3D Printing Doubles the Strength of Stainless Steel (sciencemag.org)

sciencehabit writes: Researchers have come up with a way to 3D print tough and flexible stainless steel, an advance that could lead to faster and cheaper ways to make everything from rocket engines to parts for nuclear reactors and oil rigs. The team designed a computer-controlled process to not only create dense stainless steel layers, but to more tightly control the structure of their material from the nanoscale to micron scale. That allows the printer to build in tiny cell wall-like structures on each scale that prevent fractures and other common problems. Tests showed that under certain conditions the final 3D printed stainless steels were up to three times stronger than steels made by conventional techniques and yet still ductile.
The work was done using a commercially-available 3D printer, according to Science magazine. "That makes it likely that other groups will be able to quickly follow their lead to make a wide array of high-strength stainless steel parts for everything from fuel tanks in airplanes to pressure tubes in nuclear power plants."

Comments

Metal and Plastic

[irrational_design]

So we can now 3D print metal and plastic. I think I remember reading about the 3D printing of organic material (or maybe that was just conceptual - e.g., printing someone a new liver). What materials can we not 3D print, yet?

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Useful ones.

We can print cheap plastic and junk metals, for only 1,000 times the cost of doing it other ways.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, everyone knows that 3D printing is just a fad and a gimmick only good for printing stupid little trinkets.

No practical use will ever come of the technology, so we should stop wasting out time and energy on it. Amirite?

Re:Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

unobtainium.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[dj.delorie]

Yeah, that's why it died out back in the 80's shortly after it was invented.

Re:Metal and Plastic

[FatdogHaiku]

Here you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_bioprinting

Re: Metal and Plastic

[JaredOfEuropa]

Useful stuff is already being printed. Parts that are lighter and stronger than the ones they are replacing, and are more expensive or pretty much impossible to make by traditional methods (casting, machining). Obviously not very interesting for mass produced consumer goods (yet), but this is already being used in (petro)chemical process technology and military applications, and the aircraft industry is taking note as well. There are plenty of experiments in aircraft, at this time mostly with non structural parts where weight can be saved. The other day I saw some nice (and thoroughly weird looking) suspension arms for a low production volume sports car, printed in titanium.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[oic0]

Patents killed is mostly. It cost to much to do anything with the stuff because the patent holders were harsh. Isnt that great? if you think of something first, you can hold the whole human race back if you're a jerk.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

The Microwave Oven is a useless invention. Why, it costs thousands of dollars to do what an ordinary gas oven can do in a mere 30 minutes! What's the point. I know I'll be sticking with my current appliances, thank you very much!

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Even at a thousand times the cost of other methods, that would still be quite useful. Multiple projects I've worked on had a component that was struggling with multiple constraints, and spending a lot of money to make that part work saves money for the whole project. For example, we had a project where one part could be made using tradional methods, but would be larger due to give access to machine some required features and to have enough room to assemble with fasteners or welding. Making that part bigger meant other parts got larger, limiting what shops could make it, making transportation more difficult, etc, and would have ballooned the cost of the whole machine from $10M to $50M. Spending $500k to have the critical part 3d printed instead of $10k to be traditionally machined (not counting extra engineering required to make sure assembly worked) was a hell of a lot cheaper since the part was smaller. Even if we had to pay x1000 times as much, $10M for the part, it would have been cheaper than the extra $40M needed to make the rest of the machine accommodate a larger, more traditional part.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Useful ones.

We can print cheap plastic and junk metals, for only 1,000 times the cost of doing it other ways.

You are comparing the cost of one 3-d printed object to the per-unit cost of something made in the thousands or millions.

You came here to show off how smart you are, and failed. I'm guessing you have lots of practice at failure.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

https://www.army.mil/article/129584/army_invests_in_3_d_bioprinting_to_treat_injured_soldiers
    This from 2014. I've heard they are using this now in the field.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is why they start to boom, when Patents run out. Coincidence? I think not!

