Planetary Resources Reveals Out-of-This-World 3D Printing (gizmag.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Planetary Resources Reveals Out-of-This-World 3D Printing (gizmag.com)

Posted by samzenpus on Monday January 11, 2016 @11:55AM from the from-the-asteroid-to-your-table dept.

Zothecula writes: If one is going to get into the asteroid mining business, one needs to prove that you can do something with what's brought back. That seems to be the thinking behind Planetary Resources' recent presentation at CES in Las Vegas, where the asteroid mining company unveiled the first object 3D printed using extraterrestrial materials. Made in collaboration with 3D Systems, the nickel-iron sculpture represents a stylized, geometric spacecraft, such as might be used for asteroid mining or prospecting. Planetary Resources says it is representative of what could be printed in a weightless environment.

34 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

We need to 3D print blasters. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:04 · Score: 0

We'll never be able to thrive in outer space without blasters in holsters on our hips. We're gonna need lots of them.
1. Re:We need to 3D print blasters. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:24 · Score: 1
  
  But first we need to print more printers.
2. Re:We need to 3D print blasters. by Rei · 2016-01-11 13:41 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I don't even get the point of this. Was there anybody doubting that you could laser sinter prepared nickel-iron powder? People have been laser sintering iron alloys containing nickel and cobalt for ages. I care about whether they can turn surface rock (loose or firmly attached, in chunks or as non-uniform dust) into an acceptable printing feedstock in microgravity and get it into the printer's feed system. Heck, at least modify your 3d printer to be able to handle microgravity - good luck using a stock DMP 320 in space, the dust will just drift off. Do something meaningful here.
  I'm actually a fan of the concept of space mining - I think that with ~2 decades of actual funded, dedicated effort the mining of precious-metal-rich earth-crossing asteroids could potentially prove profitable (using a quench gun to eject unguided projectiles (sintered into an ideal reentry shape) onto an Earth-intercept trajectory). Such bodies are more precious metal rich than even the best mines on Earth (as well as often with gem-quality peridot), 1-2 orders of magnitude more than typical mines, zero overburden (many Earth mines cost hundreds of millions to billions just to strip the overburden), a massive premium on sales due to the materials' origin, and our old foe the rocket equation doesn't come into play since they're such weak gravity wells. And there's really not all that much technology to develop... we've got landing in microgravity down, we need to get better at anchoring and roving, we're good at scooping regolith but it needs to be large scale and continuous, and we need a nuclear or solar sinterer and an aimable quench gun Based on other NASA missions, total development cost is probably on the order of $2-3B, including one or two smaller technology testing missions. And less cost on future mines.
  But this printing thing is just pointless. It has absolutely no bearing on any of the technical challenges related to space mining or resource utilization.
  
  --
  He's the sort of person who would sell the Red Cross to Dracula.
3. Re: We need to 3D print blasters. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 13:53 · Score: 0
  
  Can't you just rotate the printer in space for ... "gravity" ?
4. Re: We need to 3D print blasters. by Rei · 2016-01-11 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  You could certainly set up a mechanism to do that - but they haven't done that either. They haven't done anything out of the ordinary here.
  
  --
  He's the sort of person who would sell the Red Cross to Dracula.
5. Re: We need to 3D print blasters. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 20:01 · Score: 0
  
  Is it really necessary to generate acceleration for the printing to work.
  Can't you just let the printer pass over the material and let the materials inertia put it into place through the funnel?
6. Re: We need to 3D print blasters. by Rei · 2016-01-11 21:34 · Score: 1
  
  Laser sinterers don't work that way - they lay down a layer of even, fine dust, then melt it with a laser. There has to be something keeping the dust down - it won't stick on its own.
  Sounds like you're thinking of something more like laser spraying (which is imho a more interesting tech, as it yields better material properties and an almost unbounded array of materials and even finishing options.)
  
  --
  He's the sort of person who would sell the Red Cross to Dracula.
Great, first, global warming, now global fattening by kiatoa · 2016-01-11 12:12 · Score: 0

If we mine the asteroids and bring the metals back home the planet will get heavier and heavier, that means we will get heavier (weight, not mass) and the year will get longer. I'm sure that will lead to some kind of disaster. Better for us to all pick flowers from our organic gardens and just look up at the stars at night. Mining asteroids! Hmmph, stay home I say.
Senior Luddite #153.

