What Do You Think About 3D Printing

[jazzviper1]

I was about to start shopping seriously for a 3D printer but then read that for some materials, they smell bad. Unfortunately, if I have to take care of fumes, I’m gonna have to put it off for a while.

Still on the project list, but with a lower priority level.

Filament printers printing in PLA don't hardly have any odor. I recommend PRUSA printers if you can afford it.

 

[jqavins]

The key word above is "some". "[F]or some materials..." If you or someone in your house is unusually sensitive then perhaps they all do, but otherwise as long as you stick to low odor filaments it's usually OK. As I understand it (my experience is extremely limited*) the main bad guy is ABS; stick with PLA and you're probably OK.

(I used to work at a place with an on-site maker space. We were only allowed to use PLA, due to the smell produced by ABS, and the dominance of those two materials. Someone did get permission to try a rubbery material that didn't smell too bad either.)

 

[Richard Dierking]

I'm starting a project to create a 1/20th scale of the HL-10 lifting body to rocket launch and eventually drop from a high alt balloon. Without going into all the details and objectives for this project, the first thing I would like to do is create an airframe body. It would be approximately 13" long and 9" wide.
CAD files don't seem to be available (the HL-10 is 1960's), but I found dxf and dwg files and I'm researching for other detailed drawings.
Can a stl file for 3D printing be created using the dxf or dwg file? If I could print the HL-10 at the scale I'm looking for, I could use the positive model to create a negative mold.

The other option I'm considering is obtaining a model kit of the HL-10 and have it scanned for scaling and 3D printing. Unfortunately, the 1/48 version is not going to be available again until November.

I would appreciate advice on this.

And, what do I think of 3D printing? I think it's great for our hobby. I wouldn't be able to even start this project without it.

 

[Doug Holverson]

It's wonderful when it's working. Otherwise, there are times that this old guy feels like yelling at the machine, "Stop having nonsensical problems!"

 

[Funkworks]

Cool project! I think it's worth it's own thread. You might more

I'm starting a project to create a 1/20th scale of the HL-10 lifting body to rocket launch and eventually drop from a high alt balloon. Without going into all the details and objectives for this project, the first thing I would like to do is create an airframe body. It would be approximately 13" long and 9" wide.
CAD files don't seem to be available (the HL-10 is 1960's), but I found dxf and dwg files and I'm researching for other detailed drawings.
Can a stl file for 3D printing be created using the dxf or dwg file? If I could print the HL-10 at the scale I'm looking for, I could use the positive model to create a negative mold.

The other option I'm considering is obtaining a model kit of the HL-10 and have it scanned for scaling and 3D printing. Unfortunately, the 1/48 version is not going to be available again until November.

I would appreciate advice on this.

And, what do I think of 3D printing? I think it's great for our hobby. I wouldn't be able to even start this project without it.

View attachment 432848

Cool project. I'll also be looking into 3D files shortly and will have the same kind of questions. I think answers would come in quicker with a new thread in the 3-D printing section of these forums.

 

[Richard Dierking]

Cool project. I'll also be looking into 3D files shortly and will have the same kind of questions. I think answers would come in quicker with a new thread in the 3-D printing section of these forums.

Thank you. I started a thread on my project a couple days ago. When I didn't see any action, I started searching for a 3D/CAD thread I could join for help.
I'm currently in contact with someone that began creating a 1:24 scale model of the HL-10; For commercial reproduction as a kit. He created a CAD file and might be willing to share it with me. Cost yet to be determined.

My project will involve 3D printing but probably the final design will not be 3D printed, it will probably be a fiberglass shell. And, I the tail sections might be 3D printed or another material. And, it will involve other aspects such as tracking, IMU, and control. Just launching this project will be a challenge.
I think I'm going to delete my previous thread and start another when I have more information.

 

[Richard Dierking]

So, the original thread I started for my HL-10 Recovery project has been put on hold.

It's a no-go with the CAD file from the company that is creating the 1:24 version of the HL-10. It was going to cost me too much. But, have to admit, the CAD file and all the work they did was probably worth quite a bit.

So, back to square one. Does anyone have advice on scanning a small model to create a CAD file for scaling up and 3D printing? Does anyone have a 3D scanner/printer?
It might be November before I can obtain a model.

Alternatively, the curator of the Edwards AFB Museum might be getting back to me. I believe they have a display model of the HL-10 that I might be able to get scanned. Or, maybe detailed plans.
Having a bit of a problem getting this project rolling, but I'm not going to give up.