Re: Metal and Plastic

[DontBeAMoran]

That very similar to what happened to me. I needed eight plastic end caps for square metal tubes. I could've gone online to order injection-molded ones at $2 a pop, pay $20 for shipping and wait almost a week to receive them or just 3D-print them myself at $2.50 a pop and have them the day I needed them. Bonus points: I could have them in any colour I wanted as long as I had filament in that colour!

...but I didn't have the colour I wanted on hand, so I went online and paid $40 for a spool of filament, paid $20 for shipping, waited a week to receive it and then spent the day printing them.

The morale of the story is, if you have a 3D printer, make sure you have your favorite colours of filament in stock. Not everything has to be black or white.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Currently people need to talk at least slightly differently about commercial 3d printing and at-home 3d printing.

There are clear uses, but the technology is so vastly different in terms of output when using a $100k+ machine versus a $1k machine we should basically not even be discussing the same topic.

Re:Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm guessing the "cant'" thing I care about is long carbon nanotubes.

Nils

Re: Metal and Plastic

[ColdWetDog]

Amazing, isn't it? Engineering is about compromises and options. More options are helpful.

Progress scitters on.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[MightyYar]

you can hold the whole human race back

Yeah, but not for long. And you set off a furious race to find workarounds, which itself often advances the state of the art.

There are exceptions... my hometown has a historically protected bridge. The reason it is historically protected is that it is a unique draw bridge design and I don't think there are any other surviving examples. The reason there are no other surviving examples is it is needlessly complex and thus prone to breakdown and relatively expensive to maintain. The reason it is needlessly complex is it had to work around a draw-bridge (Strauss and Scherzer bascule) patent and so used a Rall bascule design. This design was abandoned after the patent ran out. Because it sucked. Pretty soon the bridge will be 90 years old, and they are stuck with 90 years of extra maintenance and downtime because of the patent situation in 1930.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Ideally your local hardware store stocks 3D printer filament. My local Ace Hardware carries Dremel brand for $30 a spool.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[ColdWetDog]

Actually, the lines are getting blurrier, not harder. Yes, you would expect a one million dollar machine to outperform some thousand dollar hobbyist device. But the underlying logic (and in fact the controlling code) may be the very same (G-code).

Right now, virtually all hobbyist class printers use thermoplastics. But let's fast forward a decade or two to a small, contained laser / sintered metal 'head'. It's some engineering and economics of scale to get down to something you can ship via UPS, but there are no theoretical or intellectual barriers to this.

Think computers, cell phones, microwave ovens. Even cars.

And no, 3D printing of whatever sort isn't going to replace Walmart, your local hardware store or pretty much anything else. It may very well add to their capabilities.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[MightyYar]

We regularly use printed "lost wax" plugs for making investment castings, and we've done so for about 20 years. Removing the casting step would be fantastic.

Re:Metal and Plastic

[mikael]

Doctors were printing out duplicate copies of a life size replica model of a human liver with the blood vessels and the cancer tumor(s). The doctor could then try as many times as he wanted, to practice dissecting the liver to remove the tumor while causing the least amount of damage or in the least number of slices (almost like a Flash game).

Re: Metal and Plastic

[esonik]

Organic materials can be 3D printed using 2 photon polymerization. Can even print bio degradable materials.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Aighearach]

While it is true that there exist such machines as you describe, those are used by machine shops that also have $100k+ metalworking machines.

The vast majority of "commercial 3d printing" is not treated like machining, and doesn't use fancy machines. If you use a 3d printing service, it typically means somebody has dozens or hundreds of cheap 3d printing machines of the same type that home users have.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

The Microwave Oven is a useless invention. Why, it costs thousands of dollars to do what an ordinary gas oven can do in a mere 30 minutes! What's the point. I know I'll be sticking with my current appliances, thank you very much!

That’s why every five star restaurant cooks their food in microwave ovens.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[thinkwaitfast]

It has its uses, but then so do many other manufacturing techniques; why don't we hear about those? And how much of this is actually 3D printing vs material science or epitaxy?

