owned by SIAEC.

The two companies intend to establish an Additive Manufacturing Service Centre in Singapore, to provide design, engineering, certification support and parts production for SIAEC's network of partners and customers.

Stratasys—which boasts two corporate headquarters, one in Eden Prairie, Minnesota and the other in Rehovot in Israel—will provide the required additive-manufacturing industry expertise and drive the development of aerospace applications, together with SIAEC.

“This strategic partnership marks an important milestone for additive manufacturing in the aviation industry,” says Ilan Levin, CEO of Stratasys.

“As we have shown with our existing relationships with leading aerospace manufacturers, including Airbus and Boeing, we are committed to advancing the use of additive manufacturing for high-requirement aerospace applications,” adds Levin. “By working closely with SIAEC, we are extending that focus to solve the unique challenges of the MRO segment and further drive adoption.”

Png Kim Chiang, chief executive officer of SIAEC, comments, “We are delighted to partner with Stratasys, a leader in its field, in our pursuit of innovation and the adoption of the latest additive manufacturing technologies. Our collaboration will strengthen SIAEC's comprehensive suite of MRO solutions and enhance our support to customers, especially in the region.”

SIAEC has a client base of more than 80 international carriers and aerospace-equipment manufacturers. It provides line-maintenance services at 36 airports in a number of countries, as well as airframe and component services for various widely used commercial-aircraft types.

In addition to MRO services, SIAEC also offers a comprehensive and integrated suite of fleet-management services.

To date, SIAEC also has established 24 joint ventures with original equipment manufacturers and strategic partners in Singapore, Australia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan, the USA and Vietnam, to increase the depth and breadth of its service offerings.

SIAEC has approvals from 27 national aviation regulatory authorities to provide MRO services for commercial aircraft.

Stratasys Ltd. has been in business for more than 25 years and today it employs more than 2,700 people and holds 1,200 granted or pending additive-manufacturing patents. Stratasys has received more than 30 technology and leadership awards.

The company's subsidiaries include MakerBot and Solidscape. Stratasys’ product line includes 3D printers for prototyping and production; a wide range of 3D-printing materials; and parts-on-demand manufacturing, through Stratasys Direct Manufacturing.

Additionally, Stratasys offers strategic consulting and professional services.

Its additive-manufacturing network resources include the Thingiverse and GrabCAD communities, which make available more than 2 million 3D-printable files for free designs.

Etihad Engineering Looks To Expanded Production, 3D Printing

http://www.mro-network.com/

Maintenance arm of Abu Dhabi carrier bets big on new technologies.

Henry Canaday | Apr 10, 2017

Etihad Airways Engineering recently received the first EASA certification for Part 21G production granted to a Middle Eastern airline MRO.

Jeff Wilkinson, chief executive officer of Etihad Engineering, says the approval means his MRO will now be able to provide parts with an EASA Form 1 Airworthiness Release Certificate. “Customers can install our kits in their base or anywhere in the world‎ where EASA certificates are accepted. Etihad Airways Engineering is becoming a global parts supplier to the aviation industry.”

Previously, Etihad could only provide replacement parts for repairs while aircraft were in its hangars, undergoing a maintenance event. This was fabrication under Part 145 repair approval, and no spare parts were allowed to be made. “Now we can make unlimited quantities and sell them to our customers around the world,” Wilkinson stresses. “We expect additional revenue out of this opportunity.” In addition, Etihad customers will benefit from its retrofit engineering services, combined with parts at competitive prices, which they can install where convenient for their operation.

The current EASA approval covers interior soft furnishings such as dress covers, curtains and carpets, composite parts such as floor panels, cargo linings and decompression panels, metallic structure parts such as brackets and other secondary structures and decals for interior and exterior markings. The EASA approval is for all commercial aircraft types in the CS25 category, including Airbus, Boeing, Embraer and Bombardier models.

Wilkinson says he has plans to extend the range of part production. “Our roadmap includes expanding our capabilities into further cabin interiors, such as stowage compartments, partitions, seat surroundings and later also galleys and VIP interiors. We continue to work with our strategic partners to develop these capabilities jointly.”