 

[ewomack]

Not long before the plague hit, I toured a commercial 3D printing company through one of the local rocketry clubs. They had a pretty impressive display room filled with everything from knick-knacks to helicopter parts to an ominous model of an actual aneurysm. On one shelf sat a completely printed model rocket (pictured below). At first I was really impressed: how cool to load a file into a computer and have a fully built rocket spit out in tiny blobs of plastic. Then I became a little sad thinking about the potential end of kits, glue, sandpaper, paint, chemical smells and rockets that human hands had built with all of the inevitable imperfections. Of course it takes skill to map out a working rocket on a computer, but something seems lost when the rocket suddenly appears as a whole after the click of a "print" button. Other hobbies such as wood carving and textiles have seen similar innovations. But great series such as "Connections" from the late 1970s show that such automation has happened for centuries. The Jacquard loom and its predecessors, which used punch cards for patterns, took a lot of the human touch out of textile manufacture as early as the late 18th century. For better or worse, it sped things up considerably. Likely only a handful of specialists, hobbyists or historical reenactors now use the more "human based" and antiquated models. It's difficult to image how the inexorable machinery of industrial automation could slow down at this point. Someday AI may even take the fun out of designing and flying rockets? Yet self-driving cars seem to always remain 5 or 10 years out. They seem to have almost vanished from the press recently. So who knows? I know nothing about the future, but many things that first appear as revelatory world-changing innovations end up being better suited to side jobs. 3D printing, self driving cars and fully generated model rockets might end up as examples. I wouldn't mind a self-driving car that drove me to a launch site as I planned the day's launches uninhibited by steering wheels and lance dividers on freeways.

te

 

[Richard Dierking]

I made this scale model (X-20 Dyna-Soar) out of a couple pieces of plywood and a block of wood. I carved the wood by hand for the shape and it took some time to get it right. It's a bit dusty because that was years ago. Now, I want to create a HL10 and want to use 3D printing. The 3D printing is going to save me time and will allow me more flexibility and time to be creative with the other things. 3D printing is a good tool.
As far as self driving cars, I want one that will find a spot and park the car at Costco at Noon on a Saturday. That would be an intelligent car!

 

[jqavins]

The Jacquard loom and its predecessors, which used punch cards for patterns, took a lot of the human touch out of textile manufacture as early as the late 18th century. For better or worse, it sped things up considerably. Likely only a handful of specialists, hobbyists or historical reenactors now use the more "human based" and antiquated models.

There's a difference that's relevant. Not better or worse, but relevant. Automated looms sped up production, as you say, and there are hobbyists using older style looms. In rocketry, we're all hobbyists. There's no billion dollar induatry depending on rapid production of rockets (of our sort). The comparrson may not be completely apples to oranges, but it's at best apples to pears.

 

[Richard Dierking]

So, does anyone use a scanner for printing? I see there are some scanners through Amazon that are not too expensive, and wonder how well they work.
Or, should find a business that does scanning to create a CAD file?

Is this thread the right place to be inquiring about things like this?

 

[rharshberger]

So, does anyone use a scanner for printing? I see there are some scanners through Amazon that are not too expensive, and wonder how well they work.
Or, should find a business that does scanning to create a CAD file?

Is this thread the right place to be inquiring about things like this?

Might be better to start a thread about scanners in the 3D printing section of the forum since it will likely develop into a discussion all its own.

 

[RobertH3]

Useful but the 3d printed ABS can also be quite fragile and brittle. My 75mm fly away guide has nice aluminum tubes and hardware but the clamps are 3d printed. I set the launch up to throw the guide into the grass. Rocket made a half turn and it hit the tarmac. Smash. Glass-reinforced plastic (GRP) or nylon would have been preferable. I honestly can't imagine a 3d printed fin can surviving a hard impact.

Also did a builders kit with very accurate triangular cross section 3d printed fins and a sharp edge crumbled off during the build. So there are material-dependent strength issues.

Kinda OT - I am building a Firefox SHX so my Interceptor E can have a drag-racing buddy. With the split tube, you can see the stuffing tube and where the Kevlar is tied off on the top, so I made a bulkhead out of 1/16" basswood. To get the template, laid out a 2.6" circle and a 2.6" x 3.6" ellipse for the 45 degree split and overlapped them to make a template. Was tough but got a self-inflicted pat on the back for it. Wood lets you make something not quite perfect and "adjust" it with files and sandpaper.

Cheers / Robert

 

[ewomack]

There's a difference that's relevant. Not better or worse, but relevant. Automated looms sped up production, as you say, and there are hobbyists using older style looms. In rocketry, we're all hobbyists. There's no billion dollar induatry depending on rapid production of rockets (of our sort). The comparrson may not be completely apples to oranges, but it's at best apples to pears.

