[HN Gopher] Plane crashed after 3D-printed part collapsed
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Plane crashed after 3D-printed part collapsed
        
       Author : toss1
       Score  : 179 points
       Date   : 2025-12-04 20:56 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
        
       | CarVac wrote:
       | I wonder what material it was printed with.
       | 
       | edit: It was ABS-CF, which shouldn't be used under stress long-
       | term in higher temperatures than maybe 65-70degC, or lower
       | depending on the blend.
        
         | gostsamo wrote:
         | > The Cozy Mk IV light aircraft was destroyed after its plastic
         | air induction elbow, bought at an air show in North America,
         | collapsed.
        
         | the_mitsuhiko wrote:
         | CF-ABS
         | 
         | > An alternative construction method for the air induction
         | elbow, shown in the Cozy Mk IV plans, is a lamination of four
         | layers of bi-directional glassfibre cloth with epoxy resin. The
         | epoxy resin specified for the laminate has a glass transition
         | temperature of 84degC, after the finished part has been post-
         | cured. The aircraft owner stated that as the glass transition
         | temperature listed for the CF-ABS material was higher than the
         | epoxy resin, he was satisfied the component was fit for use in
         | this application when it was installed
         | 
         | https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69297a4e345e3...
        
           | ohazi wrote:
           | What a misunderstanding -- glass transition temperature means
           | different things for thermoplastics (i.e. anything that comes
           | out of an FDM printer like the CF-ABS in question) and for
           | thermosetting resins like epoxy that actually undergo
           | molecular cross-linking during the curing phase.
           | Thermoplastics will get soft and can deform without limit,
           | while thermosets get rubbery but still more or less hold
           | their formed shape.
        
           | buildbot wrote:
           | I think an extended quote shows that this was a really bad
           | call:
           | 
           | " The aircraft owner stated that as the glass transition
           | temperature listed for the CF-ABS material was higher than
           | the epoxy resin, he was satisfied the component was fit for
           | use in this application when it was installed. A review of
           | the design of the laminated induction elbow in the Cozy Mk IV
           | plans showed that it featured a section of thin-walled
           | aluminium tube at the inlet end of the elbow, where the air
           | filter is attached. The aluminium tube provides a degree of
           | temperature-insensitive structural support for the inlet end
           | of the elbow. The 3D-printed induction elbow on G-BYLZ did
           | not include a similar section of aluminium tube at the inlet
           | end. Tests and research Two samples from the air induction
           | elbow were subjected to testing, using a heat-flux
           | differential scanning calorimeter, to determine their glass
           | transition temperature. The measured glass transition
           | temperature for the first sample was 52.8degC, and 54.0degC
           | for the second sample."
        
           | jandrese wrote:
           | > The epoxy resin specified for the laminate has a glass
           | transition temperature of 84degC
           | 
           | This seems very low for the kinds of epoxy I've used. I
           | wonder if the manufacturer specs are highly conservative? Or
           | maybe the material has a shortened lifespan with even
           | moderate temperatures?
           | 
           | I was thinking about the ABS in the article and wondering if
           | I would have made the same mistake. Close to every car
           | manufactured today has plastic intakes, usually bolted right
           | on top of the engine. The incoming air should help keep it
           | cool, especially on aircraft. Maybe it was the radiant heat
           | from a nearby cylinder that melted it?
        
             | CarVac wrote:
             | There are some incredibly low Tg epoxies out there, such as
             | West Systems 105 where "TG onset" is 54degC and the heat
             | deflection temperature is even lower.
        
         | bluerooibos wrote:
         | I wonder who installed it. Was the pilot home 3D printing mods
         | for their plane? And is that even allowed? Super concerning if
         | there was a company behind the installation.
         | 
         | I'd think any semi competent engineer would know better.
         | 
         | Edit: from the report - "A modification application was made to
         | the LAA in 2019, by the aircraft owner2 , to replace the
         | engine's throttle body fuel injector with a mechanical fuel
         | injection system. This system consisted of a fuel controller,
         | high-pressure engine-driven fuel pump, electric auxiliary fuel
         | pump, fuel flow transducer and associated fuel hoses, filters
         | and fittings. Following flight testing, the modified fuel
         | system was approved by the LAA in 2022. The modified fuel
         | injection system had accumulated 37 hours in service when the
         | accident occurred."
         | 
         | So the pilot himself and the LAA were incompetent. LAA is an
         | association for amateur pilots though so I'm not sure what
         | level of rigour they "approve" things with.
        
           | Zak wrote:
           | Nearly anything is allowed for experimental amateur-built
           | aircraft like the one in this incident. Unapproved
           | modifications to certified aircraft are forbidden in most
           | parts of the world.
        
           | proee wrote:
           | The plane is an experimental class, so I doubt they have to
           | follow a lot of regulations.
        
           | duskwuff wrote:
           | In addition to what other users have mentioned, the airplane
           | changed hands in August 2024, after the modifications were
           | made.
        
         | MBCook wrote:
         | Given what it was would it have been under actual stress?
         | 
         | Certainly seems questionable to use any 3-D printed plastic
         | material for exhaust. That's absolutely going to be too hot.
        