Re: Metal and Plastic

[thinkwaitfast]

And after WWII, Japan went to Zeiss and wanted to use their lenses. When they were denied,thy had to invent it themselves and in so doing surpassed Germany.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[DontBeAMoran]

That's true, north of the border we have Canadian Tire that also carries Dremel brand stuff.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[slew]

The reason it is needlessly complex is it had to work around a draw-bridge (Strauss and Scherzer bascule) patent and so used a Rall bascule design. This design was abandoned after the patent ran out. Because it sucked. Pretty soon the bridge will be 90 years old, and they are stuck with 90 years of extra maintenance and downtime because of the patent situation in 1930.

Another way to look at this is that the people that decided to work around instead of license the patent didn't take into consideration the future value of the 90 years of extra maintenance and down time when they made their decision to not license the patent? Maybe it was pennywise-poundfoolish?

Of course for some people, their politics simply doesn't accept the idea that a patent is something that encourages the sharing of innovations. That's kind of like buying a knockoff widget and complaining that it isn't as reliable as the name-brand version and blaming your choice in product on the patent system...

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Solandri]

Even at a thousand times the cost of other methods, that would still be quite useful.

While there are a myriad of factors which go into selecting the proper material for a design, the general criteria that steel is best at is strength per unit cost. If you can pay more, more exotic materials like titanium, tungsten, chromium, or amorphous ("glass") metals are stronger per unit volume than steel. If you need lighter weight, aluminum and magnesium tend to have more strength per unit mass. If you need temperature resistance, niobium, molybdenum tend to be better. etc.

That said, a 2-3x strength increase is just huge, and could upset some of the generalities I listed above. It's been a decade since I delved into materials science, but a 2-3x stronger steel could displace both glass metals for strength per volume, and aluminum for strength per weight.

The latter would have serious implications for the aerospace industry. The big drawback of aluminum (other than relatively low melting point, which isn't an issue in subsonic flight) is that it has a fatigue limit. With a steel structure, you can design it so that repeatedly flexing it no longer causes it to weaken. Aluminum has no such point - flexing it will always cause it to weaken (which is why it was stupid to make Curiosity's wheels out of aluminum). Fatigue failure of aluminum has been the cause of numerous airliner accidents, from the original de Havilland Comet, to Aloha 243, to JAL 123 (greatest loss of life from a single aircraft accident). It's why pressurized airframes are retired and destroyed after about 75,000-100,000 flights. If 3D printed steel has a higher strength per weight than aluminum, it would revolutionize aircraft design.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope those tubes aren't aluminum. . . that would be sooo incriminating. . .

Re:Metal and Plastic

[LesFerg]

There are food printers, you can print with chocolate!! What could be more important than that?

Re: Metal and Plastic

[MightyYar]

a patent is something that encourages the sharing of innovations

In a perfect world, patents would only apply to things where the alternative was a trade secret. In the case of a giant bridge, it's a bit hard to hide how it works! :)

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get it.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[careysub]

Aluminum has no such point - flexing it will always cause it to weaken (which is why it was stupid to make Curiosity's wheels out of aluminum).

Reading the article and consulting NASA information about the Curiosity mission does not support the assertion that the wheel design was in any way "stupid".

According to the article you link to the (many) components of Curiosity were not tested to destruction but were tested a maximum of three times the expected mission life without failing. Curiosity was never intended to last "forever" but to last for its two year mission life which involved an 8 km trip to Aeolis Mons, its mission target. With a three-fold mission life testing program this suggests that the rover could be expected to last up to 6 years and travel 24 km before failures would likely end the mission, but anything over the original mission specification is gravy. Curiosity has now traveled 17.5 km.

Again, according to the article, what they have observed is cracks in two treads in one wheel. Test data indicates that when there are three cracked treads the wheel is at 60% of its service life. Currently there are only two, so it is at less than 60% of its service life. But let us suppose that it is at 60%, then it should be good for 29.2 km, i.e. for another 12 km, which is over three times the planned mission. But since it is only two treads, it should be more than that. What's more this is only in one wheel so far, and Curiosity can travel on five good wheels, so the service life limitation from wheel wear is likely to be quite substantially more than another 12 km. By then lots of other components will have exceeded their 3-fold mission life testing and be candidates for failure.