And the MRO, like other advanced MROs, is focusing on 3D printing‎ and will leverage this new technology under its Production Approval. “Etihad Airways Engineering is the only airline MRO with EASA approval to design, certify and fly 3D-printed cabin parts.”

 

[BlackBat242]

And its not just non-critical/low-spec parts either:

http://www.3ders.org/articles/20161101-ge-unveils-3d-printed-atp-engine-more-additive-parts-than-any-engine-in-aviation-history.html

Nov 1, 2016 | By Benedict

General Electric (GE) has tested a demonstrator engine with 35% additive manufactured parts. The engine was made to validate 3D printed parts for the clean-sheet design Advanced Turboprop (ATP) engine, which will power the new Cessna Denali single-engine turboprop aircraft.

In its quest to turn additive manufacturing into an essential part of the aerospace industry, GE has showcased its most impressive feat of 3D printed engineering to date: an engine comprised of 35% 3D printed parts. The all-new lightweight components for the ATP will contribute to a 5% weight reduction, as well as a 1% improvement in specific fuel consumption (SFC), coming good on the promises made during the initial announcement of the 3D printed engine.

The clean-sheet design ATP will feature metal 3D printed parts which reduce the weight of the engine, not only through topologically optimized structures, but also by requiring fewer connecting parts: “With subtractive manufactured parts and assemblies, you traditionally use bolts, welds or other interfaces to attach the parts together, which adds weight to the engine,” said Gordon Follin, ATP Engineering GM at GE Aviation. “On the ATP, additive reduces weight by eliminating those attaching features while also optimizing design of the parts.”

To validate parts for the ATP, GE developed a CT7-2E1 technology demonstrator engine, the “a-CT7,” which was designed, built, and tested in 18 months. The demonstrator, reverse engineered from an existing (non-additive) CT7 engine, shows the full power of aerospace additive manufacturing, with more than 900 subtractive manufactured parts reduced to just 16 additive manufactured parts. While the demonstrator is not intended to fly, the engine architecture of the ATP is derived from the CT7, allowing for successfully tested additive parts from the a-CT7 to be incorporated into the ATP.

The ATP, which will power the new Cessna Denali single-engine turboprop aircraft, will feature more 3D printed components than any production engine in the history of aviation. 855 subtractive manufactured parts will be reduced to 12 additive parts, with those 12 making up 35% of the total part count. 3D printed parts include sumps, bearing housings, frames, exhaust case, combustor liner, heat exchangers, and stationary flowpath components.

The use of 12 3D printed parts in the ATP engine marks a dramatic increase in additive usage over the CFM LEAP engine, which contained just one instance of 3D printing: a 3D printed fuel nozzle tip. However, the eight engineers who designed the LEAP’s 3D printed fuel nozzle tip returned to the fold to create the 16 additive parts of the demonstrator a-CT7, and further 3D printed parts will be incorporated into the next version of the demonstrator.

According to GE, additive manufacturing has not only helped to reduce the weight of engine parts; it has also helped to increase production speed. The combustor liners, for example, were 3D printed in just two days. “A huge benefit of additive is expedited test schedules,” said Follin. “For a program like ATP, one of our big philosophical points of emphasis is getting hardware to test faster instead of spending too much time with models on a computer. By putting real hardware on test as quickly as we can, we can use the resultant data to help us design the next iteration for a better product, and we get that product much faster than if we were to use conventional manufacturing methods.”

The 1,240SHP-rated ATP is the first in a new line of GE turboprop engines aimed at Business and General Aviation aircraft in the 1,000-1,600 SHP range, and should be in the air by the end of 2017. The new Cessna Denali, which will be powered by the ATP, will have a range of 1,600 nautical miles and speeds higher than 285 knots.

GE Aviation Business vice president Brad Mottier recently reported that GE has spent about $1 billion developing its overall additive manufacturing plan. After failing to secure the purchase of SLM Solutions in October, GE eventually purchased 3D printing giant Concept Laser instead.