           | CarVac wrote:
           | It was an intake manifold, so it's continuously under
           | suction. At the temperatures in an engine bay the plastic
           | probably gradually creeped to a point where the restriction
           | increased the suction and suddenly it collapses completely.
        
             | MBCook wrote:
             | Oh the suction, I wasn't considering that. I was thinking
             | of general compression or tension between the connections
             | on the ends.
        
         | brovonov wrote:
         | Lower, according to the report
         | 
         | "Two samples from the air induction elbow were subjected to
         | testing, using a heat-flux differential scanning calorimeter,
         | to determine their glass transition temperature. The measured
         | glass transition temperature for the first sample was 52.8degC,
         | and 54.0degC for the second sample"
         | 
         | Yeah, they might have used ABS-CF filament, but unless they got
         | it from a good brand that uses good resin and proper printing
         | parameters, the actual Tg will be lower, plus the stress from
         | the vibration/load could have made the part fail if it was not
         | for the heat later in flight.
        
           | CarVac wrote:
           | Some manufacturers fudge the Tg.
           | 
           | Polymaker Polylite ABS has a claimed Tg of 101degC but the
           | HDT curve clearly shows it starting to lose strength at
           | 50degC, for example.
        
             | brovonov wrote:
             | Polymaker's ABS is dubious too because it is blended with
             | PETG. They are coming out with a Pro version that has a
             | higher Tg and requires way higher chamber temps to print
             | properly.
        
           | zuppy wrote:
           | by the glass transition temperature, i'm willing to bet it
           | was printed with pla (probably pla-cf).
        
         | rupellohn wrote:
         | Full report here:
         | https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69297a4e345e3...
         | 
         | The aircraft owner who installed the modified fuel system
         | stated that the 3D-printed induction elbow was purchased in the
         | USA at an airshow, and he understood from the vendor that it
         | was printed from CF-ABS (carbon fibre - acrylonitrile butadiene
         | styrene) filament material, with a glass transition
         | temperature3 of 105degC.
         | 
         | An alternative construction method for the air induction elbow,
         | shown in the Cozy Mk IV plans, is a lamination of four layers
         | of bi-directional glassfibre cloth with epoxy resin. The epoxy
         | resin specified for the laminate has a glass transition
         | temperature of 84degC, after the finished part has been post-
         | cured. The aircraft owner stated that as the glass transition
         | temperature listed for the CF-ABS material was higher than the
         | epoxy resin, he was satisfied the component was fit for use in
         | this application when it was installed.
         | 
         | A review of the design of the laminated induction elbow in the
         | Cozy Mk IV plans showed that it featured a section of thin-
         | walled aluminium tube at the inlet end of the elbow, where the
         | air filter is attached. The aluminium tube provides a degree of
         | temperature-insensitive structural support for the inlet end of
         | the elbow. The 3D-printed induction elbow on G-BYLZ did not
         | include a similar section of aluminium tube at the inlet end.
        
       | teamonkey wrote:
       | The actual report[1] holds the answer to the question you're
       | asking.
       | 
       | CF-ABS (or so claimed)
       | 
       | [1] https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-
       | cozy-m...
        
       | ohazi wrote:
       | Actual report: https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/487013
       | 
       | Material was CF-ABS
        
         | shmeeed wrote:
         | Except that it wasn't, it's just what "the owner understood
         | from the vendor". But the AAIB measured the Tg of material
         | samples to be about 53 degC, which is very low and strongly
         | suggests it being PLA or PLA-CF.
         | 
         | I wonder if he was erroneously sold a demonstrator part?
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Looks like either CF loaded ABS or PLA, the difference is
           | super hard to tell visually but given that they determined
           | that particular temp my bet would be PLA because even PETG
           | would be higher.
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> Material was CF-ABS
         | 
         | With a glass transition temp of 105C.
         | 
         | And yet "Two samples from the air induction elbow were
         | subjected to testing, using a heat-flux differential scanning
         | calorimeter, to determine their glass transition temperature.
         | The measured glass transition temperature for the first sample
         | was 52.8degC, and 54.0degC for the second sample."
        
       | o11c wrote:
       | At a glance, that looks like worse than merely the negligence of
       | using a new technology.
       | 
       | The whole _point_ of 3D printing is that the material is moldable
       | when hot but rigid when it cools. And people really should be
       | aware that engines get hot.
        
         | lazide wrote:
         | Bought it at a get-together.
         | 
         | Like gunshows, it's a magnet for bad ideas.
        
         | CarVac wrote:
         | I think the main issue is that many filament manufacturers
         | mislead or outright lie about their filament capabilities.
        
         | hatsunearu wrote:
         | Apparently they thought it's ok because the published glass
         | transition temp is higher than the epoxy used for fiberglass
         | construction
        
         | nyeah wrote:
         | I think there's some nuance missing here. "Hot" is a scale, not
         | just a true/false check.
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | >The whole point of 3D printing is that the material is
         | moldable when hot but rigid when it cools.
         | 
         | Which means what exactly? Aluminum will go soft under high
         | temperatures as well, yet this part would not have failed if it
         | was made out of aluminum.
         | 
         | The failure is not the material, the failure is someone
         | neglecting the operating conditions or material properties when
         | choosing materials.
         | 
         | This exact part could have also been milled out of some plastic
         | and would have failed the same way. The method to produce that
         | part is only relevant in so far it is open to more people.
        
