[HN Gopher] MIT researchers demonstrate rapid liquid metal 3D pr...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       MIT researchers demonstrate rapid liquid metal 3D printing
       technique
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 83 points
       Date   : 2024-02-18 07:27 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tctmagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tctmagazine.com)
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | How much energy does this use?
        
         | jameshart wrote:
         | We know enough from the article to be able to ballpark estimate
         | it. Heat capacity of aluminum is 0.9 kJ/kg degC, and the latent
         | heat of fusion is 390kJ/kg. The temperature they heat the
         | aluminum to is 700degC, from presumably room temperature around
         | 20degC - so 0.9*680 + 390 kJ/kg = 1002 kJ/kg is going to be the
         | basic heating requirement, or as near as dammit 1MJ/kg. Getting
         | that heat into the aluminum and then maintaining that
         | temperature during the print presumably introduces some
         | inefficiencies (induction furnaces can heat aluminum with about
         | 40-50% efficiency), plus they have to move the mass of aluminum
         | around with their print motors... but the heat to melt the
         | aluminum feels likely to be the main energy sink. Inductively
         | heated, with good crucible insulation, 2MJ/kg sounds like a
         | reasonable energy budget?
         | 
         | For a comparison, that's about ten times the amount of energy
         | you use running your microwave to heat up a ready meal, for
         | every kilogram of aluminum you want to form.
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Ok. How much less efficient is this process compared to mass-
           | fabrication techniques?
        
             | barelyauser wrote:
             | Mass production is not only about energy efficiency. It is
             | also about material efficiency and time efficiency. People
             | want stuff NOW. Each process has its advantages. 3d
             | printing can do stuff that mass fabrication techniques
             | can't.
        
               | Qwertious wrote:
               | >It is also about material efficiency and time
               | efficiency. People want stuff NOW.
               | 
               | Also, if you have a $1M machine then the machine-time
               | really adds up.
        
               | barelyauser wrote:
               | Precisely. $1M and interest rates of 6% per year mean
               | almost $7 per hour just to cover financing.
        
       | gregw2 wrote:
       | I wonder if you could just 3D-print a mold and then pour the
       | aluminum in as part of a 3d printer like this, rather than use a
       | nozzle, and you'd get better quality/resolution.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Or a 3 step process: PLA mold -> silicone mold -> aluminum
         | object.
        
         | jan_Sate wrote:
         | I'm thinking about the other way around. Assuming that their
         | aluminum 3D printer works, print the aluminum mold using their
         | 3D printer. Then make plastic parts with injection molding.
        
           | frognumber wrote:
           | Injection molding molds have precision requirements well
           | beyond any 3d printing.
           | 
           | They're very expensive for that reason. It's hard even for
           | precision machining.
        
             | naasking wrote:
             | You can print molds that you literally cannot machine.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | But how do you get the product out!?
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | You break the mold
        
           | ElevenLathe wrote:
           | I've seen hobbyists do investment casting with FDM-printed
           | patterns. I assume something similar in spirit is available
           | to industry if they want to do it?
        
         | barbegal wrote:
         | You can but then you lose some of the advantages of the 3d
         | printing technique e.g. the ability to create complex internal
         | geometries
        
           | frognumber wrote:
           | A 3d-printed mold could actually do that. It'd just be a
           | destructive process -- the mold would not survive.
           | 
           | Ceramic is cheap enough that this might be okay.
           | 
           | Removal would be a pain. Probably some chemical which melts
           | ceramic but not metal. Perhaps something mechanical which
           | relies on ceramic being brittle to break it up. Dunno.
        
             | amelius wrote:
             | Silicone is easy to remove.
        
         | twobitshifter wrote:
         | You would need a ceramic mold, but that might be easier to 3d
         | print?
         | 
         | Right now it is in a bed of fine glass beads that the printer
         | drags through as it goes, so this is kind of a similar
         | approach. For one offs or prototypes this might be good, but
         | when you print more than one of something than a mold likely
         | makes more sense.
        