ATP features:

12 additive parts (35% total part count)
16:1 overall pressure ratio (OPR)
20% lower fuel burn (compared to competitors in same size class)
10% higher cruise power
Ruggedized, modular architecture based on CT7 turboshaft
All-titanium, 3D aerodynamic compressor for light-weight and efficient power generation
Cooled turbine blades enabling higher thrust and fuel efficiency
Integrated electronic propulsion control

GE's 3D printed fuel nozzle tip for the LEAP engine:

 

[whartung]

I don't know, but it seems that we can 3D print items of similar quality and durability as things that can be cast.

But, for example, they're not up to the quality of a forged item. So I think that's a reasonable limit in terms of strength and such. Other than that, the singular issue with 3D printing is the cost per item, which can be quite high. But it's cheaper than the normal tooling process you would undertake to make something for production.

 

[kilemall]

I guess I would tend to even out your tech tree a little more, informed by the various materials science, computing power and tools of TL progress.

Gravitic and nuclear damper tech is huge. Robotics should enable much more precise work in addition to repetitive productivity.

I see you took a stab at biotech, the concept of tools and objects that live, eat and self-repair is somewhat creepy but can be useful. I would tend to have such objects be intro'd 1-2 TL after their mechanical versions are available.

I suspect building high quality vehicles from makers happens a bit earlier then TL14.

To avoid making Traveller a gritty version of the Star Trek replicator economy, I guess I would tend to have makers be very expensive, specialized and finicky on feedstocks until common cheap transmutation, and often require items like water, carbon, metals in combination, some of which is in abundance but others in short supply.

Gotta keep those free traders moving.

And for food I'd probably keep at least a requirement for vatfed makers rather then making food out of raw materials-or at least make it taste bad and the crew pining to go back to that Rich planet where 'real' food is available.

 

[sfchbryan]

I guess I would tend to even out your tech tree a little more, informed by the various materials science, computing power and tools of TL progress.

Gravitic and nuclear damper tech is huge. Robotics should enable much more precise work in addition to repetitive productivity.

I see you took a stab at biotech, the concept of tools and objects that live, eat and self-repair is somewhat creepy but can be useful. I would tend to have such objects be intro'd 1-2 TL after their mechanical versions are available.

I suspect building high quality vehicles from makers happens a bit earlier then TL14.

To avoid making Traveller a gritty version of the Star Trek replicator economy, I guess I would tend to have makers be very expensive, specialized and finicky on feedstocks until common cheap transmutation, and often require items like water, carbon, metals in combination, some of which is in abundance but others in short supply.

Gotta keep those free traders moving.

And for food I'd probably keep at least a requirement for vatfed makers rather then making food out of raw materials-or at least make it taste bad and the crew pining to go back to that Rich planet where 'real' food is available.

I tie 3d printing back into the IDP requirements along with energy requirements. When your ship, vehicle, etc. needs a new part, it is 3d printed - no need to stock TL9 - TL15 parts. Simply submit your IDP for the part and it gets manufactured.

This allows folks to have both bog standard parts and "aftermarket" i.e. souped up parts. Of course, if it isn't a "standard" part, it may be a slight chance of an error creeping into part, causing a potential failure later.

This is what I am using for my Traveller campaign. The PCs have a Zhodani TL 9 Free Trader (MN-09 Fanzhienz class). When they need a part, they have the following to deal with:

Due to its rarity, this ship has unique maintenance requirements. The ship contains a complete set of 10/30/50 (user/general repair/depot rebuild) level manuals (Machine translated from Zdetl to Ganglic.) Parts can be manufactured at any Class B starport (Class A for the Ozhdetsi jump drive) at 110% of standard cost.