       | cmiles8 wrote:
       | This might be Darwin Award eligible!
        
         | shagie wrote:
         | > The sole occupant was taken to hospital with minor injuries.
        
       | mdni007 wrote:
       | 3D printing parts is FAA approved?
        
         | petcat wrote:
         | Crash occurred in UK
        
         | stetrain wrote:
         | I'm not sure Gloucestershire is under FAA jurisdiction.
        
         | einpoklum wrote:
         | You may want to ask about the LAA: Light Aircraft Association.
        
         | gpm wrote:
         | Yes. I mean not this one, but the FAA has definitely approved
         | 3D printed parts. SpaceX's raptor rocket engines, for instance.
        
         | rurban wrote:
         | Lots of F1 parts are 3D printed, as well as many satellite
         | rocket parts still flying. You just need the proper materials.
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | Some of the most advanced aircraft engines for commercial
         | airliners contain 3D printed parts:
         | https://www.cfmaeroengines.com/leap
         | 
         | The FAA denying approval to parts based on how it was
         | manufactured and not how it performed under testing would be
         | totally ridiculous.
        
       | hatsunearu wrote:
       | Is this a Part 103 Ultralight?
       | 
       | Also it's insane that they used a bolted joint with plastics on a
       | critical place, the plastic will creep under the clamp load and
       | will lose clamp force.
        
         | bri3d wrote:
         | > Is this a Part 103 Ultralight?
         | 
         | Well, no, it's in the UK. It also has a gross weight of around
         | 2000lbs, so it's probably not subject to any of the relaxed
         | regulations anywhere, although I don't know how the UK
         | homebuilt rules work these days.
        
       | fudged71 wrote:
       | This is the mechanical equivalent of vibe coding. 3D printing
       | itself isn't exactly to blame but the negligence of the company
       | that created and sold this part and omitted it's use from an
       | inspection.
       | 
       | Just because a part has the shape of an engineered part does not
       | make it compatible, strong, safe, and fit for purpose. This part
       | could have likely been fine if it used a different material such
       | as Ultem.
        
         | delichon wrote:
         | > blame ... the negligence of the company that created and sold
         | this part
         | 
         | That should be so obvious that I wonder if it was DIY by the
         | pilot.
        
           | ElijahLynn wrote:
           | > The Cozy Mk IV light aircraft was destroyed after its
           | plastic air induction elbow, bought at an air show in North
           | America, collapsed.
        
           | michaelt wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_MK_IV
           | 
           |  _> The Cozy Mark IV is a 4-seat, single engine, homebuilt
           | light aircraft [...] The aircraft is built from plans using
           | basic raw materials. It is not a kit aircraft_
           | 
           | You could scarcely get more DIY than this aircraft. Home-
           | built, and not even from a kit - the builder gets to lay up
           | every part in glass fibre themselves, by hand. And this guy
           | had been flying it for 26 years.
           | 
           | It sounds like the guy was sold a part 3D printed in the
           | wrong plastic, and it melted. He thought it was ABS, but it
           | melted at the temperatures PLA melts at. If your engine air
           | inlet is made of plastic that melts at 54degC (130degF)
           | you're going to have a bad time.
           | 
           | It's easy to imagine how a chaotic 3D printing business might
           | have run off a test part in a cheaper black plastic, then a
           | confused worker could have stored the test part in with the
           | other 'identical' parts in a different black plastic.
           | 
           | The 'serious' aerospace industry avoids this with lots of
           | paperwork and procedure; when an airline maintains an airbus
           | plane, they use only airbus-approved parts from airbus-
           | approved sources with a paperwork trail confirming they were
           | inspected for being-the-right-material using an approved
           | procedure. I don't know if the home-built aircraft community
           | would be eager to adopt those practices, though.
        
         | elicash wrote:
         | In what way is this like vibe-coding -- or do you just mean
         | both are bad?
         | 
         | According to the report:
         | 
         | > The aircraft owner who installed the modified fuel system
         | stated that the 3D-printed induction elbow was purchased in the
         | USA at an airshow, and he understood from the vendor that it
         | was printed from CF-ABS (carbon fibre - acrylonitrile butadiene
         | styrene) filament material, with a glass transition
         | temperature3 of 105degC.
         | 
         | https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69297a4e345e3...
         | 
         | Isn't this simply a part that shouldn't have been allowed to be
         | sold based on it being both faulty and also misleading?
        
           | johnnyanmac wrote:
           | The implication was that the part took shortcuts and made
           | something that only looked good on the surface. But couldn't
           | stand up to deeper scrutiny.
        
           | hbrav wrote:
           | Well how confident would you be that this part isn't exposed
           | to temperatures above that glass transition temperature? It
           | is installed near the engine.
        
             | film42 wrote:
             | Installed _on_ an engine that operates at 200oC!
        
             | plorg wrote:
             | The report further states that the part included in the
             | original design (part of the kit) was made of a carbon
             | fiber composite where the epoxy had a listed glass
             | transition temperature of 840C. If there is an element to
             | be critical of along these lines it's that the part as
             | originally designed is supposed to include an aluminum tube
             | at one end that may stiffen the part - the report makes no
             | conclusions whether it truly would have, but notes that the
             | _actual_ glass transition temperature was found to be much
             | lower than listed, and lower than that of the epoxy used in
             | the original design.
        