           | frognumber wrote:
           | Aluminum sandcasting is what you're looking for.
           | 
           | Sand is cheap, and should be easy to 3d print, even for one-
           | offs.
        
             | whatshisface wrote:
             | Sand molds have to be compacted.
        
         | rpmisms wrote:
         | This is already done using sand casting. However, it's low
         | resolution.
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | Low resolution is a relative term. It certainly beats this.
        
         | Const-me wrote:
         | Here's a commercially available high resolution DLP 3D printer
         | people use to make molds for casting gold and silver parts:
         | https://www.junction3d.com/
         | 
         | There are downsides, too: printing is slow, and the build area
         | is small, furniture parts not gonna fit there.
        
       | unraveller wrote:
       | there is a video
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H93W-CiOT4A
        
         | mateo1 wrote:
         | Cool idea. Impractical but cool.
        
       | frognumber wrote:
       | Neat to see this!
       | 
       | As the technology improves, I am skeptical of the necessity of
       | sacrificing resolution. I can think of a half-dozen ways to
       | improve on this as it moves from V0 to V1 to V2.
       | 
       | The video mentions post-machining, but aside from that, we have:
       | 
       | - More sophisticated media than uniform glass pallets. In
       | particular, an outline could be preplaced, so it is more like
       | casting. For example, one could have large glass pieces, smaller
       | glass pieces, etc. arranged prior.
       | 
       | - Combined methods, where this prints the coarse shape, and
       | slower techniques fill in details. This could even be the same
       | technique but with successively smaller nozzles.
       | 
       | And simple process improvements (esp. refining nozzle design,
       | temperature, and flow rate, so in some ways). I suspect moving
       | from liquid to something more like extrusion, could help as well.
       | Extrusion can be quite precise. Better process control, with some
       | form of feedback loop, would help too. Imaging aluminum in
       | realtime through the glass pallets in realtime should not be
       | fundamentally hard.
       | 
       | By "not hard," I mean "known engineering process with known
       | technologies" (e.g. solvable, but a serious multiyear engineering
       | effort).
       | 
       | First press release + video I've seen from MIT which doesn't
       | oversell / overhype results or grossly exaggerate potential
       | impact. That's refreshing too.
        
         | Animats wrote:
         | Wasn't this on HN a few days ago?
         | 
         | There are already good metal printers. They're usually
         | sintering systems - put down a powder and fire it in a furnace.
         | There are systems for 3D printing sand molds for casting.[1]
         | Both of those processes are much more precise than this one.
         | 
         | Metals do usually have a phase in which they're solid, but
         | malleable, and can be worked with modest forces. "Modest"
         | usually means hammers, large presses, or a rolling mill. A good
         | metal extruder working with red-hot but not molten metal would
         | need to be able to apply similar forces. That's what the 3D
         | printers that work with wire and are similar to welders do.[2]
         | There's directed energy deposition, which converts metal powder
         | to molten metal for a fraction of a second at the deposition
         | point.[3]
         | 
         | This liquid system has the same problem as the 3D printing
         | systems for concrete that were being touted a few years ago.
         | Some kind of molding or die is needed to guide the material at
         | the point the metal becomes a solid, or the result is very
         | rough.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.voxeljet.com/3d-printing-solution/sand-casting/
         | 
         | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3nNlVcoba8
         | 
         | [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oL7bMhPTtDI
        
       | massifist wrote:
       | Here's an older HN link from an MIT article.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39156463
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | Lots of progress, still clearly many improvements possible. Baby
       | steps! This could be very useful in a lunar colony, quickly
       | smelting parts and structures out of the lunar soil. It's around
       | 8% aluminum (bauxite) which melts at a reasonable temperature.
       | Strong enough for larger-scale building uses such as airlocks and
       | beams.
        