To successfully create a part for the ship:
Difficult, Engineering, Edu 12hr (Uncertain)
Referee: Cautious attempt lowers difficulty level to Routine. No Truth - the part doesn't fit. (Wrong unit of measurement) Some Truth: The part fits, but is defective in some way. Roll on the Mishap Table each time the subsystem is used. Total Truth: Part works normally. Uncertain is used because the part may not fail immediately. Extraordinary Success and Failure is possible.

 

[vegas]

To avoid making Traveller a gritty version of the Star Trek replicator economy, I guess I would tend to have makers be very expensive, specialized and finicky on feedstocks until common cheap transmutation, and often require items like water, carbon, metals in combination, some of which is in abundance but others in short supply.

Gotta keep those free traders moving.

I share that concern, and I like your solutions. I'd add some more limitations to maker technology too. Ideas: makers can't achieve the precision required for integrated circuits or other advanced technologies so key computer, grav, maneuver and jump drive components have to manufactured in different production processes than portable makers. Need to fix a hydraulic lift, provided you have the raw materials, a maker is your answer. Need to fix a blown processor or damaged jump drive? Better have your components in store or limp back to a starport for repairs.

 

[Whipsnade]

I tie 3d printing back into the IDP requirements along with energy requirements.

Without feedstock requirements that approach might as well be called a "replicator" because it's little more than Treks' techno-babble magic tech.

Unlike replicators, Traveller's makers do not transmute or, more accurately, do not transmute below a certain tech level. If component needs tungsten or silicon or colloidal graphite in a 10% solution of isopropyl alcohol, you better have tungsten or silicon or colloidal graphite in a 10% solution of isopropyl alcohol on hand to "feed" the maker.

3D printing is also something of a misnomer. The term used by the professionals already using the technology is "additive machining". They use that term because it encompasses more automated processes than just "printing"; automated processes like "pick & place", measuring, component(s) reorientation, assembly, traditional machining, mechanical finishing, and many others.

Whartung's comments also need to be heeded and understood. Additive machining is not the same as mass production. Adam Smith's pin example still holds true. If a large enough number of widgets need to be made, then specific tooling and/or machinery is still more efficient.

One manufacturer I know uses additive machine to relatively quikcly form and finish components which are then used to create molds with which the real production pieces will be made.

 

[whartung]

When I went to Knott's Berry Farm once, they were celebrating the anniversary of their narrow gauge railroad. The main components of which are a couple of locomotives and rolling stock purchase from the Denver & Rio Grande railroad.

Of note was the machine shop. As the locomotives where originally built in the 1880's, creating parts for equipment pretty much falls on them.

Obviously, the queen of the machine shop is the lathe, along with other tools (shapers, drill presses). But the "universal tool" of the age was the precision lathe.

Clearly the 3D printer can fill the role of "universal tool", giving proper feed stock. At least in terms of "mechanical" things. Electronics, and other components, perhaps not so much. it certainly a nice supplement to something like a lathe.

But even with electronics, today, consider we have things like Programmable Gate Arrays and other programmable logic. For digital computing, these devices turn "software" into "hardware". You no longer need a bevy of little black chips for discrete or sequential logic, gate arrays and their brethren can replace them.

Now, in terms of scale, and performance, etc. the gate arrays can't match dedicated silicon in efficiency, density, etc. But, perhaps they can work in a pinch. For example, what many consider "computers" in the past can be loaded on a gate array today. You can take a text file, the "source" to the gate array, and "download" a working CPU.

So, you can see, extending that concept, that "programmable electronics" may well be a tool in the field kit of an engineering section on a starship. Again, not a universal solution to all problems electronic, but certainly a potential jury rig. Also, clearly, Virus took the concept of "programmable electronics" perhaps a bit too far.

3D printing and such "soft" hardware tech can fit many use cases, but will be slow and expensive to produce. "We can get a carburetor, but it's going to take a day to make."

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme...al-gun-is-a-beautiful-45-caliber-m1911-pistol is a nice example of what 3D printing can do today. They printed and rifled the barrel, and are hitting chamber pressures of 20,000 PSI. Pretty sure they didn't print the springs though .

Not bad for metal powder with a laser dancing all over it.