           | engineer_22 wrote:
           | If vibe coding is shipping code that you don't understand and
           | can't ensure it's safety,
           | 
           | And if this part was simply 3d scanned and printed in
           | whatever material seemed strongest,
           | 
           | Then it could be an apt analogy
        
           | Treegarden wrote:
           | I think by vibe coding he means taking these things at face
           | value instead of rigorously looking if they are up to the
           | standard. When coding you would rigorously look if the code
           | is good / produces any bugs. With vibe coding, you give a
           | prompt and just accept the output, which might be full of
           | errors and blow up (or melt). The analogy is that, yes you
           | can print airplane parts, but they were sloppy and just
           | accepted them at face value instead of rigorously looking if
           | they are up to the required (bug free) standard, ie they wont
           | melt.
        
             | serf wrote:
             | >I think by vibe coding he means taking these things at
             | face value instead of rigorously looking if they are up to
             | the standard.
             | 
             | Yeah, exactly -- which is why it's a stupid phrase for what
             | happened here.
             | 
             | Not every negligence is somehow equatable to an AI pitfall,
             | it's just on parents' mind so it's the only metaphor that
             | gets applied.
             | 
             | A poorly fit hammer in a _world_ of nails.
             | 
             | I say this as an engineer/proprietor with _years_ of
             | additive manufacturing experience, it 's insulting. A
             | poorly chosen and wrongly used process conveys _nothing_
             | about the underlying fundamentals of the process itself --
             | it conveys _everything_ about the engineer and the business
             | processes that birthed the problem.
             | 
             | Similarly if I came across a poorly vibe-coded project I
             | wouldn't blame Anthropic/oAI directly -- I would blame the
             | programmer who decided to release such garbage made with
             | such powerful tools..
             | 
             | tl;dr : it's not vibe-coding itself that makes vibe-coding
             | a poor fit to rocket science and brain surgery -- it's the
             | braindead engineer that pushes the code to the THERAC-25
             | without reading.
        
               | Ntrails wrote:
               | I think the idea was that 3D printing made doing a thing
               | accessible, previously required solid fundamental
               | knowledge (and very expensive kit). Now you can just take
               | some specs off the internet and press go.
               | 
               | The comparison does not seem as absurd to me as it does
               | to you. vOv
        
             | cortesoft wrote:
             | This is more like adding a third party dependency to your
             | project without vetting it.
        
             | saltcured wrote:
             | The problem is we have different terms that all mean doing
             | something without real risk management or analysis in
             | software. Both "cowboy coding" and "vibe coding" mean the
             | same thing, if you remove the agent doing the production.
             | 
             | And since vibe coding is so recently coined, I think a lot
             | of people take it to specifically mean "LLM" and not some
             | generalized "any third-party agent".
             | 
             | Then, a vibe coded engine part sounds like it would need a
             | generative AI producing the CAD file that is then printed.
             | And it might have some bizarre topology like a Klein bottle
             | or some fever dream.
        
           | benatkin wrote:
           | The person who coined the term vibe coding is now doing a
           | soylent-like [1] experiment where he only will read content
           | that has been regurgitated by an AI [2], so yes I think it's
           | a fair characterization of "vibe coding".
           | 
           | 1: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2014/10/soylent-creator-
           | hack...
           | 
           | 2: https://x.com/karpathy/status/1990577951671509438
        
             | seg_lol wrote:
             | He is gonna get slopabetes!
        
           | mwambua wrote:
           | In the report they tested samples of the part and found that
           | they actually had glass transition temperatures of 52.8degC,
           | and 54.0degC... so sounds like the owner fell victim to false
           | advertising.
        
             | plorg wrote:
             | And in fact the owner was not the person who installed the
             | part!
        
           | ncr100 wrote:
           | Experimental Aircraft are less licensed than non-
           | experimental, so this is more of a YOLO pilot.
        
           | averynicepen wrote:
           | 3D printing is to mechanical engineering what vibe coding is
           | to computer science.
           | 
           | With the rise of accessible 3D printers that can print
           | engineering materials, there are a lot of people who try to
           | create functional parts without any engineering background.
           | Loading conditions, material properties, failure modes, and
           | fatigue cycling are all important but invisible engineering
           | steps that must be taken for a part to function safely.
           | 
           | As a consumer with a 3D printer, none of this is apparent
           | when you look at a static, non-moving part. Even when you do
           | start to learn more technical details like glass transition
           | temperature, non-isotropic strength, and material creep, it's
           | still not enough to cover everything you need to consider.
           | 
           | Much of this is also taught experimentally, not analytically
           | - everyone will tell you "increasing walls increases strength
           | more than increasing infill", but very few can actually point
           | to the area moment of inertia equation that explains why.
           | 
           | 3D printing has been an incredible boon for increasing
           | accessibility for making parts in small businesses, but it
           | has also allowed for big mistakes to be made by small
           | players. My interpretation is the airshow vendor is probably
           | one of these "small businesses".
        
             | phoronixrly wrote:
             | I call bullshit. 3d-printing is just a manufacturing
             | method. Basic woodworking is much cheaper and more
             | accessible than 3d-printing, do you call it vibe-coding?
        