It wasn't really meant as a direct comparison, but the point - about which I may not have been very clear - is that automation can also affect hobbyists. Irrespecitve of larger economic concerns, 3D printing could impact model rocketry in a manner similar to how automated looms affected the production of textiles, though obviously with much less impact to the world at large. Of course it would be a very different situation and only comparable at a more abstract level. Ultimately, I decided not to get too upset about this (admittedly probably remote) possibility because such innovations seem pretty inevitable when and if they occur. Later generations might decide to use mostly 3D printed rockets to "combine hobbies" and this could impact the hobby and its business fundamentally. I have no idea whether that will or won't happen, but it would be another example of a "craft" succumbing to technology while subsuming its arguably more directly "human" elements.

 

[Richard Dierking]

Might be better to start a thread about scanners in the 3D printing section of the forum since it will likely develop into a discussion all its own.

Thank you Rich. I found someone that posted about looking for a 3D scanning service about a month ago. So far, he has not received any responses. I posted to see if it gets someone's attention. Also, I'm going to start doing some research locally.

I actually hope that the design part (CAD) involved with 3D printing will encourage young people to build more stuff. The obvious reduction in raw materials for building things for example at Radio Shack and hobby stores evidences that young people are not building things as much. Even most of the rockets I see offered at places like Hobby Lobby are very simple kits or ready to fly.

 

[manixFan]

Not to derail the thread but to get back to the OP’s point: 3D printing is just another way to build a rocket. There can be as much craftsmanship in a CAD file as in a sanded piece of balsa.

If 3D printing works for SpaceX, it seems like it ought to work for us. The last thing we need in this hobby are gatekeepers limiting innovation.


Tony

 

[OverTheTop]

Useful but the 3d printed ABS can also be quite fragile and brittle.

Would vary widely depending on the printer and filament. I have used ABS for nosecones and transitions on my half-scale Apache, and other rockets and it is no problem. Strength can be improved by post-processing. It is a material like any other and can be designed with appropriately. If a part does break you can just press "print" again.

I have built fins for my vertical trajectory system using a SLA printer. The resin fins have flown happily to just on supersonic. Strength testing revealed that the untreated ABS prints were about half the strength of the Formlab Pro Grey resin that I used. Some of their other resins are of similar strength to the ABS off the FDM machine (Stratasys ES1200).

So 3D printing is an immensely useful tool for rocketry, even in place of parts where traditional methods are favoured.

 

[Nytrunner]

The Zurek girl thats winning most of the B division contests is fond of incorporating it into her contest models.

I recall no less than 3 older competitors remarking about how she should really focus on the traditional methods and not just try and peint her way to victory, but she seems to be finding success so far

 

[RobertH3]

My buddy and I had a conversation about modeling in general, and he sometimes has minor problems. I got to watch him build a rocket and I got it immediately. The missing ingredient was patience and the ability to put it down when it wasn't going right. I am not sure that the hobby patience level from post WW2 to the PC age is still around. I am sure NAR is allowing it because it is new and they want younger folks - Estes sells 3d print rocket kits now too.

In my personal and "very" humble opinion, there should be two Scale Contests at NAR - Traditional and 3d Printed. If not the printer always has advantage due to micrometer accuracy and usual ease of finishing.
For example, a Mercury Redstone with a stick-built escape tower should stand on it's own. It is more difficult. What will happen, of course, is that someone will want to mix the techs and make this idea nix : ) Will hand-cut styrene count?

Cheers / Robert

 

[GuyNoir]

The Zurek girl thats winning most of the B division contests is fond of incorporating it into her contest models.

I recall no less than 3 older competitors remarking about how she should really focus on the traditional methods and not just try and peint her way to victory, but she seems to be finding success so far

You can't "print" your way to victory any more than you can "sand" or "paint" your way to victory. There's a lot more to competition rocketry than simply having a rocket.

 

[Nytrunner]

You can't "print" your way to victory any more than you can "sand" or "paint" your way to victory. There's a lot more to competition rocketry than simply having a rocket.

Exactly. I think in the case above, the detractors are choosing to focus on the new technology as some sort of shortcut and instead of recognizing the competitor's skill in applying it to the contest

 

[Peartree]

In the end, it's a tool. Is a flathead screwdriver ONLY good for flathead screws? Or is it occasionally good for a Phillips head screw when you don't have a Phillips screwdriver? Or for opening paint, or scraping concrete off of your trowel? Or a few dozen other things? Ultimately, this is always going to be a lot like a discussion on glue preferences. Everybody is going to have an opinion and, although different, they might all be right.