In short the wheels seem more than adequately spec'd and tested for the mission. It is unlikely that they will end up the cause of mission end, which in any case will be well more than three times the original planned mission. Putting 100 km wheels on Curiosity (for example) would simply have driven up cost, reduced the weight budget for some other items, all without meaningfully extending the mission potential life.

Re:Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Raktajino, double strong, double sweet.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

That was done using a machine from Stratasys with a head style that could better be described as laser-jet style printing rather than the ink-jet style printing (FDM) you see in the vast majority of polymer printers.

You won't be seeing affordable printers like that for a long time, it's freshly under patent and it's broad. /Working on using ball-screw servos for a large format FDM for a personal project, have been courted by Stratasys for a QE job.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

if you think of something first, you can hold the whole human race back if you're a jerk.

You don't have to think of it first. You just have to be the first jerk to think of it.
Plenty of things are realized by a lot of people at roughly the same time.
Most don't bother to patent it, but the asshole who does gets to hold everyone else back.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually fish is one of those things where texture and taste is better preserved if you microwave it instead of using more traditional cooking methods.
If a five star restaurant decides to not use microwaves in the cases where it yields a better result then they are probably a five star restaurant because of snobbery rather than quality.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[DontBeAMoran]

Ah yes, we call it "Chef Mike" (a.k.a. "Mike-rowave")

Re:Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

burger printers obviously

Re: Metal and Plastic

[PoopJuggler]

Yeah I'm sure you're cooking fish better in your microwave than 5-star chefs are in on their stoves...

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for saying that. Exactly. The cost of the first item, using practically any normal manufacturing process, is usually enormous.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Pipe bombs

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like a waste of plutonium to not overspec more

Re:Metal and Plastic

[tehcyder]

There are food printers, you can print with chocolate!! What could be more important than that?

Alcohol printers?

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Do do not even have to think of it first, you can also either
BUY the patent OR just be the first to patent something... no matter how stupid, generic or common it is... like the color Red for example! You might not be allowed to patent a basic thing like a color in the whole world, but in the US, you will most likely be able to do it... do can even use ancient stuff that it is painfully obvious you did not create, as so-called PRIOR ART in the US.

Sometimes I think the US patent office just doesn't give a rats ass and just flips a coin in order to decide if a patent should be awarded.

Re: Metal and Plastic

[Hognoxious]

That's moral, you smelly little oik.

Morale is what the wops ain't got..

"Tests showed that under certain conditions"

[Anonymous Coward]

Under certain condition that represent only 0.0000001% of the uses of stainless steel.

Re:"Tests showed that under certain conditions"

[Anonymous Coward]

If one of those uses is making a phone case that can survive a 4-foot drop undamaged, then I'm all for it.

Re:"Tests showed that under certain conditions"

[I'm New Around Here]

Any individually made phone case in the $30,000 range should be just as good.

Re: "Tests showed that under certain conditions"

[Anonymous Coward]

For 30k I'll get an adjutant so he can carry my phone

3D printed guns!

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone thought Cody Wilson was a clown and experimenting with unworkable ideas. Potentially this will make better guns than those that are milled.

Re:3D printed guns!

[Anonymous Coward]

Forget guns, just 3D print the bullet.

Re:3D printed guns!

[Anonymous Coward]

> Forget guns, just 3D print the bullet.

Forget bullets, just 3D print the hole in your enemy.

Somehow I see 007 being strapped to a CNC router more terrifying than a friggin' laser...

certain conditions

[FredrikKarlsson]

"Tests showed that under certain conditions" equals 0.00001% or 99.9999% of world usage? So in all other cases it may be three times weaker or one thousand times stronger? We just don't know yet. Stay skeptic

Will this stainless steel rust?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lately I've bought some kitchenware labeled as being made with 'stainless steel'. Yet these items have started to rust! I'm not a metallurgist, so I don't know if stainless steel is supposed to rust. But it's real strange to me that they're rusting. I'll never again buy any 'stainless steel' product made outside of the USA.

Re:Will this stainless steel rust?

[pubwvj]

There are many different grades of stainless steel that trade off cost and specific abilities. Some stainless steels have strong resistance to corrosion (rust) but that can cost more and trade off other things like workability, strength, ability to hold an edge on a knife, etc.