               | defrost wrote:
               | If you carve a wooden part with "the right shape" for an
               | engineering application that the part lacks the physical
               | properties that allow it to perform under load stress ...
               | then yes, that's vibe carving.
               | 
               | Looks good - falls apart in practice, and a junior can't
               | tell the difference as they "look the same" to the
               | inexperienced eye.
               | 
               | From practical experience, you cannot just replace a tyre
               | on a car with any old bit of wood - you really need to
               | use hard wearing mulga (or equivilant) as an emergency
               | skid. (And replace that as soon as possible)
        
           | seemaze wrote:
           | In the sense that production costs have undercut evaluation
           | costs permitting a cadre of un(der)-qualified entrants to the
           | space.
           | 
           | Not a new story in the progression of human endeavors; see
           | the printing press, perspective painting, digital
           | photography, residential construction.
        
         | carabiner wrote:
         | Vibe coding _can_ make code that is suitable for production. 3d
         | printed plastic _can not_ be a substitute for a fiberglass-
         | metal part.
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | I think a more useful definition of vibe coding is "something
         | you can do when it really doesn't matter". Which requires a
         | hell of a lot of judgement to know when it doesn't.
         | 
         | Installing life-critical parts of shoddy engineering into a
         | vital system of your _airplane_ is a good example of when
         | things do matter.
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> This part could have likely been fine if it used a different
         | material such as Ultem.
         | 
         | Maybe, but FDM printed parts are still much weaker than molded
         | parts. We tried printing some coolant pump housings once during
         | development. They worked fine until the pressure went up and
         | then layers separated and someone got to clean the lab. At
         | least an air intake is gonna have negative pressure which might
         | help hold the layers together.
        
           | PunchyHamster wrote:
           | but it didn't fail because of stress. It failed exactly
           | because it was made from wrong material. If the exact same
           | part was injection molded from the same material it would
           | melt too
        
         | itopaloglu83 wrote:
         | It's also a validation failure as well, because somebody
         | assumed that the 3d-printed part could work as intended without
         | validating it under various use-cases and situations.
         | 
         | Looks like they would like to make the early flight mistakes
         | themselves instead of following air worthiness guidelines.
        
       | owenversteeg wrote:
       | The part was claimed to be ABS-CF. UK AAIB tested the part and
       | found it to have a Tg of approximately 53C. The Tg of ABS is far
       | higher, around 100C. I suspect that the part may have been
       | accidentally printed with PLA-CF (which has a Tg of approximately
       | 55C.)
       | 
       | The original part was fiberglass/epoxy with the epoxy having a Tg
       | of 84C.
        
         | brovonov wrote:
         | Plastics under load have a lower Tg.
        
           | hatsunearu wrote:
           | Isn't Tg a poorly defined metric? It seems like
           | thermoplastics will lose their strength as temperature goes
           | up and there's no abrupt transition where there's a near
           | step-change in behavior
        
             | brovonov wrote:
             | It kind of is, a better metric is HDT (Heat Deflection
             | Temperature), and it is based on curve usually load over
             | temp.
        
               | gpm wrote:
               | And a datasheet for _a_ (not necessarily the same) CF-ABS
               | filament claims a HDT at 1.82 MPa of 93C: https://um-
               | support-files.ultimaker.com/materials/1.75mm/tds/...
               | 
               | Something funny is going on with this material given the
               | report is saying they measured a glass transition
               | temperature of ~50C.
        
               | ggreer wrote:
               | I doubt there is any form of ABS filament with such a low
               | glass transition temperature. As the original poster
               | said, it was probably PLA.
               | 
               | I find it odd that the report didn't name the
               | manufacturer of the part, and that the part was not
               | listed on the LAA modification form. There can't be many
               | people selling such parts at airshows, so you'd think the
               | investigators would have been able to find out who made
               | it.
               | 
               | Now I wonder if the previous owner (who installed the new
               | fuel system) printed the part himself, then claimed he
               | bought it overseas to avoid blame.
        
           | CarVac wrote:
           | Tg changes? Or do you mean they deflect sooner under more
           | load?
        
             | nomel wrote:
             | Maybe "load" includes the heat that comes from the changes
             | forces from the vibrations?
        
             | nomel wrote:
             | Maybe "load" includes the heat that comes from the changes
             | forces from the vibrations? But even then, that would be
             | additional heat sources, rather than a change in the
             | temperature where it happens.
        
           | Kirby64 wrote:
           | Tg does not change with load.
           | 
           | HDT does, kind of, but that's already covered by the load
           | being defined for the various conditions. HDT is always
           | defined at a specific load so it also does not change with
           | load (since load is fixed).
        
         | boothby wrote:
         | What's Tg?
        
           | digitalPhonix wrote:
           | Glass transition temperature I think
        
           | emil-lp wrote:
           | Glass transition temperature.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_transition
        
           | owenversteeg wrote:
           | Glass-liquid transition temperature, which is approximately
           | where plastics and other materials change from hard and
           | relatively brittle into flexible and rubbery.
           | 
           | As the other comments here noted, it doesn't exactly mean
           | that the material is safe to use for a rigid part below that
           | temperature, and the transition extends over a range in
           | temperatures, but it does give you a rough idea about the
           | behavior of a material at various temperatures.
        