--
90% of the wealth is in 2% of the pockets. Bummer to be in the majority.
no, "one" doesn't... by turkeydance · 2016-01-11 12:13 · Score: 1

the miner brings the material to the buyer and collects payment. the buyer sells to the fabricator who operates the printer.
Good grief by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:14 · Score: 0

These folks are watching waaaaaaay too much Netflix...
1. Re:Good grief by Mike+Frett · 2016-01-11 22:55 · Score: 1
  
  Netflix is over ... buffer ... buffer .. rated.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by NEDHead · 2016-01-11 12:27 · Score: 1

year only gets longer if the angular momentum is changed in a particular way. Judicious planning can actually make the year shorter as well. With luck we can get rid of the slowing of the rotational rate that will be caused by the melting of the ice caps.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:27 · Score: 0

... and the year will get longer....
More mass on Earth means stronger gravitational pull to the Sun. So the year will either get shorter (orbit speeds up to compensate for more mass) or we become krispy kritters...
Complete bumkum by BarbaraHudson · 2016-01-11 12:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

All the nickel near the surface of this planet comes from meteorites. This is a non-story to generate hype. There is NOTHING to see here.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
1. Re:Complete bumkum by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2016-01-12 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. A much more sensible idea would be using the waste products from asteroid mining to 3D print space habitats and refining propellants to send back the valuable ores and run the operation
  
  --
  Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by sexconker · 2016-01-11 12:36 · Score: 1

Yeah, our year will be as short as Jupiter's if we keep adding mass!
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:47 · Score: 0

Yeah, our year will be as short as Jupiter's if we keep adding mass!
Did you completely flunk Physics??? Orbital speed is set by orbiting mass vs. distance from orbited object. Jupiter's "year" is so long because of its distance from the Sun...
The Fermi Paradox by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 12:50 · Score: 0

becomes even more intractable. We naked apes are close to build self-replicating [thinking] machines in space. Where the fuck is everybody?
1. Re: The Fermi Paradox by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 13:55 · Score: 0
  
  Destroyed by their self-replicating thinking machines ?
2. Re:The Fermi Paradox by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 14:40 · Score: 0
  
  1) No, we really aren't.
  2) Self-replicating thinking machines would want to live on Earth too, just like us.
  3) There is no paradox. The laws of physics and the Periodic Table of Elements and therefore engineering, are the same across the entire universe. Therefore we won't see them, and they can't see us.
Are there any Magratheans on the company's board? by ThaumaTechnician · 2016-01-11 13:02 · Score: 2

Really, this should have been the first reply to this story. Leaving soooo disappointed.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by bored_engineer · 2016-01-11 13:04 · Score: 2

Did you completely flunk Physics??? Orbital speed is set by orbiting mass. . .
Well, it looks like you struggled in either physics or English. Your statement only bears meaning if the orbiting mass is any significant portion of the primary body. Even Jupiter is only 0.1% of the mass of the sun, so it's mass is irrelevant in computing its orbital velocity about the sun.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 13:19 · Score: 0

... With luck we can get rid of the slowing of the rotational rate that will be caused by the melting of the ice caps.
And how will that change the rotational rate? Melting of the ice caps does not change the mass of the Earth...
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Wing_Zero · 2016-01-11 13:34 · Score: 1

you can change rotation speed by moving where the mass is located, consider a ice skater spinning. pull the arms in, spin faster, move them out, spin slower
Missing by 110010001000 · 2016-01-11 14:12 · Score: 1

What is missing in their pitch: you definitely need to incorporate cloud-based AI drone technology. How are you going to get investors suckered in just by showing a crummy model? They need to hire me for sure.
Weightless by manu0601 · 2016-01-11 14:53 · Score: 2

Is their 3D printer able to operate in near-zero gravity? That does not look like something obvious.
1. Re:Weightless by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-12 00:07 · Score: 0
  
  That's because you are a Luddite. Computers got better, therefore everything gets better.
2. Re:Weightless by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-12 02:24 · Score: 0
  
  Probably not, in the vacuum of space, pure metals cold weld together. Grinding apart a meteorite in space has issues that will need to be overcome to work properly.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-11 15:14 · Score: 0

Everyone flunked because they forgot the new mass had to also bring some energy to match earths orbit in order to not burn up. So no changes to orbit from adding mass.
Re: 3 years without Aaron Swartz. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-12 00:58 · Score: 0

If you are with aaron swartz you're against Carmen Ortiz, the first woman and the first hispanic (and therefore the first hispanic woman) to become District Attorney for the State of Massachusetts, appointed by Nobel Prize recipient President Barack Hussein Obama himself. If this is the case you're a reactionary misogynist racist. Go die in a fire with the rotting carcass of your hero racist white male computer geek rapist criminal.
Out of this World 3D printing, huh? by adler187 · 2016-01-12 04:10 · Score: 1

Call me when they start building planets. I have a design for a new Earth, but all the fiddly bits around the fjords are in Africa.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-12 04:59 · Score: 0

... With luck we can get rid of the slowing of the rotational rate that will be caused by the melting of the ice caps.
And how will that change the rotational rate? Melting of the ice caps does not change the mass of the Earth...
Moon will have more liquid water to pull down. Tidal effects gets bigger, slowing rotation.
Re:Great, first, global warming, now global fatten by NEDHead · 2016-01-12 10:25 · Score: 1

And by 'year' I meant 'day'. My bad.
In any case the melting of the ice caps will result in a redistribution of the water mass, and the general warming of the ocean water will actually expand the volume (not the mass) of the water and thus also change the rotational inertial mass distribution.