One big issue is if you have the stainless steel item against another metal in a rust inducing situation the other metal, such as plain iron, may rust faster and leave a stain on the stainless steel. For this reason I space my stainless steel items apart or stack in the right order to not cause rusting.

Re:Will this stainless steel rust?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are correct. A few years ago our company considered sourcing some of our products in China. Unfortunately, after numerous visits and meetings and inspections, we concluded that it really is not worth it. The huge export tax was not the show stopper, though it was a contributing factor; the deal breaker was the corruption and demands for bribes which we encountered.

The Chinese essentially have no morals and scruples. You'd be a fool to trust them with your supply chain. Big companies like Apple can afford a permanent presence with supervision and quality control engineers. But small players can not afford that presence and end up getting hosed.

Never trust the Chinese. Ever. They will cheat you and rob you blind while stealing your IP at the same time.

Re:Will this stainless steel rust?

[PPH]

No doubt you got hold of some cutlery made out of Chinesium.

Re:Will this stainless steel rust?

[Anonymous Coward]

My experience has been similar. Did you end up going some place else like Malaysia or Taiwan, or just stay in US/EU?

Re:Will this stainless steel rust?

[willy_me]

Stainless steel has a minimum 10.5% chromium. Generally, such steel does not rust but there are exceptions. Some expensive knife blades are outrageously hard and great at holding an edge. The compromise is that they are prone to rusting despite having the required amount of chromium to be called "stainless" steel. If you give the blade a quick wipe after use they are fine. It is when people cut acidic foods and do not rinse off the blade that they typically rust.

There are also cheaper stainless steels that could rust - or perhaps stainless steel that has not been made to spec.

Not really stainless steel

[Anonymous Coward]

Stainless steel powder mixed with a strong adhesive. Not the same as real stainless steel.

Re:Not really stainless steel

[Anonymous Coward]

Look up SLM, there is no adhesive. It is metal all the way down.

Stainless steel powder mixed with a strong adhesive. Not the same as real stainless steel.

Re:Not really stainless steel

[LesFerg]

The article clearly shows they not talking about adhesive processes. There are a variety of techniques with many different names being used in industry, medical, dental etc.
You could try searching on Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) or Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS).
There are also some very cool looking machines doing Hybrid Metal Laser Sintering & Milling, combining both additive and subtractive processes.
The results are often not as solid as a cast metal, maybe, but that depends on the metals and processes used.

Re: Not really stainless steel

[Anonymous Coward]

If you've bought a gun in the past 5 years, chances are half the parts are MIM. The polymer which acts as an adhesive is burned off in an autoclave while the sintering powder bonds. Those parts are just as strong as their conventionally machined counterparts.

What do you mean "strength"?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a lot of properties that could be described that way. E.g.

- How much weight can you put on it.
- How much weight can you hang on its end / how much can you pull it.
- How much weight can you put on the middle of a bar of it.
- How easily can it be scratched.
- How easily can it be sheared.
etc.

I’m obviously no expert, but even I know you can't just say "strength".

Also, "under certain conditions"... Could you get any more weasely?
Which conditions? A teacup orbiting Jupiter being perfectly aligned with us and the invisible pink unicorn on the other side of the galaxy?

Re:What do you mean "strength"?

[ShanghaiBill]

I’m obviously no expert, but even I know you can't just say "strength".

Also, "under certain conditions"... Could you get any more weasely?

The weasel words came from the journalist, who felt a need to dumb things down for a general audience.

The actual paper is much more specific and unambiguous.

Not a metallurgist but it sounds like... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Almost like "sintering" metal (like what's done for Jet Turbine construction) - 'powdered' metal usage.

* Feel free to correct me anyone that's "more-in-the-know" than I am on this subject...

APK

P.S.=> "Onwards & Upwards" - in any event, VERY COOL seeing someone discover a new & better way to produce better product... apk

Why print, when you can GROW.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's these self-assembling nanites(?) called "cells" and "proteins", you know?
You just have to program them.
They're quite good at that sort of thing... ^^

Problem with 3D printing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Problem is that useful 3D printers - ones that can print 1) fast and 2) useful materials (like metal) are way too expensive.