         | pawelduda wrote:
         | Sounds plausible but I guess it's something that they would've
         | confirmed, had it been true
         | 
         | Or it was ABS-CF but they forgot to dry the filament /s
        
       | mberning wrote:
       | The person that installed should have thought more carefully
       | about it. But the person that printed it and sold it should face
       | some legal repercussions. Totally irresponsible what they did.
        
       | einpoklum wrote:
       | The part was a "plastic air induction elbow", i.e. this kind of
       | thing:
       | 
       | https://duckduckgo.com/?q=plastic+air+induction+elbow&ia=ima...
       | 
       | so, if you were thinking "who would use a 3D-printed part",
       | remember that it may otherwise also have been made with some
       | liquid material, but using a mold, and perhaps two parts using a
       | mold that are joined with re-heating etc. - and now it no longer
       | sounds so outlandish.
        
         | shagie wrote:
         | The picture of the collapsed one is at
         | https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/7fee/live/52acf...
         | 
         | It would be curious to know what parts and connectors it
         | _should_ look like are.
         | 
         | And that texture on the right hand side of the image doesn't
         | exactly look like something in a healthy engine.
        
       | lemonwaterlime wrote:
       | Taken at face value, this is engineering negligence. I've done
       | industrial design with plastics and 3D printed parts. Regardless
       | of the forming techniques, with plastics you still need to
       | consider properties like minimum melting temperatures, tensile
       | stress, and so forth. Then you must test that rigorously. This is
       | all standard procedure. That information is in the data sheet for
       | the material.
       | 
       | I did a quick search and found that many plastics are governed by
       | ISO 11357 test standard [1]. Some of the plastics I have worked
       | with used this standard.
       | 
       | A spec sheet for that material is here [2].
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.iso.org/standard/83904.html
       | 
       | [2]: https://um-support-
       | files.ultimaker.com/materials/1.75mm/tds/...
        
         | ToucanLoucan wrote:
         | Also, strictly as a combo 3D-printing and engine enthusiast:
         | Never with a GUN to my head would I install 3D printed parts in
         | a CAR engine, let alone in an aircraft engine. This is
         | spectacularly poor judgement on the part of the owner.
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | I wouldn't be that absolute, but not until Boeing and Airbus
           | use them in their aircraft on a regular basis.
        
             | geocrasher wrote:
             | Yes but are they printed with PLA or PETG, or even ABS? Or
             | are they using material designed exactly for their use
             | case, and tested thoroughly before being _certified_ for
             | flight?
             | 
             | Or do they get their parts from some vendor at a swap meet
             | who spends most of his time fiddling with his Ender 3?
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Neither of those is suitable for this application. Ultem
               | or PEEK. Anything else would be a very bad idea, and even
               | for those two you would want to do a lot of testing.
        
           | PunchyHamster wrote:
           | Well, there are more and less important parts of the car. I
           | wouldn't bat an eye for 3d printed dash parts or the extreme
           | example, a cup holder, but on flip side anywhere where there
           | is heat is potentially bad for anything 3d printed with heat
           | that's not metal or some hard to print high temp stuff, and
           | anywhere where mechanical robustness = safety is spot where
           | you want something very well tested, not "I printed it and it
           | looks light".
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | Depends. Some older or rare cars have no source for parts. 3D
           | printing has been a boon to keeping them operating. However
           | you absolutely have to use appropriate materials to avoid
           | problems or failures, and know where it isn't feasible.
        
           | cibyr wrote:
           | I'm sure it's fine you do it properly ([1] for example). The
           | issue here was the utter lack of engineering, not the
           | specific manufacturing technique (although those do seem to
           | be highly correlated, due to low-end 3D printing having
           | become very cheap and easy).
           | 
           | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rV74KhPNg1w
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Then you are not up to speed with what the 3D printing world
           | has to offer. You can 3D print full metal stress free parts
           | and chances are very high that if you have flown in an
           | airplane in the last five years that some of the parts of
           | that plane (and I'm not talking about trim here) were made
           | using additive processes.
           | 
           |  _Rocket engines_ can be 3D printed, in fact there are some
           | engines that can only be made using that kind of technique
           | due to internal structures.
        
       | theideaofcoffee wrote:
       | And this is why (at least for the US) aviation parts have such an
       | onerous paperwork overhead, why a seemingly cheap part like a
       | $.50 bolt balloons to much greater. Granted this aircraft was a
       | UK-equivalent to "experimental" in the US, where you can pretty
       | much do anything to it, I'm of the opinion that doesn't excuse
       | maintenance and adding fly-by-night parts that borders on
       | negligence. Stick to a minimum standard, if not just out of shame
       | of something that could happen.
        
       | gpm wrote:
       | I wonder if just including the aluminum tube that was effectively
       | acting as a heat break would have been enough...
       | 
       | Really it seems like a problem of not understanding the
       | environment, and testing (with margins) your replacement in it...
       | 3D printing seems nearly entirely unrelated apart from enabling
       | people to make parts.
       | 
       | An injection molded part, for a close more traditional analogue,
       | would presumably have failed the same way here.
       | 
       | Also the glass transition temperature reported in the report is
       | suspiciously low for ABS and the only source on the material is
       | the owner saying the person they bought it from said... I wonder
       | if it was just outright made out of the wrong material by
       | accident.
        