       | LargeTomato wrote:
       | It is a shame we're seeing a divestment in 3D printing
       | technologies. Relativity Space recently descoped their entire 3D
       | printing department, but I believe they still may be using some
       | commercially-acquired printers.
       | 
       | I hope we can see someone else take up the mantle on complex 3D
       | printing manufacturing. There's an Indian space company that is
       | trying to do what Relativity did. I hope it works out for them.
        
         | nickpinkston wrote:
         | I thought Relativity Space pulled back on their use of 3D
         | printing for the major fuselage parts, saving it more for the
         | engine components, etc., which SpaceX was already doing.
        
           | LargeTomato wrote:
           | I believe you are correct. Relativity is now only printing
           | engines, just like SpaceX, Rocket Lab, Astra, Firefly, Stoke,
           | and others. They are no longer a company driving forward 3D
           | printing technology and that's too bad.
        
         | bbarn wrote:
         | It's been amazing to watch the 3D printing space grow as far as
         | it has. In just the last 10-20 years it's gone from something
         | only dedicated people were able to build and get reasonable
         | results to high precision devices any hobbyist can get their
         | hands on for a few hundred bucks.
         | 
         | I have two resin printers and a PLA printer and I never
         | expected at-home capability to get this far this fast.
         | 
         | But, that's still all effectively plastic we're talking about.
         | I think the problem with metals is still well.. metals. The
         | same types of metallurgy needed for 3D printing have been
         | researched and hit almost a dead end with injection molding (I
         | know there are some metal injection molding systems out there,
         | but it's not hit anywhere near the strength of machined steel
         | yet)
        
           | ok123456 wrote:
           | People are 3d printing metal right now with LPBF, DED, and
           | Wire EDM. For LPBF the challenge is controlling keyholing and
           | lack of fusion defects through the process parameters.
        
           | thimkerbell wrote:
           | BBarn, how far along are the circularity tools, can I turn
           | clean used plastic jugs back into feedstock worth using to
           | make 3D stuff?
        
             | ThrowawayTestr wrote:
             | There are many designs for DIY filament makers that use 2L
             | pop bottles.
        
               | thimkerbell wrote:
               | Which kinds of plastic are reusable as filament?
        
               | evilduck wrote:
               | HDPE and PET are the most common I've seen in the
               | community, which probably accounts for the majority of
               | beverage containers you've ever encountered.
        
             | evilduck wrote:
             | Something like a PET milk jug is harder since you'd need to
             | shred it and remelt a good portion of the jug into filament
             | since the handle area would be hard to deal with, which is
             | hard to do in a DIY manner. Same for reprocessing failed
             | prints and scrap support pieces of prints, plus various
             | coloring agents and manufacturer additives make a blend of
             | recycled bits inconsistent. It's probably easier to DIY a
             | high temp composter than to recycle PLA.
             | 
             | But there's a ton of people out there with jig designs to
             | spiral cut a normal cylindrical bottle and feed it into a
             | hotend that creates filament from it. Here's one example
             | https://www.printables.com/model/768657-petalot-plastic-
             | bott.... YouTube has dozens of videos of these in action.
             | Generally speaking you won't get as good of results as
             | commercial filament since filament diameter needs to be
             | carefully controlled and it affects flow rate which then
             | affects resulting print quality. If you print something
             | simple, large, and practical it's fine, if you need
             | something finely detailed it can be fiddly.
        
       | projektfu wrote:
       | What class of fabricated metal does it compare to? Cast metal? I
       | didn't see it in the article.
        
       | SmokeyHamster wrote:
       | This was posted before. Not really 3d printing. It's more of a
       | quick casted mold maker, since it just uses a conventional CNC
       | machine to "draw" the shape in sand and then it pours molten
       | metal in the sand mold.
       | 
       | A clever enough idea, but the results are mixed. It's limited to
       | fairly simple 2d shapes and the quality of the "prints" are quite
       | poor and require a lot more post processing than true 3d metal
       | printers.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-18 23:01 UTC)