The prices need to come down at least 2-3 orders of magnitude before this technology will be really useful.

really?

[Anonymous Coward]

What we really need are higher strength 3D-printed gun barrels.

what "steel yourself" really means

[epine]

Just last night I read an entire chapter of Rust: The Longest War (2016) devoted to Harry Brearley, one among many to discover stainless steel, but the first who completely refused to shut up about it.

It was obvious to many involved that stainless steel cutlery (and certain engine parts) was the way of the future, but it took decades for most innovations in steel to find widespread commercial adoption, because every new steel at first mainly served to ruin available tooling.

I'm sure there was a slow back and forth between improved tooling, and adjusting the stainless steel to best get along with the improved tooling, but it was always slow work, and usually outside of the five-year investment cycle that made your boss loud and proud of your accomplishments.

That's why it finally took a nutter to not shut up.

Jonathan Waldman has done quite a bit of research and his writing style has an engaging tone, but there's also some kind of weird semantic deficit in his narrative structure that's difficult to diagnose in a single pass.

Be prepared for loosely grouped splotches of colour. This book has high geek appeal, but will irritate actual historians and engineers.

Re:what "steel yourself" really means

[deathguppie]

From personal experience I can tell you that working with stainless steel is quite different. It likes to burn up tools. It's a combination of the right bit materiel the right tool/part speed and the right feed. I can easily see how people never having worked with it before would just shake their head and say no.

no flying cars

[cats-paw]

but 3D printing, I think, is going to be the real deal.

And yet one more thing that will kill employment levels.

When i can set up a factory full of machines and give them a file to make what i need, that's a whole lot of people i don't need.

Re:no flying cars

[Anonymous Coward]

When i can set up a factory full of machines and give them a file to make what i need, that's a whole lot of people i don't need.

And when your customers can download a file and print what they need themselves, they don't need you and your factory.

What??

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately printing fuel tanks and nuclear fuel tubes of stainless steel is pretty useless.

  There really are no such things as "fuel tanks", not for like 70 years or so, the fuel is contained in rubber bladders or sealed wing cavities.

Nuclear fuel has to be encased in thin zirconium tubes. Stainless steel is too neutron absorbent to be a good tube material.

Re:What??

[packrat0x]

-Ahh, but what about Hastelloy-N. That's used for Thorium based fuels. It needs to resist Fluorine.

Under certain conditions.

[fahrbot-bot]

Tests showed that under certain conditions the final 3D printed stainless steels were up to three times stronger than steels made by conventional techniques and yet still ductile.

And under *other* conditions? TFA doesn't say.

Re:Under certain conditions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Reading the TFA, the authors compare the 3-D printed material with a cast and a wrought version.

Evidently the printed material is about 3 times (Yield Strength: 590 MPa / 86 ksi vs 160 MPa / 23 ksi) stronger than the reference casting.
But steel castings are KNOWN to be porous, full of inclusions and very low strength. They are, however, cheap.

It is an improvement on the wrought (YTS 590MPa vs 365 MPa & UTS 700 MPa vs 555 MPa & similar elongation)

High strength it is not. The aerospace industry will start to get interested when the Ultimate Strength approaches existing stainless materials (160 ksi / 1.1 GPa).

There is no mention of fatigue properties in the conclusions.

Is the process robust? Can it be replicated often with little change in the properties?

This is another step in the right direction and will open a number of useful applications.

Hall Petch Relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

3D printed metals have a columnar micro-structure, the grain size in the X-Y directions is every small strengthening the material. However, the properties are not uniform.

3D printer is not energy-efficient.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a waste of energy.

Why one material?

[John.Banister]

If they have micron scale control, why continuously print from one material? Couldn't they make a structural center alloy that makes a gradual change (in a subsurface adjustment zone) into a protective surface alloy? In the center, they could even print micro-scale collection of overlapping unyielding hard plates for ultra impact resistance joined by a perfectly formulated softer steel for macro-scale malleability.