         | lazide wrote:
         | The difference is, injection molds are expensive. And the type
         | of people who can afford them tend to cover their ass better -
         | or do slightly less insanely dumb things.
         | 
         | 3D printing (especially using filament) allows idiots to enter
         | entirely new areas of endeavor.
        
           | gpm wrote:
           | I agree, but I note that the 3d printing people are making
           | progress in making really cheap injection molds. I wouldn't
           | count on the difference in cost remaining prohibitive enough
           | that only reasonably serious people can afford it for much
           | longer.
           | 
           | Edit: And I hope the lesson that the safety critical people
           | take away from this is "actual engineering work is needed for
           | airplane components" and not "3d printed parts are scary"
           | because sooner or later they'll run into the same issue with
           | parts made in other ways
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | > 3D printing (especially using filament) allows idiots to
           | enter entirely new areas of endeavor.
           | 
           | That's true for any tool.
        
       | giancarlostoro wrote:
       | I showed this to a pilot friend of mine out of curiosity, he
       | noted that this type of aircraft is usually kit built / home
       | built. So the fact a part of it was 3D printed was not a total
       | shock.
       | 
       | Edit:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutan_VariEze
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burt_Rutan
        
       | commakozzi wrote:
       | i'm confused: if they were on final and lost power, why not just
       | glide to the runway??
       | 
       | edit: nvm, i found my answer in the actual report.
        
       | segmondy wrote:
       | It's a light aircraft, the owner probably built it and is allowed
       | to fix it. So it's probably not a company that printed the part.
        
         | gpm wrote:
         | Per the report
         | 
         | > The aircraft owner who installed the modified fuel system
         | stated that the 3D-printed induction elbow was purchased in the
         | USA at an airshow, and he understood from the vendor that it
         | was printed from CF-ABS
        
       | turnsout wrote:
       | Wow. It's called "thermoplastic" for a reason.
        
       | 0_____0 wrote:
       | Hah! I've actually 3D printed a part of an intake before. Just as
       | a prototype, to allow me to get a Keihin carb on a motorcycle
       | that had a CV carb.
       | 
       | Printed it on an SLA machine though! I was concerned enough about
       | chemical attack even then, even though it was a temporary part.
       | Never really thought about doing it in filament.
        
       | constantcrying wrote:
       | Hardware engineering is hard. Especially for any safety critical
       | component.
       | 
       | In this case engineering was done by someone, who either did not
       | understand the material he was working with, or the operating
       | conditions in which that part was deployed.
       | 
       | Obviously no testing or any kind of proper engineering was done
       | to create requirements validate them and verify them.
       | 
       | Being able to design a 3D model and print it does not mean you
       | are done with engineering. It is just one step in a very long
       | chain, which is needed to produce devices which stand up to their
       | use.
        
       | luckydata wrote:
       | correction to the title: the plane crashed because the owner is a
       | moron, not because he bought a 3d printed part but because he
       | failed to ensure his provider is trustworthy and instead used a
       | fly-by-night nobody to fit a machine that can kill him at any
       | moment.
       | 
       | Absurd what people will do to save a buck.
        
       | zkmon wrote:
       | I hope 3-D printing becomes obsolete when robots can achieve the
       | same efficiency with using the standard construction materials.
       | That should take away all benefits of 3-D printing over regular
       | builds.
        
         | pennomi wrote:
         | 3D printing isn't entirely about automation, it's also a way to
         | get shapes that are impossible to manufacture traditionally.
         | Modern rocket engines almost all use 3D printing because the
         | shapes are so highly optimized.
        
         | shmeeed wrote:
         | You're against additive manufacturing because you want robots
         | to become craftsmen? That's... a pretty wild take, to put it
         | mildly.
         | 
         | I'm curious, what are "standard construction materials" and
         | "regular builds" to you? And what do you think those robots are
         | made of?
        
       | fecal_henge wrote:
       | I'm massively paranoid that some cable clips I printed that will
       | sit on a circuit board will perish in the heat. Meanwhile, some
       | idiot couldn't care less about thermal stability for flight
       | hardware!
        
       | Ccecil wrote:
       | Not to be a 3d print snob but....
       | 
       | Aside from the failure it looks like it wasn't the best print to
       | start with. Lots of rashing from support and curling at the
       | edges. You can see on the flats where the support was and the
       | outer curve of the elbow looks like it likely wasn't airtight.
       | Appears to me to be printed with the inlet facing upwards.
       | 
       | Better support planning, settings and possibly orientation may
       | have helped.
       | 
       | Other commenters are saying it was likely PLA-CF, which I totally
       | agree with based on the testing, but I can't help but think there
       | is no possible way the person printing this item did not know
       | that. I doubt the print would have come off as good as it did
       | when using ABS-CF settings on PLA-CF.
       | 
       | Big chain of poor choices.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | I've _almost_ made that exact same mistake (but not on a
         | critical part). I had a bunch of identical rolls with CF loaded
         | filament of different base materials and just looking at the
         | filament you really couldn 't tell.
        