Re:Why one material?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was thinking something similar, but for me it was more like: Make a katana sword already! This is exactly why the old masters designed the blade as several fused parts, each with a different composition and folding process. If they would make the optimal katana, they would instantly have everyone's attention.

Re:Why one material?

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't have micron scale control, they are passing off a natural process, nucleation and growth, which occurs because of the cooling rates as something they did on purpose.

Re:Why one material?

[Anonymous Coward]

If they would make the optimal katana, they would instantly have everyone's attention.

Nah, only weebs would care and they are mostly irrelevant.

In general they will fall for many unsubstantiated claims that are a lot cheaper than actually making an optimal katana.

Re:Why one material?

[deathguppie]

The problem is that those materials tend to have different tensile elongation and yield rates. At one end/corner/center of your hypothetical part the metal has already started to fracture starting a cascade failure of the structure that would not have happened if the part were made of a single alloy.

Re:Why one material?

[John.Banister]

But, couldn't the sort of control discussed in this article - building slightly different shapes to the tiny cell wall like structures that prevent fractures, etc. be used to compensate, adjusting the stress response characteristics towards a single norm? Or, just making sure that the skin is stretchier than the core (while having the same rate of thermal expansion). Of course, without the micron scale level of structural control, this would all be gibberish fiction, but if they can do what they say with the structure, then successfully achieving further goals by also varying the composition should be possible.

pressure tubes in nuclear power plants

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you get the word? In the West No more nuclear power plants will ever be built again - ever.
Even half finished ones are being scrapped.

Re: pressure tubes in nuclear power plants

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone should tell these guys to go home then:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_station

I work this all the time.

[Anonymous Coward]

For now it's theoretical, in order for them to get the kinds of resolutions they're talking about, they have to have sintered powder that small. Right now the smallest commercially available sintering powder is riding at 2 microns. We'd have to get to a quarter of that size AND quadruple the resolution of the lasers currently being used (best I've seen is .02mm).

This is Grant Application reporting at best, we're at least a decade out from this being commercially viable.

Often, stiffness is more important.

[rsmith]

When designing machinery or constructions, deflection under load is often the limiting factor. In those cases the stiffness of the construction is much more important than the strength of the material.

Now the stiffness of a construction is determined by both the shape and the material stiffness or Young's Modulus.

But AFAICT, little if any progress has been made in improving the Young's Modulus of alloys.

Additionally, often the ultimate strength of metals isn't really important in a design. In general designers want to make sure that the stresses in the material don't exceed the proportionality limit.

Great

[Anonymous Coward]

So, the same people who managed to let criminals have the personal data on 150 million plus individuals have ensured us that no wrong-doing has been done.

Isn't that kinda like Trump saying "honestly"?

But exponentially reduces throughput...

[Anonymous Coward]

3D printing will always and only be a niche technology.

Re:But exponentially reduces throughput...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't let your aversion to the hype blind you to the possibilities.

3D printing is in its infancy, but it's potentially as revolutionary as the printing press.

Well Said!

[Anonymous Coward]

When you're building a system around development cost and schedule constraints, the engineering work capacity is limited. So the technical leaders should (and did) focus the effort on the areas with the highest uncertainty. In all those areas, once they hit the threshold spec and budget for each subsystem, they should stop testing. Some parts will last longer and others won't. If the heaviest parts last much longer, there is some incentive to put in extra engineering effort to save weight and put it elsewhere.

What happened for Curiosity is that it vastly exceeded expectations, and so for someone to come in after the fact and say, why is this part not exceeding spec as well as the others is just dumb. Because, there are other people who are asking a similar question in the opposite other direction, which is, could we have added more useful sensors on this thing if it wasn't so over designed?

When you're mass producing something like a low-cost car, all the design margin eventually gets pulled out over several iterations of the design to produce a car that just barely meets the product requirements. The only reason that cars don't break down all at once when the warranty runs out is that the product requirements assume a typical worse case and many customers don't get to that case in their application - i.e. people in the northeast US see a lot of snow and salt but don't run their A/C unit as much, etc.

When you have get only one shot at a design, for it to beat expectations in the manner it has is remarkable.