       | Centigonal wrote:
       | It's important to note the plane is a Cozy Mk IV, which is an
       | experimental light aircraft that is built at home out of foam and
       | fiberglass by following instructions you get online. The design
       | is very good, and hundreds have been flown over the last 35+
       | years, but Cozy pilots are the aviation equivalent of people who
       | run Arch Linux as their daily driver; many of them are tweaking
       | their aircraft with some frequency.
       | 
       | This isn't a case of an established aircraft manufacturer cutting
       | corners on a part; it's probably some small maker who made this
       | part out of the wrong materials. It's a little shocking that
       | neither the maker nor the buyer of this part thought to either
       | stick it in an oven or run it with the engine on the ground to
       | guarantee it can hold up to the expected intake air temps. I'm
       | glad the pilot made it out with only mild injuries.
       | 
       | edit: here's a fun video from a Cozy pilot in case you're curious
       | about the plane and the people who fly them:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipqmb09wbSQ
        
         | ahepp wrote:
         | Do we know whether the part was made out of spec, or whether
         | the spec specified inappropriate materials?
        
           | Centigonal wrote:
           | The spec is fiberglass, which has better thermal resistance.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | But not _that_ much better compared the better filaments
             | out there. Fair chance it was printed out of PLA, ABS or
             | PETG, by the shade of the part it looks like it was CF
             | loaded filament.
             | 
             | A better choice would have been PEEK. But even then, I
             | would have done a lot of on-the-ground testing before
             | trusting my life to a part from the printer.
        
               | Centigonal wrote:
               | 100% -- the original design for the Cozy is from the
               | early 90s, before 3D printing became popular, and this
               | part seems like a good candidate for 3D printing. It just
               | seems like the maker chose the wrong materials and didn't
               | test it adequately.
        
         | phoronixrly wrote:
         | With the tiny difference that my life has never depended on my
         | Linux booting... Bad comparison.
        
           | Centigonal wrote:
           | General aviation (and especially experimental light aircraft)
           | is not a particularly safe hobby. This pilot literally put
           | his life in the hands of a 3D printed part someone sold him
           | at an airshow. Pilots can and do "brick" their planes as a
           | result of "innovative" approaches to repairs, upgrades, and
           | maintenance. Luckily, much of the time these errors are
           | caught before the plane gets off the ground.
        
             | phoronixrly wrote:
             | Guy, the person who bet his life on a part with
             | questionable quality is a moron. People who choose an OS
             | are _not betting their life_ on their OS booting up. Do you
             | not grasp the difference in stakes?
        
               | Centigonal wrote:
               | mort96 explained my analogy better than I could.
               | Obviously your OS and your plane are not equally risky
               | choices. Regardless, there exist communities of people
               | who like to heavily customize either of those things.
        
               | crumpled wrote:
               | I don't think anyone is struggling with grasping the
               | difference in stakes. The stakes are different, the size
               | and shape are different, there are a lot of things
               | different.
               | 
               | You don't make analogies out of things that are the same,
               | that's one of the hallmarks of an analogy.
        
           | mort96 wrote:
           | The analogy they weren't making: "This is life critical, just
           | like Arch Linux"
           | 
           | The analogy they were making: "This is a commonly home-built
           | and heavily customized hacker aircraft, just like Arch Linux
           | is a commonly home-built and heavily customized hacker Linux
           | distro"
           | 
           | Two things can be analogous in one aspect while being
           | disanalogous in another aspect. That doesn't make the analogy
           | invalid.
        
           | onraglanroad wrote:
           | Clearly you have a boring life. Dial it up a bit!
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | Figured it was experimental; no A&P who cared about his future
         | would install a 3D printed part on a certified aircraft.
        
           | soursoup wrote:
           | Loads of commercial aircraft and jet engine parts are
           | manufactured using additive manufacturing, or "3D printing"
        
             | kaonwarb wrote:
             | Yes... but more often something like laser-sintered metal
             | printing, which is not going to melt when hot.
        
           | jcranmer wrote:
           | Actually, I think all of the jet engine manufacturers these
           | days are using 3d printers for some of their parts? Although
           | you usually find the press releases talking about this using
           | the term "additive manufacturing" instead. See, e.g., this
           | press release from 2018 about a notable jet engine
           | manufacturer using 3d printing: https://www.geaerospace.com/n
           | ews/articles/manufacturing/manu...
           | 
           | (Although note that these are not using plastic parts, to be
           | clear.)
        
       | genewitch wrote:
       | Belite, a company that folded (and just renamed themselves) after
       | a certain number of crashes of their experimental ultralights,
       | sold my dad a plane where the AOA sensor was malfunctioning, the
       | propeller hit the ground if there was someone in the plane, and
       | one wing side was longer than the other. By a visible amount. My
       | dad broke a set of propellers and they sent him a new set with 3"
       | cut off each blade. i have those in my shed.
       | 
       | I'm no aerospace engineer or anything, but that plane shouldn't
       | have been able to stay in the air.
       | 
       | and, lo, it didn't, the motorcycle engine used as the prime mover
       | sputtered out at 200' AGL and since it's not a glider (and i
       | don't even think it can glide), it crashed straight into the
       | ground.
       | 
       | Fly an ultralight if you want, just be aware that people will
       | think very poorly of you.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-04 23:00 UTC)